I read on CBSSports (I think) that they might actually add men's cross country and track back into the department, because they only have five men's teams (need a minimum of six for D-I).
I read on CBSSports (I think) that they might actually add men's cross country and track back into the department, because they only have five men's teams (need a minimum of six for D-I).
fano wrote:
Absolutely massive news out of UAB today, they are cutting their football team. For the first time since 1995 an FBS school is cutting football. The school, like many mid-major D1 teams, is hemorrhaging cash with the Athletics Department being subsidized to the tune of 20 million a year. With the removal of football it looks like they will save almost 10 million a year.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11967626/uab-blazers-shut-football-program
ALL this is due to Title 9... You have to spend as much money on women's sports as men's sports. If you check all division 1 colleges you will find that the men's teams have been cut. Women's soccer but no Men's soccer, Women's track, but no Men's track, etc,etc,etc.
UAB football is not loosing any more money than any other sport, as a percentage of participation, but it was the easiest to cut to make a large enough dent.
Small schools should abandon fball. It's way to expensive and they have 0% chance of ever winning anything.
Put your money in basketball and all other NCAA sports. Let the football factories be what they are.
Not MY Fault wrote:
fano wrote:Absolutely massive news out of UAB today, they are cutting their football team. For the first time since 1995 an FBS school is cutting football. The school, like many mid-major D1 teams, is hemorrhaging cash with the Athletics Department being subsidized to the tune of 20 million a year. With the removal of football it looks like they will save almost 10 million a year.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11967626/uab-blazers-shut-football-programALL this is due to Title 9... You have to spend as much money on women's sports as men's sports. If you check all division 1 colleges you will find that the men's teams have been cut. Women's soccer but no Men's soccer, Women's track, but no Men's track, etc,etc,etc.
UAB football is not loosing any more money than any other sport, as a percentage of participation, but it was the easiest to cut to make a large enough dent.
Huh? You don't think football (at any college) pours more into facilities & salaries than tennis or x-c..........particularly x-c?
cnbmckvbchbk wrote:
That's a lot of male athletic scholarships going away. How will affect the Title IX gender balance for womens sports at UAB?
Maybe they will get a men's track team. They don't have one.
Not MY Fault wrote:
ALL this is due to Title 9... You have to spend as much money on women's sports as men's sports.
WOW! You are dumb! If the above were true then not a single D1 school in the country would be compliant. Under Title IX, Universities must offer the same educational opportunities to men and women. This means scholarship numbers. NOT dollars spent on sports. No Volleyball team will EVER get as much money as a football team. My guess is that no volleyball or women's bball or softball or any other women's team will ever even get as much money per athlete as football.
The Golden Goose has been killed. Forward thinking administrators know that "cost of attendance" scholarships and the ever escalating cost of the "arms race" is a losing proposition. First the UABs, then the Power 5 will turn on themselves, and the lower funded programs like Oregon State, Iowa State, Kansas State won't be able to keep up with Oregon, USC, Texas, Ohio State.
So Alabama can pay their football players, most of whom couldn't have gotten into college on their own, the entire D1 model will be abandoned.
D3 and Ivy's have it right, and pretty soon most schools will have non-scholarship sports, or no sports at all.
Capitalism at its finest.