LaxPower Back-Up Stick

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:40 am

Hail to the Victors wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:21 am Give his history, I would guess that he does not. And he would almost certainly prefer that the next HC be someone with zero prior affiliation with the program, i.e. someone completely beholden to RD.

Is coronavirus giving everyone brainworms? What's going on?

If RD doesn't care one way or the other about the lacrosse program, it does not follow that he'd suddenly enforce these very strict rules about whom they can and cannot hire. He very likely doesn't care and would leave the decision to the AD, who may be new to the role but very much DOES care. With the help of a very active committee of alumni/advisors, she'd hire someone worthy of the job. If you think that if they wanted someone like Nadelen or Marr (or Chemotti or Wray or any one of a number of promising youngish D1 head coaches) RD would step in to say "NO you can't hire them you have to hire Joe Schmo from Algonquin College," you are completely delusional.

+1
I think it may be fair to ask about Daniels' priorities and that of the Admin in general, but I agree that IF he's basically uninterested in prioritizing success in lax, that would most likely lead to un-involvement rather than hands-on. And the AD undoubtedly cares...she knows her constituency.

IMO, the risk of pressure to go DIII across the board would not likely come from Mike Bloomberg, unless someone is personally in the know that he was treated badly by some lax jocks back in the day and has been harboring a grudge all these years??? Not likely; more likely he was one of the many Hop students cheering "we want more..."

It could come from faculty.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 12:15 pm

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:40 am

Hail to the Victors wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:21 am Give his history, I would guess that he does not. And he would almost certainly prefer that the next HC be someone with zero prior affiliation with the program, i.e. someone completely beholden to RD.

Is coronavirus giving everyone brainworms? What's going on?

If RD doesn't care one way or the other about the lacrosse program, it does not follow that he'd suddenly enforce these very strict rules about whom they can and cannot hire. He very likely doesn't care and would leave the decision to the AD, who may be new to the role but very much DOES care. With the help of a very active committee of alumni/advisors, she'd hire someone worthy of the job. If you think that if they wanted someone like Nadelen or Marr (or Chemotti or Wray or any one of a number of promising youngish D1 head coaches) RD would step in to say "NO you can't hire them you have to hire Joe Schmo from Algonquin College," you are completely delusional.

+1
I think it may be fair to ask about Daniels' priorities and that of the Admin in general, but I agree that IF he's basically uninterested in prioritizing success in lax, that would most likely lead to un-involvement rather than hands-on. And the AD undoubtedly cares...she knows her constituency.

IMO, the risk of pressure to go DIII across the board would not likely come from Mike Bloomberg, unless someone is personally in the know that he was treated badly by some lax jocks back in the day and has been harboring a grudge all these years??? Not likely; more likely he was one of the many Hop students cheering "we want more..."

It could come from faculty.

I've heard from some referencing the program going to D3. Without going back and reviewing posts....why do some believe this could happen?

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 12:15 pm

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:40 am

Hail to the Victors wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:21 am Give his history, I would guess that he does not. And he would almost certainly prefer that the next HC be someone with zero prior affiliation with the program, i.e. someone completely beholden to RD.

Is coronavirus giving everyone brainworms? What's going on?

If RD doesn't care one way or the other about the lacrosse program, it does not follow that he'd suddenly enforce these very strict rules about whom they can and cannot hire. He very likely doesn't care and would leave the decision to the AD, who may be new to the role but very much DOES care. With the help of a very active committee of alumni/advisors, she'd hire someone worthy of the job. If you think that if they wanted someone like Nadelen or Marr (or Chemotti or Wray or any one of a number of promising youngish D1 head coaches) RD would step in to say "NO you can't hire them you have to hire Joe Schmo from Algonquin College," you are completely delusional.

+1
I think it may be fair to ask about Daniels' priorities and that of the Admin in general, but I agree that IF he's basically uninterested in prioritizing success in lax, that would most likely lead to un-involvement rather than hands-on. And the AD undoubtedly cares...she knows her constituency.

IMO, the risk of pressure to go DIII across the board would not likely come from Mike Bloomberg, unless someone is personally in the know that he was treated badly by some lax jocks back in the day and has been harboring a grudge all these years??? Not likely; more likely he was one of the many Hop students cheering "we want more..."

