Monday, May 11, 2009

In defense of Mobile

People are poking fun at Mobile already. I know most BC fans won't travel to any bowl for a variety of legitimate and questionable reasons. Let me say this about Mobile: it is better than most options. No one is going to spend a week at any of the lower tier bowls. You just need a few things and Mobile has them:

-- Good Hotel options:
Mobile has a variety of branded hotels from which to chose. You want high end, you have a choice. You want quick, clean and cheap, you have a choice. It is much better than Boise.
-- Good weather: Mobile is not Hawaii or South Beach, but it will have better weather than Boise, DC, Nashville, Charlotte or San Fran will on Jan 6.
-- Flight options: no direct flights from New York of Boston, but you can connect via most of the major hubs in the southeast.
-- Something to do: tons of golf in the area and tons of bars/clubs downtown.

I don't want to see BC in Mobile next year. I want to be in the national championship, but if we do end up there, I will probably go to the bowl. But let me echo what I say about all road games: just go! Most people have fun regardless of the location.


BCMike said...

I don't think it was Mobile folks were attacking as much as it was the presentation of this now bottom-feeder bowl's president saying that they didn't want us but would rather have FSU or Miami.

I'd rather have a date with Christine Taylor, but I don't think I'd share that with my girlfriend or the other ladies I would be likely to date...

And honestly, it's questionable whether Mobile is better than Boise. Boise is further away and you stand a decent chance of playing Boise State on their own blue turf; but from those I know who went, Boise apparently isn't a half bad town. Still not exactly at the top of my places to go list, though....

Brian said...

Agree with BCMike. Not only do we not feel the love from the top of the ACC bowl pecking order, but now the GMAC Bowl (over/under 1 more year on that being the name of that bowl?) comes out and says they'd rather have FSU/Miami citing the e-word again. Give me a break.

Mobile has never had a BCS team play in their bowl. They'd be lucky to have BC, although my money is on no more than 8 bowl-eligible teams out of the ACC in 2009 and GMAC Bowl scavenges for an at-large team.

Erik said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Erik said...

I'm sure you can have a good time in Mobile. Probably cheap drinks at the bars, southern food, women, and hospitality. Isn't it pretty close to the gulf waters, too?

G.A. said...

Yeah, I used to live in New Orleans and my girlfriend is from Mobile. It's a really nice place with some fun bars and friendly people. It had the first Mardi Gras in the country. The bigger problem is that there's a bowl for a 9th place team.

J Mac said...

Its not about Mobile, I'm sure its a nice place to have a good time but its about being in a bottom feeder bowl. If Boise was the site of BCS bowl, I'd be there in a heartbeat. I'm just tired of settling. I've been to Charlotte to see our boys play and your right it is fun wherever you travel to see the eagles.

mod34b said...

It is the #9 ACC finisher Bowl.. who really cares.

Would anyone have any enthusiasm if BC went to the Meineke Car Care Bowl in NC, the Eagle Bank Bowl in DC...I think NOT. These are crap bowls too in bad locations for a bowl.

The only glimpse of light I see is that the GMAC bowl is a January Bowl...whoa! BC could get to a January Bowl on the cheap if it wound up going to the GMAC bowl.

The big problem for BC is we are in a Southern League with a Southern mindset..While BC had aspirations of "going national" by joining the ACC, the ACC is still good 'ol boy country...I don't see that changing anytime soon. But that being said, we are still better off than had we stayed in the Big east (i think??)

downtown_resident said...

The problem is that BC is a national university forced to compete with mostly-southern institutions for these southern bowl games. That's why the bowls in San Francisco and Boise seem to like BC relative to the southern bowls.

In retrospect I would have liked to see the ACC pursue an affiliation with a smaller west coast bowl game like the Poinsettia in San Diego or the Las Vegas Bowl. We'd draw well relative to our southern brethren and it would be a nice vacation destination. But at the end of the day, these are still ninth-place bowl games and it's doubtful any fan base will be very fired up about them, no matter where they are.

mod34b said...

