Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
AgentOrange

Gilmans drop off is as shocking as the elections

223 posts in this topic

You act like Gilman is the only private school dealing out good education. Out of all MIAA schools that had National Merit Semifinalist Gilman only had 1,McD 1, CHC and Loyola each had 3. Loyola had 2 on the football team, both starters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You act like Gilman is the only private school dealing out good education. Out of all MIAA schools that had National Merit Semifinalist Gilman only had 1,McD 1, CHC and Loyola each had 3. Loyola had 2 on the football team, both starters

Like what Fylde said, not all about it is academics. It's about being the more attractive option. Gilman is the top rated area Private school, there's no publication that has any school in the area ranked higher. They don't just ranked purely academics. Part of it has to do with acceptance rates. When kids stop applying, the rate changes. Part of it has to do with fundraising. When that falls, so will the ranking. There's plenty of great options. And not only private. I'm speaking only about Gilman and them losing their luster and reputation as an overall school. I don't care about the other schools, so it's not for me to speak on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the complaints I heard from Gilman parents was my son wasn't given a fair chance to play because Biff brought in his hand picked recruits and gave them positions versus them earning them. If the widespread opinion is its not a meritocracy and the playing field isn't level, the peasants revolt and storm the Bastille. As an outsider, I saw Kai Locksley starting at qb based on recruiting politics not merit. There are a number of other examples that have been conveyed to me but I'll keep them under my hat as they were communicated to me in private. If I'm a full pay parent at Gilman and my son is a very good high school football player, I wouldn't take kindly to some rich guy (no matter how good his intentions were) hijacking the program to build a D1 recruiting juggernaut at the expense of my son's high school athletic experience.

You named one position, QB. Every program at the rec, HS and college levels have parents who think there son didn't get a fair shot to play. The problem is that most of those sons weren't better than who Biff played. Biff's starters for the most part went on to play at the highest levels. If those parents' sons were good enough to play wouldn't they have played during the time that we're discussing, the golden age of GIlman football? Every team needs depth. GIlman had plenty of huge leads during Biff's tenure. Those players had opportunities to play lots of football. This season at GIlman is what happens when the entitled aren't good enough. I hope that the full tuition paying parents' sons continue this year's train wreck for years to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You named one position, QB. Every program at the rec, HS and college levels have parents who think there son didn't get a fair shot to play. The problem is that most of those sons weren't better than who Biff played. Biff's starters for the most part went on to play at the highest levels. If those parents' sons were good enough to play wouldn't they have played during the time that we're discussing, the golden age of GIlman football? Every team needs depth. GIlman had plenty of huge leads during Biff's tenure. Those players had opportunities to play lots of football. This season at GIlman is what happens when the entitled aren't good enough. I hope that the full tuition paying parents' sons continue this year's train wreck for years to come.

I'm sorry but Biff paid for kids to go to Gilman. If any HC pays a kid's tuition, do you think he's biased towards starting the kid on his team so he gets a full football ride to college? Are you that naive to think human nature doesn't have a role in that decision.

 

High school football is supposed to be a meritocracy not a rich guy buying a team and playing his "guys" or kids he wants to help. I look at Kai Locksley as a prima facia case. Hill was 10x better qb but he didn't get the nod. I know of several top flight athletes at Gilman who dropped football based on their perception that they weren't going to get a fair shot at playing. I didn't agree with their decision but you can't deny that sentiment didn't exist.

 

Denying that this environment existed (whether real or perceived) is sticking your head in the sand. Biff is gone and I'm guessing the administration/board at Gilman will make certain that type of coach focused program is never duplicated. 

Edited by mop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You named one position, QB. Every program at the rec, HS and college levels have parents who think there son didn't get a fair shot to play. The problem is that most of those sons weren't better than who Biff played. Biff's starters for the most part went on to play at the highest levels. If those parents' sons were good enough to play wouldn't they have played during the time that we're discussing, the golden age of GIlman football? Every team needs depth. GIlman had plenty of huge leads during Biff's tenure. Those players had opportunities to play lots of football. This season at GIlman is what happens when the entitled aren't good enough. I hope that the full tuition paying parents' sons continue this year's train wreck for years to come.

This is the most disgraceful post I have ever read and the reason why kids are the way they are today. Shame! Entitled you say? Those recruited players are the most entitled kids at the school. 

 

I am a racist in 5,4,3,2....

Edited by Outside Looking In

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but Biff paid for kids to go to Gilman. If any HC pays a kid's tuition, do you think he's biased towards starting the kid on his team so he gets a full football ride to college? Are you that naive to think human nature doesn't have a role in that decision.

