Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About usf87

  • Rank
  1. If football is such a financial drain on an institution why is it that so many schools have added football to their programs? Since 2000 more programs have added football than dropped it. And it's all levels, from NAIA to DIII, D2 and D1. Look at these schools: Dropped football since 2000: Massachsetts-Boston - 2000 Swarthmore - 2000 Mt. Senario (dropped all sports) - 2001 Cal State-Northridge (I-AA) - 2001 Canisius (I-AA) - 2002 St. John's (I-AA) - 2002 Fairfield (I-AA) - 2002 Massachusetts-Lowell - 2002 Morris Brown (dropped all sports) - 2002 N.J. City State - 2002 Siena (
  2. The only difference is that Fr. Biondi is on his way out. A new president will be announced in mid 2014 who is hopefully open to the idea of bringing back football, unlike Biondi. Yes, hopefully. If the new president approves of at least creating a committee to research the possibility of bringing the sport back, then I'm all for it. If the committee says "no" then so be it. We'll drop the subject and nothing more will be said about SLU football. In the meantime, this is a tremendous opportunity for the proponents of SLU football to grab a hold of and pin their hopes on. Yes, it's a lot of "If
  3. I don't know how it works in the NCAA, but I do know in NAIA they split the athletic scholarships however they feel the need. I believe a football team has 24. They can split that into 36 or 48 or however many they think they need to accommodate the players' needs. Fordham and Holy cross have smaller endowments than SLU, yet have football programs. And it's not just endowments, but a lot of the expense can be offset by corporate sponsorship, by simply hanging their corporate banner in or around the facilities. Look closely at the Hermann Stadium scoreboard and there's the name of a brewery on
  4. Thanks, Box. I knew going in that this wasn't the venue for this post, but a colleague suggested I try the forums to test the waters, so to speak. They should have called this site billikensmensbasketballonly.com.
  5. So you're saying top-notch schools like Georgetown, Holy Cross, Fordham, Old Dominion, WashU, Harvard, Yale, Princeton (I could go on…) have all knowingly or unknowingly introduced 75 rapists on each of their campuses? You're saying that 75% of any football team (assuming a 100-member roster) are all rapists? You're thinking of Florida State and other major state schools who routinely recruit convicts to play for their program and give them a free education that have no business playing football or attending whichever institution they happen to play for. They're off the streets for four years
  6. I'm sorry you got held back in your remedial reading courses. Yet another kid left behind.
  7. Title IX does not prohibit adding men's sports. Adding football would improve SLU's gender equity by enrolling more male students to a campus which is now disproportionately female (41% male vs 59% female, based on SLU university profile collected in 2012). As long as another women's sport is added to balance the equation. SLU currently has 8 men's sports, the women's has 9. How does Title IX come into play here?
  8. I read with interest the "Annual Plea for Football at SLU" threads posted on this message board. I believe it's time to resurrect the topic, but with renewed vigor this time. I graduated from a small school in Indiana (U of Saint Francis, NAIA), and played some soccer there. We didn't have football at the time and basketball was untouchable. As a student I (and fellow classmates) often wished we had a football program. The president we had during my collegiate years was a stodgy old nun (think Fr. Biondi) who was satisfied with the status quo and didn't do anything to promote the school. The
  9. Test...test...test
  • Create New...