BC is a "national university" -- do you really think so when it comes to football? aside from one fan in Atlanta, I do not think we have a national following or national fan base...maybe we are working toward that, but we have not yet arrived...

BCMike said...

mod34b, I'd argue that the school absolutely is national. The brand equity the school enjoys is far from regional. Just ask Babson grads. Another great school but no one outside of New England has heard of it. Just about everyone knows BC.

I agree with you that our sports programs aren't USC in football or UNC in hoops, but we're decently well-known. Between Flutie and Matty, we've gotten more than a fair amount of press.

dixieagle said...

I've lived in Mobile for all but 4 years since my husband and I graduated from BC in '74. Clearly, the GMAC folks (and we know them) wanted the ACC connection almost solely for the possibility they could end up with a Florida State playing close to their own back yard, and for the prestige of having an ACC affiliation, even if it's with a miserable team.

That said, you can do a lot worse than Mobile in January, folks. The seafood is to die for, there are some great hotels, they will put on a "Mardi Gras" parade for you and pull out all the stops. Unfortunately the game is played in the utterly crappy Ladd-Peebles Stadium, site of the Senior Bowl. The local University of South Alabama is just starting to field a football team, and I imagine that, down the road, a more suitable stadium will be available, but until then the GMAC Bowl is stuck with the worst stadium anywhere.

But, if you get the chance, y'all come on down!

Erik said...

Do as Rod Roddy says!

CT said...

Um, make that two fans in Atlanta.

But I was born and raised here. So maybe I'm the original Eagle in Atlanta.

You should see the surprise when I tell Southerners and Northerners alike that I actually left the South to go to BC. Kinda like the comment about the ACC being "good ol' boy country."

Probably doesn't help the stereotypes both regions have of each other.

The SEC is good ol' boy country. Anybody who follows the coverage of both conferences here in Atlanta knows that very well.
Atlanta is probably the best big city for college sports in the country. And the SEC dominates coverage. You think the ACC is a parochial conference? Try the SEC. Ha, just thinking about BC in the SEC makes me laugh. Oil and water.

One stereotype that's true: prettier girls down here.

If we do wind up ever going to Mobile, would it really be that much different than all the empty seats in the BC section at the ACC Championship game? What do we get, 5,000 down to a bowl game in Florida?

We're a national university with a regional fanbase--Mass. to NJ. BC is known down here in Atlanta by the SEC folks. But there really is nothing other than the SEC that is worthy of conversation here.

That's one reason I'm happy Matt Ryan has been such a success here.

Back to the bowl...nothing wrong with Mobile. Plenty wrong with going to play a bowl game there.

BC isn't better than Mobile.
BC is better than the GMAC Bowl.

Coast said...

I would say the school has greater national aspirations than they currently enjoy.

The school is obviously well known in NE, but the further south and west you go, the less recognition they see.

I've spent a number of years in Illinois and Texas, and BC is known nearly exclusively to the Catholic schools (especially the Jesuit ones) and families who already have BC ties.

Does the school draw students from all over the US? Yes. But could you visit a random guy on the street in Wyoming, New Mexico, or Iowa and get the same recognition as Duke, Notre Dame, North Carolina, Stanford, and increasingly USC? Not quite yet, but they could get there.

Unknown said...

If we do end up in Mobile, my suggestion is to stay on Pensacola Beach or Orange Beach just South of Mobile. You can't go wrong with staying on the beach with the rest of the snowbirds.

As a Pensacola native, I'd prefer Pensacola nightlife over Mobile. While I hope we don't end up in Mobile, I know that the locals will treat us right.

I just hope I don't have to post a list of things to do in the area in another 7 months.

bc1900 said...

I think they should have a Gen. Sherman bowl in Columbia, SC.

Unknown said...

"the ACC is still good 'ol boy country"
GT fan here. I'm laughing really hard at the "good ol boy country" comment. Maybe if you BC people ever traveled to games you would understand what life is like outside of Massachusetts.

