2015 Spring Practice

[eepstein0]

Daz not letting up. From the heights:

Addazio also used the event as a platform to campaign for an indoor facility, highlighting Saturday as a the perfect opportunity to make use of such. This is the second time this week he has appealed to the media, mentioning the need for a permanent indoor facility to help with recruiting and also for dire weather conditions.

Nor should he. It just illustrates how clueless BC is about the value of Athletics and the investment needed in it.

[TobaccoRoadEagle]

Daz not letting up. From the heights:

Addazio also used the event as a platform to campaign for an indoor facility, highlighting Saturday as a the perfect opportunity to make use of such. This is the second time this week he has appealed to the media, mentioning the need for a permanent indoor facility to help with recruiting and also for dire weather conditions.

Nor should he. It just illustrates how clueless BC is about the value of Athletics and the investment needed in it.

that is true. i remember when holy cross shifted their focus away from athletics... they had to shut their doors months later. or remember when there were a group of well respected schools known as the "ivy league?" most of you fucking millenial nerds are probably too young to remember but they used to exist and offer a strong eduaction to those qualified enough to attend. then they moved their focus away from athletics and *POOF* they're gone. now all we have to fill that void is notre dame and stanford.

no school could possibly exist if it weren't for athletics

[DomingoOrtiz]

Daz not letting up. From the heights:

Addazio also used the event as a platform to campaign for an indoor facility, highlighting Saturday as a the perfect opportunity to make use of such. This is the second time this week he has appealed to the media, mentioning the need for a permanent indoor facility to help with recruiting and also for dire weather conditions.

How about updating the roster? lazy bastard

[twballgame9]

Just saw what I assume will be the first of many at BCI:

"Darius Wade is a runner with some throwing abilty. Flutie is a passer who can also run."

Best part about this is that it is actually the other way around.

[twballgame9]

Daz not letting up. From the heights:

Addazio also used the event as a platform to campaign for an indoor facility, highlighting Saturday as a the perfect opportunity to make use of such. This is the second time this week he has appealed to the media, mentioning the need for a permanent indoor facility to help with recruiting and also for dire weather conditions.

Nor should he. It just illustrates how clueless BC is about the value of Athletics and the investment needed in it.

that is true. i remember when holy cross shifted their focus away from athletics... they had to shut their doors months later. or remember when there were a group of well respected schools known as the "ivy league?" most of you fucking millenial nerds are probably too young to remember but they used to exist and offer a strong eduaction to those qualified enough to attend. then they moved their focus away from athletics and *POOF* they're gone. now all we have to fill that void is notre dame and stanford.

no school could possibly exist if it weren't for athletics

Remember when BC guys compared their school to Holy Cross and Harvard? Yeah, me neither.

[eagle9903]

that is true. i remember when holy cross shifted their focus away from athletics... they had to shut their doors months later. or remember when there were a group of well respected schools known as the "ivy league?" most of you fucking millenial nerds are probably too young to remember but they used to exist and offer a strong eduaction to those qualified enough to attend. then they moved their focus away from athletics and *POOF* they're gone. now all we have to fill that void is notre dame and stanford.

no school could possibly exist if it weren't for athletics

I think when you attended school in the before times when you had to go to the cafeteria to watch Beavis and Butthead, Holy Cross was still harder to get into than BC. Now - and even in my mod fence construction attendance years - its the opposite and I don't think sports exposure is unrelated to that.

Harvard is a little bit different because of things like it's Harvard.

[TobaccoRoadEagle]

Daz not letting up. From the heights:

Addazio also used the event as a platform to campaign for an indoor facility, highlighting Saturday as a the perfect opportunity to make use of such. This is the second time this week he has appealed to the media, mentioning the need for a permanent indoor facility to help with recruiting and also for dire weather conditions.

Nor should he. It just illustrates how clueless BC is about the value of Athletics and the investment needed in it.

that is true. i remember when holy cross shifted their focus away from athletics... they had to shut their doors months later. or remember when there were a group of well respected schools known as the "ivy league?" most of you fucking millenial nerds are probably too young to remember but they used to exist and offer a strong eduaction to those qualified enough to attend. then they moved their focus away from athletics and *POOF* they're gone. now all we have to fill that void is notre dame and stanford.

no school could possibly exist if it weren't for athletics

Remember when BC guys compared their school to Holy Cross and Harvard? Yeah, me neither.

you're right - bc is a far superior academic institution to harvard. how silly of me.

[twballgame9]

Daz not letting up. From the heights:

Addazio also used the event as a platform to campaign for an indoor facility, highlighting Saturday as a the perfect opportunity to make use of such. This is the second time this week he has appealed to the media, mentioning the need for a permanent indoor facility to help with recruiting and also for dire weather conditions.

