A number of readers tell me that President Lee Bollinger finally responded today. to their emails to his office about the football program.
That is, if you can call a boilerplate, form letter response a real response.
They ALL received the SAME following email.
I have been glad to receive messages like yours, demonstrating the passion so many feel about Columbia’s football program. Thank you for your note and your interest in our team’s challenges this season. The frustration you feel is shared by our hardworking student-athletes, who take great pride in their performance. The well-being of our student-athletes is of the utmost important to the University and, though this season has not showcased the potential of our team, we are confident that their efforts and perseverance will payoff in future seasons.
My certainty in the leadership and dedication of Director of Athletics, M. Dianne Murphy, and Football Coach, Pete Mangurian, has never wavered, and in the decade since I appointed Dianne, we have made enormous progress in the athletic department. I remain proud of our student-athletes, and thank you for your ongoing support of them and of Columbia athletics.
Sincerely,
Lee C. Bollinger
Another day, another insult and slap in the face from this administration.
Even the worst failure in the history of Ivy football doesn't merit a real response.
These people have no shame.
115 comments:
Jake, if I were you, I would talk directly to Pres. Bollinger about how he really feels about the football program and athletics dept. as well as give your own views because it seems like they still don't get how we really feel about this situation.
It's just a diplomatic way of saying Pete is gone after next season which we all know will be 0-10. Firing Murphy is something he may not be up to doing.
So, if Pete is staying, what record next year will keep him from being fired? i know there have been calls for 0-10, but even a broken clock is correct 2x per day. is 3-7 a victory for Pete? i tend to think that if the kids and alumns have experienced this pain and we have such great leadership, that we need to expect nothing short of a 500 season to retain him. if the record is less than that then he needs to go. as they do not respond to us, we need to elevate oru expectations because we certainly are not getting any guidance.
First of all, you have to laugh at the line "this season has not showcased the potential of our team." Yes, and Chernobyl did not showcase the potential of Russia, did it. Holy crap.
Second, the poster above makes a good point. The schedule is easier next year, with Cornell at home and I believe a game with Georgetown. If Nottingham, Connors and Nelligan return, we might win two games. Does Pete then keep his job? Believe me, I would love for the team to get some wins next season, but given the abdication of responsibility from LB and the AD, I suspect they would declare 2-8 a success and keep Pete.
Maybe burning effigies would help get the point across. Not enough antagonism directed in Pete's face. Not enough fans with bullhorns demanding Pete leave immediately. That kind of thing.
Rich Forzani '66
Stay tuned. We're just getting started.
How do you like them apples? Huh, what's that? I can't hear you???
UNWAVERING SUPPORT. Let me put it in different terms that my esteemed boss of bosses did not use but may as well have - unflappable. That's right. This is a clear message to the peanut gallery that I am unscathed by your attempts to dislodge me from my perch as dictator of all things Columbia football.
In case you didn't notice, I don't have to win. I have unwavering support!
War's over, man. Wormer dropped the big one. Sigh.
This is a minor battle and the war is still ongoing. It has always been about change for the better and that is going to take a while. The coach is bad news and the AD will follow him out. Even if he were to win, CU is not his home as he has turned so many people off that he has lost, but he just does not know it yet. The real losers right now may be the players coming back. However, they have and have had the opportunity to step forward. If they have not or will not then they have nobody to blame but themselves.
I love the idea of keeping it in the family. i was the youngest of 10 and we kept it in the family. Yet, we always stood up for ourselves. It was that freedom of speech and respect which drove the concept of family home. This is anything but that. This is a dictatorship.
It took decades to create what we have and will take a long time to change. However, once that train starts to move it will pick up speed and over time the family will grow, not through idle threats or bullying, but through trust/respect and a sense of family. We are not moving in that direction under the current regime. By treating the kids the way they do, the powers that be are only strengthening the support base fighting the current leaders plus he has alienated enough alums, in what seems to be an attempt to move away from the football roots that he has no support except from those currently in power.
They will only be in power for so long and if we make a stand now and have a voice in the future we can change the dynamic.
It is an inevitable loss for the current regime, but like most leaders affected by their position, they just dont know they have already lost.
Des Werthman
Jake, I just figured out the real problem. When Mangurian was offered the job of coaching football at Columbia, he assumed he'd be coaching the freshman team since even that is beyond his ability, but he figured he'd give it a try.
That's why when training started and a bunch of sophs, juniors and seniors also showed up, he told them to go sit in the stands and wait. He assumed the varsity coach would be coming along to get them.
Mangurian didn't disband the freshman team...
he thinks he's coaching them.
I'm hoping to go to Levien Gymnasium on 2/23 for their nationally televised NBCSN basketball game vs. Yale. If there are alumni or students who want to show their displeasure at this situation, I hope they come out with signs demanding Mangurian gets fired as well as show displeasure for AD Dianne Murphy & Pres. Bollinger. I think this is the best way to get the message out. Have people with banners and anti-Mangurian/Murphy signs for the nation to see how bad Columbia football and its Athletics Department is.
Bollinger legacy will not be the manhattanville project, rather, it will be his inability to lead. It couldn't be more evident with his decision here to do Nothing when there is a clear outcry for change!
