New Info on Future (Info on Fr. Leahy)

[ILikeBC]

Posted by TOS member Eagles 28, who seems to be quite in the know. This is all info from the board meeting.

My sources indicated that Fr. Leahy is not a happy camper. He tied successful athletics to enhanced student life experience , strong alumni relations and donations. He said athletics are a huge asset to BC . Their takeaway was football gets to a bowl in 16 or the coach is gone. JC gets more than a year if progress can be shown next year. He informed the board about the upcoming Globe piece. He said that Bates will be on the talk radio stations Monday. He was defensive about the allegations that BC is taking the ACC money and not investing it in athletics. He said that BC is losing more than $20 million a year in athletics even after the receipt of the ACC money. That loss is greater than any school in the ACC. He expects that the football program is on track to succeed and hopes that will in turn result in higher ticket sales and help to reduce the loss. Those of you who read this board and are familiar with my posts know that I have been a defender of Leahy. I heard nothing tonight from my sources to dissuade me . He cares about athletics and is holding those in charge accountable.

[HJS]

He's losing more money than anyone else in the ACC because (a) we have the 1st or 2nd highest cost per scholarship and (b) we have the most sports. Combine that with BB and FB not being great since the mid 2000s... well, it's little wonder we only lose $20mm. If Leahy wants what is alleged, he can begin by pairing down the sports significantly and then plowing those savings into elite head coaches and facilities. Anything else is fighting with both hands tied behind your back.

[claver2010]

as has been said here, above all else leahy hoo & the bot don't wan't to be embarrassed. it's why they eat up the bates' rubio-esque (tm homojs), 'student development' bullshit.

i think the events in the last couple of weeks + what's about to drop tomorrow might do the trick. what that turns into? who knows

if this was a business i think we all know what would go down

[eagle9903]

I expect to be disappointed by the article tomorrow. Does the Sunday globe actually get released on Sunday or is it like lots of papers that now release most of the Sunday edition on Saturday?

[TobaccoRoadEagle]

I expect to be disappointed by the article tomorrow. Does the Sunday globe actually get released on Sunday or is it like lots of papers that now release most of the Sunday edition on Saturday?

I assume it will be in the sports section which is one they really can't finalize until tonight

[twballgame9]

None of what is attributed to Leahy would surprise me remotely had it been attributed to someone else running a university

[eagle9903]

I expect to be disappointed by the article tomorrow. Does the Sunday globe actually get released on Sunday or is it like lots of papers that now release most of the Sunday edition on Saturday?

I assume it will be in the sports section which is one they really can't finalize until tonight

I haven't had a paper delivered in a few years so am probably wrong, but I thought we got some sports stuff on Saturday and then an update on Sunday.

[angrychicken]

None of what is attributed to Leahy would surprise me remotely had it been attributed to someone else running a university

Agreed. He probably was advised to say it, but I don't expect anything to be done.

[eagle33]

I expect to be disappointed by the article tomorrow. Does the Sunday globe actually get released on Sunday or is it like lots of papers that now release most of the Sunday edition on Saturday?

This. It could possibly be online by tonight unless Hohler in furiously adding to the story from all the emails he got from TOS members.

[DuchesneEast]

Once Leahy says this:

BC is losing more than $20 million a year in athletics even after the receipt of the ACC money

He loses all credibility with me. Not a true statistic at all. If you didnt have sports you would lose even more.

[DomingoOrtiz]

I expect to be disappointed by the article tomorrow. Does the Sunday globe actually get released on Sunday or is it like lots of papers that now release most of the Sunday edition on Saturday?

This. It could possibly be online by tonight unless Hohler in furiously adding to the story from all the emails he got from TOS members.

IF the article is accurate and objective, it could be a net positive for BC. But this being the Globe, it will probably be another hit piece.

[commavegarage]

i want a hit piece. people should be embarrassed.

[eepstein0]

i want a hit piece. people should be embarrassed.

This.

And if you're losing $20 million you need to count better

[DomingoOrtiz]

By "hit piece" I mean: "BC never should have left the Big East" "They can't compete in the ACC" "BC should drop football" Bob Ryan, Blaudscum type BS.

