Brett Boretti
It was an amazing Saturday for Columbia sports as the Lions
baseball team won its second straight Ivy League Championship Series, and for
the second straight time it happened at home.
And it’s great news that the men’s tennis team has advanced
to the NCAA Sweet 16.
But getting back to baseball, the legend of Coach Brett
Boretti is growing in Columbia lore.
Boretti now has won three Ivy titles and four Gehrig
Division titles.
He started at the helm of CU baseball in 2006 and the
championships started rolling in in 2008. So over seven seasons, we have three
outright championships and if you count the Gehrig Division titles, the Boretti
Lions have made the postseason MOST of those year.
I decided to check back to see if any other coach of in Lion
history has achieved that level of consistent excellence over that many years.
Lou Little
Lou Little’s best years were from 1930-36 and then from 1945-47. Little came to CU in 1930 and raced out of the gate with a record of 43-15-3 in those first seven seasons highlighted by the 7-0 win in the 1934 Rose Bowl.
But even with Sid Luckman on the team in the years that followed, the only other consistent period of excellence for Little was 1945-47 which was highlighted by the huge win over Army in '47.
So you have to look to Columbia soccer in the later 1970’s and early 1980’s as the high-bar standard for CU athletics.
From 1978 to 1985, Columbia men’s soccer won or shared the
Ivy title for eight straight years. Their Ivy record was an untouchable 60-5-5
and the Lions won eight NCAA tournament matches during that stretch. The
pinnacle of that period was 1983, when Columbia made it to the national championship
game before losing to Indiana in double OT.
Since then, Columbia men’s soccer has won a grand total of
just ONE Ivy title.
Dieter Ficken
The coach during that magical run was Dieter Ficken.
Boretti is not yet at Ficken’s level, but he’s getting
there.
Again, I want to discuss ways Columbia can retain Boretti
and give him a more influential role in athletics as a whole. We need to keep
this guy around and get more of our coaches to learn from him.
25 comments:
the late Irv Dekoff, fencing?
Fencing was indeed dominant, but the field of competition, especially in Irv's day, was not large at all. Ficken is the standard-bearer and Boretti the best of the last 25 years.
Also, the fencing coaches who have followed have been able to replicate, at least in stretches, Dekoff's success. Ficken has been unmatched completely.
Boretti and his guys are also their own groundskeepers. They covered the pitching mound when it started to rain on Saturday and generally took care of both the mound and home plate. One observation from my perch on Saturday: this team carries itself like it expects to win. Each time Dartmouth scored a run we answered. We never closed an inning a run behind. In the second game, through the first three innings the Dartmouth pitcher looked unhittable, until he wasn't. Very deep, confident lineup with new talent in the pipeline.
Boretti and his guys are also their own groundskeepers. They covered the pitching mound when it started to rain on Saturday and generally took care of both the mound and home plate. One observation from my perch on Saturday: this team carries itself like it expects to win. Each time Dartmouth scored a run we answered. We never closed an inning a run behind. In the second game, through the first three innings the Dartmouth pitcher looked unhittable, until he wasn't. Very deep, confident lineup with new talent in the pipeline.
While I don't recall the competition during Irv's time,from his bio:
Starting in 1953-54, only his second year on Morningside Heights, DeKoff led Columbia to the national championship final round in five consecutive seasons. The Lions won the national title twice... and finished second three times, each time by four touches or less. (my note: national championships)
Upon the start of formal Ivy League competition in 1955-56, DeKoff’s Lions jumped to the top of the League – winning the Ancient Eight title in 11 of the first 12 seasons of official round robin competition.
Dekoff was responsible for the development of numerous talented fencers, including 18 All-Americans, 8 NCAA individual champions and two Olympians.
I remember Irv well; he also acted as a Dean and was a hell of a nice guy. I walked into his office once at Hamilton and he tossed me a wooden sword before even saying hello. It was a Japanese Kendo, and he spent 10 minutes explaining it to me.
Re Jake's message; just another way of describing our Problem. Just like this spring is going to cause temporary amnesia in the brains of most CU fans.
We do get it right once in a while. But we don't cross-pollinate. DeKoff had a heck of a run, as did Ficken. Boretti looks good too. Where is our consistency? We pull off (suddenly) a few well-appreciated titles this year. But they came out of the blue (except for baseball)and can disappear just as fast. There is no evidence showing a deliberate build towards general competence. Does this spring's results mean that after 10 years of non-achievement, CU athletics is in the first year of a renaissance. Seriously?
We have promise in basketball; a proven winner in baseball. Men's tennis ditto. What about all the rest of our teams? Do we start winning a statistically fair share of Ivy titles now, or drop back into our 1.6 crowns per year average yet again? What if anything has changed, except for the luck of the draw?
Let's not forget men's and women's squash. Both are top ten caliber out of a field of a 100+ programs.
Pro squash is quite the revenue generator in the middle east so you never know, grads could end up having illustrious pro careers should they choose to take that route.
