I took some time off this week to find that I hadn’t missed
much.
Yes, I’m aware that earlier this week Head Coach Pete Mangurian held a Twitter Q&A.
I know there was a time when we would have been excited by
such an exchange, but after an 0-10 season in 2013 and an extremely likely 0-10
season in 2014, I know I’m through celebrating anything but victories.
I’m not sure what to take away from a “conversation” that
included no promises to actually win a game this fall. That would have been
nice even if it wasn’t backed up by any truth.
The bottom line is the football team is light years behind
everyone else in the Ivies. This is like an instructional league team without
the proper instructors.
I’m also seeing many of the fans making the same old
mistakes and assumptions. There was almost universal acceptance of Mangurian’s
claim that the offensive line will improve with experience this season. Sorry,
but I haven’t seen the O-line do anything but get worse week after week since
Mangurian took over. The linemen are scrawny, slow, and clueless out there. And
there’s no use thinking the Lions will be able to win any games with such a
subpar unit up front.
There’s a time to be an ever-optimistic fan and a time to be
a realist who can affect some real change.
I think we all know what time it is right now.
The only real question is whether Athletic Director Dianne Murphy, who is feuding with
Mangurian at present, will have the guts to fire him in year three of his
four-year contract.
For those of you who insist I be more positive, I will… when
I write about the baseball team.
Count me among those who believe this week’s 2-2 start was
not indicative of how good Coach Brett Boretti’s guys are. This weekend should
be very interesting with games against Harvard and #1 rival Dartmouth. The
Dartmouth games come first with the doubleheader tomorrow.
23 comments:
and I thought I was a gloomy gus!
Let's be realistic. Twitter is a lame format. It is not progressive technology. It is regressive, in fact it retards social development and does not qualify as media. The fact that it is used that way is a statement at how regressed the world has become.
I will not hold any coach responsible for not being forthcoming or interesting on twitter. Though, Pete struggles with his communication in general, I don't think he tripped up in this instance. He's not Mr. wizard techie fast typer. He was on point with the need to rebuild the OL as a priority. 140 characters at a time is not the way to go in depth. The basic message was we have guys coming in who will help and we have guys who need to step up in the Fall. Simple and direct, nothing to bowl us over but that is 140 characters worth.
No coach guarantees or promises wins.
If they go winless, well that is a shame but I think we all know the writing on the wall by now. Getting the right coaching staff in there is an objective. It's just not happening this upcoming season.
Taking shots at the coaches is fair game, but calling out the OLs as slow, scrawny, etc. is not. They are part of the Columbia family and should not be attacked in this fashion.
Unless they unionize.
I must have missed the critique of the linemen in the twitter feed. My gut feeling is Pete has hit the wall professionally. It is obvious his time tested and trusted tactics have not worked well in the CU program. I suspect he doesn't know what to do next other than forge ahead but I would very surprised if he did not turn his internal criticism down a notch or two since he has basically accomplished nothing or very little thus far. He's on the ropes getting the crap kicked out of him so he would have to be more stubborn than a mule to keep at it business as usual without changes.
Alswingman, you got it wrong bigtime. It was Jake, not Pete, who called the OL "slow, scrawny," etc., as oldlion pointed out and took him to task for, which I will do as well. Not too bright, Jake!
My goodness, Jake was being kind! This O-Line has gotten progressively worse in Pete's tenure. Two years ago, we had a Freshman guard who was 240lb "protecting" Brackett... We all know how that ended. Last year we had a left tackle that wouldn't start on most HS Varsity teams and he started. All opposing coached did was watch our left side and they blitzed the heck out of us. I don't want to hear that the kid was only 16/17 years old. He was a boy playing with men, and it showed. If Nottinghamham is smart, he'll switch to WR!
I think all of us are coming from the same place on this, and we are all hoping somehow to get to another place.
It isn't the team's personal fault for being what they are re size, etc. And none of our comments about this will have any additional effect. The parties have already heard what we say. I also believe there will be significant consequences if we have a repeat of last season in terms of incompetence.
So I am going to observe the ongoing results with a hopeful and optimistic eye, with the assumption that DM, with a sense of her own self-preservation, will do what she should have been doing for 10 years for every team here, which is crack the whip.
She is on notice and I truly believe she knows this. If not, she'd best learn quickly.
#1 Lion, I admire your willingness to say what you think and tell it like it is. Throughout America, in sports and in EVERYTHING, most are too fearful or brainwashed to stand up to fools and bullies like the Dartmouth students
who took over their school admin. building this week. See the WSJ editorial about it today. Of all their ridiculous demands, the least offensive was for same sex toilets everywhere including in athletic facilities, which is crazy as hell and shows how crazy those students are.