Did Murphy also ghost write this letter on Lee's behalf? Any accomplished lawyer will tell you that once you lose your credibility you are useless. Lee used to be a law professor. He of all people must understand that he has lost his credibility.
It is hard to believe that major changes have not been made by now.
1. 0-10 is 0-10. What coach would avoid dismissal with a winless record in his second or later year? The question is even more relevant in light of the many questions and allegations about the actions of the head coach.
2. A tough disciplinarian coach is acceptable. However, abuses are not acceptable. Does Columbia want to deal with problems, costs, stories and potential lawsuits similar to those related to recent Rutgers scandals. Some of the costs are described in the following article.
http://www.nj.com/education/2013/12/rutgers_pays_discounted_481k_b.html
3. Does Columbia want to live through another infamous winless streak and deal with numerous stories about the new streak and the old streak?
4. The program needs major changes and requires a comprehensive evaluation by an independent and well respected college sports consulting organization. Half way changes and status quo will not solve the many and substantial problems.
Bollinger's reply to e-mailers sounds exactly like the smelly letter he sent to Spectator, minus Murphy's
statistics about our winning dominoes and hop-scotch teams. Bollinger's now plagiarizing himself. He's a minus for our entire U, not only athletics. I don't doubt that Mangurian is inadequate,
but Bollinger and Murphy, who hired him, must leave too or else they'll just hire another loser the next time.
Bollinger was recently granted a contract extension which runs through 2016. In fairness, except for athletics he has been a successful president. And compared to John Sexton of NYU, who was recently raked over the coals by The New Yorker, he is a hall of farmer. The real issue is that he has a terrible AD and his chairman has not stepped up and told him that she has to go.
Gee, only another year to wait for the next 0-10.
This guy coached in the NFL for 20 plus years?
The people who wrote maybe we can win two games
next year can forget it. Only freshman play. The others will be in the stands, maybe as vendors. Buy something from them so Mangurian can get a better
game jacket or buy a better playbook.
Th real issue, Old Lion. is that Bollinger is a BS artist
who insults alums who complain about a ridiculous football program. Most high schools operate theirs better.
Do you believe he'd be writing this silly pap to Michigan alums if he were still there and the team had done 0-10...excuse me, 0-13?
Michigan alums show up at the games 30,000+ strong. Win or lose. Home or away. The CU stands at Dartmouth had about 100, maybe, and 80 of those were parents.
Get real! Only about 5 frosh got any significant playing time, on both sides of the ball.
Get your hands on a roster before you start spouting off bad info.
The Big House holds 115,000 and is always sold out. 30,000 would lead to firing of HC, AD and prez.
Not sure recent grad ratio U of M v CU, but best CU home attendance record can't be over 2,000? this year.
I am not defending Bollinger's stewardship of the athletic program. He has abdicated his responsibility. My point is that Murphy and Mangurain are stationary targets. Bollinger is not. while he has been a dismal failure in this regard his overall performance as president has been strong in the one area the trustees care about the most, raising money, and he has been fortunate enough to be president at a time when the City has flourished and the university's prestige has soared. What absolutely baffles me, however, is his failure to dump Murphy and Mangurian.
My take is that most CU grads show their loyalty be sending in checks.
Football game attendance is laughable. Not all 115,000 at UM games are students or alumni.
Old lion correct me if I'm wrong, but the recent announcement of Rhodes Scholarships had several Harvard and no Columbia recipients. Yet their football program is far superior to CU, as is their endowment total. Could there possibly be a connection?
Columbia usually draws over 10K for homecoming, and did so again this year.
Did the team have an awards banquet this year?
I was there. Sure didn't look like that much. Normal Friday night Texas HS football is higher than that. Embarrassing!
Not yet.
I am convinced Mangurian has untreated mental illness.
Guys, let's bury the hatchet. How about all of you come over to my place for some holiday cheer? No egg nog - that's for sissies. Full bar, my treat. We'll celebrate the 0-10 season behind us and also look forward to celebrating at least one victory next season which should solidify my expected contract extension. Come on guys, get on board the Pete Mangurian express. What do you say?
Columbia Football Fury
NY Post
December 8, 2013
Page 21
http://nypost.com/2013/12/08/football-fury-at-columbia-coachs-go-slim-strategy/
Jake and Rich deserve our thanks for this great article and for all of their efforts.
That article is actually gonna put PM and the university in a "good light" because we are gonna appear to be fore runners in the health and well being of our players. BMI index management and losing weight is gonna sound real good to mothers all over the country as well as health care advocates. Losing weight is always better sounding to people than being fat. The article back fired gentleman.
Not to anyone that knows football. Check out the linemen on any of the TV games. Mothers and Grand Mothers love to feed their teen aged sons,love to see them eat. Weight can be controlled after football playing years are over. Let their future wives worry about their BMI.
NOT FUNNEY.
Good light. You obviously never had to feed a 6'6" teenager who burns off enough calaries everyday to heat a small house. 40 # on that frame is hardly noticeable.
Mike Halpin
Two years ago the offensive line for Stanford averaged 300 lbs and a height of 6'6" or 6'7" without any excess weight on them. They were straight up and down. Maybe PM and company can get their OL up to 300 lbs and level off there so they don't killed in his last year at CU.