"Good Ole Boy" country is south Georgia, Alabama, Miss., Ark. La., and northern Flordia. Guess how many teams we have there? 1. Even if I give you Clemson, that's only 2. Does VTech count? They were in your division before the switch too. That makes 3, at best. SEC? You got roughly 7, and that's ignoring ugag, UK, UT, and USC - all of which are pretty country

Is Atlanta "good ol boy" country? Only if Boston is too.

The research triangle schools? Duke is pretty much the New York of the south, and Raleigh - while not a major metropolitan area - is still a city. Wake, UNC, and UVA? It's hard to call top tier schools "good ol boys."

U of Maryland? The DC Subway system connects to it. Miami? While technically the furthest south you can get and still have college football, its population consists of Latinos and old grandparents from New York.

Unknown said...

"Duke, Notre Dame, North Carolina, Stanford, and increasingly USC"

GT fan again. Have to respond to this comment too. ARE YOU ON CRACK? BC is a pretty good academic school with relatively mediocre sports. Trust me, sports fans know who you are, however, they have no reason to associate you with the greatness of the aforementioned schools. Even Notre Dame (18), UNC (30), and USC (27) are ranked higher academically than BC (34). And we haven't even gotten to sports yet, where BC can't hold a candle to the others.

Academics - BC is a fine school, and I wouldn't be disappointed if my kid ended up going there. Still, it's a far cry from some of the elite that you named. Stanford - No. 4. Duke - No. 8.

Football - You claim 1 national title from 1940, which isn't recognized by any major polls. Notre Dame: 11. Can't tell if you are talking about USC west or USC east. I'm assuming you are talking about the real USC, and they've won 11 too. Even schools like GTech (4, but 6 the way you count them) and Clemson (1) have more legit national football titles than you. Hell, Duke even claims a national title in football. I love Matt Ryan and I think it's cute how you cling to Doug Flutie but how can you compare BC to Notre Dame and USC with a straight face?

Basketball - Again, just looking to national championships. BC has zero final four appearances. Duke - 3 championships and 14 final fours. UNC - 5 and 18.

Even the non-basketball schools have better basketball histories. Stanford - 3 (2 pre-tourney) and 2. USC - 0 and 2. ND - 2 and 1.

I understand the pride you have in your school, but you've never won a national championship in a major sport, never made it to the final four in basketball, and most of your fans don't care enough to travel outside of Boston proper. Still, you want to be known as an elite institution.

CT said...

Shratt, you do nothing for the reputation of "GT fans."

There are stereotypes on both sides...from those in the South looking North, and vice versa.


We certainly don't need a "GT fan" to tell us of our sporting deficiencies.

We know them all too well.

And don't patronize us by saying our allegiance to Flutie is "cute." It's unbecoming and speaks poorly of "GT fans."

The post you cite was made by ONE PERSON. He/she wasn't speaking for the entire BC community. Or didn't you get that?

Like I already said, as a BC alum from Atlanta, the poster is wrong if he/she thinks the ACC is good ol' boy country.

And then to talk down BC's academic reputation...poor form. You cite US News and World Report College Rankings? Wow. That seems to be the lazy fallback--to cite those numbers as if they're the final BCS standings. Please.

BC students and alumni are the only ones who can speak to the academic rigor of the school, not a "GT fan" who quotes a ranking based on empirical data that includes alumni donors as part of its ranking system on the merit of the school. Now that's cute.

Save your sensitivity for a UGA blog. Complain to Ga. Tech about the academic reputation of its basketball and football teams (shall we compare, or are championships your only arbiter of success?).

As a Catholic school, we really do mean it when we say "Ever to Excel," both at school and in our contributions to the community at large. If you didn't attend BC, you really wouldn't understand.

I guess our definitions of "elite institution" probably differ. Winning BCS titles and making Final Fours are all well and good, but pale in comparison to how BC students and alumni judge themselves to be "elite."

