ATLeagle {l Wrote}:The only reason you could call sports a money loser is because of the accounting allocations that go with waiving/crediting 200+ tuitions. If the BOT doesn't believe that sports matters, then they need to ask themselves why BC's admissions, ranking and endowment are so different from BU, Nova, Fordham, Holy Cross, etc. Even if you do apples to apples and just compare BC to other Jesuits universities in cities that have a similar alumni population but no Football, the impact is even more obvious. Georgetown is the only one that is doing better ranking wise, but our endowment is better and Georgetown sold their soul to big time sports three decades ago. A smart Board member should realize that Patrick Ewing did almost as much for Georgetown as Flutie did for us.
said board member didn't believe in the flutie effect. he said it was other reasons the school took off (lengthy story about a line of credit received when the school was almost going to have to fold). my jaw dropped. i said if thats the case you should adjust the csom curriculum and remove the part where they educate students about the flutie effect.
even if he is correct, it doesn't mean the flutie effect is INCORRECT. they're not mutually exclusive.
honestly it was a disaster. really shut down my hopes of us every going for it in athletics under this administration.
hey huerta if you readin this dont tell jimmy **** that i put xlax in teh chuck wagons...lol