As for the Post article, it was written by a lazy reporter who didn't exactly do a lot of leg work interviewing the few folks he said hello to.
This article in no way makes Mangurian look bad. He made his players get in shape and be healthy. Big woop. It comes across as you guys want to fire Mangurian and Diane Murphy because he made his players eat right and get healthier. LOL
Ask Archie Roberts what he thinks. Not to defend Mangurian,, it's not good for anyone to bulk up to 300 pounds. It makes even less sense for kids who are not going to play on Sundays. Most pay a price health-wise over tme.
Mike Halpin
Ooooops I goooofed. It was a she and not a he at the Post who was a lazy reporter.
I agree. The Post article greatly helped PM and the administration. Doctors and health care officials have been advocating for healthy weights and proper eating habits for decades. Columbia has always been progressive and this article continues to make the school look at the apex of health and well being for its student athletes. PM comes off in the article as someone who truly cares about the players and the mention of him advocating this long ago when he was with the Giants puts him out front in the fight against obesity and gives him a track record. He can play this to his advantage and the advantage of Columbia. The pooch got screwed on this one! Can this be characterized as unintended
The article completely undid all of Jake's and Rich's work. It makes Jake and Rich look like they don't care about the health of the kids and only care about winning. Wow
The student athlete the reporter quoted helped Mangurian look great. Paraphrasing, he wants us healthy. Other coaches would have you beefing up on burgers and shakes. How can that help the cause people?
Granted the thyme of the Post article was not what we were all hoping, are you all trying to say that Yale, Harvard and all the rest of the IVYs have got it wrong. No football knowledge in any of the above comments. Find a blog that espouses your ideals and let the real football fans discuss things that will enhance our w/l record in the future. Watch a game once in a while,
Stop throwing poison darts at people that want CU sports to get better.
Crybaby.
Right so the article may make you think the guys are healthier, what you needed to add to the article was that as a consequence of being lean and mean and skinny, you've suffered some serious injuries, as well as players being out for the season because of them. I personally don't think the article shed good light on PM , I will take it one step further , it would also make me question why the AD is still there and how the Pres. Of the University is OK with this.
You have blinders on. You are seeing what you want to see. The article is the article. Your addendum is irrelevant in the PR battle. PM comes off pro healthy and Jake and Rich come off as pro unhealthy fat guys.
You can't make the case for serious injuries and people being loss for the season based on the Oline size because every team has serious injuries and people loss for the season. That's not an uncommon denominator. Football fans will come off as unhealthy morons and Neanderthals in this debate and the powers that be will smell like roses to the mothers and families of these student athletes as well as the health care advocates, insurance companies, Obama care proponents and any one else whom cares about good healthy living and diets. I think this is "strike 3" fellas. PM definitely gets a contract extension and gets the cover of Men's Health Magazine.
Most of the members of the echo chamber are pretty silent today.
First, as the above reference to Archie Roberts suggests, Roberts as a cardiologist has a program to monitor and treat 300+ pound athletes whose inflated size puts their health at high risk. This risk is indeed a real problem.
Also, as I've pointed out elsewhere, the evolution of the game has rewarded huge linemen. Since O linemen are now allowed to use their hands, and since the agility required for cut blocking is not available to many huge guys, gigantic linemen are now where it's at. These are huge sumo wrestlers pushing and shoving. That's how the game is now played.
If you look at videos of great teams from the 60s and early 70s, you'll see that football was played much closer to the ground with much more blocking below the waist. If you could have a team of highly skilled 170 pound Billy Campbells from 1961 to block against today's sumo men -- with the old no hands rules in place -- I think you could actually be surprisingly successful. But there's no point in even thinking about that, because the rules are not going to change and that kind of low to the ground agility is not possible for 99% of today's players, whether they weigh 300 or 270.
So in the present day game, it may indeed be a tactical mistake for Mangurian to stress weight loss. Further, if we're going to really look at what's best for the players' health, they should not be playing football in the first place. Even Terry Bradshaw has predicted that the game will eventually be marginalized in terms of participation, like boxing, because of health issues. I'm glad I got to see it and play it before these trends took hold.
The article means nothing. The weight thing has nothing to do with the sad state of CU sports in general. We need help, not constant nit picking from people like you. You sound like the Post is the Bible. How many CU grads read the Post on a regular basis?
Less than their attendance at the football games.
We were to smart for our own good. Now what Jake? Now what Rich?
Did I read the same article as those who are saying it helps PM? You must be nuts. I read your comments first, then the article. It's an indictment of PM's stupidity. No way does it demean our efforts here! What the hell are you people reading.? Was there a longer article in the actual newspaper than online?
On line it quotes a parent saying their son passed out from hunger....a player saying they looked like inmates of a concentration camp starving at their cold, early morning workouts. The article end abruptly with a ridiculous AD blurb about how successful PM has been in reducing body fat. The AD blurb doesn't mention 0-10 but the article began "They're losing weight and losing games."
It points out that other Ivy OLs are heavier.
If we're so much "healthier" whatever the hell that means, why do we lose every game? Why did those unhealthy Harvard and Princeton kids--and everyone else--whip the hell out of us?
JAKE, HELP ME OUT HERE. Did I read the wrong article or are Bollinger, Murphy and Mangurian writing those ridiculous comments above about how the Post article hurts our cause?