Unknown said...

I do declare CT that your panties are in a wad and that you (not me) should relax.

1) It is cute how you guys love Doug Flutie. Is endearing a better word?

2) You argue that my post "speaks poorly of GT fans" and "do[es] nothing for the reputation of GT fans," yet shortly thereafter you claim that "[t]he post you cite was made by ONE PERSON. He/she wasn't speaking for the entire BC community. Or didn't you get that?"

As YOU know, "[t]he post you cite was made by ONE PERSON. He/she wasn't speaking for the entire [GT] community. Or didn't you get that?"

3) How on God's green earth was I talking down BC's academic reputation? "BC is a pretty good academic school with relatively mediocre sports." "BC is a fine school, and I wouldn't be disappointed if my kid ended up going there."

Apparently BC isn't as good a school as I thought, because you apparently got a degree from it WITHOUT KNOWING HOW TO READ. Like I said (and read this part this time), BC is "a fine school" and "I understand the pride you have in your school." That said, you'd be hard pressed to argue that it's a better school than either Stanford or Duke.

4) I didn't go to GT. Still, I'm wondering how you can possibly insult the football teams' academics. They were 24th in the country in APR rankings and 29 football players were on the Dean's list this year. Finally, the football team had the highest incoming average SAT score last year. You are correct that the basketball team was embarrassingly deficient this year in both academics and performance, but at the same time you clearly have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to the football side of academics. Start here: If you were educated on the topic, you'd realize that there are three schools in the ACC that have commendable entrance requirements for sports: Duke, BC, and GT.

5) You really believe that you have to have gone to BC to understand a need to excel at school and to contribute to the community? I hate to break it to you but neither is Catholic/BC exclusive. More importantly, however, excelling at school really means nothing unless you do something with it. I'm glad that BC preaches education, but it's more important, IMO, to preach what you will do with it. Then again, maybe only BC people understand what it means to excel - nah, probably not.

6) We probably do differ on what qualifies as "elite." As someone who went to law school with a few BC grads, I can tell you that they did not think their undergrad institution was "elite" or even "great." Don't get me wrong, AGAIN, BC is a fine school. When I interview BC grads I assume that they have received a good education, but not an elite one. I haven't been wowed by any of the 20-30 BC grads that I've known over the years. Most have been reasonably intelligent and most have been good people (with a few exceptions that probably apply across the board to all schools).

Anyways, I digress

7) The only on point response. The original post I responded to was questioning why people outside of the northeast don't know BC. My response was that we do know BC, but we think of it as a school that is decent/good across the boards but does not excel in anything - be it sports or academics (generally speaking, every school probably has a couple of elite departments it can point to).

You can't, with a straight face, argue that BC comes close the academics of Ivy league schools, Duke, Stanford, Wash U, etc. It just doesn't. I'll agree with you that the difference between a 30 and 40 ranking in the US News rankings is negligible/questionable, but not 30+ compared to top 10.

Same goes for football, an argument that BC football holds a candle to ND or USC doesn't pass the laugh test. Likewise UNC and Duke in basketball.

Thus, my original point (that you seemed to take so much issue with) is quite reasonable and was not meant to be mean spirited at all. BC is well-known, but only as an across the board top 35 institution. Good but not great in academics, football, and basketball. Nothing to be ashamed of at all and definitely something to be proud of. Definitely not a statement that deserved the response you gave.

downtown_resident said...

Wow, it's rare to see such arrogance from someone other than a Domer. Nice work, Shratty.

Darius said...