[BCSUPERFAN22]

He's losing more money than anyone else in the ACC because (a) we have the 1st or 2nd highest cost per scholarship and (b) we have the most sports. Combine that with BB and FB not being great since the mid 2000s... well, it's little wonder we only lose $20mm. If Leahy wants what is alleged, he can begin by pairing down the sports significantly and then plowing those savings into elite head coaches and facilities. Anything else is fighting with both hands tied behind your back.

Does anyone have at least a basic understanding of how BC accounts for scholarships vs how other schools account for them ? I know some have said that, for instance, they don't account for the average student aid (maybe up to 30%) when accounting the cost of scholarships. The $20mm loss after ACC money number seems ridiculous any way you cut it.

[flyingelvii]

For financial reporting purposes, it should all be the same. Not sure if they're using internal or external metrics though.

[ILikeBC]

http://bcheights.com/news/athletics-new ... tics-data/

[DomingoOrtiz]

http://bcheights.com/news/athletics-news/2016/bc-mens-basketball-returns-to-profitability-according-to-equity-in-athletics-data/

If nag hoops loses $3.09m (2014-15) how much did nag hockey lose? I assume this is the female sport with the most scholarships.

[twballgame9]

Ugh. Scholarships don't actually cost real money. Accounting bullshit.

[hansen]

http://bcheights.com/news/athletics-news/2016/bc-mens-basketball-returns-to-profitability-according-to-equity-in-athletics-data/

Majority of that article is accurate although I take umbrage with the per capita calculations in the last paragraph. Comparing these numbers to other schools in the ACC when some have half the amount of total sports as we do is .

P.s. Accountants are the worst.

[HJS]

BC accounts each schollie at its full retail price.

I won't defend anything the school does, but I will admit they are being very consistent in their allocation of costs. For instance, they don't have one number for financial aid, another for athletes and another for paying players cash to cover the full cost of attendance. Because of this BC (as with most private schools) had very little gap with their full scholarships. Bottom line is that despite the common fallacy that colleges are rolling in cash on the backs of slave labor, the truth is very different... especially when colleges use the money sports to support the non-revenue sports. The Northwestern case and liberal media aside, outside of maybe a dozen programs, the NCAA is still about amateur sports.

[Cadillac90]

If Leahy-hoo did in fact say this and feels this way, then I am pleasantly surprised and happy to hear it. However, getting back to a bowl doesn't really do it for me. I think Coach Chimp can get to 6-6 or 7-5, I'd like a little taste of some real success and I don't think Daz can get to that next level. I liked him but the lack of development on the offensive line has me real concerned about his true abilities.

[DomingoOrtiz]

Here it is: http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2016/ ... story.html

[BCSUPERFAN22]

If Leahy-hoo did in fact say this and feels this way, then I am pleasantly surprised and happy to hear it. However, getting back to a bowl doesn't really do it for me. I think Coach Chimp can get to 6-6 or 7-5, I'd like a little taste of some real success and I don't think Daz can get to that next level. I liked him but the lack of development on the offensive line has me real concerned about his true abilities.

Not to take this too far off topic, but you can't criticize OL development yet. It's the hardest position to bring guys along and they don't have bodies in senior roles because Spaziani didn't recruit any. I, not saying your wrong, but you have to wait until after next year or the one after to questions development of the offensive line.

[Cadillac90]

If Leahy-hoo did in fact say this and feels this way, then I am pleasantly surprised and happy to hear it. However, getting back to a bowl doesn't really do it for me. I think Coach Chimp can get to 6-6 or 7-5, I'd like a little taste of some real success and I don't think Daz can get to that next level. I liked him but the lack of development on the offensive line has me real concerned about his true abilities.

Not to take this too far off topic, but you can't criticize OL development yet. It's the hardest position to bring guys along and they don't have bodies in senior roles because Spaziani didn't recruit any. I, not saying your wrong, but you have to wait until after next year or the one after to questions development of the offensive line.

Seriously? He's had guys that have been there under him for three years and they were horrendous. After three years of coaching some of these kids, that was the result? I wasn't expecting any all-Americans but that was a poor coaching effort, sorry.