Wake up you health nuts. Are practicing what you preach? We are not talking about 5' 6" 300 pounders.
We are talking 6'6" 260 pounders going to 280. Try to stay on subject.
Did they look like pow's during the season? Where's the proof her son past out in the bathroom? Why didn't she give her name to give her statement more credibility in the article? How can anyone prove causality if her statement was true? Everyone forgets that the kids are piss tested by the trainers weekly and monitored for EVERYTHING. The head trainer is a trainer for the NY Giants and the Olympic committee. Article makes PM look good.
You guys are just upset that the reporter didn't repeat a bunch of unsubstantiated third, fourth and fifth hand gossip about what a horrible guy PM is. She is a reporter. Real reporters don't publish unsubstantiated garbage from disgruntled parents.
HELLO AGAIN, JAKE! You obviously have a bunch of AD Murphy trolls posting today, and you really should do something about it. "Where's the roof her son PAST out?" Past instead of passed? These aren't Columbia alums posting here, they're some low-level Murphy stooges. And no, they didn't look like POWs during the season, they looked like boys next to the men who were beating up on them. ZERO and 10, that's what your idiot diets get you.
I wrote before that Mangurian thinks he's coaching the freshman team. Actually he thinks he's a dietician. Let's put him in the stands during the games. Since when does the dietician stand on the sidelines. Of course, he wouldn't buy a ticket to watch the massacre every week.
An all-freshman team with the playbook from Weight Watchers. What a coach. And delusional Bollinger proudly says he has never wavered from his support of PM and DM. Lee should join them in the kitchen taking the last gram of fat from the Weight Watchers meals.
You're good. Good luck in the 7th grade .
Yes, allow no dissention on this blog. That is the American way. Stamp out free speech and ban those rascally dissenters. Very intellectual approach to debate.
I think that the article did have
some comments that were favorable to PM, but the overall article raised many negatives about PM and the article appeared in a major mainstream publication.
1. The reporter failed to consider all of the health issues. Is the lower weight strategy a matter of good health or is it more about control over players?
Furthermore, is it good football strategy?
2. The physical health aspects raise more questions than answers. Do many doctors recommend relatively large and rapid weight loss regimens - particularly for football players?
Does the lower weight strategy result in more injuries,less competitive teams and more health issues? Are most of the players in better or worse physical health as a result of the PM program?
3. There are mental health issues that need to be considered. Do players suffer problems when they are subjected to multiple losses by large margins? What about the damages that could occur in the event of another long winless streak?
4. Is PM a visionary or an outlier?
How many other college teams have used a lower weight strategy? What have been the effects on the physical and mental health of the players? What about the effects on competitiveness and on wins and losses?
I would ask the same questions about pro football teams.
I am not aware of any other college or pro team that has followed a lower weight strategy.
That would speak volumes in the absence of proof of successful lower weight strategy programs elsewhere.
5. Significant weight differentials can involves safety and fair competition issues. Boxing and wrestling are different sports, but they have weight classes to assist in safety and competitiveness.
6. The appearance of the article
in a mainstream publication is a major plus. It provides more visibility for the change group,
the blog and the many problems that have existed with respect to PM and the football program.
7. Another long winless streak must be avoided and that would require major changes now.
How about turning fat to muscle? That is a very common technique in bodybuilding. Does CU have a nutritionist on staff? Having a real fitness expert as part of the football staff - not spread thin for all CU athletes - would solve the problem. Then of course feeding the players and training them on how to match their calorie burn with workout regimen is essential. If they do not have that to supplement the program then they will never get it right on the field.
I am a living example and I have not played football since HS. I was at least 40 lbs overweight several years ago and am now a ripped middle aged man. My body fat is very minimal (has to go somewhere, maybe my butt?) and I am down to gym once a week.
Now I am off to enjoy the California sunshine and eat a kale and chickpea (we call it garbanzo beans out here) salad.
You make many valid points in your post however you miss the significance of this article. It was supposed to be a big hit piece that so embarrassed CU and PM that PM would have to resign or be fired. It did no such thing. It probably helps PM's cause by reducing the argument to a discussion of playing weights and healthy eating. Pro fat guys vs healthy athletes.
Way too much out of control spin by Jake detractors. Most do not have any positive points to make to improve the program. They just want to disagree with Jake. Anyone that says that the status quo of CU sports is acceptable is not following the teams. Wholesale head chopping is not required. Including Jakes. Just some attitude adjustments could accomplish a lot.
This is Columbia University athletics. If you can imagine it, they have it on staff. The training table is designed specifically for football by the nutritionist on staff. Many of the items eaten by the players is made by bakeries to enhance nutrition and vitamin intake and are protein rich. The strength and conditioning coach comes from the NFL and is a specimen himself. I just can't believe those anonymous quotes in the article from the parents because weekly testing tests for hydration, drugs, alcohol, proteins and so many other things to make the student athletes optimum in their sport.
Rich Forzani '66C
Everyone gets to have their say. No objection from me.
I'm delighted by the article. The last thing any of our U pals wanted is publicity of any kind. We're happy to provide and we thank the Post.
