Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| Friday, April 25, 09:43:46am | [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
whoa is Holy Cross, big bad Colgate did you in -- thx, RPI, Harvard, Dartmouth & Princeton, 11:06:58 07/23/04 Fri
it's pretty simple -- you had 5 schools in the mix -- that group was reduced to two finalists -- one of those schools, HC, happens to be in the same athletic conference that was founded by that school and Colgate -- aside from hockey and golf, both schools now have close-knit athletic bonds and are excellent liberal arts institutions -- the final vote is underway and Harvard, Dartmouth, Princeton and RPI believe that HC is a good fit for the ECAC, warts and all -- yes, at this juncture Colgate, given its ties to HC in virtually all other sports, should have done the honorable thing and supported the Cross -- they didn't and yes it's disloyal -- you may not think so but others at Colgate do -- Colgate's a great school but their recent actions are pretty low in my esitmation
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [>
Yes, it is simple -- colgate13, 11:15:25 07/23/04 Fri
Harvard, Dartmouth, Princeton and RPI must not care about their athletic programs as much as Colgate or Brown.
Again, loyalty? How loyal has HC's committment to the PL been? Half ass in everything but basketball. You cry that the competition in the PL is not good enough, yet ask us to water the competition down in the ECAC?
Get your athletic priorities straight and apply to the ECAC again when you're serious.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [>
colgate > princeton... no sir -- dadominate, 12:56:08 07/23/04 Fri
you're telling me princeton doesn't care about it's athletics (because they voted for us - interesting logic by the way) but colgate does?!?
how many NCAA basketball tournaments has colgate been to? how many lacrosse final 4's? princeton has a much more prestigious athletic program than colgate. they were ranked in the top 10 in men's basketball in the late 90's and are a lacrosse institution.
only an absolute imbecile would argue that colgate has a better, more respected nationwide athletic program than princeton. please, i know it wasn't the colgate that left us hanging and obviously don't blame you, but your logic here about princeton not caring about athletics is faulty at best.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
He said no such thing. Are you Sean Hannity? -- 'gate88, 15:01:24 07/23/04 Fri
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: He said no such thing. Are you Sean Hannity? -- dadominate, 17:35:34 07/23/04 Fri
"Harvard, Dartmouth, Princeton and RPI must not care about their athletic programs as much as Colgate or Brown"
said no such thing? that's a direct quote there genius. there's no two ways about it, to claim that colgate cares more about their athletic program as a whole than princeton is simply misguided. to defend that remark is straight up idiotic.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [>
My inference was... -- colgate13, 14:07:39 07/23/04 Fri
First off, my response was very tounge in cheek. My tone was missed, I apologize. The Ivy's all have great athletic programs.
That said, Princeton hockey has not been a great program as of late. Basketball is much more of a priority. I don't think they put as much of an athletic priority on their hockey as they do their basketball, lacrosse or football.
Therein lies my logic - they voted for you for the ECAC because they care more about the academic profile of the ECAC than the athletic competitiveness. Just my tainted opinion formed from these unwarranted HC backlashings.
As for the other "yes" votes, Harvard seems obvious as the in state rival (Yale did the same in voting for Q), Dartmouth... who knows? I wasn't there. RPI? Maybe they would prefer a nonscholarship school in the ECAC and Q is more of a threat to them? Speculation all indeed.
But again, the point I'm making is don't fault Colgate for trying to maintain or increase the athletic competitiveness of the ECAC when that's all HC would do if the shoe was on the other foot for basketball. If HC chose to be competitive, I have no doubt they'd be in the ECAC.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Re: Oh, whoa is Holy Cross, big bad Colgate -- purple1, 12:00:04 07/23/04 Fri
Please get your priority right. Academic/athletic mix is in order for here. We have student athletes at HC, who are willing to compete in the ECAC with similar minded schools.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [>
Great! -- colgate13, 14:12:55 07/23/04 Fri
We have student athletes here at Colgate too! In fact, you could argue we have "smarter" student athletes here and we have a higher AI too! I normally don't get into the "my school is better than your school" fight, but whether it is intended or not your inference is that Colgate somehow has it's academic priorities out of whack. Right...
Now, on your other point, that's where you're missing it. You are not of a similiar mind of other ECAC schools if you want to support women's ice hockey at the D-III level. You may be of similiar academic mind, but the mix that you speak of is off!
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Great! -- purple1, 18:47:02 07/23/04 Fri
colgate 13 YOUR priority is in need of an explanation, not Colgate U.
No one said D-III women's hockey, but 3-5 years to build into D-I program.
HC arranged to play some games at the Centrum, 2 miles away from campus, where Icecats play before 6-8000 hockey fans. NCAA hockey regionals have played there 2-3 times with 13000 fans in attendance. Quality facility for hockey fans in central New England, more exposure for all ECAC teams.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Great! -- purple1, 18:47:38 07/23/04 Fri
colgate 13 YOUR priority is in need of an explanation, not Colgate U.
No one said D-III women's hockey, but 3-5 years to build into D-I program.
