Thursday, December 20, 2012

Recruiting 2013 --- Josh Bruns II

When I blogged previously about Josh Bruns, 6-6 295 pound OL from Arizona, I misstated his status.

The signing period for JUCO's has already started, so Brun is UMass' first signing for 2013 as opposed to a verbal commitment.

The UMass web site has an article on Brun's signing.

13 comments:

vetteson said...

I've stated my sentiments about the Faculty Senate below. The most outspoken members of the Senate are just that, people who like the sound of their own voice. Nevertheless, the FBS move needs to show it can work without encumbering the university financially. That starts with the athletic director and his staff showing more leadership and acuity. Be honest with assessments of the program and quit making big mistakes like thinking Gillete would be the Holy Grail for UMass football.

prof. said...

I second that. And I've stated previously that it is incumbent that the University address the need for an on-campus stadium, without which, the move to Gillette and FBS would be like moving all holdings of Du Bois into a warehouse in Boston--and expect students and faculty to applaud the effort while something is contemplated about the structure's poor integrity. You make a plan, it should not be executed improvidently, but with prudence and foresight.

Anonymous said...

If it wasn't for the use of Gillette there would be no FBS! I don't get why people don't understand this.

vetteson said...

Mr "Anonymous"

The plan to use Gillete was based on a (false) belief that it would draw crowds of alums. Look what happened, and this was predicted by many.

UMass could have gotten around the seating requirement if there was in place a plan to immediately improve McGuirk. Other schools have been able to do this. The capacity could have been increased simply by knocking down the north wall and adding a bleacher for 7500 seats or whatever. Big changes would came later. The athletic department's obfuscations on this have been dissappointing and it looks like the Gillete joke will continue adnauseam.

UMass74 said...

The third commenter has it right. Some people apparently don't play chess.

There was ZERO options other than Gillette for moving us to FBS.

I'm sure the University would dearly love a new campus facility, but where would the money come from?

The plan would be for UMass to get good in the MAC and then parley that into some legislature support for a new campus facility.

It's turning out to be a damm good thing that UMass went FBS, with the possible coming collapse of the A10.

UMass athletics would be looking down the barrel of a possible major downgrade in resources. That would hit all UMass sports including UMass hoops, women's sports and Hockey.

Now, there is a chance UMass could end up in a BCS league or an enhanced MAC.

And again, 2012 WAS THE FIRST FREAKING YEAR! We were a "provisional" FBS team this year. That meant we were paid lesser amounts than regular FBS teams for our BCS games.

Next year we will receive almost double revenue in 2013 and we play FOUR BCS games in 2014, which means even better income.

Becoming a winning FBS program, averaging 25,000 attendance, making money and finagling a better on-campus facility is a multi-year project.

Complaining all that hasn't happened after three-and-half months in FBS is just goofy...

vetteson said...

UMASS74,

I can't disagree more. The school went into the whole thing A..backwards. Electing Gillete was a Hoover job. Because of the "unforeseen" extra expenses (mostly because Gillete attracted no one and the athletic department hid behind the curtain), the faculty is in an uproar. True, the faculty senate has little to say about athletics but they are now after eliminating the sport altogether (one option), and they may gain sympathy from the chancellor. And it's in the newspapers now.(Their other options, to drop to DIAA or DIII, make no sense at this point, maybe your comment on the A10 belongs here also.) Your vision of where this program will be, or could be, is about as far fetched as a manned mission to Mars..... We can only hope the program survives and, with divine intervention, McGuirk gets to where it needs to be as soon as possible. So drop the slander and start thinking realistically.

Anonymous said...

Right On

Anonymous said...

Well put Frank! I think aside from our low attendance numbers I think our 1st season was very successful, despite the fact the UMass staff only had a couple of months to recruit. At present the incoming recruits look solid and have been rated as a middle of the MAC recruiting class, if not better. Moreover, we did win a game, and were extremely competitive in most games, while playing 6-7 bowl teams. Thankfully for once UMass made a proactive move with help of Robert Kraft to the MAC which is turning out to be a solid conference, and who knows where we could end up in the next 3-5 years. The biggest problem I see is the complete lack of initiative by the folks running The Friends of UMass Football, in my opinion they have been non-existent in supporting this move to FBS! Maybe they need to look at shaking things up a bit. Go!, Go U!, Go UMass!, Go UMass!

Anonymous said...

As a person who used to work for the team, The MAC was not taking us without Gillette. When they came to look at the facilities on Campus, the MAC Officials spent about 10 minutes looking around and then said alright lets go look at the real stadium. The move to Gillette was not about the Seating requirement at all, it was about looking attractive to a FBS Conference. UMASS brought nothing to the table without Gillette if we had, we would have moved up long ago.

prof. said...

It's a given that without Gillette, there would have been no upgrade. My assertion is that the University and the legislature fail to plan accordingly. Upgrading to FBS status is a major investment in resources and the allocation of millions of dollars over the former budget allocated for FCS competition, which otherwise might be spent in areas deemed more politically correct and academically expedient. Staying at Gillette for the four years or so is wonderful, and it's a great venue, but BEYOND that, as with most long-term planning in the Commonwealth, the future of Minuteman football seems to be more tenuous than secure, even with the improvements to McGuirk. Just sayin'.

Anonymous said...

Just can't be stated enough: No Gillette and No FBS. It HAD to be this way of there would've been NO MAC invitation. That being said, those that went to Gillette had a really great time in a great facility. Sure, the attendance was disappointing but the tailgating, parking etc. was fantastic. To the above poster who said that MAC officials spent 10 minutes evaluating McGuirk, they clearly wasted 9 minutes and 59 seconds. It's a freak'n concrete dump which was built for cheap money back in 1965. Nothing like parking in a swamp behind McGuirk and having to be towed out of the mud after the game. (actually happened to me). Gillette was fantastic, but I'd go back if huge improvements were made. Problem is, improvements they're talking about (training rooms and pressbox) do nothing for the fans. New restrooms, new concession areas, new parking lots are needed. Needs TONS of non-existent cash unfortunately.

Anonymous said...

Vetteson your negative, can't do attitude is why we only drew 10-11,000 a game! Stop the blame game and get on board. Happy Holidays to all in UMass Nation!

Anonymous said...

Those observations from MAC officials about the stadium were published at the time. As I understand it the conference would not accept Umass without a decent place to play and the on campus facility was not it according to them. With the planned upgrades there will be at least one game in Amherst in 2014. Thats at least a start. Revisionist history is not helpful. This should have been done 30 years ago!