It could come from faculty.

I've heard from some referencing the program going to D3. Without going back and reviewing posts....why do some believe this could happen?

I don't believe any sensible person believes that the program is going DIII. Far off the deep end speculation that the Daniels administration doesn't like the program and wants to bring in in line with his view of the university.

As a I dislike Daniels and his identity politics BS (as an alum married to an alum, it there another university I ask for legacy status for my kids, since you guys decided to disenfranchise us?), this going DIII thing is from deep in the fever swamps.

nyjay wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 2:13 pm I don't believe any sensible person believes that the program is going DIII. Far off the deep end speculation that the Daniels administration doesn't like the program and wants to bring in in line with his view of the university.

As a I dislike Daniels and his identity politics BS (as an alum married to an alum, it there another university I ask for legacy status for my kids, since you guys decided to disenfranchise us?), this going DIII thing is from deep in the fever swamps.

Lets hope so!

I actually do agree with you NYJAY.
But not entirely from the 'fever swamp' as there are all sorts of institutions that are struggling with pressures to focus on academic education and less on athletic education. Hopkins faculty is where I'd see that coming from, if anywhere.

But at least the faculty who I know aren't hostile to the program. So, I think quite low risk.
And it's not as if the Ivies are going DIII.

But man, better not foul up in off-field behaviors.

nyjay wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 2:13 pm I don't believe any sensible person believes that the program is going DIII. Far off the deep end speculation that the Daniels administration doesn't like the program and wants to bring in in line with his view of the university.

As a I dislike Daniels and his identity politics BS (as an alum married to an alum, it there another university I ask for legacy status for my kids, since you guys decided to disenfranchise us?), this going DIII thing is from deep in the fever swamps.

Good to hear some sensibility. Hopefully that stops some of the nonsense subject matter on this forum.

going d3 is up there with dropping the s in johns on the university to do list.

next.

jhu06 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:42 pm going d3 is up there with dropping the s in johns on the university to do list.

next.

Very likely correct. Just don't ask sports reporters about the s.

nyjay wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 2:13 pm I don't believe any sensible person believes that the program is going DIII. Far off the deep end speculation that the Daniels administration doesn't like the program and wants to bring in in line with his view of the university.

As a I dislike Daniels and his identity politics BS (as an alum married to an alum, it there another university I ask for legacy status for my kids, since you guys decided to disenfranchise us?), this going DIII thing is from deep in the fever swamps.

The issue came up once before when Hopkins faced the (remote but still real) possibility that schools would not be permitted to compete at both the Division I and III levels.

Johns Hopkins considered the option of going all Division I.

If ever forced to do so, that’s precisely what I think Hopkins would do ... go all Division I.

Would be great to watch Johns Hopkins play Ohio State and Alabama in football. They could play in the Ravens’ stadium while they convert Homewood into a 40,000-capacity football cathedral.

DocBarrister

Dave Huntley

RIP

nyjay wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 2:13 pm I don't believe any sensible person believes that the program is going DIII. Far off the deep end speculation that the Daniels administration doesn't like the program and wants to bring in in line with his view of the university.

As a I dislike Daniels and his identity politics BS (as an alum married to an alum, it there another university I ask for legacy status for my kids, since you guys decided to disenfranchise us?), this going DIII thing is from deep in the fever swamps.

First, the discussion about lax being grandfathered in to DI or moving all sports up to DI took place at least a decade ago. Lots of things have changed. At the time, the President was very active in the sports program and attended many games not just lacrosse. This was also at a time that Hopkins lax under DP was in its prime. You also had a very supportive AD in Tom Calder. He was the assistant AD when Bob Scott (who was alive at the time this decision was going on) was the AD so had a natural affinity to the program staying in DI. A number of big time supporters - guys like Larry Goldfarb, RIP, are long passed away. Sadly, many of the people that knew LG and others like him no longer work at Hopkins. He is just a name on a sign now.