Not to jump into the middle of this and entrench myself too deeply, but I'm a little confused at how you define "holding a candle to" and "mediocre." BC doesn't often get the national respect it ought to, that's certainly true, but our actual on-field results of the last decade would strongly support the notion that our major programs are holding a candle to traditional powers these days and would testify against the notion that we're a mediocre school athletically. The football team bowls every year, beats ND every year, wins an average of nearly 9 games every year, and generally visits and/or finishes the season in the polls every year. The basketball team wins about 20 games a year, usually makes the NCAA tournament, and beat both UNC AND Duke last year. The hockey team's won 2 national championships this decade. If you don't consider that a major sport because the school you root for doesn't play it, that's your perogative, but those on the north side of the Mason-Dixon line do. (Anyway, it's certainly as major a sport in the national collegiate landscape as soccer, which our school also excels at, and is at the very least close to the status of baseball.) Within the last five years, BC has been in the Top 5 of the rankings in all of those sports save baseball: #2 in football, #3 in basketball, #1 in hockey, and #1 in soccer. Sure, the other programs you cite have had more national championships or final fours than BC, but discounting BC in favor of them solely on that basis leads to the absurd conclusion that Duke has a better football program and Rutgers a better basketball one. "Elite," schmelite... we just win games, thank you.

Your academic analysis suffers similar shortcomings. Here's a suggestion: don't boast of your team's academics to fans of a team that rates higher than yours every year (almost always in the Top 5, and actually #1 in the nation numerous times over the last 15-20 years).

By the way, do you know why BC "clings" to Doug Flutie? It's more than just the Heisman trophy (which no one from Tech has ever won, which is kind of an embarrassing factoid when you recall that it's named for a Tech coach). He's also a damn fine role model and citizen, an enthusiastic celebrity supporter of his school, and the very embodiment of overachievement that generally signifies the "little engine that could" Boston College mentality. Not a lot of schools have a sports representative who does us proud at every turn and is such a willing spokesman. Sorry if that bothers you.

Unknown said...

Is some logic too much to ask for?

1) Your football program is pretty mediocre. For starters, "bowling every year" counts for nothing when you are playing in bottom tier bowls year in and year out (exception of 2007). Further, winning 9 games a year in the big east barely counts for anything. For example, looking at your 2004 schedule, I'm shocked you didn't finish with 10 wins. You chased a great coach off because he wanted to look elsewhere. Your stadium only seats 44k and is usually empty. You've won 1 conference title in the entire history of your program. Congrats on racking up the wins in one of the worst major conferences. Congrats on being ranked #2 in 2007, something that had not happened to your school since 1940. Congrats on finishing that year outside of the top 10, even though you had the best QB in the country.

2) Basketball - Congrats on being one of the top 64 teams in the country most years, but only making it to the sweet sixteen once since 1985. Congrats on beating both Duke and UNC last year, even though you lost by 17 in the first round of the NCAA tournament and UNC won the whole thing.

3) Hockey - I love how you bring north/south into it. Guess what, it appears that nobody up north cares about hockey either. In a city of almost 6 million people, your "major program" can't draw over 6k people per game. In fact, your stadium is on average a quarter empty every night. I don't consider any college sport to be "major" where the team with the 25th best attendance barely averages 3k fans a game.

4) Yeah you win the big games alright. Just like the first round of the NCAA tournament this year and the music city bowl. Keep racking up the big wins buddy.

5) Re academics, I was just responding to the statement that implied that GT football had poor academics. I note that you are the second BC fan I've encountered today with a reading comprehension problem. In fact, I wasn't boasting at all and commented that "there are three schools in the ACC that have commendable entrance requirements for sports: Duke, BC, and GT." If you will look at (and this time read) my post, you will see that at no point did I belittle BC's sports academics and - in fact - I did the opposite, commending them on being one of three ACC schools that require significantly more than the NCAA minimum from its athletes. Luckily, your football team can read better than either you or CT, otherwise you would have severe APR problems.

6) I don't know why you guys keep bringing up Flutie. I'm being genuine when I say it's endearing that you cling to him. It's almost like you are so used to getting insulted on it that you overreact when someone finally pays you a complement.

Brian said...

Yeah, let's poke fun at BC for losing its first bowl game in 9 years (albeit a bottom tier bowl).

