UNIVERSITY OF RICHMOND CUTS MEN'S INDOOR AND OUTDOOR TRACK TEAMS!

So do they fire the male coaches? What happens to the scholarship athletes?

I don't think this is true. Just looked them up and this school just put in a new track stadium and it is a "rich kids" school. They have the money to support all the sports. Didn't realize they were DI.

If you really believe these cuts are because of Title IX, I suggest you invest in a new theater production titled "Springtime For Hitler".

If you want to know how to fight it, get as mean and dirty as you can. The only way you might be able to succeed to to get the university president's balls in a vice--either figuratively or literally.

I have never understood how (or why) athletic departments are required to provide "equal opportunity", but other groups on campus are not. You don't hear about the marching band, fraternities/sororities, glee club or community service groups conducting head counts to ensure that both genders are represented equally.

And taking it a step further, why are athletic departments required to reflect the makeup of their student bodies in an effort to show equality, yet the admissions office is not required to admit those students to reflect the general population.

Look at a school like Georgia Tech. They have 80% male enrollment because males are more likely to study engineering. You don't see anyone complaining that they should cut 60% of their (male) students because women are outnumbered.

24th @ NCAA's in 2010 XC. No scholarships.

no way is this true. Richmond is a program on the rise. They made it to xc nats for godsakes.

That program isn't bringing any money to the school. The University of Richmond like all colleges is a business. Many track teams should be cut.

no way is this true. Richmond is a program on the rise. They made it to xc nats for godsakes.

I assume you're being sarcastic. JMU was 9th in the country in 1998. Cut in 2006.

"Making money" was never the purpose of college sports to begin with. Remember, generating ticket revenue does not necessarily guarantee an excess over expenses, especially if you consider debt servicing on huge stadiums that sit vacant 359 days per year.

Now the illusion of "making money" (which we know only about 15 out of the 700 NCAA Division I, II, and III schools do) has grabbed ahold of the imagination of most every athletic administration. Forget about education through sport. Greed is the favorite sin of today's athletic administrator.

The only teams that bring money to schools are some college basketball and 15-20 college football teams. "Revenue-generating sports" is such a sneaky way of saying they bring in money - problem is that they don't say they lose even more than those other sports because of how much they spend...

UR men's xc/track is funded with ZERO scholarships...

bleu wrote:

So do they fire the male coaches? What happens to the scholarship athletes?

Men’s soccer and track & field cut in favor of lacrosse

http://thecollegianur.com/2012/09/21/mens-soccer-and-track-field-cut-in-favor-of-lacrosse/28685/

Oh my God, that is insane! They move up club Lacrosse and cut programs that have been around for decades? What a bunch of fools. But typical of an small, faux elite, East Coast school to cater to the Lax crowd, anticipating they will bring in paying spectators. Terrible decision.

Well at least the men still have cross country.

WOW, what a terrible decision. You should never, ever cut sports just to bring in another. What a f*cking joke.

Can't believe they're doing this and bumping f*cking lacrosse up to the varsity level. A track program that didn't have a penny of scholarship funding. That lax program won't bring in any significant amount of revenue either

I too thought that Title IX had resulted in the loss of many non revenue generating male sports. But check out this link, which shows that male participation numbers are at their highest level ever, the number of teams is higher, the scholarship money is higher, and the real culprit in division I is the enormous amount of budgets going to football and basketball. 59 percent to football, 22 percent to all non revenue generating sports. In D3, 59 percent go to non revenue generating sports.

http://espn.go.com/espnw/title-ix/7729603/five-myths-title-ix

They still have cross country for the time being. You wait another year or two and that will be the next sport gone and then sports like men's golf, tennis, and swimming (Richmond does not have a mens swimming team) will be next on the chopping block.

Anything to please the lax bros out there.

URichmond is kind of a Lax type of place.

To clarify, cutting the indoor and outdoor track teams along with the soccer team will free up 64 spots for new male athletes. The lacrosse team only needs 40. So, this is not a Title IX issue.

There is a large endowment coming from an alumni to fund the new lacrosse team. This alumni also happens to be on the board that made the decision to cut these programs. This is definitely not a budget issue.

Especially when you consider that the men's cross country and track teams have received Academic All American honor's for the past 10 years, this cut is completely unfounded.