|
Post by durenduren on Jan 27, 2018 15:06:02 GMT -5
If this is as untrue as it seems congrats on making big 5 rollout material for the next few years for all our opponents Admittedly, this was a pretty damaging exchange. I wish everyone didn't feel the need to defend themselves against La Salle every waking moment - we ran with some info, created a firestorm, and manufactured a bigger issue all because we didn't trust La Salle. IMO, the current administration has given us plenty of transparency and honesty with other issues, but why are we nailing them to the cross worse than Brother Mike's regime? You don't need to defend yourself from them, we're all on the same side. Stop assuming the absolute worst.
|
|
|
Post by mookie on Jan 27, 2018 15:07:00 GMT -5
No clue about these rumors of dropping levels or conferences. I do know i wouldn’t have considered attending La Salle if it were a D2 or D3 school. I would’ve gone to St Joe’s, Towson (since I’m from Baltimore) or maybe PSU.
We need to consider the health of the university long term and not just athletics. The current facilities are below standard and it’s amazing how other programs have been successful. WMBB has not been successful and I wouldn’t say not very competitive. MBB has not been successful with the exception of that 2 year “run” but it hasn’t been relatively competitive. The university cannot expect to improve on its current health over the long run under the status quo given the continuous changing of college athletics (namely BB and FB).
My personal opinion is that the university is better served taking the necessary steps to remain in a multi-bid conference and adequately fund its MBB program. The ROI is substantial and proven. The Sweet 16 run generated $4-6M in NCAA money alone (somebody correct me if I’m wrong). By making the tourney, they made at least $1.5M. Investing 2-3M upfront to upgrade current facilities will be recovered in just 2 years provides a tourney appearance. Not sure what NIT appearances pay BUT consistent NOT appearances in the absence of NCAAs builds a brand AND student engagement. Student engagement means increased attendance for both students and alum (ie ticket sales). This makes them more appealing to sponsors and this will mean an increase in revenue from school apparel. ROI would be slower with NIT appearances but still worth it.
La Salle has traditionally struggled to increase its alumni donations; however, I believe there was a noticeable uptick in donations immediately following the Sweet 16. I understand the university concerns and potential financial troubles, but I recommend doubling down on its athletic program as the only option vs slowly trying to recover from the mistakes of previous leadership.
|
|
|
Post by mookie on Jan 27, 2018 15:12:34 GMT -5
I made one recommendation earlier, and here’s another: Tone it down several levels. You are NOT a friend of the university with out of line posts calling for a coach to be fired and implied prejudice comments about the university president. If you truly did attend La Salle, you are embarrassing the university and the alums. The coach is not the reason for any financial issues the university may or may not be experiencing, neither is the president of the university.
|
|
|
Post by coachd on Jan 27, 2018 15:18:10 GMT -5
I made one recommendation earlier, and here’s another: Tone it down several levels. You are NOT a friend of the university with out of line posts calling for a coach to be fired and implied prejudice comments about the university president. If you truly did attend La Salle, you are embarrassing the university and the alums. The coach is not the reason for any financial issues the university may or may not be experiencing, neither is the president of the university. I bleed Blue and Gold as do most here. No one is going to sell us on division 2 or 3. My post is not embarrassing to anyone. If you have financial problems you consult experts from TruMark Financial, our premiere sponsor.
|
|
|
Post by mookie on Jan 27, 2018 15:35:02 GMT -5
I made one recommendation earlier, and here’s another: Tone it down several levels. You are NOT a friend of the university with out of line posts calling for a coach to be fired and implied prejudice comments about the university president. If you truly did attend La Salle, you are embarrassing the university and the alums. The coach is not the reason for any financial issues the university may or may not be experiencing, neither is the president of the university. I bleed Blue and Gold as do most here. No one is going to sell us on division 2 or 3. My post is not embarrassing to anyone. If you have financial problems you consult experts from TruMark Financial, our premiere sponsor. At least agree on where we want La Salle to be.
|
|
|
Post by GlitterBro #2 on Jan 27, 2018 16:23:15 GMT -5
So here's where this stands after 19 hours: - A couple of people from the school did reach out to me via phone today (one from President's Advisory Council) and said that nothing about D3 was discussed at the Wednesday meeting with ICA and one asked that I make that known here
- An additional person familiar with the matter said it was mentioned by ICA only insofar as nothing is off the table, but should not be taken seriously (I believe this aligns with what one of our admins heard today)
- An alum contacted me Thursday and said he heard a committee was looking at conference realignment
- Two individuals at a meeting with ICA on Friday gave me the information that I put in the original post (the two people mentioned in the first bullet above couldn't refute that info though because they were not in the meeting)
There seem to be different messages out there from different people, but synthesizing it all, I'm led to believe that options are being examined by ICA to evaluate where La Salle needs to be athletically. It sounds like the D3 thing was just mentioned in passing and likely should not have been mentioned at all to the faculty, and there is still a lot of data gathering happening and recommendations by ICA will ultimately be made about sports, conferences, and overall investments in athletics.
