Track Lawsuit at Iowa

Impending Choke wrote:

Based on what I've heard from athletes at Iowa and on their results in both track and xc, they should just clean house and dismiss the entire staff and then they can even out the male:female ratio. That athletic program is just a mess between their terrible track/xc and their football program. I imagine it filters down into a lot of other sports too.

0/10

Iowa has won a men's team B1G title in track, won a BCS Bowl game in football and has multiple Top 5 women in XC in the last 5 or so years(not exactly sure when the XC girls graduated).

Go back to your dump in Ames.

sdjskjj wrote:

Impending Choke wrote:

Based on what I've heard from athletes at Iowa and on their results in both track and xc, they should just clean house and dismiss the entire staff and then they can even out the male:female ratio. That athletic program is just a mess between their terrible track/xc and their football program. I imagine it filters down into a lot of other sports too.

0/10

Iowa has won a men's team B1G title in track, won a BCS Bowl game in football and has multiple Top 5 women in XC in the last 5 or so years(not exactly sure when the XC girls graduated).

Go back to your dump in Ames.

+1. Not sure why the football team got dragged into this. That might have been a relevant comment last season, but they seem to be back on the right track. Speaking of track, Iowa did win the Big 10 title only a couple years ago. Can't really argue with XC though, especially on the men's side. Outside of Thode they have been struggling hard for the past 5 years or so.

A Princeton graduate that worked for two years with one of the best jump coaches in the country is plenty qualified for the opportunity to coach at a mid level division I program that is hoping to diversify its staff. The interim did not set the world on fire and did not for e Iowa to kep him because of his outstanding results. These coaches know each other very well and interact and jump from job to job. They know what volunteer coaches do and learn, especially coming from a power like FSU. All of these coaches, especially if they are not former Olympians, follow the same path to jobs.

Obtuse - I think you have it wrong again. Job positions don't lack "diversity". The job position description either had a rational relationship to the school's business needs, or it did not. If they changed the job description solely to get a certain gender without due regard to the school's operational or business needs, then yes, that is discrimination based on gender.

These cases are difficult because there are always a number of apparatchiks who believe that while males cannot be the subject of discrimination. But the law, whether properly applied or not, does outlaw gender discrimination.

Someone above posted the distance program at Iowa was struggling... maybe their rational was they needed more assistants with a distance background. But if I remember Scott and the chick that was ultimately hired both have a multi event background, which I assume is what they were looking for in the 3rd go around since Scott felt qualified to apply in that round but not the second. While I have not seen the job descriptions, there are a number of ways it could have discouraged women from applying. Colleges are trending towards combined programs but its highly unusual for a woman to coach a men's team in any sport at the college level. Women are not even allowed to compete in the same events i.e.xc men race a 10k, women 6k, men decathlon, women heptathlon so I can see where what appears to be a non discriminatory job description to you actually discourages women from applying. Its like a job description that requires the applicant be able to lift 300lbs...fewer women would apply...and if the position doesn't really require that...its discriminatory towards women. More men will have experience coaching a combined program or both genders, thus they will have an advantage based on participation opportunities afforded as a result of gender. I'm not familiar with the reasoning used in Fisher, but it would likely apply here.

NCAA Track and Field has become the dumping ground for gender and minority equity. Why? A coach for cross country, indoor track and outdoor track counts for three sports, add in both men and women team and it grows to six.

Is this one of the women you are talking about? Marchand was 5th at NCAA's, then was later caught for EPO.

sdjskjj wrote:

Impending Choke wrote:

Based on what I've heard from athletes at Iowa and on their results in both track and xc, they should just clean house and dismiss the entire staff and then they can even out the male:female ratio. That athletic program is just a mess between their terrible track/xc and their football program. I imagine it filters down into a lot of other sports too.

0/10

Iowa has won a men's team B1G title in track, won a BCS Bowl game in football and has multiple Top 5 women in XC in the last 5 or so years(not exactly sure when the XC girls graduated).

Go back to your dump in Ames.

Does the athletic departmentat Iowa even care about track? The womens side has been beyond horrible for years but they don't fire the staff. If they were committed to winning instead of just existing there would have been a change a long time ago.

If they're on the right track, why are athletes like Thode washing cars in coralville their senior season instead of running? And what happened to all their top female recruits from Illinois? There's no way they can compete in the B1G let alone on the national scene with Wisconsin, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State and an up and coming U of Illinois.

Although I'm basing this on the last couple years and what I've been hearing from the Iowa athletes I talk to.

I don't know what this coach is hoping to accomplish. This is tantamount to career suicide.

Coaches News Network wrote:

I don't know what this coach is hoping to accomplish. This is tantamount to career suicide.

Have to wonder what Missouri State thinks of this since they recently hired him? Can't imagine his new bosses like the controversy. This guy better get it done at his new job or he'll be out there too and no admin will allow their head coach to hire him elsewhere. Stupid, stupid move.

Also, I hope this guy isn't naive enough to think that if Iowa was going to hire a male he was going to get the job. He's not qualified for a BigTen job either.

obtuse wrote:

I dont get it either. He got passed over the first time by a more qualified male candidate. That candidate turned down the position so he got to coach on an interim basis (no gender discrimination there). When the job was posted again they hired a more qualified female coach. Unless he can show that she was substantially less qualified or he was promised a non interim position, I dont think he has a case. I'm sure the female attorney he hired will be happy to take his $900 expense +hourly fees to look into it.

This is spot on. "Substantially less qualified" is the standard that he has to overcome if he expects to survive summary judgment on a discrimination claim. Otherwise, the court will not sit as a super-personnel department and decide which candidate is more qualified.

Lol... the guy is a track coach. Is that even a job???

Why doesn't he apply for the homeless man's job on the subway?? probably the same pay

If we're gonna complain about this... why don't we complain that restaurants mostly hire hot woman

I know they used to do that with athlete roster counts for EADA data, not sure if that practice is still in use. Anyone here know what current EADA manual says?

12:57 pm wrote:

It's not a union position so the administration isn't bound to hiring the most senior applicant. It happens very day that companies hire outside of the organization to get the person they want. That's capitalism. That's the system that we all signed on for.

Hiring for gender isn't capitalism. Hiring the best qualified candidate for the lowest possible salary you can get him or her for is capitalism. Hiring based around gender/racial quotas has NOTHING to do with capitalism.

smallfry wrote:

Isn't the ex female vol coach from FSU now the XC/distane coach at North Texas?

I'm pretty sure she's still a female.

You need to read better. He said the ex female vol coach, not ex female.

You see , the ex female vol coach is still a female, but not the volunteer coach.

Do you understand now.

Helps if you try to make a smart remark you know what you are talking about

Got ya