
As an AU alumnus (BA, International Relations '95), I greatly resent your comments on your latest entry. I'm sure you have more "insider information" than I do about the PL offices, but are the "league-wide concerns" over AU's academic shortcomings coming from within the PL administration or just from fans of the old-guard schools? The idea that American is not academically equal to any of the Patriot League schools is laughable. With the possible exception of Lehigh, American is probably the most nationally respected university in the league. This is not to take anything away from the other excellent schools in the Patriot League, but your posting gave the clear impression that AU lags far behind Colgate, Bucknell, Lafayette, or Holy Cross in terms of its academic reputation I think you would have a very hard time making an effective case for that argument.
The statistics you point to are for the 1996-1999 cohorts, when AU was at a true low point in terms of its basketball administration. Chris Knoche really let things go at the end of his tenure as coach, and then Art Perry was a disastrous hire, trying to find quick solutions in very questionable characters who had basketball talent. This was the period of our swan song in the CAA, and the university made an institutional decision to move the Patriot League in order to be sure that our athletics department stayed representative of the high academic level the university as a whole is known for. So while 18% is truly an atrocious number, it's not really relevant for discussion when considering AU's history as a member of the Patriot League. And I guarantee you that the rate is MUCH higher now, as the type of athletes we have recruited has changed after entering the Patriot League.
Similarly, your pot shot at the new AD is disappointing. Again, your statistics are NOT APPLICABLE to the period when Gill was at Oklahoma. You'd need to see the CHANGE is graduation rates during his tenure to know what his impact was. How do we know that graduation rates didn't go up from 41% to 60%? Of course, they could have gone down, too, but my point is that we don't have the information. Your quickness to make an assumption makes me wonder if you have some prejudice against American.
I'm sorry to come off as defensive, but I have really enjoyed following your blog, and I think your comments really matter in forming opinions. You should be commended for that, for the hard work you put in. But there was no way to read your last post and not feel insulted as an American University alumnus.
I'd love to see you address some of my comments on your blog. Perhaps you can show me that I am wrong in some way. But it's disappointing to see my school seemingly looked on with disdain, when I don't see a real rationale for that.
| SCHOOL | Pct. adm. | Pct. Top 10 |
|---|---|---|
| American | 53 | 48 |
| Army | NA | 72 |
| Bucknell | 33 | 71 |
| Colgate | 28 | 70 |
| Holy Cross | 34 | 64 |
| Lafayette | 37 | 62 |
| Lehigh | 39 | 62 |
| Navy | NA | 54 |
| Source: The College Board | ||
| SCHOOL | Math | Crit. Rdg. |
|---|---|---|
| American | 603 | 620 |
| Army | 641 | 627 |
| Bucknell | 666 | 636 |
| Colgate | 675 | 666 |
| Holy Cross | 629 | 631 |
| Lafayette | 665 | 620 |
| Lehigh | 671 | 631 |
| Navy | 670 | 648 |
| Source: Princeton Review | ||
| SCHOOL | All | SA |
|---|---|---|
| American | 71 | 56 |
| Army | NA | NA |
| Bucknell | 88 | 90 |
| Colgate | 91 | 89 |
| Holy Cross | 91 | 82 |
| Lafayette | 90 | 88 |
| Lehigh | 85 | 86 |
| Navy | NA | NA |
| Source: 2006 NCAA Division I GSR Data | ||
Labels: AU
Labels: HC
Labels: Army
Labels: HC
Labels: BU
Labels: Navy
Labels: AU
Labels: Laf
Labels: HC
Labels: HC
Labels: HC
Labels: HC
Labels: HC
Labels: HC
Labels: HC
Labels: HC
Labels: HC
Labels: HC
Labels: Navy
"“Disrupt” is the perfect word to describe what Southern Illinois does to teams defensively. The Salukis don’t apply a full-court team press, but Lowery has his point guard, Bryan Mullins, pick up the opposing team’s point guard and defend him the full length of the floor. That can really wear a point guard down and make it difficult for a team to get into its offense. And once a team manages to get into its half-court offense against SIU, it’s under constant pressure. Each Salukis defender gets right up in his man’s grill when he has the ball. Virtually every pass is contested, let alone every shot. It’s rare to see a team get a clean, uncontested shot against Southern Illinois.Leftovers: Tatum got his hair cut and dreadlocks done with roommate Falker in April, 2004. Neither have cut it since . . . only three opposing players have scored 20 or more points against the Salukis this season . . . Southern Illinois shoots 69.3 percent from the free throw line for the season, but the Salukis are better during crunch time, making 71.4 percent in the last two minutes of regulation . . . the Salukis are 4-9 all-time in NCAA Tournament games . . . SIU has now strung together six straight 20-win seasons . . . All five starters and the top eight in Lowery's rotation are the same guys who filled those roles on last year's SIU team, which lost in the first round.
