Luv2Run
CO Coach wrote:
just saying... wrote:
Wrong. They directly reference title 9 as the reason behind getting rid of track and field:
"Our athletic department is now facing a projected loss of revenue of approximately $75 million just this fiscal year. This is a significant deficit and one that will have an impact for years to come. At the same time, we remain steadfast in our commitment to provide Title IX gender-equitable participation opportunities that are closely aligned with our male and female undergraduate enrollment percentages. We are mindful that our sport programs have worked to adjust their participation opportunities to keep pace with our growing female undergraduate population percentages.
As a result, we have determined that Athletics is no longer able to financially or equitably sustain 25 varsity programs, and pending approval of the Board of Regents, we will discontinue men's indoor track and field, men's outdoor track and field, men's gymnastics and men's tennis at the completion of their 2020-21 competition season. Should health and safety precautions allow, these teams will have the opportunity to compete during the 2020-21 season."
Just because you don't want something to be true doesn't mean it isn't.
The key phrase in that press release is "At the same time, we remain steadfast in our commitment to provide Title IX gender-equitable participation opportunities that are closely aligned with our male and female undergraduate enrollment percentages."
The University of Minnesota's enrollment is currently 53.6% women and 46.4% men. The combination of football and the declining enrollment of men across the country will be the final death of most other men's sports. The irony here is cutting men's sports is only going to accelerate the declining enrollment of men at many universities and colleges.
So you think college sports is a major driver for why men go to college? Maybe it plays a role in picking a college, but even then I wonder.