I see some teams only have 15 guys and then others have 40? Why do some teams have so little and others so much? Is it because the schools with so many dont give scholarships or what?
I see some teams only have 15 guys and then others have 40? Why do some teams have so little and others so much? Is it because the schools with so many dont give scholarships or what?
The fact that not all teams are the same size necessarily means that some teams will be bigger than others. It is for this reason that there are large teams and small teams.
Well what does this say about the schools program?
whyyohwhyy wrote:
Well what does this say about the schools program?
That it is either smaller or larger than other schools' programs, depending on how the number of runners at the school in question compares to the number of runners at other schools.
Why do you need 40 runners? Also does that mean less scholarships or more?
It doesn't necessarily mean either.
Small team could mean:
There's not enough money for a larger team
The coach doesn't want a larger team
They're are not a lot athletes that want to be a part of that team
Large team could mean:
Coach likes to train athletes really hard, and not all of them will be able to survive the season
Coach had a lot of money to spend and might as well have a big team
Coach had limited resources, but didn't mind a lot of walk ons, who knows if one of them might turn into a star.
The real answer is Title IX. Men's athletes to women's athletes has to be close to the number of men and women attending a school. Let's say a school doesn't offer football, that's 70+ spots that can be divided up among the other teams. Or, if there are a tons of women's sports offered, it allows for more men's spots to be offered at a school. It's all about numbers.
interested fellow wrote:
The real answer is Title IX. Men's athletes to women's athletes has to be close to the number of men and women attending a school. Let's say a school doesn't offer football, that's 70+ spots that can be divided up among the other teams. Or, if there are a tons of women's sports offered, it allows for more men's spots to be offered at a school. It's all about numbers.
Usually, if a school has a ton of women it's because administrators have decided that track/xc is going to make up for those football numbers (usually 100+...85 of them on scholarship). Our sport is a popular one to do it with since you get to count every XC woman three times for Title IX since Indoor & Outdoor are technically two other separate sports. Some schools have been known to slip their sprinters & field event athletes onto the XC roster to make them count a 3rd time as well...U of South Florida did this a few years ago as detailed in an Atlantic article. Though this practice is frowned upon, it's technically not against the rules...and I'm sure others do it. I know of programs that only require female "team members" to show up the first day, pick up a pair of shoes and the t-shirt and then never be seen again. They got to count that woman. To those administrators, it was worth it - their female athletic participation matched the proportion of females on campus.
At schools this desperate to pad female numbers, it's not uncommon to see very small men's rosters where administrators will often place a cap on numbers. I've known DI XC teams to have an 8 - 12 man cap on their roster...and some of those are not allowed to run track so they do not count again...or vice versa for middle distance athletes.
At schools without football, large or small rosters are often based more on the philosophy of the program/coach. Title IX may still influence things, but usually not nearly as drastically when you sponsor an all-male sport with massive numbers and scholarships. I've been at schools that did not have Title IX compliance concerns that still wanted as many women as possible even if they never showed up for practice or competed.