Jump to content
IronChef

Another B1G school drops sports

Recommended Posts

There were Title IX considerations in this decision as well, according to the article, and reducing the numbers from indoor and outdoor track is a big reduction in the number of male athletes. I don't really know why the school cited that as a reason, given the makeup of the department. From the latest available EADA report, Minnesota has 429 male participants and 445 female. That is a 49/51 split at a school that is about 46/54. Using unduplicated numbers (these account for athletes like T&F that play multiple sports), there are 359 male and 338 female athletes for a ratio of 51/49.  This is not a school that was in danger of getting in trouble for Title IX violations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, jchapman said:

What needs to happen (but never will) is one of the following two:

1)  Exempt Football from Title IX considerations

2)  Create Women's Football

Or simply reduce football scholarships #s to a reasonable level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What has happened to NCAA men's gymnastics is a damn shame.  U of M finished 2nd in the team championships as recently as 2018.  The sport will be down to 13 teams after this season.  

Don't think this can't happen to wrestling with no SEC, small numbers from the Big XII, and dwindling numbers from the Pac 12.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Voice_of_the_Quakers said:

What has happened to NCAA men's gymnastics is a damn shame.  U of M finished 2nd in the team championships as recently as 2018.  The sport will be down to 13 teams after this season.  

Don't think this can't happen to wrestling with no SEC, small numbers from the Big XII, and dwindling numbers from the Pac 12.

What % of high schools have gymnastics programs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, ionel said:

What % of high schools have gymnastics programs?

I think girls HS gymnastics has 10+ times the number pf boys. 104 boys teams 1,600 individual. Girls 1600 teams, 19,000 individual

Of course, their are a lot of Gymnasts who compete for a "club". No idea of the number.

Girl HS Wrestlers(21,000 outnumber Girl HS Gymnasts. And that number does not, for the most part, reflect all of the introductions since August 2019

 

Edited by RichB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ionel said:

Or simply reduce football scholarships #s to a reasonable level.

Return to limited substitution. 2 players at a time unless clock stops or possession changes (then unlimited). Anyone remember when that rule ended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, RichB said:

I think girls HS gymnastics has 10+ times the number pf boys. 104 boys teams 1,600 individual. Girls 1600 teams, 19,000 individual

Of course, their are a lot of Gymnasts who compete for a "club". No idea of the number.

Girl HS Wrestlers(21,000 outnumber Girl HS Gymnasts. And that number does not, for the most part, reflect all of the introductions since August 2019

 

I'm asking for % so can compare to other men's sports like soccer, wrestling etc which very high % of high schools offer but, especially say soccer but also less degree wrestling, very few options at D1 for certain majors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IronChef said:

There were Title IX considerations in this decision as well, according to the article, and reducing the numbers from indoor and outdoor track is a big reduction in the number of male athletes. I don't really know why the school cited that as a reason, given the makeup of the department. From the latest available EADA report, Minnesota has 429 male participants and 445 female. That is a 49/51 split at a school that is about 46/54. Using unduplicated numbers (these account for athletes like T&F that play multiple sports), there are 359 male and 338 female athletes for a ratio of 51/49.  This is not a school that was in danger of getting in trouble for Title IX violations.

46/54 male to female?  Based on your numbers, isn’t that in violation?  Is that before the cuts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this was mentioned in a prior article, but it looks like both men's and women's Track & Field share the same coaches.    With that in mind, would they really be saving much money by cutting men's but keeping women's?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jchapman said:

What needs to happen (but never will) is one of the following two:

1)  Exempt Football from Title IX considerations

2)  Create Women's Football

Or have fully endowed programs exempt from Title 9.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

46/54 male to female?  Based on your numbers, isn’t that in violation?  Is that before the cuts?

Yes, that is before the cuts. My point was that they are close to being in compliance with the proportionality prong of Title IX. Schools that are that close do not get in trouble, because there is not any sort of automatic enforcement of proportionality. Schools get in trouble when they do something that causes them to be sued, at which point the Department of Education can get involved. This would only happen if a school that was not in compliance tries to eliminate women's opportunities. The government (regardless of the party in power) has not been in the practice of proactively going after schools for Title IX violations in athletics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ionel said:

I'm asking for % so can compare to other men's sports like soccer, wrestling etc which very high % of high schools offer but, especially say soccer but also less degree wrestling, very few options at D1 for certain majors.

18,600 schools with boys Bkt-B, 18,200 with Girls BB. so about 0.5% of male and 10% of female. Assume 99-98% of schools with sports have BB.

Just look at NFHS.org participant statistics. https://www.nfhs.org/media/1020412/2018-19_participation_survey.pdf

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, IronChef said:

Yes, that is before the cuts. My point was that they are close to being in compliance with the proportionality prong of Title IX. Schools that are that close do not get in trouble, because there is not any sort of automatic enforcement of proportionality. Schools get in trouble when they do something that causes them to be sued, at which point the Department of Education can get involved. This would only happen if a school that was not in compliance tries to eliminate women's opportunities. The government (regardless of the party in power) has not been in the practice of proactively going after schools for Title IX violations in athletics.

Was that the case with EMU?  Saw their president and AD got canned after a Title IX lawsuit when they cut women's tennis (which got reinstated) and softball (where they added women's lacrosse instead) at the same time wrestling was cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

I think this was mentioned in a prior article, but it looks like both men's and women's Track & Field share the same coaches.    With that in mind, would they really be saving much money by cutting men's but keeping women's?

If it where mainly a T9 numbers game they could have just dropped indoor Track, not losing many if any opportunities

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jchapman said:

What needs to happen (but never will) is one of the following two:

1)  Exempt Football from Title IX considerations

2)  Create Women's Football

Yeah I’m pretty sure #2 would eliminate all men’s sports. 85 scholarships with 85 people in the stands. Not even the Alabama football could take that financial hit. This is the WNBA on steroids. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ionel said:

Or simply reduce football scholarships #s to a reasonable level.

What would be a reasonable number for football schollies? I'd say "23". That's 11 starters on offense and defense, plus a kicker/punter. Why should 2nd or 3rd teamers get full rides in football when they rarely, if ever, see the field? If you don't start in D1 wrestling, well, tough **** on a scholly. Even if you DO start you will probably only get a partial scholly. Bull****.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ionel said:

What % of high schools have gymnastics programs?

Not many, at least in Oklahoma. Granted it was in the Stone Age when I went through HS, but the only schools that had gymnastics programs were the big, rich, 4A schools in Tulsa, OKC, and some of the surrounding burbs such as Broken Arrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TobusRex said:

What would be a reasonable number for football schollies? I'd say "23". That's 11 starters on offense and defense, plus a kicker/punter. Why should 2nd or 3rd teamers get full rides in football when they rarely, if ever, see the field? If you don't start in D1 wrestling, well, tough **** on a scholly. Even if you DO start you will probably only get a partial scholly. Bull****.

And I think football is currently not allowed to give out partials.  Go with your 23 (or slightly more) aand allow partials just like most other men's sport.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...