Jump to content
Mavric

Expanding Football Roster Has Title IX, Logistical Issues

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

Yes. I argue that it shouldn't matter because the additional players are paying their own way....

 

For what it's worth, if they're adding a Women's team, I hope they choose Hockey.

 

 

But they aren't paying their own way except for the education part. Walk Ons cost a lot of $. Read Mavric's post. $450,000 for 20 players. If they do these they need to add 20 female walk ons to other programs or make a new team.

 

Also, people arguing that this will make the team better are missing the point. I think we can all agree it will make the team better and we want that, so it's pointless to discuss that part of it. Discussing it is a way of implying that someone in the discussion doesn't understand this fact. We all want the football team to be good. I care more about football than any female sport UNL has to offer.


I also think people should look into what Title IX did. I wouldn't want anything about it to be reduced in any way. 1 out of 27 girls played high school athletics before it was implemented.

Edited by Moiraine
  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

But they aren't paying their own way except for the education part. Walk Ons cost a lot of $. Read Mavric's post. $450,000 for 20 players. If they do these they need to add 20 female walk ons to other programs or make a new team.

 

Also, people arguing that this will make the team better are missing the point. I think we can all agree it will make the team better and we want that, so it's pointless to discuss that part of it. Discussing it is a way of implying that someone in the discussion doesn't understand this fact. We all want the football team to be good. I care more about football than any female sport UNL has to offer.


I also think people should look into what Title IX did. I wouldn't want anything about it to be reduced in any way. 1 out of 27 girls played high school athletics before it was implemented.

 

In no way was I trying to diminish Title lX, or it's importance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

In no way was I trying to diminish Title lX, or it's importance.

 

 

Everything after "Also, people" was not directed at you. The board merged my replies so I just kept it that way. And several people have argued about the advantages of adding 20 people as if anyone's arguing against that, so I wasn't gonna quote everyone :P

Edited by Moiraine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One factor in favor of Women's Crew/Rowing is the rosters can be much larger than most other women's sports. 

 

I used to see women's crew practice on the Mississippi River when I lived in Minneapolis, and I think UMN's roster is in the high 30s or low 40s.   I just moved to Tuscaloosa and Alabama's women's crew team is actually pretty popular.  I don't know what sort of revenue it brings in, but there are close to 60 women on the roster with only 4 coaches: http://rolltide.com/roster.aspx?path=wrow

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of good discussion here...

 

Back in the day there used to be a JV team where the walkons, freshman, and other non-regular players/contributors played, usually on Friday afternoon/evening.  Let's start that again, but make it for the ladies and create a women's football team.  #OpenTryouts

Edited by Making Chimichangas
  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

How is adding 20 walk-ons to the FOOTBALL team taking away opportunity from women?

 

If someone did that without adding corresponding women's sports, it would be denying an opportunity to ~20 some more potential women who should/could have a chance at playing college athletics, is all.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

If someone did that without adding corresponding women's sports, it would be denying an opportunity to ~20 some more potential women who should/could have a chance at playing college athletics, is all.

 

Can't the Volleyball team just sign up 20 walk ons too?:D

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Making Chimichangas said:

Lots of good discussion here...

 

Back in the day there used to be a JV team where the walkons, freshman, and other non-regular players/contributors played, usually on Friday afternoon/evening.  Let's start that again, but make it for the ladies and create a women's football team.  #OpenTryouts

 

Lingerie football

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, huKSer said:

 

Lingerie football

 

 

You make me laugh out loud pretty often but you're kind of a butthead for posting that in this topic.

So... there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha, ha, can’t the University devote a lion’s share of its offered resources and opportunity to men’s athletics, the ones that matter, and get away with it by pretending to care about women’s sports?

 

There’s probably a measure of this going on already. But balance should be assertive and genuine.

 

The lingerie comment is telling. Women do not matter, and to the extent that they do they’re most useful or relevant as sex symbols for our consumption. It’s a joke but then it’s not really a joke, and it reflects pretty fairly there way the world works, and the resistance to efforts like Title IX to keep things balanced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Title IX needs to be revised. Football should probably be exempted. Or make schools balance male and female scholarships from the non-revenue sports no one cares about.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should football be exempted? Because we like football?

 

Why isn't it football that should be changed (or, in this case, not expanded)? 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, zoogs said:

Why should football be exempted? Because we like football?

 

Why isn't it football that should be changed (or, in this case, not expanded)? 

 

Because in most cases it generates the revenue that allows non-revenue sports to exist.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Title IX is a good thing.  It provides opportunities to women that the money generated from a football program can afford.  I dont think many would argue that.

 

I just dont understand why we need to create more women scholarship athletes in order to add more men non-scholarship athletes.  I understand opportunities need to be created, but couldnt that be achieved by creating more women non-scholarship athletes.  There's got to be 10 women's programs that could add 2 walk-ons each.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...