Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Title IX violations


  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#61 Michigan_Dane

Michigan_Dane

    Great Dane

  • Big Purple Fans
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 983 posts

Posted 05 October 2017 - 10:16 AM

Title IX was never meant to regulate sports. I say that as a HR professional. It's hijacking laws after the fact... government run amuck.

This is a huge waste of time. Why cheer is not considered in the mix but tennis is just shows how this process has become about identity politics and not sports (or helping girls and women).

People know how to kill the fun in sports.
Formerly ATL_Dane

#62 kikuria

kikuria

    Dane

  • Purple Fans
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 126 posts

Posted 05 October 2017 - 11:54 AM

Everyone was content before Benson took out the tennis program.

 

Before he dropped the ax, men had 7 programs, women had 10.

Football forces the numbers to askew.

 

Reeder points out that it's not a numbers issue, but meeting the demand.

Wasn't the demand being met?  I think women's sports was already being 'honored'.

 

Does the university need to have knitting and power walking programs as well?

 

Wish Benson didn't cut the program.  Did he and graham have personal conflicts that we don't know about?

 

I have it on very, very good authority that the school was NOT meeting demand insomuch as there were at least TWO requests to add a specific women's sport in the last five years.  If true, it scares the hell out of me because according to the OCR report  "The University stated that it has not received and written or oral requests to expand the men's and/or women's intercollegiate athletic programs in the last five(5) years."

 

It appears that supporting evidence exists which I'm hoping to get a copy. Pointing out what might be obvious, but lying to a federal agency during an investigation is bad news. 



#63 kikuria

kikuria

    Dane

  • Purple Fans
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 126 posts

Posted 09 October 2017 - 07:42 AM

The issue isn't Graham, it's a athletics leadership issue. How do you get to the point where you're off by 97 student athletes? You don't even need a proportional number of student athletes - just had to show that you were meeting the demand. Surely there are national or regional title IX conferences or compliance officer meetings where ideas are discussed.

I went through most of the other America East and CAA athletic websites and they all have either rowing, swimming or gymnastics that allow the women a chance for increased athletic participation. Someone in athletics administration must have noticed that.

It looks like we have a Senior Women's Administrator, a compliance officer, a deputy athletics director... did none of them go to Mark Benson and say there's an issue?

 

I posted this as park of another thread but thought I'd include it since you mentioned the CAA.

 

************

 

I've been doing a ton of research. It appears that the current team starting attending an early season MAAC invitational in 2012 and performed reasonably well (particularly notable since they would have had no institutional support.)  It also looks like they see those same schools on at least one other occasion during the regular spring season. 

 

Since Women's Golf is already an Associate Member of the MAAC, it's not a stretch to think that Crew could also join as an Associate Member.  The MAAC Championships for Crew is an AQ for NCAA's so there would be a direct line to post season play.  It's also realistic since the they've already been able to hang with the current MAAC program.   

 

The CAA also has a championships that is an AQ.  Again, direct line to post season play.  The current team doesn't really travel in those circles for competition so there's no direct comparison to be make.  But we know that football is already an Associate Member. It's not a leap to see the team join that conference too. It's also my understanding that there's an opening as an Associate Member for Crew just left the conference.



#64 Patch

Patch

    Great Dane

  • Big Purple Fans
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,969 posts

Posted 11 October 2017 - 10:40 AM

I love football but this is an inherent problem with football. The numbers have to be equated on the women's side as well as the expenditures and evidently this has not been handled well by the Athletic Department.

Men's soccer and women's soccer are a probably a push, men's basketball and women's basketball are probably a push but how do you balance out football on both the roster size as well as the financial expenditures.

This is a MAJOR problem which will cripple the budget especially on the men's side. This shouldn't be joked about or made to be trivial this is MAJOR.

#65 kikuria

kikuria

    Dane

  • Purple Fans
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 126 posts

Posted 11 October 2017 - 11:47 AM

I love football but this is an inherent problem with football. The numbers have to be equated on the women's side as well as the expenditures and evidently this has not been handled well by the Athletic Department.

Men's soccer and women's soccer are a probably a push, men's basketball and women's basketball are probably a push but how do you balance out football on both the roster size as well as the financial expenditures.

This is a MAJOR problem which will cripple the budget especially on the men's side. This shouldn't be joked about or made to be trivial this is MAJOR.

