This is why many of us donât want football at Charlotte. I have already written the chancellor to express my opinion and encourage others to do the same. I now plan to forward this new information. Unless we have someone step forward to write a huge check OR unless they drop Title IX, we donât need football. It will damage basketball as well as our other sports. You canât have both!!!
Future Atlantic-10 rival Rhode Island has announced they will make significant changes to comply with Title IX regulations, on the eve of an NCAA visit in May. Because their enrollment is 57% female and the funding and scholarships to female programs is only 50%, they will need to increase funding to womenâs programs to 57%. Men will be reduced from 50% to 43%. They debated about starting another program for women but decided the travel cost and expenses would be too great. Instead, they are telling existing womens programs to add scholarship players even if they donât need the players so they can get to 57%.
The Rhode Island AD said they will cut all menâs programs, especially basketball, golf, football and track. They are allowed 63 scholarships for I-AA football and want to keep the program. They had a record of 4-7 this year and were in last place in the A-10 North Division. Their home football games this year were against Central Connecticut (attendance 2,865), Brown (3,551) UMass (4,376), Villanova (2,236), New Hampshire (4,595) and Maine (2,068). Now thatâs real exciting!!!
They use to be good in basketball. They finished 6-22 this year and now they have to make additional cuts to basketball??? Why on earth some of you idiots still want football is amazing to me. DO THE MATH!!!
I think most of us who want football, only want it on the condition that we donât cut our other major menâs sports such as basketball, baseball, track and soccer. No offense but I donât give too much of a hoot about menâs tennis or golf. I donât know how many scholarships are alloted for those two, but I wouldnât cry if they were cut for football. I wonder if Cheerleading counts as a sport. Then we could also give schollys to cheer leaders. That would create about 40 open scholarship spots for Title IX me thinks (assuming Tennis and Golf actually do recieve scholarship). 40 is plenty to start a fledgling football program. The problem of course would be funding the new scholarships.
There was a title IX court ruling the other day too that wonât help any. Basically ruled that womenâs coaches can complain about funding and âfairnessâ and the school can not take any action against them for being outspoken.
Does Title IX have anything to do with why our womenâs coach has a base salary that is close to Lutzâs base?
Took me a while for finally find out whatâs going on at Rhode Island. They are shifting scholarships from menâs track and golf to the womenâs side. Nothing from menâs hoops.
So basically by cutting schollys from golf and tennis weâd free up 7 more sholarships. Not a ton, but its a start. However football would be very expensive to start up because it would involve the creation of many many more womenâs scholarships.
You can thank our stupid congressmen for making Title IX such a pain in the ass. If it werenât for their passing the Civil rights Restoration Act in 1987, the U.S. Supreme Courtâs 1984 ruling that Title IX only applies to programs that directly benefit from federal funding (thereby limiting its jurisdiction over athletic programs) would still be the precendent.
Title 9 is crap. The Feds. should get balls & shut it down.
That being said, almost none of the 117 D1-A schools in Football are in compliance. How do they pull it off?
If we do have to cut Menâs sports, the only one important is Menâs Basketball. Really, who watches the others? Not that I want them cut, but if the only way to have Football is for it to be that & just Basketball for the guys, then I can live with that.
We should make demands of the ladies.
If yâall want Title 9 for sports, we want Title 9 for Home Ec., Nursing, Education, Dancing, etc.
We donât really want it, we just want them to back off if we back off of their areas.
Why canât competitive swimsuit modelling be a 40 scholarship sport for women?
The âsportâ of it would be working out daily to have the most buff body possible.
Iâd put up with Bulldog Diva in a two piece if it meant cheap sports/scholarships for women.
I think that I remember reading an article at some point about Dean Smithâs base salary. It was about the same as our coachesâ and the article explained that as a state university employee there was a maximum that he could be paid. I suspect our coaches are facing the same thing and we pay both of them the maximum state pay ($155,000 ??) and then supplement it with money from the Athletic Foundation, camps, media, etc. Nothing subvesive going on here.
[i]Originally posted by NinerLoudNProud[/i]@Apr 1 2005, 01:20 PM
[b] Why can't competitive swimsuit modelling be a 40 scholarship sport for women?
The "sport" of it would be working out daily to have the most buff body possible.
[/b]
âswimsuit modellingâ is clearly the best idea Iâve ever heard. Thatâs good!!! Wouldnât you love to see the liberals have a field day on that one. (Anyone that disagrees with this suggestion should once again visit the Goldusters Thread.)
As for adding football, division I-AA allows 63 scholarships. (Itâs 85 for Division I) Therefore youâd have to fund 126 scholarships assuming you give women the same amount. More if their enrollment percentage is higher. This is one of the reasons that Univ of Richmond came very close to dropping scholarships for football last month. Itâs expected to happen there within the next few years. All of that is before travel, coaches salaries, facilitiesâŚ
I use to be a strong advocate for football here until someone explained it all to me. Everytime I see someone here promoting football I realize that they are just caught up in the emotion of it and havenât done the math. Football would cripple our athletic program. I encourage you to write the chancellor and tell him what I have about why we donât need football.
[i]Originally posted by Zone9er[/i]@Apr 2 2005, 08:45 AM
[b] This is one of the reasons that Univ of Richmond came very close to dropping scholarships for football last month. It's expected to happen there within the next few years. All of that is before travel, coaches salaries, facilities....
I use to be a strong advocate for football here until someone explained it all to me. Everytime I see someone here promoting football I realize that they are just caught up in the emotion of it and havenât done the math. Football would cripple our athletic program. I encourage you to write the chancellor and tell him what I have about why we donât need football. [/b]
I understand your point about Richmond, but isnt that school only 3000 students tops. As Charlotte moves over the 20,000 mark in students, it think it is acceptable to develop a plan to start football. I can agree with your statement that we dont need football RIGHT NOW, but we should be able to communicate a position and have a road map now to get there.
[i]Originally posted by Zone9er[/i]@Apr 2 2005, 08:45 AM
[b] As for adding football, division I-AA allows 63 scholarships. (It's 85 for Division I) Therefore you'd have to fund 126 scholarships assuming you give women the same amount. More if their enrollment percentage is higher. This is one of the reasons that Univ of Richmond came very close to dropping scholarships for football last month. It's expected to happen there within the next few years. All of that is before travel, coaches salaries, facilities....
I use to be a strong advocate for football here until someone explained it all to me. Everytime I see someone here promoting football I realize that they are just caught up in the emotion of it and havenât done the math. Football would cripple our athletic program. I encourage you to write the chancellor and tell him what I have about why we donât need football. [/b]
It is so refreshing to see that someone else understands the difficulty of adding football.
Even if we could scrape up the 10-15 million just to start the team we would deplete the remainder of mens athletics to the point where we wouldnât even be competitive. You could say goodbye to our mens basketball program as well as most other mens sports.
Besides having no money to attempt any of this we also have no stadium, no practice facilities and little interest in our athletics by the community and students alike.
If we can only average about 5000/game to see a good basketball program compete in D1, how are we going to draw anyone to see a bad D1AA football team?
Itâs not going to happen people. A football program here would have to make money in the first year and every year after to keep the athletic department alive and that is about impossible to do in college football anymore.