Does anyone really think that furious alumni and 0-10 and a formal committee formed for change is positive publicity for those people? If so, bless you. I'll take the story and be happy with it.
I'm back from CA tomorrow, and CAEC kicks into high gear. We've done a hell of a lot already and it's only been 10 days.
Join us. Rforzani1@optonline.net
Rich Forzani '66C
Everyone gets to have their say. No objection from me.
I'm delighted by the article. The last thing any of our U pals wanted is publicity of any kind. We're happy to provide and we thank the Post.
Does anyone really think that furious alumni and 0-10 and a formal committee formed for change is positive publicity for those people? If so, bless you. I'll take the story and be happy with it.
I'm back from CA tomorrow, and CAEC kicks into high gear. We've done a hell of a lot already and it's only been 10 days.
Join us. Rforzani1@optonline.net
The football player quoted in the article says it all. "He wants us healthy where other coaches would be pushing burgers and shakes on us." Now he is anonymous and spoke positively of the coach and staff. If PM wants the team healthy, then he obviously cares about them and can't be the monster that many have made him out to be.
How naive can you get? So we have the healthiest 0 and 10 football team in the country. Changes in team chemistry are coming. Player talent is improving every day. Coaches are here to stay.
Can the individual who is so supportive of PM please give us valid reasons for hope with this program? What positive signs can you share with us that would indicate Pete is on the verge of turning things around?
Turning it around does not mean 10 and 0. 20 kids with talent and playing time will be on the field. Which should add up to 3 or 4 wins
The problem with the Post article is that it deals exclusively with the weight issue, completely overlooking the other issues that have contributed to this horrible season, such as poor coaching tactics, demoralized players, and dissension and division in the ranks. I would say the weight issue is relatively minor compared to the many other problems.
How can you suggest Pete cares about the health of the players when 2 of our QB's are injured an done should never have been put in the position. Last I checked Pete does not get paid for having healthy kids, he gets paid for wins of which he has provided very few, none last year.
The parents dont give their name because they fear the bully, which he is, and they do not want their kids to have to deal with his anger, of which (well documented btw) he has a lot of. Perhaps if he learned how to hone his anger into a useful skill like coaching, of which he knows little, we may actually win a few games. We get beaten up and down the field like rag dolls and you clowns that work for the department try to suggest that is acceptable. It is not acceptable nor is this coach.
So go on ranting about how great Napolean is, but he will have his Waterloo.
I am sorry, but 3 or 4 wins is unacceptabel for thsi putz to keep his job. Given the total lack of dialogue by the powers that be; it seems correct that we should expect good ole Petey to produce a 500 season. Anything less is a failure as far as he is concerned. He and the AD and trustees hand quaf hair boy have set the bar extremely high.
If Nick Sabin had been coaching and recruiting for 3 years we would go 8 and 2 with an Ivy title, but there is no chance to get a coach with that track record to come to CU. So get real. The decision makers have their statements in cement. Get behind the team.
no coach wants players to eat burgers and shakes. That is idiocy. Though, if you check out how some of the big programs in the south feed their athletes it is shocking. Pancakes and other really unhealthy southern eating. That is just part of the culture where fat southern boys need their grits with no nutritional value. Obesity rules the south anyway.
A good athletic program preaches understanding body metabolism. If you don't have the athletes buying into it and the program providing the right kinds of nutritional meals there is no gain.
Coaches who do not understand this are just missing the boat. Eat right and see how better legs you have in the 4th quarter.
3 is a must. 4 would be great,
5 is not possible. More fan support at the games would help. Right now there is no home field advantage.
Welp that article was a waste of your time. How bout we go on ranting with facts?
2 of our QBs are injured? Who is the second?
PM is a bully? Please elaborate since his anger is so well documented.
Mangurian only plays Freshmen? Oh wait, I'll clear up this one - there was only 4 starting for the Lions vs Brown. Yale had 13 ON THEIR DEPTH CHART.
It's pretty clear from the article and this blog that you value TMZ quality gossip more than truth or insight. Time to move on people, the train is leaving without you.
In his third year, 3 or 4 wins is not showing me signs that we are turning things around. 3 or 4 wins is showing me we are the same old Columbia...
Well nottingham is injured and where is hilinski, have you asked around on campus?
Did you not see the articles written about him from the nfl or his tirade at penn?
So come out from under the table where Pete is sitting and smell the coffee.
Jake u do not no what you are talking about and never will.
I beg to differ, the train isn't moving, but the boat is sinking.
There is no solid ground with this coach or at Columbia....how long do you think it will take for Pete to leave or get fired? Seriously, it appears to be in his DNA as does losing, but unlike math a negative times a negative does not equal a positive here! Nice try, but wishful thinking.
In other news, a man claiming to be a coach said that year 2 of a new coach shows the biggest advances a football team will make!
No dietitian that talks to us players and we are not given any food. All dining halls. Not a matter of turning fat to muscle, which it should be. Its a matter of making them skinny (Many guys have come in and lost over 50/60 pounds). Punishments for not staying within a weight range.
Well, there you go. Only an idiot of a coach would want players to lose weight without knowledge of what it takes to train athletes effectively. If you just lose weight, that does not translate to athletic success. Yous till need calories to burn. It just has to be the right kind of calories. Otherwise, you just get tired,. You need nutrition. It is a player's responsibility to eat well but you have to provide guidance. Maybe Pete is such a loser he thinks gatorade is all they need.