 

Your correct, it hasn't been handled well by the Athletic Department or the larger Administration as a whole.

 

To balance football you have to FIRST address the roster number gap and THEN address any budgetary issues that arise (note: roster gap was the primary concern of the OCR report.) 

 

I had a conversation about 20 years ago with the Senior Women's Administrator for another Division 1 school.  She said "There's always money for priorities."  So maybe the FIRST thing should be elevating this to a priority for the Department. So important that should be, if necessary, to the exclusion of other things until fully resolved.   This thing will be fixed ASAP if it's that much of for Benson, Athletics, and the University as a whole.

 

But here's the thing, the only solution(s) to the Title IX roster problem is the addition of Crew or the cutting of a men's sport with a big roster. There's no way to hit those roster numbers any other way.   The most straightforward is adding Crew because you can literally have the 97 women they need on a Crew roster.  Will the school have to some spend money to do it? Of course.  Does it have to take away from Men's sports? No freaking way. That's a matter of choice.



#66 HOF2013

HOF2013

    Dane

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 155 posts

Posted 12 October 2017 - 08:38 PM

The entire Title IX argument is BS.  There are NO women's sports which have the same number of participants as Football for example.  All other things being equal there is no opportunity to add the number of females that would cause an equal number because of that.  They have other sports that men do not have like Field Hockey, but the numbers of participants are not as high.  A someone else pointed out Title IX was never meant to apply to athletics - give thanks the liberals and liberal organizations like the ACLU.  I am NOT a politically correct person and get tired of the BS caused by these people and organizations and the fear they cause among all of the snowflakes!!!!!



#67 jalidanefan

jalidanefan

    Great Dane

  • Big Purple Fans
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 586 posts

Posted 13 October 2017 - 06:49 AM

I'm a proud liberal and proud that this country tries to remedy historic ills.  Our university uses public dollars and those dollars need to be spent equitably.  There is no god or law (unless you live in 'bama) proclaiming football as outside that basic premise.  I am one of "these" people and if you are afraid of getting buried by snowflakes, go seek counseling.  



#68 uofalbany

uofalbany

    Great Dane

  • Big Purple Fans
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,820 posts

Posted 13 October 2017 - 07:45 AM

How about we all shut the $iena up.

UA Class of '93

 

599489_235629683226336_1094172808_n+(2).


#69 dslyank

dslyank

    Great Dane

  • Big Purple Fans
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 944 posts

Posted 13 October 2017 - 09:26 AM

This blog is NOT about politics and it should not be. It is forum for FUN, information, and an avenue to express "opinions" for individuals who love all things UA and especially UA athletics.

 

So I am not trying to be political when I say Title IX is indeed (in my opinion) not the answer to "equity" in ncaa sports. It was NEVER designed to be. The issue is and probably always will be about MONEY! And Title IX seems to NOT take into account this key component. ALL college sports especially at the mid major level lose money. Some sports (let's be honest men's football & basketball) generate some/enough revenue to be applied to their loses. AT the BIG 5 level, football & basketball probably (I am obviously not an expert on ncaa finances) generate enough revenue to pay for most/many other sports @ their institutions. Unlike professional sports where there is revenue sharing and luxury taxes and such, this is not the case in college sports. I guess the ncaa does make some token concessions with tv revenue. But this minor sharing of MONIES does not give them the right to dictate how individual schools try to provide equities and  opportunities and EDUCATIONS; while trying to budget institutions which by definition are non-profit. Not to sound political again, but I previously likened Title IX to unfunded mandates and in my opinion the analogy goes to the heart of the matter.



#70 kikuria

kikuria

    Dane

  • Purple Fans
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 126 posts

Posted 13 October 2017 - 12:52 PM

The entire Title IX argument is BS.  There are NO women's sports which have the same number of participants as Football for example.  All other things being equal there is no opportunity to add the number of females that would cause an equal number because of that.  They have other sports that men do not have like Field Hockey, but the numbers of participants are not as high.  A someone else pointed out Title IX was never meant to apply to athletics - give thanks the liberals and liberal organizations like the ACLU.  I am NOT a politically correct person and get tired of the BS caused by these people and organizations and the fear they cause among all of the snowflakes!!!!!

 

I agree with you that comparable sports like MLAX and WLAX don't have equivalent roster numbers (I have my theories as to why.)  But you are factually incorrect regarding a women's spor which has the same number of participants as Football. Women's Crew is the ONLY sport that can offset rosters from football as it very often has the same number of participants as football.