I wish we didn't have to tiptoe around the question of athletic ABILITY in football. So long as they want to play hard and try their best, I don't fault the players. But the Admin has to realize the teams represent the school.
In decades past we had JV teams and lightweight teams for kids that just weren't at varsity level for size, speed, technique, etc. I'd still like to see that to give more kids the chance to play.
But if the Admin wants just one team , the one that represents the U, it must field players (and coaches)
who are up to competing with their opponents on an equal basis. Period. All this waiting, and hoping, and sighing, for decades and decades is BS.
both tennis teams beat Harvard handily.
Why is it that we can out recruit and outplay or at least hold our own in every Ivy sport except football? And don't tell me it is the trip,to Baker Field, since that doesn't hurt baseball or tennis.
Old Lion:
It's because football has been stigmatized by the faculty and admin. for generations... and not just at CU. It's the same reason why only football is barred from postseason play. Despite the explosion in popularity for other college sports, especially college basketball, the Ivy administrations are most sensitive to being accused of running some kind of football factory. The administrative disdain for football at Columbia is acute.
Jake, is the evidence of the disdain of the administration inferential? Or is there direct evidence, that is, statements by Bollinger or others, that they have no use for football?
I just read his twitter "interview". Perhaps I missed it but he did not appear to answer the quesiton as to how the fans should assess if his plan is working or not. A year ago the answer would have been "wins and losses", woulnd't it?
Good question, oldlion. My guess is that their intentions are indicated by their pattern of actions over the long years of futility.
I also believe that they recognize it is political dynamite to actually, formally reject football. Therefore they have taken the Spiro Agnew path of "benign neglect".
I can't think of any other set of circumstances that could have gotten us to this place.
I also want to correct part of your peni-ultimate statement. We have not held our own re other sports. We have just not failed as badly. Our overall accomplishments for the past 60 years are far worse than any other Ivy; this is also true for the past 10 years.
WOF, I don't think he was directly asked that question. Overall it was a hard conversation to follow with lots of starts and stops. There's not a whole lot to be gained by 140 characters at a time. He really needs to be addressing supporters directly on the many issues like other head coaches do.
As for reasons for futility, the reasons are numerous. I remember when I was a little kid watching them compete hard but come up short time and time again. Always missing a few vital ingredients other teams had or had just a bit more than the Lions did.
I hate to say it but Coach Garrett was on the right track with his "losers" remark. Though he phrased it poorly, the sentiment is the losing mentality kicks in as soon as the tide turns against them. Most football teams turn the corner and can put defeat behind them with a few wins. This program rarely accomplishes that.
Old Lion, recall Bollinger's letter to Spectator? He said football is just slightly behind his fast-track schedule for
Columbia supremacy in all sports. Look at archery for example.
Bollinger may have something there! Perhaps we could accelerate Mangurian's pace by having our archers
fire arrows at his posterior every time every time his team
gives up a long TD run or pass, or fails to score from first and goal.
Benign neglect is actually a term coined by Daniel Patrick Moynihan while serving in the Nixon WH. And any clever bon mot attributed to Agnew was probably coined by Safire. But the point is valid. I would note, however, that at the present time we are fielding some very good teams pretty much across the board, including MBB, tennis both M and W, baseball, swimming, wrestling and T and F.
OL is correct, but it should have been Agnew.
He was the individual with the intellectual and moral credibility in the Nixon WH who could have been the compass of our country in those troubled times, prior to being unfairly hounded out of office by the fellow traveler global conspirators.
:-)
I'll bet that Jake loved Safire. He would never survive the current regime at The Times. I like to think that Safire, had he gone to Columbia, would have been a member of CAEC.
The Lion baseball team swept the doubleheader with Harvard.
Al's wingman, agree it is tough to follow, but here are the questions I saw asked but not answered:
Peter Andrews @pfandrews Apr 1
.@ColumbiaLionsFB thanks, Coach. What do you think we, as fans, should view as progress on "the plan" this season?
Reply Retweet Favorite More Collapse
FAVORITES
2
daniela quintanillaThe Lion
4:48 PM - 1 Apr 2014 · Details
Peter Andrews @pfandrews Apr 1
.@ColumbiaLionsFB or, put another way: how should fans assess whether the plan is succeeding — or not?
Reply Retweet Favorite More Collapse
4:49 PM - 1 Apr 2014 · Details
He should just go back to his blog and reply to comments, similar to the format here. Pete's just not interested and really struggling from all angles. If I were in his shoes i would be wondering how to salvage an 3-27 record and move forward in my career. That is my guess what he is doing - exit strategy.
Post a Comment