To the poster who mentioned kelly hilinski being upset at the Penn game, haven't heard anything about that. It was a big concern of mine when he signed on at CU that a solid talent like him would get fed up early with brickhead Pete. I hope he is at least happy with the school and education. It is unfortunate his football career is not as bright as he deserves (for that matter, all the CU players deserve).
Nothing happened to Hilinski at the Penn game. The post was referring to a supposed dust up at last year's Penn game between PM and some parent. The post was so poorly written it made you conflate Hilinski and the Penn reference.
Here's quotes from Mangurian when he was coaching the O-line for the Falcons. Not sure what it says about CU, but it should be part of the record. His conditioning theory isn't new or untested:
“You can’t judge them by normal standards,” said first-year Falcons offensive line coach Pete Mangurian. “They are big guys and their metabolisms are different.”
But, Mangurian added, it is possible for linemen to be too big.
“They were way above weight when I got here. Absolutely,” said Mangurian, who set lofty fitness goals for his players during the offseason — most were expected to drop at least 20 pounds before the start of spring practice. “The key is to be what you are. If you can be 325, and that’s what you’re supposed to be, then that’s what you are. To me, that’s the goal: not to get as big as you can, but to be whatever is optimum for you.”
Todd’s “optimum” weight was determined to be no more than 286 pounds. Odd news for Todd. Last year, the team asked him to bulk up to 305. Todd tried to gain the weight every way he knew how, but couldn’t get past 297 during the season.
Early in the offseason, however, he managed to pack on the pounds just fine.
“Right after the season was over with, I just ate anything that I wanted and I wasn’t working out as much,” Todd said. “You’ve really got to watch yourself.”
Todd topped out at 308. Three months later, he checked in at 280 — the lightest he had been since his freshman year at LSU.
“I can feel it just walking around,” McClure said. “I feel a ton better. I’m in a lot better shape than I was in last year. I’m moving a lot better. It was definitely for the best for the whole line, losing weight.”
But it wasn’t easy. His diet was strict and structured: lots of fruits, vegetables and chicken breasts. Mangurian tracked the line’s weight and body fat from week to week."
(Dan Washburn's On the Line with Dan McClure)
Firstly, I never said anything happened to Hilinski it against Penn, but obviously something happened or maybe it was a game earlier. Since you are the smart guy who just put your foot in your own mouth, why not let us know what happened and what is going on. Tell us about what the coaches say about injured players and how much is actually known to the outside world.
while you are at it, why dont you tell us why Garret never suited up again? Perhaps it was because he loved playing for the coach so much he never wanted to don the Columbia blue again even though he would have cemented his name in the Columbia record books.
Like others have said, it is only a matter of time before this clown cements his own fate and in doing so will cement the fate of the AD and others. It may take longer than anticipated, but it will happen nonetheless.
I would love to smell the coffee and I thank "anonymous" for addressing only one of my questions with another inaccurate answer. To clarify, there was only one QB injured in the 2013 season. We don't need to ask around campus or read disgruntled blog posts regarding Hilinski because he was never injured.
2. No one has given examples of bully behavior. Or how players are "demoralized." Oh wait - I can give a few - just read the comments section on Jake's site and you will get plenty examples of trashy attacks from bullies....unfortunately all the examples are from the fans.
3. "No dietitian that talks to us players and we are not given any food. "...... The quote speaks for itself. Clearly you are not a student-athlete of Columbia University...or any institution of higher education for that matter.
4. What happened to free thinking? Jake says the players are starved but yet he personally reported the weight GAINS of ALL LINEMEN this season?
(http://culions.blogspot.com/2013/09/breaking-roster-starting-to-be-updated.html)
As for the article - seems like more rumors regarding the above. “...parent of another player told him his son lost 30 pounds over the summer and passed out in the bathroom...”
To argue simply, look at the above weight changes (reported by Jake) and notice at the end of the summer the BIGGEST WEIGHT LOSS ON THE ROSTER WAS SIX POUNDS.
Well, there you go. Time to demand facts instead of gossip, wins instead of losses and fan support instead of poorly written exposes to the post.
the only thing that the atlanta experiment tells me is that he has a second job in food management and nutrition. it doesnt mention if the team did better or the line played better.
David K, yes we demand wins of which we have seen few.
I addressed your hilinski question obviosuly after you wrote your long winded nothingness since you or one of your friends wrote a retort already. I think you should go back to campus and see who is injured and who isnt.
You guys who troll this blog are singularly unimpressive and argue/debate with a sense that you have a soap box to stand on, but you dont.
Nowhere in this world is 0-10 acceptable except at Columbia. So, go cheer to alma mater in support of a coach who cant coach his way out of a paperbag, a group of assistants who should find other professions because at a school of higher learning that is as demanding as Columbia these results are just unacceptable. There is no rumor or bluster in that. They were 0-10 and set the all time worst record ever in the IVY league..and guess what, that is a hell of a long history.
Good luck trying to defend the indefensible.
Wow, thre is a lot of angst on this blog lately. The usual banter is quite boring, but there have been some interesting entries.