And on the offensive end, Lowery’s Salukis are extremely disciplined as well. You’ll rarely see them take a quick or forced shot. They’ll pass the ball around the perimeter looking for an open jumper or for their big men inside, using the majority of the 35-second shot clock in the process. That wears teams down too, having to play defense for that long."
Labels: BU
Labels: HC
Labels: Army, AU, BU, HC, previews
Name: VeryAnother anonymous one read like this:
Address : Pissed
Address: Off
City: Lehigh
State: Fan
Zip: Wow
Comments: We got screwed...shouldn't have been that close...but Chris,
we got screwed.
Lehigh has sent video of the game to the league already. The shot was approximately .3-.5 seconds late. If they were smart they would send it to ESPN and put some pressure on the league. It comes down to being Lehigh's fault though. If they put a better product on the court, the local television wouldn't be televising a high school game over the first round of the Patriot League tourney. They should have pushed to get the station to do this game. It is funny (sad) that Lehigh has been screwed 3 times now at the end of the game; twice by not having television there. This call was truly awful. I hope you get to see how late the "basket" actually was, Chris. Long story short...LU should not have allowed this game to be close, but in the end, it should have been a LU win...refs truly blew it.This one also identified itself as being from a Lehigh fan, but gave no name:
Here is what my people are telling me: The league ADs met this afternoon (sans Lehigh's and Army's) on a conference call to discuss the situation, presumably after Taylor had pushed for this. It was determined that Lehigh should have won the game (the shot was late), but because the refs had left the court, they couldn't take the game away from Army. Last night, after the one ref (description deleted) made the call, the three stormed off the court without a conference. The reason is because Lehigh never informed the refs that the game was indeed being broadcasted on Internet video. The refs thought it was just game film, something they couldn't look at. Had Lehigh been clear prior to the game that indeed their was a monitor they could review, things may have gone differently. My problem is the with the alacrity that the refs left the court, not allowing Taylor anytime to explain that they were actually able to review the monitor. Once they went into the locker room though, it was over. Really, these refs should be examined for missing such a blatant call. Garbage!Mike from Bethlehem, whose e-mail address was a lehigh.edu domain, wrote:
I'm not sure I understand the "deserve to win" rhetoric. While both teams played poor in the Army/Lehigh game, that doesn't mean Lehigh didn't "deserve" the win. I could quote Herm Edwards, but you get the idea. Obviously, Lehigh would not have been happy with their collective performance had they won, but I'm sure they felt the same way in 2003 after squeaking by Navy in the 1st round.
The story coming from this game isn't about a sub 30% shooting performance; it is the bureaucracy that is the NCAA. How can this result be upheld? A jury of 1,000,000 would unanimously declare that the final shot should not have counted. However, because the three blind officials left the court the result is final?
I understand some Internet broadcast technicality, but the proof could be found on the sidelines within 5 minutes of the disputed shot. This is a disgrace. The NCAA is a joke. Imagine this happening in an ACC tournament game - simply put, Lehigh wins. I feel like shit.
"We have to fight the fight because it was clearly after the light went off, so we are going to continue to fight until they say we can't anymore, and then we'll fight some more."That time might be better spent working on shooting. Although No. 3 seed Lehigh (12-19) finished the season ranked third in the league in scoring, it came into the game shooting 36 percent from the field in its last nine games. Had it managed even that meager performance, there would be no controversy.