|
|
|
Post by mookie on Jan 27, 2018 16:41:05 GMT -5
So here's where this stands after 19 hours: - A couple of people from the school did reach out to me via phone today (one from President's Advisory Council) and said that nothing about D3 was discussed at the Wednesday meeting with ICA and one asked that I make that known here
- An additional person familiar with the matter said it was mentioned by ICA only insofar as nothing is off the table, but should not be taken seriously (I believe this aligns with what one of our admins heard today)
- An alum contacted me Thursday and said he heard a committee was looking at conference realignment
- Two individuals at a meeting with ICA on Friday gave me the information that I put in the original post (the two people mentioned in the first bullet above couldn't refute that info though because they were not in the meeting)
There seem to be different messages out there from different people, but synthesizing it all, I'm led to believe that options are being examined by ICA to evaluate where La Salle needs to be athletically. It sounds like the D3 thing was just mentioned in passing and likely should not have been mentioned at all to the faculty, and there is still a lot of data gathering happening and recommendations by ICA will ultimately be made about sports, conferences, and overall investments in athletics.
If you’re hiring a consulting firm, you have to expect all options would be mentioned. Not surprised at all by its mentioning and not surprised at all it’s not truly being considered.
|
|
|
Post by jellybean on Jan 27, 2018 16:41:42 GMT -5
My question is who is ICA? Some of the principles in this firm and what's their reputation? What was the results of their findings and suggestions? I had some friends around the country who told me their schools used firms where Eddie Fogler ( long time UNC assistant and Vandy HC) and Gale Catlett Jr (son of WVU MBB coach) were key people.
|
|
postup
Mop-Up Time
Posts: 90
Likes: 25
|
Post by postup on Jan 27, 2018 17:01:55 GMT -5
IMO, the current administration has given us plenty of transparency and honesty with other issues, That may be true, but generally over the years, La Salle has taken a "It's none of your business" attitude toward students and alumni when they formulate their stupid decisions.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Jan 27, 2018 17:08:39 GMT -5
My question is who is ICA? Some of the principles in this firm and what's their reputation? What was the results of their findings and suggestions? I had some friends around the country who told me their schools used firms where Eddie Fogler ( long time UNC assistant and Vandy HC) and Gale Catlett Jr (son of WVU MBB coach) were key people. www.icac.us - they've got a good reputation. Have worked with 180 schools of all different sizes. All publicly available info. D3 likely only arose because a responsible consulting firm would make it clear that all options are on the table, including that as Mookie suggested. But it's not the end game here as multiple sources have confirmed, and let that be abundantly known.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Jan 27, 2018 17:10:42 GMT -5
IMO, the current administration has given us plenty of transparency and honesty with other issues, That may be true, but generally over the years, La Salle has taken a "It's none of your business" attitude toward students and alumni when they formulate their stupid decisions. I don't disagree, but when do we let go of that and begin to trust the current crew, who have made an honest commitment to as much transparency as possible? Can't hold the indiscretions of ten, fifteen years ago against a totally different leadership.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Jan 27, 2018 17:12:45 GMT -5
That may be true, but generally over the years, La Salle has taken a "It's none of your business" attitude toward students and alumni when they formulate their stupid decisions. But when do we let go of that and begin to trust the current crew, who have made an honest commitment to as much transparency as possible? They've been great, but no results have been concrete yet. When they are, the trust will come.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Jan 27, 2018 17:14:20 GMT -5
But when do we let go of that and begin to trust the current crew, who have made an honest commitment to as much transparency as possible? They've been great, but no results have been concrete yet. When they are, the trust will come. So let's grab our pitchforks every time they make a decision and assume the absolute worst? I get it, but I think there comes a time when it needs to be tempered.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Jan 27, 2018 17:18:02 GMT -5
They've been great, but no results have been concrete yet. When they are, the trust will come. So let's grab our pitchforks every time they make a decision and assume the absolute worst? I get it, but I think there comes a time when it needs to be tempered. One of the worries when Colleen took over was that she never managed an athletic department. When even the mention (and I get that it was a mention, but someone should tell ICA its off the table) of going D3 comes up, you can imagine the over-reaction. I actually had higher expectations for where we'd be right now.