HC arranged to play some games at the Centrum, 2 miles away from campus, where Icecats play before 6-8000 hockey fans. NCAA hockey regionals have played there 2-3 times with 13000 fans in attendance. Quality facility for hockey fans in central New England, more exposure for all ECAC teams.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
How loyal was HC when you blackmailed the PL? -- What goes around, comes around, 10:53:20 07/23/04 Fri
Scholarships, now, or we leave you "true friends" without an NCAA bid. With friends like that...
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Re: I guess -- purple1, 11:45:45 07/23/04 Fri
Army, Navy, HC all said the same thing at that time. Seeing the power rating of the the PL dropping in basketball, they became proactive to do something about this. If other Pl schools instituted scholarships at that time, we could be further ahead as a league in the power ratings.
The ECAC did not taken the CHAMPION of the AHL who participated in the NCAA tournament. Creative financial aid was side tracked for pure athletic scholarships.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Re: COME ON, ALL!!!! -- Go...'gate, 13:11:12 07/23/04 Fri
Let's cut out the sniping. I certainly hope Colgate did not sell out Holy Cross, and my gut tells me they did not. However, the points made about HC always having complaints about the PL and bullying the conference are also valid. Finally, the HC President and AD strike me as being less than candid about how sincerely HC pushed this application. Why the Hell doesn't HC issue a statement or give an interview with USCHO or its local media? Whatever the facts are, this is not going away - HC's president is handling this as if it does not exist.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Re: COME ON, ALL!!!! -- PatriotFan, 00:09:26 07/24/04 Sat
There are many people in the administration who are more concerned with how many nerds there are in the First Year Program then they are with how many hockey players there are in the Hart Center.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Huh? -- Go...'gate, 20:42:54 07/25/04 Sun
What's your point?
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Re: I guess -- HC was/is Loyal to the PL, 12:58:29 07/23/04 Fri
How was HC loyal to the PL?
By working the scholarship issue thru the PL, HC was loyal to the league.
By telling the PL and giving the PL the chance to respond to HC's desires to restore some of the luster to their school's signature sport, HC was loyal.
By not just making their scholarship decision and then deciding to bolt, HC was loyal to the PL.
Holy Cross may have threatened to leave if no scholarships were granted, but it was done in the open and with the knowledge of each institution. That's not blackmail.
The league (i.e. every institution)had an opportunity to stand on their principles, reject the HC proposal, stand together, tell HC to take a hike, recruit other schools that wanted to drink the Ivy League Kool Aid and continue to operate. The league discussed and debated the issue and
We know what the league decided.
Think the league saw the wisdom of limited scholarships?
Think the league, and therefore the schools in it are better off now than 5 years ago in all sports?
Think Colgate would be offering limited hockey scholarships to improve the luster on their signature sport now if HC hadn't done this?
Now, was Colgate loyal here. On the surface you would think not, but there may be alot we don't know that may change our view of Colgates actions. let's wait until all of the facts and a final decision is made.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Re: I guess -- Debatable, 16:47:28 07/23/04 Fri
"Holy Cross may have threatened to leave if no scholarships were granted, but it was done in the open and with the knowledge of each institution. That's not blackmail."
Of course the institutions knew, they were the victims. Whether outsiders knew or not isn't important. We're not talking legal definition here. "Give us A, or we'll do B, which leaves you with situation C that you can't survive" sounds like extortion and doesn't pass the "true friend" test.
"By not just making their scholarship decision and then deciding to bolt, HC was loyal to the PL."
Not doing something (making the decision and bolting) that would have been universally condemned doesn't make one loyal. Do you want kudos for getting what you wanted and then staying? It seems to have worked out pretty well, no? Three straight trips to the dance before the rest of the league caught up.
"The league (i.e. every institution)had an opportunity to stand on their principles, reject the HC proposal, stand together, tell HC to take a hike, recruit other schools that wanted to drink the Ivy League Kool Aid and continue to operate. The league discussed and debated the issue and
We know what the league decided."
The league discussed and debated the issue while under the gun, the decision was one for survival. Once the decision was made, the others eventually going scholarship was inevitable as they are, after all, members of a league and competitors. Letting HC run away with the title every year is not their way. One can assert that following suit on the issue was an endorsement, but I'd be willing to bet that a majority of PL alumni, faculty, and administrators don't believe that giving scholarships to rich kids with jump shots to get that 13 seed is the right thing to do. But, we've beaten that topic to death. I just think that HC's tactics in '96 should preclude it from pointing fingers at Colgate today.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Women's progam is red herring -- 'gate88, 10:05:27 07/26/04 Mon
the problem is the arena. The ECAC does not want to play in front of 10,000 empty seats at the Centrum. That's part of your BigEast/Atlantic10 fantasy -- keep it straight.
As for the ladies -- what's so hard about just declaring "we're d-1," with the same players and growing into it?
Bottom line: HC promises to expand Hart then ECAC should back them 100%. Otherwise, it's a tough sell.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]