[BCSUPERFAN22]

If Leahy-hoo did in fact say this and feels this way, then I am pleasantly surprised and happy to hear it. However, getting back to a bowl doesn't really do it for me. I think Coach Chimp can get to 6-6 or 7-5, I'd like a little taste of some real success and I don't think Daz can get to that next level. I liked him but the lack of development on the offensive line has me real concerned about his true abilities.

Not to take this too far off topic, but you can't criticize OL development yet. It's the hardest position to bring guys along and they don't have bodies in senior roles because Spaziani didn't recruit any. I, not saying your wrong, but you have to wait until after next year or the one after to questions development of the offensive line.

Seriously? He's had guys that have been there under him for three years and they were horrendous. After three years of coaching some of these kids, that was the result? I wasn't expecting any all-Americans but that was a poor coaching effort, sorry.

You're just plain wrong. Spazianis last 2 classes had 3 offensive line recruits, only 2 are still on campus. Addazio has been taking 4-5 a year. It's a warm body issue, the players don't exist.

As for the article, I thought that was pretty fair, about what I expected. I think the diversity stuff is dumb, but overall that was more just regurgitating what we already know.

[Cadillac90]

If Leahy-hoo did in fact say this and feels this way, then I am pleasantly surprised and happy to hear it. However, getting back to a bowl doesn't really do it for me. I think Coach Chimp can get to 6-6 or 7-5, I'd like a little taste of some real success and I don't think Daz can get to that next level. I liked him but the lack of development on the offensive line has me real concerned about his true abilities.

Not to take this too far off topic, but you can't criticize OL development yet. It's the hardest position to bring guys along and they don't have bodies in senior roles because Spaziani didn't recruit any. I, not saying your wrong, but you have to wait until after next year or the one after to questions development of the offensive line.

Seriously? He's had guys that have been there under him for three years and they were horrendous. After three years of coaching some of these kids, that was the result? I wasn't expecting any all-Americans but that was a poor coaching effort, sorry.

You're just plain wrong. Spazianis last 2 classes had 3 offensive line recruits, only 2 are still on campus. Addazio has been taking 4-5 a year. It's a warm body issue, the players don't exist.

As for the article, I thought that was pretty fair, about what I expected. I think the diversity stuff is dumb, but overall that was more just regurgitating what we already know.

No, you are dead wrong. Second from the bottom in total offense is all I needed. There have been plenty of good freshmen and sophomores that have suited up. Costanzo comes to mind as an effective starter his first year.

[Cadillac90]

I forgot they extended Donahue, wtf???? Then for the little greasy midget to say Bates made a mistake by not keeping Donahue for another year! What a slimeball.

[BCSUPERFAN22]

If Leahy-hoo did in fact say this and feels this way, then I am pleasantly surprised and happy to hear it. However, getting back to a bowl doesn't really do it for me. I think Coach Chimp can get to 6-6 or 7-5, I'd like a little taste of some real success and I don't think Daz can get to that next level. I liked him but the lack of development on the offensive line has me real concerned about his true abilities.

Not to take this too far off topic, but you can't criticize OL development yet. It's the hardest position to bring guys along and they don't have bodies in senior roles because Spaziani didn't recruit any. I, not saying your wrong, but you have to wait until after next year or the one after to questions development of the offensive line.

Seriously? He's had guys that have been there under him for three years and they were horrendous. After three years of coaching some of these kids, that was the result? I wasn't expecting any all-Americans but that was a poor coaching effort, sorry.

You're just plain wrong. Spazianis last 2 classes had 3 offensive line recruits, only 2 are still on campus. Addazio has been taking 4-5 a year. It's a warm body issue, the players don't exist.

As for the article, I thought that was pretty fair, about what I expected. I think the diversity stuff is dumb, but overall that was more just regurgitating what we already know.

No, you are dead wrong. Second from the bottom in total offense is all I needed. There have been plenty of good freshmen and sophomores that have suited up. Costanzo comes to mind as an effective starter his first year.

Castonzo was the first freshman ever until this year and he was on a line with guys who had been in the program for 3-5 years. Have some perspective

[angrychicken]

Here it is: http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2016/ ... story.html

Meh