Is this the same school that that Dawson guy from Varsity Blues ended up going to? That's really the only time I've ever heard of it, but it does make make sense that football would be popular there. That movie was a pretty big deal at the time it came out!
What is their moral argument in cutting men's track but not women? Do women deserve more than men? Title IX has been a joke since day one.
Ummmm wrote:
alummm wrote:
Well, good job Brown. You continue to devalue the institution.
Yes, as a BTFXC alum, I'm emotionally tied to this decision. But, cutting these teams, especially ones tied with tradition and history like XC and track, will hurt the cache of this school. And that stuff is important in the Ivy League.
Your really went to Brown and don’t know the difference between cache and cachet?
Yeah, no one who has graduated from Brown has EVER made a typo. Thank you for taking some of your clearly valuable time to expose this idiot. It's people like you who make this forum so nice to be on.
how much do sailors donate? wrote:
I think people may be missing part of the money argument.
Let's say you have 12-15 track recruits per year and most of them are on huge scholarships. Remember Brown costs like 70k a year so let's say 15 of them get $750k between them. If you replace them with sailors paying full boat you are talking about major money right there.
And let's be honest, the real money comes from 1-2 donors. Most sailors are rich. You get a couple of sailing recruits from super-wealthy families and you could be reaping in millions.
There are no athletic or academic scholarships in the ivy league, it's all needs based in the ivy league.
why?????? wrote:
What is their moral argument in cutting men's track but not women? Do women deserve more than men? Title IX has been a joke since day one.
This isn't about morals, entities make decisions every day and very few get 100% support, this is one of them. There are plenty of schools without certain varsity sports, Brown is no different than anyone else.
BTW, Brown will be off the front page soon, there will be more cuts coming elsewhere, Brown is leading the way just like they did when canceling spring sports due to COVID. We all knew these days were coming about athletics and schools re-aligning for whatever reason, not always financial. Athletics aren't the only thing that is going to be hurt at universities.
Re: cutting the football team at Brown — football might be profitable if you count donations tied to it. My beloved Swarthmore’s football team was historically bad [0] and there was still (reportedly) an appreciable dip in alumni donations after they cut it [1]. Just saying, we might not see the full financial picture.
[0]
[1]
What is everyone's prediction of what college cuts xc or track. I'll take Marist.
BRF wrote:
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).
The NCAA rules allow 3 full time coaches (equal to one for each season) for a single gender program. Unless Brown is going to keep current coaches on in another role, someone is gone. If any of the current coaching staff change roles or titles, the administration better be careful about those folks engaging in "coaching related activities" that would be illegal based on their titles according to the NCAA.
WTF is the sport coming to...
rojo wrote:
My two best friends in life had n o chance at Princeton if they weren't recruited athletes? Are they bums? No, one has written two books and the other speeches for hilary clinton.
Now I know that you're talking out your butt! No way you had a friend that was a democrat!
JK. I had to take my shot.
Yes - but the school will likely see savings through a reduction in need-based aid to track and field athletes.
As an alum, I will say that the team is very diverse in race, socioeconomic class, and even sexual orientation. It was a very open and accepting group among all event types. Narrowing into the socioeconomic diversity, I would say that in the 70-75% range received varying amounts of needs based financial aid. Personally, I grew up middle-class with a family that owned a small business, and I got about half my costs cut down. I believe most of the team fell into the middle-class bracket. Replacing these athletes with people in sailing, who presumably will pay full tuition, has a financial implication through the aid process.
Don’t want to derail the thread on this, but all the Ivies go out of their way to find “need-based” financial aid to prospective stars of the football and basketball teams. Parents making +$400,000, no problem!
FBI should be on that sh-t, not Aunt Betsy.
I wonder if this would affect enrollment. If you were a Brown-worthy student and interested in running you could probably go to your regional university for free or another institution with a healthy scholarship.
It's a small drop in the puddle either way, but it will be interesting to see how the talent disperses itself.
Just wanted to offer a few thoughts on this.
