Look at the brightside, maybe now you'll have the ability to do something useful with your time.
Look at the brightside, maybe now you'll have the ability to do something useful with your time.
Maybe it's time for America to move from a school system to a club system?
How many other countries are using their schools as the pinnacle of development of for their sportsmen? Most other countries use a club system who has absolutely no links to schools.
Silverliner wrote:
Look at the brightside, maybe now you'll have the ability to do something useful with your time.
Lol!!!
Absalon wrote:
Maybe it's time for America to move from a school system to a club system?
How many other countries are using their schools as the pinnacle of development of for their sportsmen? Most other countries use a club system who has absolutely no links to schools.
+10
College athletics has little to do with the athletes thought's on their own importance.
The fact is academic institutions are businesses. And, whether you like it or not, sports helps these businesses attract support (donors & fans) and customers (students). Sports promote the institution brand name... essentially they are good advertisement for the school.
Certainly there are other ways to promote and advertise your business but I'm guessing the University of Alabama (for example) thinks their football team does a great job of attracting customers and support for them... why would they change that.
As for XC & track, well, most of these programs do little to help the brand image at most of these businesses so they are easily dropped.
I'm looking at this thread and it's not making any sense at all to me. I guess this is because my running (with the exception of a small amount of high school cross - got talked into it by one of my training posse Sophomore year and realized it was, for me, a waste of time) has always been unattached. I just don't have the memories of being on a team. The camaraderie that appears in Running With The Buffaloes apparently does exist, but I haven't experienced it (or sought it out). In fact, Chris Lear's Sub-4 book is more relatable to me. Webb doesn't seem to appreciate, much less need, the team element - and he leaves it behind at the end of the book. Although there may be no similarity between Alan Webb and me other than this lack of desire to belong to something, that sentiment is consistent with my own view on and experience of the sport.
The above is simply a caveat perhaps making the following concept understandable. I don't see why this is a tragedy. No one's opportunity to run is being removed. If I didn't need a school to successfully train and race at 14 years old, nobody needs a school at any point other than for education. That is the original reason educational institutions were invented. Why did they get involved with sports in the first place and why wasn't it a problem before they did? I don't suggest the world would be a better place if schools (elementary, university, etc.) did not exist. I DO, however, feel that the world not be worse if none of them participated in sports in any way. In that situation, the United States would simply be just like most of the world in that sense: various individuals would participate in sports but schools would have nothing to do with it.
Let's take a look at some other popular sports. At the teenage level, AAU basketball and American Legion baseball at least were (when I was young and maybe a couple decades thereafter) the primary competitive outlets for the best practitioners of those sports. Some younger than I may chime in and suggest that today's stars play for their high school teams. I'm not positive one way or the other but the folks I know that had a decision to make as to which organizations to take their talents to are getting into middle age now. Still, I suspect the situation is similar to years ago in that most of the best are not on their school's sanctioned teams. I just don't know if that's changed over the years. A little older and most of the realistic MLB prospects play in the farm leagues. Sure, some play NCAA but if that didn't exist, competitive outlets would still not be lacking. Those from third world countries and impoverished backgrounds play single-A if at all possible. Getting rich is the goal, but making enough to comfortably live is still a win.
European Soccer also doesn't rely on school-organized systems for players nor do potential pro players need such to develop. How many players in La Liga or the Premier League played for an NCAA team, or even a high school team? Youth 'football' is common world-wide. Semi-pro and farm leagues function just fine without Brown's involvement. Those with potential pro skills have opportunities if they are desirous of such. Kids just looking to have fun do too.
The sport that really does rely on schools is American football. The NCAA is THE farm league for the NFL. Very close to 100% of NFL players played for an official high school-sanctioned team even prior to a college team. But is that ideal, or would everybody including the individual players and the NFL itself be better off if schools got out of the football business? I don't know how many of you listen to (or watch) American sports talk. Whether you like 'Screamin A Smith' or Cowherd or Rome, one topic that comes up is the idea of 'student-athletes' making money. They want to sign autographs and get a buck from every jersey sold and so forth. Or at least the best and most famous do - the ones certain to go pro. This applies to both football and basketball and commonly, the host and panel of ex-jocks suggest that these guys ARE, in fact semi-pro players and should be able to make a grand here or there. But more and more, the idea of colleges NOT being involved in the process comes up.
With basketball, this is already happening. Quite frequently, during the couple weeks that the NBA draft is constantly discussed, the idea of avoiding NCAA is presented. Years ago, this was unknown. Jordan felt he 'had to' play for a school, and for 4 years at that. Slightly more recently, the stars of the '00s very often went straight from high school to NBA, as opposed to '90s stars who didn't consider that. But that was still a little unusual. It worked for Garnett and Kobe but the many still did a 4-year college stint. It's changed a little more since then. Everyone knew LeBron wouldn't grace any college with his skills. Carmelo played one year, as did Zion very recently. But more often every year, the panel of experts discusses where the teenage stars are going, and all these '90s and '00 stars talk about who's going to the G-League or a Euro or Aussie league without a hint of scepticism. These very analysts usually played NCAA themselves and not long ago would have discouraged the idea of avoiding college. Today, they say they respect what the guy is doing when he announces a year in Serbia or wherever. Lavar Ball is an attention-seeking clown, but he had the good sense to steer his youngest son into a pro league and there has been discussion of him going 1st in the draft.
If the NCAA ceased to exist or just got out of the football business, a farm league like baseball's A, AA, AAA leagues or the NBA G-League would be created immediately. I hear sports announcers discuss this and suggesting it would be an improvement. 20 years ago I did not hear this. Today, it is easy to consider the current system - the NFL is extremely dependant on the NCAA and even high schools - as outdated. This isn't me talking; I simply tune into sports talk TV and radio and listen to guys who themselves went to colleges discussing how removing them from the equation would be an improvement - especially for young, developing athletes themselves.
