This whole situation reeks of title IX.
This whole situation reeks of title IX.
RunALittleFaster wrote:
Brown does have a pretty cool location for sailing on the Narragansett Bay, so I'm not terribly opposed to this move.
Yes, it's an absolutely gorgeous place to sail. Good water and good wind, less than a mile from the Main Green.
Given Rhode Island's long history of a strong association with sailing -- the America's Cup was in Newport for over a hundred years, and most objects associated with Rhode Island have a sailboat or an anchor on them -- I like the increased emphasis on sailing. It seems like a way for Brown to embrace its Rhode Island identity. But I think cutting football would have been preferable to cutting men's T&F and XC.
One of the worst parts of this is it wasn't even in response to the financial struggles of the pandemic. It was solely to allocate more money and funding to the other teams that did not get cut.
Harambe wrote:
NERunner053 wrote:
It's admin pay that should be scrutinized. The kids shouldn't be penalized because a lot of people have found a way to do really, really well financially in higher education.
No way in hell does Brown's president take a pay cut "in these challenging times."
She actually did, FYI.
Taking a wild guess that the current president of the school, Christina Paxton, simply does not understand, and is far disconnected, from what XC and track and field means to student-athletes, who chose to go to that Ivy over the others, along with the long line of alumni who have worn the Bruno uniform in the past. Some of the brightest minds that I met at the school were the smart, nerdy kids that tried out for XC and track and field back in high school, found passion and success, and eventually found their way to the long, enduring runs around Providence. I see backlash coming.
Just don't see the other ivy's being able to have a competitive league without a Brown varsity xc and track team. Bad move on their part, especially considering the billions the school is sitting on.
this obviously is hard
But I have to say that I'm glad that the D1 sports bubble is being deflated.
The money colleges spend on sports and the admissions standards lowered for sports are absolutely scandalous.
Just think about how many better students could be at D1 schools if athletic scholarships/eased admissions standards didn't exist.
These smallish liberal schools like Brown and Dartmouth give away large numbers of positions to athletes instead of scholars. It's embarrassing.
And big state schools spend endless fortunes on sports. Has to end. Go to a D3 model.
ddnbb wrote:
RunALittleFaster wrote:
Brown does have a pretty cool location for sailing on the Narragansett Bay, so I'm not terribly opposed to this move.
Yes, it's an absolutely gorgeous place to sail. Good water and good wind, less than a mile from the Main Green.
Given Rhode Island's long history of a strong association with sailing -- the America's Cup was in Newport for over a hundred years, and most objects associated with Rhode Island have a sailboat or an anchor on them -- I like the increased emphasis on sailing. It seems like a way for Brown to embrace its Rhode Island identity. But I think cutting football would have been preferable to cutting men's T&F and XC.
Ted Turner ('60) Sailing Pavilion -- Brown plays to its strengths...
https://www.brown.edu/Athletics/Sailing_Club/node/1From her perspective, a sports team is a sports team--she probably doesn't think there is inherently more value in track as compared to other sports.
It seems like they really should have made this decision at a time when recruits could still choose somewhere else.
Brown's gymnastic team sued in 1992, and as a result, Brown has a much more challenging Title IX situation than other schools (so it seems). Track being cut clearly seems to be about Title IX.
It seems unfair to me that cross country & track and field athletes are counted 3 times as male athletic opportunities, and track athletes are counted twice. These athletes are unfairly targeted for cuts just because of the sport that they play. Cutting 1 cross country athlete is the equivalent of cutting 3 separately athletes that all play single-season sports. Is it fair that distance runners should now not be able to compete at all because they are counted 3 times?
I think the fair thing would be to count an athletic opportunity as 1 person = 1 opportunity. If you play 3 sports or 1 sport, you are 1 athlete.
Coaching staff and facilities used by men and women's teams are the same. Virtually no cost savings by cutting the men and not the women (other than very minor travel expenses).
The press release made me want to vomit. I personally can accept the argument that "You only want to have sports you are good at" but come on and be honest and stop acting like this is solely some master plan to reimagine Brown.
If that was the case, why did you wait until a global pandemic to do it?
Finances have almost always been an issue at Brown - they were the last Ivy to go to need-blind admissions.
malmo wrote:
RunALittleFaster wrote:
My jaw dropped when I saw this email. Our football team was ranked 8th in the Ivy league last year, and brings in no revenue to the university despite its massive costs.
Don't worry, they've added coed and womens sailing in their stated quest to be more competitive. Who exactly competes in sailing?