I ran mens track/xc at brown a few years ago. We had a great group of guys and a strong alumni community that would always come out to support at heps. It was also clear that we were a second-rate (third-rate?) program within the ivy league. Princeton always nailed the best recruits. We came in dead-last at XC heps more than once. Our facilities were sub-par (only had a 6-lane track and therefore couldn't host large meets). The coaching was questionable and inconsistent (anyone remember craig lake??).
So yea, it was a bottom-of-the-league program. But the thing about running is you rely more on yourself than anything else to succeed. As teammates, we pushed each other to run and train hard every day, going out and logging miles all over rhode island. It was, and still is, by and large a focused and dedicated group - not to mention a strong one academically too. You should see some of the meatheads on brown's "prestigious" football team who sit in the back row of exams to cheat together and spend all week getting blackout drunk.
So all I'm really left with is, how embarrassing this is for Brown. How silly do you look cutting your track team to save what, 200k? To ostensibly improve your other teams? There is a 0% chance that brown's other teams get significantly better as a result of this "excellence" initiative.
And lastly, how sad this is for the larger Track and XC community. This wave of programs closing at schools around the US hits all of us as runners, who have always struggled to get our share of the spotlight.
NERunner2738 wrote:
Yes - but the school will likely see savings through a reduction in need-based aid to track and field athletes.
As an alum, I will say that the team is very diverse in race, socioeconomic class, and even sexual orientation. It was a very open and accepting group among all event types. Narrowing into the socioeconomic diversity, I would say that in the 70-75% range received varying amounts of needs based financial aid. Personally, I grew up middle-class with a family that owned a small business, and I got about half my costs cut down. I believe most of the team fell into the middle-class bracket. Replacing these athletes with people in sailing, who presumably will pay full tuition, has a financial implication through the aid process.
True, but when your endowment is in the billions the difference this kind of change makes is peanuts. Especially if you're going to try to match the total need & diversity from class to class anyway (don't know if Brown does that, but most places do).
Now Entering Toushon Square (ding ding) wrote:
Just wanted to offer a few thoughts on this.
I ran mens track/xc at brown a few years ago. We had a great group of guys and a strong alumni community that would always come out to support at heps. It was also clear that we were a second-rate (third-rate?) program within the ivy league. Princeton always nailed the best recruits. We came in dead-last at XC heps more than once. Our facilities were sub-par (only had a 6-lane track and therefore couldn't host large meets). The coaching was questionable and inconsistent (anyone remember craig lake??).
So yea, it was a bottom-of-the-league program. But the thing about running is you rely more on yourself than anything else to succeed. As teammates, we pushed each other to run and train hard every day, going out and logging miles all over rhode island. It was, and still is, by and large a focused and dedicated group - not to mention a strong one academically too. You should see some of the meatheads on brown's "prestigious" football team who sit in the back row of exams to cheat together and spend all week getting blackout drunk.
So all I'm really left with is, how embarrassing this is for Brown. How silly do you look cutting your track team to save what, 200k? To ostensibly improve your other teams? There is a 0% chance that brown's other teams get significantly better as a result of this "excellence" initiative.
And lastly, how sad this is for the larger Track and XC community. This wave of programs closing at schools around the US hits all of us as runners, who have always struggled to get our share of the spotlight.
Couldn't host meets? Brown could have hosted distance twilight meets and while some teams wouldn't come, by reaching out to the community they could have got a lot of the local road racers to come for a 5 or 10. When I've seen colleges do this they rake in a lot of money for their track program, but you have to make the effort to get local fast guys, not just teams, to show up. If a meet gets big enough people travel from all over the region, like the swarthmore twilight some years. Then xc can be hosted with no facilities at all by simply partnering with a local golf course - or a state park or battlefield. I even saw one university nirca club host a meet on the fields at a local elementary school. Sure you need a great course to get a ton of teams, but you have to start somewhere.
I agree with the rest of your post. After alumni donations are factored in, brown is barely saving a few thousand probably. You talk about bottom of the heps like they were some bottom feeder team and I don't think that is the case. They'd still crush a bunch of d1 universities (miami, boston college, etc) and win just about any meet if they were d3. It sucks that the program you ran for is getting cut. I think a big part of the problem is this all or nothing thinking from administrators and alumni - either you win conference or you could be on the chopping block. There is more to it, such as the value students get by being on a team. Everything is talked about as a financial decision and at some point you have to step back and look at the benefit to students.