Nor should he. It just illustrates how clueless BC is about the value of Athletics and the investment needed in it.

that is true. i remember when holy cross shifted their focus away from athletics... they had to shut their doors months later. or remember when there were a group of well respected schools known as the "ivy league?" most of you fucking millenial nerds are probably too young to remember but they used to exist and offer a strong eduaction to those qualified enough to attend. then they moved their focus away from athletics and *POOF* they're gone. now all we have to fill that void is notre dame and stanford.

no school could possibly exist if it weren't for athletics

Remember when BC guys compared their school to Holy Cross and Harvard? Yeah, me neither.

you're right - bc is a far superior academic institution to harvard. how silly of me.

Not remotely my point, whether you were ironic or not.

[TobaccoRoadEagle]

Harvard is a little bit different because of things like it's Harvard.

so your point is that harvard's focus is on academic strength and bc is not an academic institution, it is primarily a athletic venture with some pesky academic type stuff attached. as a result, the two cannot be compared and bc should spend all its money on athletic pursuits. gotcha.

i missed the memo where bc stopped being a school and started being a farm system for 32 different sports teams

[twballgame9]

Harvard is a little bit different because of things like it's Harvard.

so your point is that harvard's focus is on academic strength and bc is not an academic institution, it is primarily a athletic venture with some pesky academic type stuff attached. as a result, the two cannot be compared and bc should spend all its money on athletic pursuits. gotcha.

i missed the memo where bc stopped being a school and started being a farm system for 32 different sports teams

I missed the memo where most colleges and universities pretended to be solely academic institutions.

[twballgame9]

PS, your arguments in this regard are very absolute. If it is not white, TRE, the only other color it could be is black!

[TobaccoRoadEagle]

. It just illustrates how clueless BC is about the value of Athletics and the investment needed in it.

this is the point that i'm expressing disagreement with. at bc athletics is (a) already a cash drain on the operations of the school and (2) secondary to the point of boston college existing in the first place.

just because we are posting on a website that is loosely based on boston college sports does not let me ignore the fact that bc is a school first and an athletic entertainer second (or maybe even 4th or 5th... who's to say).

acting like we need to spend money on some grandiose indoor facility or run the risk of ceasing to exist is retardical to me. sorry that i am alone on this since all of campion's aliasses have been banned

[Corporal Funishment]

You guys should talk to your department heads and make sure you are on all appropriate listservs, seems like there's a lot of memos being missed.

[twballgame9]

. It just illustrates how clueless BC is about the value of Athletics and the investment needed in it.

this is the point that i'm expressing disagreement with. at bc athletics is (a) already a cash drain on the operations of the school and (2) secondary to the point of boston college existing in the first place.

just because we are posting on a website that is loosely based on boston college sports does not let me ignore the fact that bc is a school first and an athletic entertainer second (or maybe even 4th or 5th... who's to say).

acting like we need to spend money on some grandiose indoor facility or run the risk of ceasing to exist is retardical to me. sorry that i am alone on this since all of campion's aliasses have been banned

Do you really believe the first point?

[TobaccoRoadEagle]

not solely but primarily. when 90% of the student population is there to be a student; shouldn't 90% of the money the school is spending be spent on them and their pursuits?

does that introduce enough of a gray for you, jerk?

[twballgame9]

not solely but primarily. when 90% of the student population is there to be a student; shouldn't 90% of the money the school is spending be spent on them and their pursuits?

does that introduce enough of a gray for you, jerk?

What are you using to make up your numbers?

[twballgame9]

[TobaccoRoadEagle]

ball park. are you saying there are more or less than 900 undergrad student athletes? it seemed like a reasonable guess to me so that's why i went with 90/10.

anyway, i've decided i don't care enough to continue this conversation. bc should spend money on an indoor practice facility because it is the only thing that makes sense for bc to do as the academic institution that it is.

good luck and go eagles!

[twballgame9]

ball park. are you saying there are more or less than 900 undergrad student athletes? it seemed like a reasonable guess to me so that's why i went with 90/10.

anyway, i've decided i don't care enough to continue this conversation. bc should spend money on an indoor practice facility because it is the only thing that makes sense for bc to do as the academic institution that it is.

good luck and go eagles!

BC should spend money on whatever it wants. Unless and until they stop charging $60K to "teach" people, the self-righteous should probably be coat checked.

[TobaccoRoadEagle]

ball park. are you saying there are more or less than 900 undergrad student athletes? it seemed like a reasonable guess to me so that's why i went with 90/10.

anyway, i've decided i don't care enough to continue this conversation. bc should spend money on an indoor practice facility because it is the only thing that makes sense for bc to do as the academic institution that it is.

good luck and go eagles!