Sort of rings hollow when your team hasn't won a bowl game since 2005 and got embarrassed in bowls three of the last four years.

Just sayin'

Darius said...

Shratt, ye king of backhanded compliments, don't knock yourself out trying to flatter BC. Your tone is clear to all of us. You say things like our fanbase "clings" to Doug Flutie and then that it's "cute," and then deny that you mean anything negative by it. But the truth of the matter is, looking back at the thread, there wasn't any clinging to Flutie to begin with, just one mention of his name in passing. So you're obviously just trying to stir things up. That's fine, but it's disingenuous of you to claim otherwise. And remarks like "I'm shocked you didn't win 10 games..." well, does Georgia Tech EVER win ten games? 'One conference title in our program's HISTORY' ignores the fact that were an independent team for 98 of those 117 years.

Rather than go point-by-point on everything, though, let me lay it out for you: surpassing mediocrity does not demand national titles. A program is measured by its body of work, and consistency counts for a lot, and an athletic department is measured by the aggregation of its programs. There are plenty of players in Cooperstown who have never won an MVP. Put another way, a golfer who turns in four straight rounds with a score two strokes worse than that day's best round usually wins the tournament by a wide margin. Boston College has surpassed mediocrity.

By the way, when you insist on equating BC's and Georgia Tech's football program academic achievements, as you do in your two most recent posts, you DO belittle BC.

A couple of your other shots at BC don't bear out factually.
1. BC *did* finish inside the Top 10 in football in 2007.
2. BC does not play in an empty stadium. While plenty of excuses are made for why we haven't filled the stadium to 100% capacity the last few years, BC HAS been filling it in the 93-95% range, a measure that surpasses schools like your beloved Georgia Tech.
3. Boston is not a city of almost 6 million people. Maybe that's Bangalore you're thinking of. Although the widest definition of the Greater Boston metropolitan area, which includes parts of Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, and Maine, *does* hold that many. Of course, that area also contains an NHL team, half a dozen other professional hockey teams, and better than a dozen D-1 hockey teams, and only about 0.7% of the people in it are BC grads, but I don't suppose you thought about any of that when crafting your dig.

In addition, if you're going to use attendance to measure major sports, then it's clear that hockey is the #3 sport in the country, far ahead of baseball (Georgia Tech's best sport). After all, only 16 baseball teams average 3,000 a game, and fewer than 30 average even 2,000. I invite you to plunk down a few hundred bucks for the Frozen Four ticket lottery. Good luck; you'll need it. And mocking BC's average hockey attendance of 6,000 rings pretty hollow when your team can't get more than an average of 1,786 fans out to support its #3 team.

mod34b said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mod34b said...

Shratt -- you got us all revved up!! i can't beleive anyone would take you seriously. You are obviously a joker and rabblerouser. But you have worn out your welcome.

I am also the orignal poster CT says is d/n represent BC. Yes I do! I am a proud graduate.

Maybe my good ol boy comment was a bit much, but you've got to admit the southern mindset is very different than the northern. For example, much like you Shratt, I find quite a lot of overconfdence in the southern fan. Think of the looney zealots at Clemson who think they are going to be national champs every year (thunder and lightning..good lord).

I do not think the southerners will embrace BC anytime soon. Especially, since BC keeps showing you southern boys 'how its done"

CT said...

Shratt, you come on a BC blog (first time?) and are patronizing. That's a fact.

Quite simply, you're wrong. But that's okay.

And boring. But that's not the point.

You'll have to trust me when I say that I don't get worked up over silly comments made by anonymous people from behind the safety of their computer. I really don't.

I'm disappointed, however, because I grew up a Ga. Tech fan right here in Atlanta and had season tickets for the 1990 National Championship season (and went to the Citrus Bowl and cried when Rocket Ismail's punt return was called back later that night meaning Colorado beat ND and prevented an AP/UPI Champ. for Tech). And I still root for Tech (when not playing you know who). Knowing we root (on most occasions) for the same team...ugh. Take my name off the subscriber list.