We can dwell on the past but I prefer looking at the upward trends.
Let's not forget WSw beat both Harv and Pr in dual meets in the last couple of years, for the first time in each. T&F seems quite competitive.
As I understanding fencing, many athletes participate in foreign meets, often finishing high up, and are not always available for duals here.
If FB shows little improvement, some of the critics will be proven right. But, I prefer to wait for the games before passing judgment.
Oh, yes, as able as Ficken was, his teams didn't play many national schools, with the major exception of Indiana in the NCAA final which the Lions lost after multiple OTs.
I believe the Lions lost that soccer game to Indiana in overtime by a score of 1-0. Closest we've been to a national title? (fencing??)
Does anybody have any details on the new baseball recruits? I heard some good things but just generalities. Could we be building a baseball dynasty? Break up the Lions!! :)
Here's an article on our recent star, Dario Pizzano. He's doing real good, batted .295 and made the Appalachian League All-Star Team. Here's an article about his return to Columbia to finish his degree (in political science!). Great pic of him swinging in Lion blue.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/regionals/north/2014/02/20/saugus-dario-pizzano-continues-his-push-mariners-farm-system/pGf7WvPDNtLvbdnMJLqCAJ/story.html
I got the league wrong on Pizzano. He started his minor league career in the Appalachian League, but played 2014 in the California League (slugging percentage of .519)
RLB, most of us who are pessimists about football's prospects would only be too thrilled to be proven wrong this year.
The sad thing will be if we win 3 games, or something like that. The pessimists will say we are going knowhere and the bright siders will say that 3 wins is a good sign and reason for optimism.
alawicius: see my post re Dekoff which notes national titles
WOF, I draw the line at 4 wins to be optimistic. If a team gets 4 wins that means they at least know they can win as a team and just missed catching the breaks to get above .500.
When I coached women's soccer foir a decade or more I set a benchmark of .500 since we played in such a tough division. Winning more than half our games seemed a ridiculous notion. Though we captured 2nd place 2 years in a row and almost pulled out a 1-0 win if not for a shot off ringing the crossbar.
You have to see improvement at least in how a team competes. If they give up on themselves then players will clearly not get used to the idea of winning. Sounds simple but of course it is not.
I wonder how the baseball players would characterize their motivation by Coach Boretti to get past their plateaus. The guy seems to be an ideal leader.
1-0 in the championship game I meant.
The underlining theme here is that these students/athletes (basketball, baseball, track, tennis, etc.) are NOT at a disadvantage. This is NOT an administration, or a facilities issues (although we could use a new gymnasium, indoor track facility, etc.). These teams are winning because theses coaches recruit superior athletes, motivate players on multiple levels (as opposed to PM’s “my way or the highway” apprpoach), and they do not use every excuse under the sun as to why they are not winning (or, in the case of football, whining). Looking at the success of these programs, we should not have ANY excuses as to why we lose in football, it’s that simple!
wingman: I would need to see more than simply 4 wins. As you mentioned, the team should be playing better overall and it should be noticeable, so 4 wins with more consistency, smart and tough play, much closer games, wins toward end of season, etc. and I might agree with you.
Jake: the field of competition during Irv's day was national, as his teams went to the NCAA. Ficken's was mostly limited to the NE.
DeKoff and Ficken were both top notch. #1Lion says it best, and it is what I believe; that CU has had a propensity for tolerance of non-performance, not so much from athletes but from coaches and admin. So mediocre results are not punished and a losing syndrome permeates. Every once in a while we get a consistent winner in the person of a DeKoff or Ficken or Boretti. They are exceptions.
CU must demand competence within the coaching and admin levels across the board re recruiting and motivating and, well, coaching. Those items are directly on the coaches shoulders. BUT, unless the AD refuses to tolerate bad results and demands competence, nothing will change.
To be perfectly clear, if somehow DM "gets it" and this past spring is an indicator of a sea change, then kudos all around. Ditto if PM turns around FB, whatever that may be. I'll be a happy alum.
But if we start sliding backwards again, then people have to go, and quickly.
Jake....How would you give Boretti more influence over all Columbia athletics as you propose, unless he were appointed Athletic Director?
Charisma is probably part of the equation Chick
Someone other than Dianne needs to be able to throw some red flags out to the big donors, etc.
I usually hate any added levels of bureaucracy, but I would give Boretti a big raise in return for giving him a major vote in all coaching hires and make him the "Dean of Coaching", (a title like that), with the authority to go to the President and board with any concerns he has about a coach of another team.
Would Dianne stand for such a power-sharing arrangement? Probably not, and to that I would say: "You should live and be well, and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out."
How about letting Boretti be Boretti, that is to say, a great baseball coach, without looking for distractions. I just hope that he is being fairly compensated.
Yes, but it would be a shame if he's figured something out that could help our other coaches. Pay him a ton more money to hold two seminars a year for all the other coaches at least.
Post a Comment