BC should spend money on whatever it wants. Unless and until they stop charging $60K to "teach" people, the self-righteous should probably be coat checked.

they are spending money on whatever they want. i took exception to eepstein telling them how they have to spend money because, sports...

unless you really mean bc should spend money on whatever you want. then i disagree with you and say that i think bc should spend money on whatever they want

[twballgame9]

ball park. are you saying there are more or less than 900 undergrad student athletes? it seemed like a reasonable guess to me so that's why i went with 90/10.

anyway, i've decided i don't care enough to continue this conversation. bc should spend money on an indoor practice facility because it is the only thing that makes sense for bc to do as the academic institution that it is.

good luck and go eagles!

BC should spend money on whatever it wants. Unless and until they stop charging $60K to "teach" people, the self-righteous should probably be coat checked.

they are spending money on whatever they want. i took exception to eepstein telling them how they have to spend money because, sports...

unless you really mean bc should spend money on whatever you want. then i disagree with you and say that i think bc should spend money on whatever they want

I just disagree with your description of BC as the prep school in Dead Poet's Society.

If your point is that growing sports at BC is less important than it used to be because there are more nerds that don't care and it has already earned its status as "one of the more desirable academic schools that everyone wants to overpay for," then fine. But ignoring the role that the sports program played in that is ostrich level shit.

[TobaccoRoadEagle]

fine, i went too absolute with my exaggeration.

it was an attempt to match the absolute that bc has to recognize the value of athletics (which appeared to support that athletics are the only thing that matters and the only thing that adds value to a school). maybe eepstein didn't mean it in the absolute in which i interpreted it... but since that's pretty much eepsteins mo, i'm going to assume i interpreted him correctly.

i agree bc athletics adds to the experience that is boston college. i also agree that bc should spend it's money how it wants to spend its money. i don't agree that bc HAS to spend it's money on athletics because athletics are not the only thing that bc has a choice to spend money on. sorry for shitting on all that folks here believe by suggesting there are other things in this world than an indoor football facility.

[twballgame9]

fine, i went too absolute with my exaggeration.

it was an attempt to match the absolute that bc has to recognize the value of athletics (which appeared to support that athletics are the only thing that matters and the only thing that adds value to a school). maybe eepstein didn't mean it in the absolute in which i interpreted it... but since that's pretty much eepsteins mo, i'm going to assume i interpreted him correctly.

i agree bc athletics adds to the experience that is boston college. i also agree that bc should spend it's money how it wants to spend its money. i don't agree that bc HAS to spend it's money on athletics because athletics are not the only thing that bc has a choice to spend money on. sorry for shitting on all that folks here believe by suggesting there are other things in this world than an indoor football facility.

For an institution that just completed $78 million Stokes Hall for academics, and has an inflatable bubble collapse on the football team during spring practices in the north, I don't think it is misguided priorities to suggest that it is time for an indoor practice facility. Whether the failure to do so will signal the death knell of the program is ridiculous conjecture, as is whether the school needs the football program to remain as relevant. But it is that relevant in part because of the football program, and therefore legitimate concern in that regard is not unwarranted.

[twballgame9]

Back to a more relevant point, do you honestly believe that athletics is a net loss? In 2008, ESPN made an educated guess that BC revenue and expenses each accounted for about $61 million, with the school running at a slight profit (which is all numbers magic anyway, since the goal is to make the whole thing a wash). That said, of that $61 million in expenses, $13 million was attributable to tuition, the one category that they did not have to guess. Texas had a $7 million hit.

The accounting myth that BC loses money by handing out scholarships is one of my favorite pieces of bullshit.

[TobaccoRoadEagle]

Back to a more relevant point, do you honestly believe that athletics is a net loss? In 2008, ESPN made an educated guess that BC revenue and expenses each accounted for about $61 million, with the school running at a slight profit (which is all numbers magic anyway, since the goal is to make the whole thing a wash). That said, of that $61 million in expenses, $13 million was attributable to tuition, the one category that they did not have to guess. Texas had a $7 million hit.

The accounting myth that BC loses money by handing out scholarships is one of my favorite pieces of bullshit.

i'd say our revenue sports are much deeper in the shitter today than they were in 2008. i also think we're paying larger marketing firm fees now than we did then. whether that makes up the $13 million of fake tuition or not is a debate for the "spend money, sports" guys. my one guarantee is athletics brings in far fewer profits than the students paying the overvalue $60k/year generate for the school.

it would be interesting to know if the $13 million includes food that is given away or "rent" on dorm rooms. i agree with you on the scholarship aspect of the cost being bullshit but less so on the cash being expended (food, utilities, etc. on the dorms)

[eepstein0]

fine, i went too absolute with my exaggeration.

it was an attempt to match the absolute that bc has to recognize the value of athletics (which appeared to support that athletics are the only thing that matters and the only thing that adds value to a school). maybe eepstein didn't mean it in the absolute in which i interpreted it... but since that's pretty much eepsteins mo, i'm going to assume i interpreted him correctly.

i agree bc athletics adds to the experience that is boston college. i also agree that bc should spend it's money how it wants to spend its money. i don't agree that bc HAS to spend it's money on athletics because athletics are not the only thing that bc has a choice to spend money on. sorry for shitting on all that folks here believe by suggesting there are other things in this world than an indoor football facility.