 

High school football is supposed to be a meritocracy not a rich guy buying a team and playing his "guys" or kids he wants to help. I look at Kai Locksley as a prima facia case. Hill was 10x better qb but he didn't get the nod. I know of several top flight athletes at Gilman who dropped football based on their perception that they weren't going to get a fair shot at playing. I didn't agree with their decision but you can't deny that sentiment didn't exist.

 

Denying that this environment existed (whether real or perceived) is sticking your head in the sand. Biff is gone and I'm guessing the administration/board at Gilman will make certain that type of coach focused program is never duplicated.

He recruited Hill too. It's no different than any program that has multiple capable QBs. The coach plays the one he feels will help him win. If all things are equal (Wins and losses-wise) then the upperclassmen starts. Who pays what tuition matters not. You still won't name the kids and I respect that but I guarantee those players weren't better than those that Biff started. Biff just ignored the politics unlike other MIAA schools not named McDonogh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gilman no longer wants to be a powerhouse, plain and simple.  They want to be competitive every year, with the likes of McD, MSJ, Spalding, CHC, etc.  They'll win a championship every so often and be happy.  St. Frances will become a regional powerhouse in a very short period of time.  And if you don't think Poggi is out to prove that he "made" Gilman, you're wrong.  He has a major chip on his shoulder.  

 

The major sports at Gilman stink these days between Football, Basketball, and Lacrosse.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He recruited Hill too. It's no different than any program that has multiple capable QBs. The coach plays the one he feels will help him win. If all things are equal (Wins and losses-wise) then the upperclassmen starts. Who pays what tuition matters not. You still won't name the kids and I respect that but I guarantee those players weren't better than those that Biff started. Biff just ignored the politics unlike other MIAA schools not named McDonogh.

Politics exist everywhere. I think there's an inherent conflict of interest when a HC is both paying tuitions of certain recruited kids and determining playing time vs kids he wasn't subsidizing.  If he paid everyone on the football team's full tuition then at least you make the case that he wasn't conflicted. That was not the case at Gilman. To be clear, my kids didn't attend Gilman and all started at their respective high schools. Mine is an outside observation and not one from a disgruntled parent. I also believe Trump has to put all of his holdings (even if that means laying off his kids) in a blind trust during his presidency. No conflicts of interest.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gilman no longer wants to be a powerhouse, plain and simple.  They want to be competitive every year, with the likes of McD, MSJ, Spalding, CHC, etc.  They'll win a championship every so often and be happy.  St. Frances will become a regional powerhouse in a very short period of time.  And if you don't think Poggi is out to prove that he "made" Gilman, you're wrong.  He has a major chip on his shoulder.  

 

The major sports at Gilman stink these days between Football, Basketball, and Lacrosse.  

To quote GA, I heard the middle school and incoming 9th graders are stacked. Hope springs eternal. Unfortunately 9th graders (even big ones) never make great linemen. That's a gig for upperclassmen (occasionally a sophomore). 

Edited by mop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the wealthy Gilman alums should be taxed by Gilman (it will of course be Tax deductible) to make "Gilman Football Great Again".

 

With each Contribution of $ 100K you will receive a "Make Gilman Great Again" hat. I know a certain poster on here already has 5 hats. My sources tell me DeMatha is ducking Gilman in Basketball because they got the # 342 recruit out of the Jolly UK. Cheerio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the most disgraceful post I have ever read and the reason why kids are the way they are today. Shame! Entitled you say? Those recruited players are the most entitled kids at the school. 

 

I am a racist in 5,4,3,2....

Name one "recruited" player you know from Gilman? You call his post shameful but yours isn't?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gilman no longer wants to be a powerhouse, plain and simple.  They want to be competitive every year, with the likes of McD, MSJ, Spalding, CHC, etc.  They'll win a championship every so often and be happy.  St. Frances will become a regional powerhouse in a very short period of time.  And if you don't think Poggi is out to prove that he "made" Gilman, you're wrong.  He has a major chip on his shoulder.  

 

The major sports at Gilman stink these days between Football, Basketball, and Lacrosse.

 

Part of what you said is true. Like I said, Gilman might never be like they were in the Poggi era. I'm not saying that's going to happen. But I do believe that they will probably have some very very strong years coming up in the next three four years. They're still recruiting DC, something I didn't even know until Saturday.

 

Also think you're right about what you said about Poggi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Politics exist everywhere. I think there's an inherent conflict of interest when a HC is both paying tuitions of certain recruited kids and determining playing time vs kids he wasn't subsidizing.  If he paid everyone on the football team's full tuition then at least you make the case that he wasn't conflicted. That was not the case at Gilman. To be clear, my kids didn't attend Gilman and all started at their respective high schools. Mine is an outside observation and not one from a disgruntled parent. I also believe Trump has to put all of his holdings (even if that means laying off his kids) in a blind trust during his presidency. No conflicts of interest.