Kvothe wrote:
Couldn't host meets? Brown could have hosted distance twilight meets and while some teams wouldn't come, by reaching out to the community they could have got a lot of the local road racers to come for a 5 or 10. When I've seen colleges do this they rake in a lot of money for their track program, but you have to make the effort to get local fast guys, not just teams, to show up. If a meet gets big enough people travel from all over the region, like the swarthmore twilight some years. Then xc can be hosted with no facilities at all by simply partnering with a local golf course - or a state park or battlefield. I even saw one university nirca club host a meet on the fields at a local elementary school. Sure you need a great course to get a ton of teams, but you have to start somewhere.
I agree with the rest of your post. After alumni donations are factored in, brown is barely saving a few thousand probably. You talk about bottom of the heps like they were some bottom feeder team and I don't think that is the case. They'd still crush a bunch of d1 universities (miami, boston college, etc) and win just about any meet if they were d3. It sucks that the program you ran for is getting cut. I think a big part of the problem is this all or nothing thinking from administrators and alumni - either you win conference or you could be on the chopping block. There is more to it, such as the value students get by being on a team. Everything is talked about as a financial decision and at some point you have to step back and look at the benefit to students.
he didnt say couldnt host meets. he said couldnt host large meets.
they had 1 home invite every year for each season (xc, indoor, and outdoor). but brown is the only ivy without adequate track facilities to host outdoor heps (as deemed by the conference).
Ho Hum wrote:
NERunner2738 wrote:
Yes - but the school will likely see savings through a reduction in need-based aid to track and field athletes.
As an alum, I will say that the team is very diverse in race, socioeconomic class, and even sexual orientation. It was a very open and accepting group among all event types. Narrowing into the socioeconomic diversity, I would say that in the 70-75% range received varying amounts of needs based financial aid. Personally, I grew up middle-class with a family that owned a small business, and I got about half my costs cut down. I believe most of the team fell into the middle-class bracket. Replacing these athletes with people in sailing, who presumably will pay full tuition, has a financial implication through the aid process.
True, but when your endowment is in the billions the difference this kind of change makes is peanuts. Especially if you're going to try to match the total need & diversity from class to class anyway (don't know if Brown does that, but most places do).
It isn't a financial decision at least according to them. They were running too many sports, they weren't very competitive at most of them and they are restructuring just like the private sector companies do, there is carnage and there will be plenty more at other schools, companies, etc. If I'm a brown distance guy, I'm embracing the challenge and becoming a damn good 5k-10k road guy, having fun with that around the Northeast and road racing will give you years of enjoyment when college is in the rearview mirror. You went to Brown for a great education, you still have that.
It would be insulting to minimize the loss all kids have had this year at all levels but the smart ones will find the next challenge and learn from all that has happened.
It's clearly a title ix cut.
No one logically thinks, "Oh I really want to have x program, but only for one sex. If you are spending on a women's track team, and having to resurface the track every 10 years, you might as well have men's."
People need to remember that Brown lost one of the original Title IX lawsuits i think back when I was in college. But
I think we've progressed long enough that the men's track team could potentially win a Title IX lawsuit, particularly when it comes to the "proportionality text" - the idea that the male/female percentage of athletes in a University needs to match that student body. That test drives me nuts as they don't do it for engineering, nursing, etc. Title IX covers that as well. Plus the way they do the tests is absurd. You count the same women's xc runner three times - once for xc, indoors and outdoors.
Why do you think Marist?
You a Brown alum?
What is the threshold that separates a "hobbyjogger" from a "sub-elite" runner?
BREAKING: Leonard Korir not going to Paris! 11 Universality athletes get in ahead of him!
Do "running influencers" harm the competitive nature of the sport?
Hicham El Guerrouj is back baby! Runs Community Mile in Oxford
Why's it cost every household $5000 in taxes just to run a public school?