 

Let me provide you some specific examples which I hope will get you to reconsider.  These following numbers are the reported roster number from the 2015-2016 school year for men's football and Women's Crew.   

 

Michigan - 125 Football -  108 Women's Crew

 

Washington - 114 (football) - 143 (Women's Crew)

 

Wisconsin 117 (football) - 176 (Women's Crew)

 
Michigan State - 120 (football) - 90 (Women's Crew)
 
************************************
 
Title IX is the law of the land whether or not people agree with it.  The most important question now is how do we come into compliance?  Women's Crew is the ONLY solution to the school's Title IX violations that doesn't include cutting a men's sport. 


#71 dslyank

dslyank

    Great Dane

  • Big Purple Fans
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 944 posts

Posted 13 October 2017 - 03:49 PM

kik,

 

I would be absolutely thrilled to see UA add women's crew; and would not cry over cutting men' soccer {my bias showing --sorry}. The problem in the first instance is MONEY of course. The four football programs referenced in your post generate enough revenue to cover the cost of the complimenting crew sport. As you eloquently showed in previous post woman's crew could be started at much less than the exorbitant amounts often bandied about. But even @ these reduced levels the athletic department would have to come up with significant revenues from SOMEWHERE. I guarantee you football @ UA barely or does not even cover it own costs. Title IX might be the law of the land, but it was NOT designed to be an equity fix for intercollegiate athletics. Perhaps a better more appropriate law with cost/revenue components should be enacted.

 

ps. sorry about the soccer comment, I would hate to see UA have to cut anymore sports. One of my best friends was on the swim team a couple of years before it got the axe.


Edited by dslyank, 13 October 2017 - 03:55 PM.


#72 kikuria

kikuria

    Dane

  • Purple Fans
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 126 posts

Posted 13 October 2017 - 06:52 PM

kik,

 

I would be absolutely thrilled to see UA add women's crew; and would not cry over cutting men' soccer {my bias showing --sorry}. The problem in the first instance is MONEY of course. The four football programs referenced in your post generate enough revenue to cover the cost of the complimenting crew sport. As you eloquently showed in previous post woman's crew could be started at much less than the exorbitant amounts often bandied about. But even @ these reduced levels the athletic department would have to come up with significant revenues from SOMEWHERE. I guarantee you football @ UA barely or does not even cover it own costs. Title IX might be the law of the land, but it was NOT designed to be an equity fix for intercollegiate athletics. Perhaps a better more appropriate law with cost/revenue components should be enacted.

 

ps. sorry about the soccer comment, I would hate to see UA have to cut anymore sports. One of my best friends was on the swim team a couple of years before it got the axe.

 

Can't say that I disagree with anything that you've written other than cutting a men's sport (I think that baseball is more like to be on the chopping block because they already have a roster cap in place.) I'm just not in favor of cutting men's opportunities; just expanding them for women.  

 

Looking through a bunch of old Title IX cases, more than a fair share initially cited cost as a barrier and sought dispensation from the courts. They were summarily smacked on the back-side and told to find the money even if it meant taking it from other places.  It is on the University as a whole, not just Athletics, to find the money. There is more than enough $$$ flowing the the school to cover the cost of adding Crew.  But solving the Title IX problem has to be elevated to priority status. 

 

My suggestion would be to start small and grow the budget over time as resources become available. But headcount, headcount, headcount is what really matters right now. Get the monkey off the back.

 

For what it's worth, it's also my understanding that the current team has a very organized and supportive (financially) alumni base. I was told that they refuse to give to the school because of the way that Crew has been treated in the past and the overall lack of support for those athletes.  So they just send their dollars to an outside not-for-profit or pay for things directly.  Quick example: I spoke with one alum who said that when the team travels it's common for alumni to simply pay for the hotel rooms directly.  He said that he and his wife "sponsor" one of the trips every year and cover all the rooms for it.

 

Find me team or any other group on campus that can say that!  Whatever culture they've created there, they're doing something right.  



#73 kikuria

kikuria

    Dane

  • Purple Fans
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 126 posts

Posted 13 November 2017 - 04:04 PM

Story in the Albany Student Press about the Federal Lawsuit that was filed. 

 

http://www.albanystu...nation-charges/






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users