 

There was no conflict of interest. As someone who have watched Gilman football for close to 30 years(missing some years of course), Biff played the best player. The ONLY time I can think where the best player didn't play at their position, was Locksley. And guess what, he was a FULL PAYING STUDENT!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gilman no longer wants to be a powerhouse, plain and simple. They want to be competitive every year, with the likes of McD, MSJ, Spalding, CHC, etc. They'll win a championship every so often and be happy. St. Frances will become a regional powerhouse in a very short period of time. And if you don't think Poggi is out to prove that he "made" Gilman, you're wrong. He has a major chip on his shoulder.

 

The major sports at Gilman stink these days between Football, Basketball, and Lacrosse.

 

By the way, I asked a big lacrosse guy about the future of Gilman lacrosse and how some were saying that they didn't have the best young talent coming in and that they got no one and he said those people should never speak lacrosse again. Said that Gilman's young lacrosse talent rivals any! And he said not just in Baltimore. That they won Trilogy Tourney this summer and went undefeated. Also that they went to the Championship the week before that at NHSLS and were undefeated until then.

 

Just like lacrosse, Gilman will never let its football team fall off.

Edited by GREYHOUND ALUM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, I asked a big lacrosse guy about the future of Gilman lacrosse and how some were saying that they didn't have the best young talent coming in and that they got no one and he said those people should never speak lacrosse again. Said that Gilman's young lacrosse talent rivals any! And he said not just in Baltimore. That they won Trilogy Tourney this summer and went undefeated. Also that they went to the Championship the week before that at NHSLS and were undefeated until then.

 

Just like lacrosse, Gilman will never let its football team fall off.

 

Gilman has been down in lacrosse as of late, and I have to believe that makes the alums angrier than anything.  They did better towards the end of last season but still went something like 3-6 in conference.  All of the local schools have recently posted their "national signing day" photos to social media.  Most of the MIAA teams have 5-10 kids going D1.  Gilman had 2.  

 

That being said, I have no doubt that the younger talent is there.  Gilman, SP, BL, McD, Loyola will always have good young talent.  Most of the lacrosse kids aren't recruited at all other than maybe CHC, since they only have high school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Politics exist everywhere. I think there's an inherent conflict of interest when a HC is both paying tuitions of certain recruited kids and determining playing time vs kids he wasn't subsidizing.  If he paid everyone on the football team's full tuition then at least you make the case that he wasn't conflicted. That was not the case at Gilman. To be clear, my kids didn't attend Gilman and all started at their respective high schools. Mine is an outside observation and not one from a disgruntled parent. I also believe Trump has to put all of his holdings (even if that means laying off his kids) in a blind trust during his presidency. No conflicts of interest.   

I didn't think the kids you described are yours.  But does stand to reason that a coach recruits to get better players than what he already has.  If you have a 3-star player at LT, you try to get a 4-star LT to strengthen your team.  I'm sure that the recruited players were head and shoulder's better than the kids of the complaining parents.  Just look at the kids individually and tell me, in your honest opinion, if they were better than the players who started. I'd wager that they weren't better or even comparable.

Edited by TheGuru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the most disgraceful post I have ever read and the reason why kids are the way they are today. Shame! Entitled you say? Those recruited players are the most entitled kids at the school. 

 

I am a racist in 5,4,3,2....

Thanks for clearing that up OLI.  And it only took 5 seconds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was no conflict of interest. As someone who have watched Gilman football for close to 30 years(missing some years of course), Biff played the best player. The ONLY time I can think where the best player didn't play at their position, was Locksley. And guess what, he was a FULL PAYING STUDENT!!

Say it again, GA.  Locksley's father paid his tuition.  Whoa!  I guess that conflict of interest argument goes right down the drain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think the kids you described are yours.  Just look at the kids and tell me, in your honest opinion, if they were better than the starters. Only you and Poggi know.  

Without naming names, at least two were definately better athletes and football players than the starters. Both are or were D1 starters (one on a national championship team) in other contact sports. Both fast, strong and better athletes than the kids that started ahead of them. My guess is that Biff or someone on his staff made promises to parents or kids or had some college say "this kid is blank blank and I project him here" based on some in shorts combine workout. Guys, anyone that has been around team contact sports know that a freshman or sophomore with D1 potential often isn't ready yet. What I saw when Gilman played the better team nationally is that they had more upperclassmen starting and weren't try to give some underclass kid with potential some shine. Play the best player that's all I ask, nothing more, nothing less. Screw the college scouts, combine times, play to win by playing the best available player. I have seen a lot of track stars or stud looking athletes be duds on the athletic field. Some kids have the grit and nose for the ball and some don't. No one would pick the Honey Badger out of a combine drill but that guy is a baller. Pat Tillman is another example as is the Raven's current safety. Don't read the press clippings, watch the film..... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say it again, GA.  Locksley's father paid his tuition.  Whoa!  I guess that conflict of interest argument goes right down the drain.

