The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(02-04-2015 10:24 AM)acer1 Wrote:  Oh, I forgot you know how all of the recruits think and what they are impressed with. My bad for even questioning your superior knowledge of all things sport.

I would guess then that the football upgrades had nothing to do with WMU recruiting the two highest ranking classes in Mid American Conference history.

Always proud to be a Bronco, RTB.

Ouch..............I don't know what the recruits think and neither do you.

But if facilities were the end all in a recruits decision than BSU, NIU, EMU, BG and UT would be winning everything. Instead it's WMU, Akron, and Kent, who have been very consistent and at the top of their division for quite some time. Neither Akron or Kent have facilities that will dazzle recruits.

Granted, Western could use an indoor practice facility, which according to Hawkins could be done reasonably cheap. But the idea that we need to build a new arena to keep up with the Jones's is just fiscally stupid.

Seth Dugan certainly could have played in more impressive arenas than UA, but other things factored into his decision.

Do you see where college sports is heading? Players are going to court wanting to be paid. According to you without glamorous facilities they won't come. At what point do you say enough is enough? You build a state of the art facility, the next guy builds a better one. It's never ending.

(02-04-2015 11:35 AM)Dirty Ernie Wrote:  I do agree, better facilities make it easier for a recruiter to impress recruits. Just like, you are trying to impress the attractive woman to come into your life, you've got a nice A8 Audi with a saddle leather interior, to drive her to your 28th floor penthouse condo for the weekend, you know, lots of girls will roll with that.

Not directly comparing a hot chick to an athletic B-ball recruit, but you know, it can't hurt.

But, I'm thinking our top level boosters might be getting stretched thin. We've got football, basketball, hockey operating at a higher level, top flight soccer and tennis, others. Yet we don't have that $100 million alumni base kicking in like an MSU or Ohio State. Makes it tough.

Oh, by the way. Our president is trying to do away with tax breaks on donations to athletic programs, i.e. the Gary Fund, and such. Throw that into the mix of things that will make fund raising that much harder.

Poorest example of online forum Moderator in the history of the internet.
Wonder if he is posting drunk AGAIN ???

(02-04-2015 11:50 AM)Chipdip2 Wrote:  Oh, by the way. Our president is trying to do away with tax breaks on donations to athletic programs, i.e. the Gary Fund, and such. Throw that into the mix of things that will make fund raising that much harder.

Wait... what? Now you've got my attention.

(02-04-2015 01:04 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(02-04-2015 11:50 AM)Chipdip2 Wrote:  Oh, by the way. Our president is trying to do away with tax breaks on donations to athletic programs, i.e. the Gary Fund, and such. Throw that into the mix of things that will make fund raising that much harder.

Wait... what? Now you've got my attention.

It's one of the ways he wants to pay for free community college. He also wants to tax 529 college savings plans to pay for "free" community college.

(02-04-2015 12:44 PM)okgc Wrote:  Poorest example of online forum Moderator in the history of the internet.
Wonder if he is posting drunk AGAIN ???

DRUNK...I am always drunk...especially at 6am, when I posted this morning!

Hey, you don't see me ranting about the coaches, or the players. No, I don't know what the athletes that do not come here say about things, perhaps you do. I talk to them after they come to campus.

Some of those other programs you refer to do not have the coaching stability that we have had. Are they competitive they sure are. I'm not saying that we need the "best facilities" and I don't think that you can point to me saying that. I'm saying that others have passed us by, and it is important for us to "stay in the game", if we hope to continue the success that we have.
No
Don't you remember a football coaching staff that talked about our locker rooms, and hear how the recruits were not permitted to go into them, the coaches were ashamed of them. Other MAC coaches would always tell the recruits, make them show you the facilities. It wasn't that long ago.

I'm just trying to add some realism here. Years ago, the CMU facilities reminded everyone of a high school gym, not so more after they changed the entrance added a practice court and all new locker rooms. No they are not getting the recruits that we are, but they are "competing" with us. We will see how successful they have been after the season.

I'm proud of my university, I'm proud of the coaches that we have (thank you KB), and I'm very proud of the young men that we have representing us. I'd like to be proud of our fans too.

Always proud to be a Bronco, RTB.

Acer there is no evidence at all that there is a correlation between success and facilities in MAC basketball. Our facilities suck so bad we just won the MAC title.

I'm all for new facilities if they can find a way to pay for them without student fees or tax dollars. But simply doing it to keep up with your neighbor isn't a good enough reason, and as we've seen, today's good enough is tomorrow's not good enough. At some point it needs to be put in perspective and the unfettered growth of athletic infrastructure needs to stop.

Acer wrote

Quote:Hey, you don't see me ranting about the coaches, or the players. No, I don't know what the athletes that do not come here say about things, perhaps you do. I talk to them after they come to campus.

So you've talked to them after they get to campus and they tell you that they came here "in spite" of our crap facilities? What did we have that brought them here over overtures from schools with more attractive facilities?

Why is it that Murphy, who is in one of the most talent rich regions in the country can only get a handful of locals to commit out of HS. Those facilities are top notch. He's got facilities, proximity to talent, and he learned under one of the all time great coaches. Murph should be winning the league year in year out.

Then we have Dambrot. Guy has baggage. Facilities are so so. Program is stellar. Speaking of Akron, look at that football stadium and the pedigree of their coach. What has it got them? NOTHING.

As for ranting about coaches I'm pretty consistent. I stuck with Fleck when we were 1-9, got labeled a lap dog, a company man etc. Like GBL (who you'd never question) I get perplexed by some of our rotations. But all in all I think Hawkins has been very good for WMU. Apparently, if one doesn't goose step to your liking they're not a true fan.