Firstly, to the person who wondered aloud what is acceptable for next year for Pete to retain his job, that is a great question. Given all of the dialogue and semmingly getting a free pass this year, it is my opinion that nothing less than 500 is acceptable and that is the baseline. We know we did not see much in the anticipated year 2, but at some point you have to put up or shut up.
On the weight article. I am not sure what that article was outside of just press. It did not seem to be bad nor overly good, it just seemed to be, like space in the paper needed to be filled.
On the constant badgering of Jake, well I, like Bob Kent, have known him for a long time, and if all of the players showed his dedication to football Columbia would never have a losing season.
What I do know is that Columbia has a long history of losing and many times cannot get out of its own way. So, we have more of the same now. History as a guide, this coach will not succeed and there will be another shortly. There have been a lot of knocks on Tellier, but this coach pales in comparison on so many levels. If you use Ray as the baseline, we are way below currently. So, I am not going to get into mindless banter with whomever is defending the current regime, but will say that they have an uphill battle in terms of recruiting new players, retaining current players and overcoming a mountain of history.
In my opinion and based upon what I know and have seen; he is a terrible coach and a poor leader of men. If you want evidence just simply look at the numbers. They are the basis for judgement and they do not support retaining him.
Des Werthman
Nice post DK.
Logical, well reasoned, and full of facts. How rude of you to bring out facts that contradict the party line.
Let the name calling begin.
where are the facts in Dk;s post. Perhaps inbetween writing both posts you forgot to put any facts in there? Seriously, DK didnt post one fact at all. In fact, show me proof that Hilinski isnt hurt? this is the same tactic you clowns pull, so produce it already. Wait there are no facts. You try to poke holes in the well proven mantra on this blog because you have no proof or facts fo your own.
Seriously, when you are done getting your degree at the JC law school, come back and provide a well thought out discussion. Until then femme la bouche.
Where
Dk's
This
of
I just wanted to correct the grammar before you went down that boring path.
I am not a troll. I am a long time supporter of the Lions who is just as disappointed in the "numbers" as you. But you have failed to debate my "long winded nothingness" with any truth or knowledge of the team - or the game itself.
I am not on a soap box. I have stated only facts, mostly quoted by the blog itself. Why? Because I knew you and others would attack me "defending the undefensible." (PS its INdefensible)
Yet you can't refute any of my arguments? Oh and insulting people and the program doesn't count as disproving the facts I stand behind.
Let me drive home the point since you are not very good at recall (...aka stating false injuries and failing to give an example of a Head Coach's "well documented" anger issue) .... you say the Lions "were 0-10 and set the all time worst record ever in the IVY league".... let me recommend you review our 'hell of a long history' and recall Columbia's 44 GAME LOSING STREAK.
'At a school of higher learning that is as demanding as Columbia' I would expect people to be educated when posting. Unfortunately Columbia has never been successful in football -- and changing the result on the field will be just as difficult as changing the reaction on this blog.
There is no rumor or bluster in that.
ugh, it says indefensible above not undefensible.
that is just it guy, he produced a team that was worse than the teams during the streak!
it is up to the players to come forward with their injuries, i can only say what i have seen with my own two eyes; which you have not. would you like me to take a picture for you.
So snotty boy who corrected something that did not need to be corrected, you are on a soap box as you have given no evidence that is contrary to my comments. so the burden is magically put on me to prove that which you do not know? ok, the world is flat, pete is the greatest, his team was better than any team in Ivy history...does that make you feel warm and cozy on the inside, are you no longer afraid of the booggeyman? do some research outside of looking at the blog and then lets have a discussion or whatever it is you call it when you are always correct, with no evidence, until proiven wrong.
thanks for the back and forth; i learned absolutely nothing new outside there is another follower on the blog. another one that is part of the problem.
btw, there are a ton of typos and grammatical errors in here as i really dont care about you clowsn who cant think for yourselves focusing on the minutia.
I smell less coffee and more desperation to be relevant. So yes, please take a picture of injuries that don't exist. No burden or magic - just a simple request that you explain your position with facts or first hand experiences ... instead of insults or using the words troll, clown, etc.
I smell less coffee and more desperation to be relevant. So yes, please take a picture of injuries that don't exist. No burden or magic - just a simple request that you explain your position with facts or first hand experiences ... instead of insults or using the words troll, clown, etc.
I have seen it with my own eyes. i do not need to prove it to you. By the way, name calling is no different than your tactics of trying to point out flaws in grammar, which dont exist. In typical Ivy league fashion, trying to be relevant by attempting to seem smarter. I do not need the proof, but perhaps you should come closer from afar and be more pedestrian in your approach.
Parting is such sweet sorrow....
At Cornell, PM's went 5-2 in the Ivy League in back to back seasons (1999 & 2000).
When was the last time a CU coach went at least 5-2 in the Ivy League in back to back seasons? By my count, it looks like the answer is never. Since the founding of the league in 1954, NO CU coach has ever had back to back 5-2 IVY LEAGUE seasons. The records are on the CU website, you can look it up. I am talking ivy wins, not overall records (but they suck too).
By this measure (ivy wins in back to back seasons), at the time of his hiring, PM had done something that no past CU coach had ever achieved.