Dropping equestrian is going to disappoint Mike Bloomberg. His position on school choice was "every child deserves to attend the equestrian boarding school of her choice."
There are a few universities that compete in sailing. Its probably the least competitive ncaa sport besides rifle and dominated by the well to do. Brown's team should do pretty well there. And ya, haha equestrian is like the one sport that has no one who isn't wealthy. Also the one sport (besides sailing maybe) that gets fewer fans than xc.
This is exactly the same logic that allows them to count a single athlete on women's indoor/outdoor track and xc as 3 women to balance out football, and that helps to keep women's track and xc around.
Kvothe wrote:
malmo wrote:
Don't worry, they've added coed and womens sailing in their stated quest to be more competitive. Who exactly competes in sailing?
Dropping equestrian is going to disappoint Mike Bloomberg. His position on school choice was "every child deserves to attend the equestrian boarding school of her choice."
There are a few universities that compete in sailing. Its probably the least competitive ncaa sport besides rifle and dominated by the well to do. Brown's team should do pretty well there. And ya, haha equestrian is like the one sport that has no one who isn't wealthy. Also the one sport (besides sailing maybe) that gets fewer fans than xc.
By "a few", what do you mean? I'm looking at my hand, how many fingers?
Detrie wrote:
rare wrote:
Yikes, "club coed sailing and club women’s sailing each will transition to varsity status" feels like a slap in the face to men's track and cross country.
Sailing has a much broader appeal to the masses than Track . This is a fact . The surprise here is Golf , which is a well supported sport , by equipment companies .
Lol. You must live in a well to do beach tow in new england if you think this.
Kvothe wrote:
Detrie wrote:
Sailing has a much broader appeal to the masses than Track . This is a fact . The surprise here is Golf , which is a well supported sport , by equipment companies .
Lol. You must live in a well to do beach tow in new england if you think this.
Muffy, don't be so insipid. ;-)
BRF wrote:
But they're definitely not gonna drop football, no matter what, and they have to make the Title IX slots balance. Oof.
I believe the Brown coaching staff was the same for men and women. Interesting to see whether any of the coaches will be let go (or go on their own)..
This just isn’t true. There is no rule that says you have to hit a quota for title nine.
Brown offers 30+ sports and by and large women don’t play football. It wouldn’t be hard to argue that women have every opportunity necessary to play sports at Brown. Now men’s track athletes don’t have the opportunity women’s track athletes have.
And this pretty much only to hit a quota.
If you cut men’s track that means axing 50 sots for indoor track and 50 for outdoor and 20 for xc. That’s 120 spots on paper if not more.
Male athletes should mandate for title ix purposes you don’t count the same athlete three times.
malmo wrote:
Kvothe wrote:
There are a few universities that compete in sailing. Its probably the least competitive ncaa sport besides rifle and dominated by the well to do. Brown's team should do pretty well there. And ya, haha equestrian is like the one sport that has no one who isn't wealthy. Also the one sport (besides sailing maybe) that gets fewer fans than xc.
By "a few", what do you mean? I'm looking at my hand, how many fingers?
I knew one guy who liked watching sailing, thats it. I've never known anyone who wanted to watch equestrian. The consensus is that horse girls are really weird and most people tried to avoid them. When I was running in college a few students who weren't on the teams came to watch home meets, mostly friends or sos of team members, but every now and then there would be local high school teams that turned up to watch college meets even with no associated hs meet.
wejo wrote:
Male athletes should mandate for title ix purposes you don’t count the same athlete three times.
I agree. Counting them three times is absurd. XC/Indoor/Outdoor should count as one sport for title IX purposes. There is a fall and spring golf season. Theydon't count the golfers twice, same thing for soccer, football, etc.
agip wrote:
this obviously is hard
But I have to say that I'm glad that the D1 sports bubble is being deflated.
The money colleges spend on sports and the admissions standards lowered for sports are absolutely scandalous.
Just think about how many better students could be at D1 schools if athletic scholarships/eased admissions standards didn't exist.
These smallish liberal schools like Brown and Dartmouth give away large numbers of positions to athletes instead of scholars. It's embarrassing.
And big state schools spend endless fortunes on sports. Has to end. Go to a D3 model.
It’s not embarrassing.
It’s what unites the Ivy League. It’s a sports league. The ivies as schools have always said being an athlete is an integral part of what the school is about. A much higher percentage of the students at the best academic schools in America are athletes. The Ivy schools all have Small enrollments and tons of varsity sports. There are more athletes at Brown than the university of Texas. Mind and body have always been important tenants of the Ivy League schools.