William and Mary women's XC/TF threaten boycott unless men's track is reinstated

Sliding Scale wrote:

briswiss wrote:

I hope this works and they bring the guys team back but it would be kind of hilarious if they just cut the women’s team too

It would in no way be hilarious, but it is likely not going to happen. Most schools could not survive the Title IX ramifications of cutting two to three women's programs.

I commend them, and I hope they have the guts to follow through if the admin does not cave before the season begins.

Well, they just reinstated 3 women's programs, so it is possible

If only that were true, we would have twice as many guys in college sports. Colleges cut guys from teams and cut sports frequently to keep roster spots in proportion to enrollment.

Badder than bad wrote:

If only that were true, we would have twice as many guys in college sports. Colleges cut guys from teams and cut sports frequently to keep roster spots in proportion to enrollment.

I guess what I was trying to infer is that W&M could drop the current women who are boycotting. They would be in compliance because they are offering the sport and fill it with 20+ minute walk-ons. And don't think there would not be plenty of women who would fill that role either not knowing any better or caring how/why the slots are open. Minimum schedule, costs, and bother for the administration and pads spots for football.

Sorry I was so vague.

briswiss wrote:

orar sin cesar wrote:

They should cut both teams. Where is the $$ gonna come from. Selfish kids.

I hope this works and they bring the guys team back but it would be kind of hilarious if they just cut the women’s team too

Funnier than that is if they cut the woman's team and bring back the men's team. These girls are suffering from Entitlement Syndrome.

orar sin cesar wrote:

briswiss wrote:

I hope this works and they bring the guys team back but it would be kind of hilarious if they just cut the women’s team too

Funnier than that is if they cut the woman's team and bring back the men's team. These girls are suffering from Entitlement Syndrome.

Entitlement syndrome? Jeez, settle down boomer

orar sin cesar wrote:

briswiss wrote:

I hope this works and they bring the guys team back but it would be kind of hilarious if they just cut the women’s team too

Funnier than that is if they cut the woman's team and bring back the men's team. These girls are suffering from Entitlement Syndrome.

LMAO, "Entitlement Syndrome"!?! Somehow risking their own running careers to advocate for their teammates makes these girls entitled?

If that's the case we need more entitlement in this world.

spot on! wrote:

orar sin cesar wrote:

Funnier than that is if they cut the woman's team and bring back the men's team. These girls are suffering from Entitlement Syndrome.

Entitlement syndrome? Jeez, settle down boomer

Okay, Angry Karen!

orar sin cesar wrote:

briswiss wrote:

I hope this works and they bring the guys team back but it would be kind of hilarious if they just cut the women’s team too

Funnier than that is if they cut the woman's team and bring back the men's team. These girls are suffering from Entitlement Syndrome.

Male sports are more entertaining to watch...

Opinionated guy wrote:

Tribe wrote:

This creates a title 9 issue for the administration and title 9 compliance was one of the reasons they used to justify these cuts in the first place.

I believe title IX just says the sports have to be 'offered'. Women boycotting would not affect the fact that W&M is offering the sports. However, roster numbers or some other caveat may come into play.

Regardless, I am glad young people are becoming bolder and standing up for what they feel is right rather than "just taking it" like previous generations seemed to do with a few exceptions.

So part of Title 9 includes offering participation opportunities that match the abililities and interests of students (or potential students) being served. The Part of Title 9 the school is using to justify cutting the men's teams is Prong 1 of Part 1 of Title 9 which calls for participation opportunities that are substantially proportionate to the male:female ratio of enrollment at the school. There was a court ruling that for a participation opportunity to actually count, that roster spot has to actually be filled, so just offering the spot and arguing they would be willing to have more participants if someone would fill the spot doesn't cut it. It's not clear if they have to actually compete to count though. It sounds like as long as they are practicing and on the roster as of the first day of the season then they count for Title 9 Part 1 purposes. Most conferences will fine teams though for not sending a full team to conference if they sponsor that sport for that gender though, so it's possible the school could be fined if they can't field a full team for conference.

Thanks!

I did such a poor job of typing what I was trying to say that I submitted a follow up in an attempt to be more clear. You probably skimmed over that. Regardless, I appreciate the explanation.

You ask a great question if sponsoring a team is enough. Also, there have been some schools that have successfully interpreted "participant opportunities" as things other than sport such as dance.

How many supporting these brave women are also full on Trump/Dejoy/Kavanaugh/Abbot vote suppression fans?

If any, get your priorities straight.

I ran on scholarship in the 80s at a big D1 school before Title IX and it was not a robust system then-a few talented football and basketball players were clearly paying for everything. A lot of the money that they were not paying Michael Jordan or Lawrence Taylor was going to low-interest sports like track and XC. Our sole utility was keeping the department's GPA up and we were not that great at that task.

Title IX, the large run in tuition costs (3-4x inflation), and the football and basketball arms race changed everything. Big sport coaching staffs now make Silicon Valley salaries and need increasingly upscale facilities. Once these items are paid for, resources must be spread out among the remaining sports. But the remaining sports have a problem aside from extravagant major sports spending in a post title IX world, they have to add 85 female spots (or drop an equivalent amount of male spots) to make up for football. So you drop some men's sports (i.e.Maryland track, once a marvel of a program) and hopefully concentrate resources on sports that women only play-field hockey, gymnastics.

There are two arguments here. One is that men's track will go the way of wrestling and the gymnastics-the arms race is getting worse as are tuition burdens. Two, the system is based upon underpaying questionable students to serve as minor leagues for pro sports. With image and likeness movement, this artificial monopoly is starting to erode. We need clubs, not colleges to run sports. Sports twist academic priorities and create whole departments that exist to serve underqualified athletes. My school ran a department whose head gave out 1200 A's for no class attendance and one paragraph term papers. It is just a lousy system.

Oh no! Anyways..

I hope this works out for the W&M ladies but i really dont see them getting their way

The ladies should have a bake sale so that they can pay for their track season and not take money away from the not so important academics!

Can't the guys just compete on the women's team?

Cutting an administrator or two would save a lot more than cutting a T&F program.

Not about money. It is about Title IX.

mine are faster wrote:

Can't the guys just compete on the women's team?

We'll find out next Tuesday.