|
|
|
Post by stlexplorer on Jan 27, 2018 17:30:22 GMT -5
So here's where this stands after 19 hours: - A couple of people from the school did reach out to me via phone today (one from President's Advisory Council) and said that nothing about D3 was discussed at the Wednesday meeting with ICA and one asked that I make that known here
- An additional person familiar with the matter said it was mentioned by ICA only insofar as nothing is off the table, but should not be taken seriously (I believe this aligns with what one of our admins heard today)
- An alum contacted me Thursday and said he heard a committee was looking at conference realignment
- Two individuals at a meeting with ICA on Friday gave me the information that I put in the original post (the two people mentioned in the first bullet above couldn't refute that info though because they were not in the meeting)
There seem to be different messages out there from different people, but synthesizing it all, I'm led to believe that options are being examined by ICA to evaluate where La Salle needs to be athletically. It sounds like the D3 thing was just mentioned in passing and likely should not have been mentioned at all to the faculty, and there is still a lot of data gathering happening and recommendations by ICA will ultimately be made about sports, conferences, and overall investments in athletics.
Glitter, I love your passion and your a vital member of this board but I really wish you had vetted this info a little more before starting this shitstorm. I understand a message board can be a good place for debate and topics of conversation but this was quite the bomb to drop on hearsay. Thank you for continuing to look into and updating your first information but I think this could have been avoided by some more looking into it before setting everyone's hair ablaze.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Jan 27, 2018 17:38:36 GMT -5
In Glitter’s defense, his sentiments were confirmed to me. At least the part that said D3 was ‘on the table’ but not happening.
We discussed it as Mods. We felt it was newsworthy. Did it get a little out of hand? Maybe. But this is why you tell ICA that they can remove that option from their recommendations. Most people, me included, had no idea a consultation was going on.
|
|
|
Post by manayunk53 on Jan 27, 2018 19:00:40 GMT -5
I heard from a fake source that ICA does not accept money. They only enter into contracts that compensate them with paintings and other works of art.
|
|
|
Post by gymrat67 on Jan 27, 2018 19:02:44 GMT -5
Whoa. Downgrade and Lesser are such ugly words. The internal and external communication campaigns for this announcement will couch it as a “competitive conference realignment.” Be it the MAAC or NEC, any move would be announced with a “rededication to winning athletics” illustrated by an actual (slight) increase in spending and with the pointed-out idea that the school will get more bang for their buck in our new conference. The announcement will harken back to the school’s athletic successes in prior conferences if that somehow insures success returning to their ranks. The announcement would also be coupled with a (purposely too nebulous) long term plan to “upgrade our athletic facilities” to be the newest and best in the new conference. Despite the campaign the headlines and more importantly, the University community backlash will be ferocious and likely vicious. Explorers Are Never Lost (unless we cut and …) Put me down for a NO on competitive conference realignment bullshit. I’d rather to learn to swim in the Olympic size pool than be relegated to the kiddie one. In advance of the University's anticipated internal and external communication campaigns pertaining to such announcements ( i.e., " the exciting news " ), following is a glossary of the Administration's standard key terminology as an aid to the members of this board in deciphering same : Lasallian leveraging critical analysis institutional learning outcomes disruption impactful deep understanding diverse perspectives disruptive overarching deaccession agents of change transformative reallocating student outcomes mission-aligned visionary disruptions reflective thinking sustainable robust core mission edu-innovators soft skills rethink momentum unique outcomes catalyst
|
|
|
Post by charmcityexplorer on Jan 27, 2018 19:12:34 GMT -5
Did this consultant factor in the % of alumni, in particular YOUNG alumni, that are former athletes and the pride that comes with knowing they were Division 1 athletes in their career? To then move their programs down to a Division 3 level would be an absolute insult to those folks when the solicitation for donations came in the mail. I attended a “Momemntum” presentation a few months ago in DC, and I believe I heard that the overall Alumni giving last year was 8%. Sadly, the solicitations for donations to any facet of our alma mater (academics, athletics, extra-curricular activities) are being ignored irrespective of whether we’re D-I or D-III. That is what I find to be “an absolute insult.”
|
|
|
Post by glorydays on Jan 27, 2018 19:47:16 GMT -5
I am glad they are not considering the Ches-Mont. I hate going into Coatesville.
|
|
|
Post by lasalle89 on Jan 27, 2018 20:11:41 GMT -5
What comes to mind reading all this is that LaSalle has to decide if it wants to play with 10 foot high rims and learn to reach them or does it want to lower the rims to 8 feet to suit them.
This consulting group is looking around the campus and is saying this simply is not cutting it. You either have to step up and make things happen or drop down a couple of divisions.