First, it's rich to have a "GT fan" talk about empty stadiums, empty arenas, and attendance at bowls, away games, etc. I mean, come on. Did you type that with a straight face? Atlanta is the best big-city for college sports in the country and Tech is overwhelmed by UGA here and don't sell-out themselves. Pot. Kettle. Boston is a horrible college sports town, but maybe the best pro sports town in the country. See a pattern?

You sound...petulant with your criticism of BC alumni (overall not that impressed, yada yada yada), its athletic accomplishments, and the liberal arts education it imparts.

The poster above was about the King of the Backhanded Compliment. We're both a "fine" school and a "decent" school? Wow. Such clear thinking. We don't "excel" in anything? It's too bad you don't make much sense or else this would be enertaining. I'd love to interview with you.

We won't ever be USC in football or UConn in basketball b/c we can't recruit the same kids. We know this, we accept this. We also win the graduation award for D1 football programs or come a close second or third. I guess we could recruit the same kids that Ga. Tech recruits (who compete for UGA for the same kids), but then we wouldn't graduate them (like Ga. Tech--about 60%, like UGA). And that's not BC. Duke, ND and Stanford graduate their kids at similar rates, but still usually don't beat BC--and we're a far better football program than Duke or Stanford and pretty much always beat ND (ho-hum).

BC isn't Duke or Stanford academically (happy? Huh?), but there are only about 8 or 10 that are and they don't play football (that counts). I've never heard a BC guy or gal think that to be true, and I've met plenty more than you have.

With a post like yours above, I doubt your kid could get in to BC. Oops, there I go, hold on...Forgive me Father, for I have sinned...

You didn't go to GT, but if "29 kids made the Dean's List," you should consider working for their Sports Information Dept. You sound like Buzz.

I don't believe you have to go to BC to understand the need to contribute or excel, but Catholic schools ARE different than secular schools. I've gotten degrees from both--apparently without being able to read very well. You're funny.

If by "elite" you mean Top 10 or one would argue that. Duh. But this is semantics. How about "highly selective?" Since many people seem to love to point out the US News rankings--b/c Harvard is #1?, gee, that's hard--if you can quantify for me the difference b/t the 15th ranked school and the 34th ranked school, I'm all ears. You can't. It's absurd. Those rankings are for marketing purposes and brand recognition for smaller schools. That's all. Did they teach logic in law school, or were you too busy criticizing your BC classmates (you haven't been wowed...ok...kinda like your post)?

If it makes you happy, and that's what I'm all about, we don't compare to ND in football...historically, or UNC in basketball. That's plainly stating the obvious. Happy?

We are very proud of what we do stand for, however, and when someone anonymous comes on here and, quite frankly, belittles the school (and you did w/ the backhandedness of your post, and you know it), then that SHOULD disappoint us. But, having been born and raised in this parochial city (Atlanta), I'm hardly surprised. I believe I know the reason for it, but I'll keep that to myself.

You didn't mean to be mean-spirited? Ah, but methinks you did. That's okay. But remember: you can't speak out both sides of your mouth (note to lawyer self). It's disingenuous. But maybe you really did go to law school and really are a "GT fan" and really aren't wowed...and...and...nah.

Back to a serious topic with serious people, while Charlotte makes geographic and, hence, economic sense for the ACCCG (direct flights from the N.E.?), the weather is a bit colder in December than most people give it credit for. As for the towns themselves, I'd pick Tampa over Charlotte. Why Charlotte again?

CT said...

I apologize for the kid comment.

Not becoming.

Hey, did any of BC's free agents stick with their respective teams out of minicamp or did some get cut?

Ry said...

Just a thought...and i sense that it is trending in this direction anyway, but let's just ignore this shratt nonsense. he's obviously trolling and it really does no one any good to take it to heart or get bent out of shape about it.

yeah, i don't like to hear this stuff as a BC guy either...but really, what can you do?

CT said...

right on. ignorance is bliss.