Now let look at CU's best single season Ivy win/loss records. There are a only three seasons in the history of the Ivy League where has CU gone 5-2 (or better) in the Ivy League. One 6-1 season and two other seasons of 5-2. That is it.
So to summarize, while at Cornell, PM accomplished something that no CU coach had ever achieved - back to back 5-2 ivy league seasons. Only one CU coach has ever had a single season ivy league win loss record better than PM's best single season performance, Aldo Donelli in 1961.
So Dianne and the search committee were idiots for hiring this guy based on what they knew at the time? Hardly. PM accomplished more in three ivy league seasons than any CU coach since 1962.
I don't think this guy forgot how to coach and I expect CU will do much better next year.
He accomplished this with another coaches recruits and some would suggest that accomplishing this at Cornell is significantly easier than at Columbia.
You are comparing apples to oranges.
However, if we go along with your logic, how do you explain such a horrible season and what is your definition of much better?
Getting sick reading some of this crap.
Left is right, right is left. Don't post if you are not a CU grad. Heavy LM are slow and fat. Grammar counts. QB is hurt. QB is not hurt. All freshmen lineup. Checking out until spring practice starts. Maybe time will heal some of you contrarians so that you can add constructive criticism to this blog.
David K obviously wasn't on campus during the streak. Our 1986 team stood as the worst in Ivy history until Pete worked his magic this year. That team was outscored by 290 points and played only a couple of competitive games. There were only about 60-70 kids in the program then, as many recruits quit during or immediately after their 0-6 freshman season. And that 1986 team was the culmination of a horrible stretch: we had won two games in the prior four seasons, been winless in 1985 and had hired a terrible person as our new coach, MacElreavy. The program was completely broken and in very poor hands.
By contrast, Pete inherited a program that had won nine games in the prior three seasons and had numerous all-Ivy caliber players returning (Brackett, Ward, Garner, Ollinger, etc). There were 100 kids in the program and the Campbell Center was set to open. The team went 1-9 in 2011, but lost five games by single digit margins. So the program was weak, but not uncompetitive.
From this starting point, in just his second year Pete fielded the worst team in Ivy history, outscored by 330 points and not competitive in a single game. In fact, our score differential did not come close to describing the lopsided nature of the games, as several teams including Harvard, Dartmouth and Yale put in their 3rd string as early as the first half. Princeton could have beaten us by 70 points had they chosen to do so. I sincerely doubt David K. was at that game.
We don't need the histrionics about Pete's personality and bullying. The facts are sufficient. He destroyed our football program in two years. We have one All-Ivy HM player returning next year! That's out of 40 returning league-wide. Pete's had two recruiting classes, and if we are objective about it, they are not good enough for this level of play. That will bruise some egos, but the fact is we were not competitive against the 3rd string players from other Ivy teams.
Next year we will have another disgraceful record and Pete will be out, because our talent is decreasing year by year and not even the AD will be able to rationalize his performance away. The argument then boils down to whether it is better to take action now and try to begin rebuilding sooner or whether we stand by and let the current leadership ruin another football season and leave an even bigger mess for the next person to clean up. I continue to wait for Pete's defenders to tell us one thing he did this year as a football coach that helped us be a better team.
Respectfully, PM was there three years. In 2000, 3 /4 of the players were his recruits. In 1999, 1/2 of the players were his recruits. His worst record was during his first year when 3/4 of the players that y were his predecessor's recruits. Besides, the theory here is PM is terrible coach who can’t win with anybody. History says otherwise.
Penn basketball feels your pain. Check out the comments on the Penn hoops board about their season.
http://boards.basketball-u.com/showforum.php?fid/43/
Hey. " getting sick of reading some of this crap" nobody is twisting your arm, and it really does not affect any of us that you are no longer reading.
Signed, Not a Columbia Grad
Enough is enough. The President insults the intelligence of Columbia alumni with this sort of statement. The bottom line is Manguarian is an awful coach and Dianne Murphy is a laughing stock. It is time that Presbo stops trying to justify his having hired Dianne Murphy and fires her. He undermines his credibility by holding on to these jokers.
Pete had nothing to do with the end at Cornell. Ricky Rahne did.
I agree, he was only the head coach.
No influence at all.
Not a grad. You're a prime example of the aggressive detractors who are looking to critizise everything he reads on this blog. Have you stopped beating your wife?
Al, those obese southern guys from FL State, AL and Auburn seem to be doing well eating pancakes and grits.
Did you watch the games? Look at the stats? Read what players had to say about Pete st Cornell? Assume that Pete had anything to do with what a great QB can do with receivers he has played a career with? Keep dreaming and get your head further up his arse.
Jake,
You must get a radio show so you can hang up on some of these crazies. The only thing that has been hurt in KH has been his pride.
Ricky Rahne was a Mangurian recruit.
Ricky Rahne was the QB in 2001 after Mangurian left. Cornell went 2-7 overall and 2-5 in the ivy league. They only played 9 games that season. Don't know why. I got these number off Cornell's website.
Big drop off after PM left. Rahne was still there. Poster who said "Pete had nothing to do with the end at Cornell. Ricky Rahne did." is all wet.
How quickly we forget. Games the weekend after the 9/11 attacks were canceled.
Post a Comment