Yeah, getting his kids full rides to MD wasn't in the equation... Guys, I have some swamp land in FL for you Are you going to tell me that didn't have any influence in the matter? .. guys you are so naive.

Edited by mop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MOP, I wonder if the two recruited kids who started over your "better athletes" and "D1 starters in other contact sports" went on to play college football.  Its a rhetorical question, but if they did go on to the next level then the argument is moot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Name one "recruited" player you know from Gilman? You call his post shameful but yours isn't?

I do not know any. I do not have to to know they are there on that team and feel very entitled. If they didn't feel entitled than they would have stayed instead of bailing on their team and school. No loyalty from the entitled class. Not just from Gilman, but at many schools.

 

Since I do not know one recruited player are you implying there are none? How much are you giving to the school to fund these athletes JP Morgan?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MOP, I wonder if the two recruited kids who started over your "better athletes" and "D1 starters in other contact sports" went on to play college football.  Its a rhetorical question, but if they did go on to the next level then the argument is moot. 

That's the dumbest thing I ever seen posted. Its about the here and now. Ricky Henderson was a superstar RB in high school. He didn't deserve to start in high school because he was a pro baseball prospect and never planned to play college football. Really moronic. Here's another analogy: one student is a great fiction writer but tells the teacher, I want to go to law school. Another student is not as strong academically but because he professes to aspire to a career as a novelist, he gets the A vs the better student. HA HA. Is that the way they evaluate student athletes at Gilman?

Edited by mop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without naming names, at least two were definately better athletes and football players than the starters. Both are or were D1 starters (one on a national championship team) in other contact sports. Both fast, strong and better athletes than the kids that started ahead of them. My guess is that Biff or someone on his staff made promises to parents or kids or had some college say "this kid is blank blank and I project him here" based on some in shorts combine workout. Guys, anyone that has been around team contact sports know that a freshman or sophomore with D1 potential often isn't ready yet. What I saw when Gilman played the better team nationally is that they had more upperclassmen starting and weren't try to give some underclass kid with potential some shine. Play the best player that's all I ask, nothing more, nothing less. Screw the college scouts, combine times, play to win by playing the best available player. I have seen a lot of track stars or stud looking athletes be duds on the athletic field. Some kids have the grit and nose for the ball and some don't. No one would pick the Honey Badger out of a combine drill but that guy is a baller. Pat Tillman is another example as is the Raven's current safety. Don't read the press clippings, watch the film.....

 

If you knew Biff, you would know that he hated combines and recruiting in general. Gilman got heavy in the whole recruiting game because of McGregor. Not because of Biff. Biff literally use to withhold recruiting letters from players. This is facts.

 

Just because you think those kids were better, how would you actually know if they were better if they didn't play? Were you at Gilman's practices? The kids aren't there anymore and adults now. Nothing wrong with saying who was better in your eyes than others.

Edited by GREYHOUND ALUM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you knew Biff, you would know that he hated combines and recruiting in general. Gilman got heavy in the whole recruiting game because of McGregor. Not because of Biff. Biff literally use to withhold recruiting letters from players. This is facts.

 

Just because you think those kids were better, how would you actually know if they were better if they didn't play? Were you at Gilman's practices? The kids aren't there anymore and adults now. Nothing wrong with saying who was better in your eyes than others.

In my opinion, Miles Norris and Micah Kaiser were the two best LBs to go through Gilman in the past 8 years. Miles was a much better high school LB than many of the so called D1 Gilman studs who graduated after him. I watch the film. He and Micah could find the ball and weren't exclusively pass rushers. I don't know who on the staff fell in love with some of these kids but I watched a couple of the MCD teams steam roll them. They couldn't read their keys worth a crap and they only excelled when they dominated physically (against most of the other MIAA competition). What I'm saying is there were better athletes (kids that were tough and could actually find the ball) in your cheering section. Frankly, player mismanagement and bad coaching is why you lost in 2013 and 2014. You got killed by MCDs run game because you couldn't find the ball or read the blocking schemes. What I heard from the kids (remember they all talk around the kitchen table) is that the staff identified kids when they were young and pidgeon holed them (that's why Kareem Montgomery ended up at MCD) whether they fit there or not. Its about how you play in pads versus how you look in shorts that should dictate whether and where you play. 

 

I was out at Elder a couple of years ago and got into a discussion with several old men about a local star Luke Kuechly. They told me that he was a late bloomer (began shining in his junior year of high school) and many of the top programs recruited over him. He grew and got faster later in life but always had a nose for the ball and a high football IQ. My point is evaluate a kid on where he is here and now not on some perceived potential. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0