LaSalle always has had champagne taste on a beer budget.
To the poster that said Gola was Speeys fault I disagree. I was no Speedy fan but he had a model of what Gola WAS SUPPOSE TO LOOK LIKE in his office. Did anyone see it? It was super nice with seats behind the basket. He was proud of it and showed it to everyone.
LaSalle dropped the ball and went with the crap that we have now. Not even close to the model.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,490
Likes: 6,384
|
Post by MisterD on Jan 27, 2018 20:47:33 GMT -5
Legit question: Who do we blame for Gola?
|
|
|
Post by calsufan on Jan 27, 2018 20:54:24 GMT -5
I heard from a fake source that ICA does not accept money. They only enter into contracts that compensate them with paintings and other works of art. This sounds like a great premise for a movie...oh wait, it was...
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Jan 27, 2018 21:12:55 GMT -5
Legit question: Who do we blame for Gola? You suck.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2018 21:17:47 GMT -5
In Glitter’s defense, his sentiments were confirmed to me. At least the part that said D3 was ‘on the table’ but not happening. We discussed it as Mods. We felt it was newsworthy. Did it get a little out of hand? Maybe. But this is why you tell ICA that they can remove that option from their recommendations. Most people, me included, had no idea a consultation was going on. But... aren't these recommendations due at a later date? We don't see the context in which D3 was mentioned, so there is almost no basis for this thread. I do think it is not uncommon at all for consultation to include baseline "do nothing" or "close it" scenarios in order to show the differential value of going through with one of their investment scenarios. Conference realignment concept was already out there during a president's halftime show a year ago. I would like to find the president's statement that was made at that time, it didn't expire just because a consultant was brought in to explore some of the many options. Also, glitterbro's, and his associate with the Facebook page, strategy of posting a rumor and seeking clarification later is extremely careless and ruthless... did anyone pick up the phone to corroborate these stories?
|
|
|
Post by stlexplorer on Jan 27, 2018 21:54:00 GMT -5
As an aside, what a job being a consultant is. Recommend stuff everyone already knows, put it on fancy letter head and get paid for it. This message board when we stay on topic is as good of a La Salle focus group from the alum perspective as you'll get and last I checked there's no checks flowing our way
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,490
Likes: 6,384
|
Post by MisterD on Jan 27, 2018 23:02:21 GMT -5
Knowing everyone here cares about the long term future of the program and the school, I don’t get seeing this sort of assessment as anything but a positive. Does anyone really think we can sustain another decade carrying on like we have since we got into the A-10? If leadership is on it, whatever “it” ends up being will still be better than the apathy or indecision of the last admin.
|
|
|
Post by GlitterBro #2 on Jan 28, 2018 7:54:41 GMT -5
In Glitter’s defense, his sentiments were confirmed to me. At least the part that said D3 was ‘on the table’ but not happening. We discussed it as Mods. We felt it was newsworthy. Did it get a little out of hand? Maybe. But this is why you tell ICA that they can remove that option from their recommendations. Most people, me included, had no idea a consultation was going on. did anyone pick up the phone to corroborate these stories? I'm not Woodward and Bernstein. Two people at the faculty meeting contacted me, and both their stories were similar with the details they mentioned. I asked if this was confidential (both said no). I asked if things like D2 were mentioned (both said no). I asked if they were sure about D3 being mentioned or being mentioned just for basketball in that meeting (both said yes). Putting that together with something another alum told me the day prior that I dismissed about conference changes, I realized SOMETHING was there and happening, and quite frankly, felt alumni needed to know about it. You may not like the message, but it you read my first post again carefully, nothing in there has been found, at this point in time, to be untrue. Name of consulting company was correct and confirmed by other sources (and now their website was posted here), that a faculty meeting happened where they presented was correct and confirmed by other sources, what they told the faculty (to my knowledge) was correctly reported (at least...no one who spoke to me other than faculty was present and could refute what was said). I think this is why, as Joe said, even if this was a considered option that was dismissed, you don't communicate it to the faculty as an option that they will walk away from the meeting and talk about to alumni and current students. Maybe the University can get out in front of this now in a way they didn't do with the Art Museum and control the messaging better.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,490
Likes: 6,384
|
Post by MisterD on Jan 28, 2018 10:08:09 GMT -5
Legit question: Who do we blame for Gola? You suck. This was a completely sincere question. My first in a while, but still ...
|
|
|
Post by walkon on Jan 28, 2018 10:35:37 GMT -5
Bullshit. I could see if we were at the bottom every season, but we are not.. they will not leave Division I basketball.
|
|