So, is lack of NCAA running a problem? It's not one in Kenya or Ethiopia. Haile didn't need a school to hold his hand and tell him to run. As more schools get out of the cross-country business, the less relevant NCAA cross will be and the fewer up-and-coming runners will want to be part of it. Eventually, it may just become a 'fun' league like today's school-affiliated club teams are and just fade into obscurity. I like what's happening; it's a step in the right direction.
Can the Brown men's athletes run for say....Williams or Bowdoin ? Why not. They would probably pick up a few Al Americans along the way. If they drop down to D3 do they still have to go through transfer protal.
It would be awesome if some well to do alumni stepped in and funded the program. I’m sure some former athletes have done very well in life.
This is one of the things d3 usually gets right. Sports are typically looked at as experiences for the students. Not cost or profit centers.
Note the lame PR spin. This AP reporter gave Brown a pass.
"Brown University reduced its number of sports from 38 to 29 in a move to enhance competitiveness and unrelated to the coronavirus outbreak."
The beginning of the end for the non revenue-generating sports in the NCAA. Let them go.
Don't attend schools with football teams. Title IX problem solved.
DanM wrote:
Note the lame PR spin. This AP reporter gave Brown a pass.
"Brown University reduced its number of sports from 38 to 29 in a move to enhance competitiveness and unrelated to the coronavirus outbreak."
This is what makes their decision unacceptable. The timing. If it’s truly unrelated to the pandemic, then they must as a matter of conscience offer the sport for the upcoming school year.
DanM wrote:
Note the lame PR spin. This AP reporter gave Brown a pass.
"Brown University reduced its number of sports from 38 to 29 in a move to enhance competitiveness and unrelated to the coronavirus outbreak."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/list-of-college-teams-cut-because-of-coronavirus-pandemic/2020/05/30/a4287e24-a284-11ea-be06-af5514ee0385_story.html
maybe their basketball team will win more games now--doubt it...
You are ignorant. Being on an NCAA team provides many things: equipment, coaching, travel to meets, entry to meets (there are meets that only NCAA athletes can compete in), paid entry fees, a team to train with, facilities to use, athletic trainers, sports nutritionists, sports psychologists, academic advisors, and more.
There is something special about representing your school at the highest level. Ask any pro athlete how they feel representing the United States at a world championships. It's about something bigger than yourself.
Being part of a team is a great experience. Making commitments to each other, working hard, and trying to achieve something together. They will be your closest friends for life because you've been through it all together.
For those opportunities to be taken away from people is a tragedy and if you can't understand that then you shouldn't be on this messageboard.
This gets more interesting, the longer I look at it. Apparently these moves were made to "improve competitiveness", so in other words to improve the winning percentage of some combination of all sports.
If the AD gets rid of some sports with continually losing records, and adds some club teams to varsity that actually perform quite well on a national level, the overall school winning percentage will improve.
now of course there is a lot of unnecessary collateral damage.
The more I think about the decision, the more at peace I feel. Brown cuts track? Cut Brown. Cut all the Ivies. They only further perpetuate elitist ideals. We live in an increasingly pragmatic and egalitarian society. Cut the NCAA. Students can go to state school and receive THE SAME IF NOT BETTER education as the Ivies while competing semi-professionally on a club level. Who says no?
rojo wrote:
2) Given that they did announce it on May 28th, they need at a minimum immediately agree to sponsor men's track and xc through for the upcoming school year.
I love this idea. Actually I feel like there should be rules like this for every D1 sport. You shouldn't be allowed to eliminate a D1 program with such short notice. Or if a program is eliminated the students should be given special dispensation to transfer.
I get that there's a pandemic going on and we may not even have XC in the fall, but it seems absurd to me that you're going to try to screw these kids over. Hopefully it's just one year...
Also, it seems ridiculous that they're cutting a non-contact sport like T&F where competitions might conceivably happen, as opposed to a full-contact sport like football or basketball which seem much less likely to happen.
Really poor from Brown admins. They should support the team and the students. Running -- and especially distance running is a great way to build character. Running track an XC in college (DIII) was easily as educational as my coursework and provided me with a strong cohort and good lifestyle habits to carry into the 'real world' -- not something shared by most of the student body (or even for a lot of the team sports).
That being said, there is a big problem with the DI system. The scholarships need to go. The fancy facilities need to go. Running is about participation, education, and improvement. It isn't about spending a lot of money or getting the best recruits. Brown men should run as a club. I'm sure clubs there get school funding -- even they don't get physiotherapy and locker rooms. We did this at our DIII school for decades before track became 'varsity' and it was a lot of fun -- even the fundraising (especially the fundraising). It wasn't luxurious and we couldn't compete at regional meets, but it wasn't about trophies and NCAA stuff anyway. It isn't still.
Absalon wrote:
Maybe it's time for America to move from a school system to a club system?
How many other countries are using their schools as the pinnacle of development of for their sportsmen? Most other countries use a club system who has absolutely no links to schools.
Right, because there's so much money coming into the sport. Competitive T&F/XC in the US has a huge dropoff in participation as well as funding going beyond the scholastic systems. Those systems exist due basically to entrenched tradition, more or less a charitable endeavor. They wouldn't have survived the '90s and '00s without particular NCAA regulations in place. This is why people like Rojo get "outraged" and work the petition process to desperately cling to any scant level of funding for development programs in the sport because once it's gone it ain't coming back. Not even in the form of even some bare bones club system (how is that working today in the UK, France, and Germany for development?) that exists solely in fantasy. We have a barely working club system for post-collegiate runners, how is adding one for juniors realistic?
Let them go.