Second, saying that. I doubt Hopkins would move to D3 but to think it wouldn't be discussed is misplaced. I'm sure there are discussions on this whenever long term planning about the Athletic Department take place. There is also likely a great deal of pressure from the faculty to reduce the emphasis on sports - see a school like Swathmore dropping football 20 years ago or Hofstra, St. Johns, or Boston U dropping football. Reducing the commitment (i.e. the cost) of high level sports is not unheard of.

Third, I am alum married to an alum who comes from an alum family. And the decision to discount legacy has meant the entire family has stopped giving. Some of them helped fund scholarships. So it isn't Bloomberg money but some years it was significant. If my kid isn't smart enough to get into Hopkins that is fine. But, if my kid was in the gray area that many decisions are made or equal to someone else who isn't a legacy, I see no reason why being a legacy shouldn't provide some small bonus. Note, Hopkins took a very broad view of legacy such that it was almost to the point that the school's janitor's cousin's kid would be considered a legacy but tightening that up would have made more sense than just dropping it all together.

I don't see DP leaving until his kids finish high school. From the looks of it, I think he could stick around as long as he wants.

johnnyonthegunpowder wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 10:09 am I don't see DP leaving until his kids finish high school. From the looks of it, I think he could stick around as long as he wants.

Why didn't they renew his contract prior to this season then? If the guy has a lifetime appointment, then you don't let him coach on an expiring deal. There's no reason to turn him into a lame duck unless you're trying to play some real mind games, which really doesn't seem like something this AD/administration would do.

While I do suspect he comes back for at least another year, I don't think he has carte blanche.

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 10:15 am
While I do suspect he comes back for at least another year...

Based on what? His stellar 2020 season, or the stellar dozen seasons preceding it?

Sagittarius A* wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:17 pm

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 10:15 am
While I do suspect he comes back for at least another year...

Based on what? His stellar 2020 season, or the stellar dozen seasons preceding it?

You should all count yourselves LUCKY to have him. Look at the big picture! He develops good men and is a solid role model. Not just about W/L. Everybody thinks they can do better until then next guy faces the same and additional issues. The grass is NOT always greener. Not many upgrades available in that mold... there just isn't.

Sagittarius A* wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:17 pm

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 10:15 am
While I do suspect he comes back for at least another year...

Based on what? His stellar 2020 season, or the stellar dozen seasons preceding it?

Based on the fact that it's going to be extraordinarily difficult to conduct a coaching search this offseason, even if they wanted to. On top of that, given all the uncertainty around eligibility, logistics, etc., it might be even more difficult for a hypothetical new regime to come in right now and make a seamless transition. There are countless questions that need answering headed into next season. Here is just one example of many: Imagine being a senior and trying to decide your future and you have no idea who your coach would even be next year. Likewise, you need a coach to help decide who should/shouldn't return, who gets scholarships, etc. etc. etc. These are decisions that need to be made very soon. I don't think they are going to want to risk being without a captain as they try to navigate these waters. Not having a staff for any sustained period of time this offseason could do a lot more damage to the program longterm than one more mediocre season under the current group. And this may not be as much of a factor but perhaps the AD has heard the hoopla about the incoming class and wants to do whatever it takes to keep it in tact.

There have been two occasions when Hopkins had to consider the Dlll issue. Back in the mid 70s schools had to decide D-lll or D-l for lax. If they decided D-1 but were D-lll in other sports it introduced two levels of regulations to follow. Hopkins chose D-1 but W&L D-lll. Later there was a move led by a D-lll college to require schools to become the same in all sports. Hopkins would have moved to D-1A to stay D1 in lax. Different President. Now it is almost a certainty Hookins would move to D-llll. There are quite a few people who think it’s what the prez wants anyway. It would explain many decisions in recent years.

OCanada wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:36 pm It would explain many decisions in recent years.

Like being an advocate for the lacrosse programs joining the Big Ten?

Daniels was very involved in that process. Really doesn't seem like something you'd do if you had your sights set on going D3.

https://hub.jhu.edu/gazette/2013/july/t ... e-big-ten/

(I'm not even sure why we're talking about this. It isn't going to happen.)

Try a better example. If you want to go to bat for Daniels I won’t argue about it. Your choice. Next time you talk to him ask him why the Bubble that is fully funded isn’t getting built.