For an institution that just completed $78 million Stokes Hall for academics, and has an inflatable bubble collapse on the football team during spring practices in the north, I don't think it is misguided priorities to suggest that it is time for an indoor practice facility. Whether the failure to do so will signal the death knell of the program is ridiculous conjecture, as is whether the school needs the football program to remain as relevant. But it is that relevant in part because of the football program, and therefore legitimate concern in that regard is not unwarranted.

TWB is close here. If you'd like to win in football, make the $ investment.

Where do you think BCs application #s go if they decide to go the HC route of football? Being good at sports helps the #s at a place like BC. BC would still be a very desirable school without football, but not as high as if they were constantly in the Top 25 and playing national relevant games (last few years of Spaz aside).

Scenes like the USC game is attractive to prospective students.

[eepstein0]

ball park. are you saying there are more or less than 900 undergrad student athletes? it seemed like a reasonable guess to me so that's why i went with 90/10.

anyway, i've decided i don't care enough to continue this conversation. bc should spend money on an indoor practice facility because it is the only thing that makes sense for bc to do as the academic institution that it is.

good luck and go eagles!

BC should spend money on whatever it wants. Unless and until they stop charging $60K to "teach" people, the self-righteous should probably be coat checked.

they are spending money on whatever they want. i took exception to eepstein telling them how they have to spend money because, sports...

unless you really mean bc should spend money on whatever you want. then i disagree with you and say that i think bc should spend money on whatever they want

Spend the money however they'd like but if you want a competitive nationally relevant football program (which I think helps draw applications and prospective students nationally), invest the $.

[twballgame9]

Back to a more relevant point, do you honestly believe that athletics is a net loss? In 2008, ESPN made an educated guess that BC revenue and expenses each accounted for about $61 million, with the school running at a slight profit (which is all numbers magic anyway, since the goal is to make the whole thing a wash). That said, of that $61 million in expenses, $13 million was attributable to tuition, the one category that they did not have to guess. Texas had a $7 million hit.

The accounting myth that BC loses money by handing out scholarships is one of my favorite pieces of bullshit.

i'd say our revenue sports are much deeper in the shitter today than they were in 2008. i also think we're paying larger marketing firm fees now than we did then. whether that makes up the $13 million of fake tuition or not is a debate for the "spend money, sports" guys. my one guarantee is athletics brings in far fewer profits than the students paying the overvalue $60k/year generate for the school.

it would be interesting to know if the $13 million includes food that is given away or "rent" on dorm rooms. i agree with you on the scholarship aspect of the cost being bullshit but less so on the cash being expended (food, utilities, etc. on the dorms)

Cash expended is about to go up, too, with recent legislation BC opposed. That said, the scholarship accounting is a farce.

Given that over a third of the revenue end is a giant payout from the ACC, I'm not sure that total revenue is down a hell of a lot. Maybe.

Of course, if BC is struggling, they could do what everyone else does and cut bullshit like fencing. I suspect they aren't struggling that much.

[eepstein0]

http://www.cmaxxsports.com/misc/MurphyTrandel.pdf

Written by economics professors at BC and UGA

[ATLeagle]

Back to a more relevant point, do you honestly believe that athletics is a net loss? In 2008, ESPN made an educated guess that BC revenue and expenses each accounted for about $61 million, with the school running at a slight profit (which is all numbers magic anyway, since the goal is to make the whole thing a wash). That said, of that $61 million in expenses, $13 million was attributable to tuition, the one category that they did not have to guess. Texas had a $7 million hit.

The accounting myth that BC loses money by handing out scholarships is one of my favorite pieces of bullshit.

i'd say our revenue sports are much deeper in the shitter today than they were in 2008. i also think we're paying larger marketing firm fees now than we did then. whether that makes up the $13 million of fake tuition or not is a debate for the "spend money, sports" guys. my one guarantee is athletics brings in far fewer profits than the students paying the overvalue $60k/year generate for the school.

it would be interesting to know if the $13 million includes food that is given away or "rent" on dorm rooms. i agree with you on the scholarship aspect of the cost being bullshit but less so on the cash being expended (food, utilities, etc. on the dorms)

Revenues are higher now than in 2008. The loss of ticket revenue from football and basketball in those years has been made up for by more TV money and richer uniform deals.