sbu87
New Member
Posts: 32 
|
Post by sbu87 on Aug 19, 2007 6:02:49 GMT -5
In ESPN's recent "Shoot Around" article regarding Rick Majerus resurrecting St. Louis, and the possibility of returning the A-10 to national prominence, each team was critiqued. Below are the author's comments regarding St. Bonaventure. It makes me wonder if we are so enamored to have Coach Schmidt, and the possibility of change at SBU, that we're losing sight of just how bad the problem really is.
The proud 87-year-old program has devolved into the A-10's sad sack, still reeling from the infamous welding-certificate scandal of 2003. Four years of Anthony Solomon resulted in four 19-loss seasons, so Mark Schmidt -- who left the head job at Robert Morris for the opportunity -- will get a shot at turning the brown-clads around. But maybe there's another reason for the Bonnies' recent lack of success: If the school and its $5.3 million athletic budget were in the Northeast Conference (Schmidt's former league), St. Bonaventure would rank 10th in expenses, just ahead of Mount St. Mary's and St. Francis (N.Y.).
|
|
|
|
Post by sburizz on Aug 19, 2007 9:29:28 GMT -5
I don't think the problems are really that bad, we just lacked leadership during Solomon's tenure. It is pointless to say that SBU has a $5.3 million athletic budget and associate that with our basketball failures. Comparing the Basketball budget would matter. This is pathetic reporting. I don't follow your negativity and view of our program. Please explain why our budget is a problem now but wasn't when we whipped UCONN or made it to the Tourney?
|
|
sbu87
New Member
Posts: 32
|
Post by sbu87 on Aug 19, 2007 10:44:52 GMT -5
For clarrification sake, sburizz, the text in yellow in no way reflects my negativity but rather that of the "Special Contributor" to ESPN , Kyle Whelliston. I firmly believe that our program has turned a corner and is heading in the right direction. I can't help but wonder, however, if Mr. Whelliston's view is shared by the majority of people who don't have a vested interest in the program.
|
|
|
|
Post by sbu79 on Aug 19, 2007 19:52:16 GMT -5
That may very well be the view that is shared by most - because it is the easy one. It takes absolutely zero intellectual effort to follow the conventional "wisdom" rather than do some real discovery. We are probably overly positive because of what the school means to us, but one thing I've noted over the years is that many (most?) sports writers will write the easy story.
|
|
|
|
Post by clubhouse on Aug 19, 2007 20:23:19 GMT -5
What have we accomplished over the past few years that would warrant any columnist from spending more than 2 seconds writing a synopsis? It's not like this is a local beat writer. He has to put up something for each school. I'm sure by the time he gets to SBU he's tired and looks at a few other articles, checks a fact or two and rehashes what has already been stated. What he writes about SBU, good or bad, isn't going to sell more magazines or increase readership by any measurable amount.
|
|
|
|
Post by jh on Aug 19, 2007 21:08:59 GMT -5
What have we accomplished over the past few years that would warrant any columnist from spending more than 2 seconds writing a synopsis? It's not like this is a local beat writer. He has to put up something for each school. I'm sure by the time he gets to SBU he's tired and looks at a few other articles, checks a fact or two and rehashes what has already been stated. What he writes about SBU, good or bad, isn't going to sell more magazines or increase readership by any measurable amount. \ Whatever happened to striving for quality or accuracy? |
|
