KeepItReal

Gilman Football Coach

442 posts in this topic

47 minutes ago, bleedingorangeandblack said:

But this opens the gates for schools to do so imo 

Gilman and McDonogh would never do it, so it's not an issue. Neither school were complaining about "competitive balance." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, GREYHOUND ALUM said:

Gilman and McDonogh would never do it, so it's not an issue. Neither school were complaining about "competitive balance." 

Neither school stayed on the schedule either 

Im fact one could look at it as they let the weaker schools (sorry if its insulting) make a move 1st so they wouldnt look bad 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, bleedingorangeandblack said:

Neither school stayed on the schedule either 

Im fact one could look at it as they let the weaker schools (sorry if its insulting) make a move 1st so they wouldnt look bad 

 

What I'm told, SFA didn't want to keep them on the schedule, after they left the conference. Gilman would absolutely never cancel a game with SFA, by their own choice. What people don't realize, Gilman's new Co-AD, is married to somebody who works directky for Biff. So, they wouldn't drop them. They would do everything to help SFA out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, GREYHOUND ALUM said:

I don't think SFA played on a level playing field per se, but wouldn't have kicked them out if they did not break rules(not saying they did not). 

Let me ask you this question, where does it stop? There can be an argument that CHC, Spalding and MSJ doesn't play on level playing fields with Gilman and McDonogh. Because they have way more boys to choose from. But you will never hear Gilman and McD cry about this. It's life, just compete. 

I was speaking in general terms, not necessarily about the SFA situation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, GREYHOUND ALUM said:

What I'm told, SFA didn't want to keep them on the schedule, after they left the conference. Gilman would absolutely never cancel a game with SFA, by their own choice. What people don't realize, Gilman's new Co-AD, is married to somebody who works directky for Biff. So, they wouldn't drop them. They would do everything to help SFA out. 

I would agree with you there i also think this wasnt a choice by many on the sidelines but those in the stands 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GREYHOUND ALUM said:

Gilman and McDonogh would never do it, so it's not an issue. Neither school were complaining about "competitive balance." 

Dom Damico was one of the leaders in trying to get SFA out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

47 minutes ago, jbmad said:

Dom Damico was one of the leaders in trying to get SFA out

We're talking about complaining about the size of MSJ, Spalding and CHC. Which technically, isn't a level playing field. 

Edited by GREYHOUND ALUM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GREYHOUND ALUM said:

We're talking about complaining about the size of MSJ, Spalding and CHC. Which technically, isn't a level playing field. 

Ok gotcha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlike the Publics there will never be what could objectively said to be a level playing field in the MIAA in terms of school size. No real need there, what there should be is a level playing field in terms of the missions of the school. At none of the schools should sports be more than an extra curricular. In a perfect world where the schools divulged their financial aid allowances, there would be no financial aid given out just on the basis of athletics. 

The schools will still compete for students on the basis of facilities, faculty, history, alumni networks, coaches, academic fit etc. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sparky1 said:

Unlike the Publics there will never be what could objectively said to be a level playing field in the MIAA in terms of school size. No real need there, what there should be is a level playing field in terms of the missions of the school. At none of the schools should sports be more than an extra curricular. In a perfect world where the schools divulged their financial aid allowances, there would be no financial aid given out just on the basis of athletics. 

The schools will still compete for students on the basis of facilities, faculty, history, alumni networks, coaches, academic fit etc. 

 

If you limit merit scholarships to 8 per program, you get to the same place. 2 per year is not egregious. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sparky1 said:

Unlike the Publics there will never be what could objectively said to be a level playing field in the MIAA in terms of school size. No real need there, what there should be is a level playing field in terms of the missions of the school. At none of the schools should sports be more than an extra curricular. In a perfect world where the schools divulged their financial aid allowances, there would be no financial aid given out just on the basis of athletics. 

The schools will still compete for students on the basis of facilities, faculty, history, alumni networks, coaches, academic fit etc. 

 

To be honest having only been around this conference for three or four years now. It is crazy the disparity it’s basically a school by school judgment call and that varies by sport too. Public schools have their act together there’s a standard and everyone is held to it. There may be people who try to get around it but eventually everyone gets caught.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, MIAA has been hijacked by weak Presidents and ineffective leadership. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sparky1 said:

Unlike the Publics there will never be what could objectively said to be a level playing field in the MIAA in terms of school size. No real need there, what there should be is a level playing field in terms of the missions of the school. At none of the schools should sports be more than an extra curricular. In a perfect world where the schools divulged their financial aid allowances, there would be no financial aid given out just on the basis of athletics. 

The schools will still compete for students on the basis of facilities, faculty, history, alumni networks, coaches, academic fit etc. 

 

There will never be a level playing field in more ways than schools size! The schools missions aren't the same. CHC and MSJ's mission, aren't the same as a Gilman's. There's no such thing as a level playing field, period. As it is in life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GREYHOUND ALUM said:

There will never be a level playing field in more ways than schools size! The schools missions aren't the same. CHC and MSJ's mission, aren't the same as a Gilman's. There's no such thing as a level playing field, period. As it is in life. 

Well said!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, GREYHOUND ALUM said:

There will never be a level playing field in more ways than schools size! The schools missions aren't the same. CHC and MSJ's mission, aren't the same as a Gilman's. There's no such thing as a level playing field, period. As it is in life. 

Not level but rules. Alabama and Troy State will never be level but both abide by D1 NCAA rules. Same thing should be in effect in my opinion 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, OldBallCoach said:

Not level but rules. Alabama and Troy State will never be level but both abide by D1 NCAA rules. Same thing should be in effect in my opinion 

Rules and level playing field are totally different things. Every team should play by the rules. But these people want restrictions on recruits and stuff, and that's BS. That's an individual school's decision. Some schools have more money, and can give kids more. Do they also want a restriction on financial aid that can be given by the schools? That's like saying every man has the right to have a supermodel as a girlfriend/wife, some guys just have it better in this world. Just not fair. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, GREYHOUND ALUM said:

Rules and level playing field are totally different things. Every team should play by the rules. But these people want restrictions on recruits and stuff, and that's BS. That's an individual school's decision. Some schools have more money, and can give kids more. Do they also want a restriction on financial aid that can be given by the schools? That's like saying every man has the right to have a supermodel as a girlfriend/wife, some guys just have it better in this world. Just not fair. 

I agree that’s why I used the analogy. But it seems that the rules are arbitrary right now

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