Here is an example of well-intentioned law producing rediculous result

Parent Cafe
161

<p>"But data show that she is not the norm"</p>

<p>I hate to use the word "evolution" here as it may be misconstrued but, with girls, isn't the sporting norm changing? :) </p>

<p>"Many teams are having trouble filling rosters" Many? :) </p>

<p>"Sorry about your ER experience. I guess that doc forgot the part about "First do no harm." I hope he didn't purposely leave a nasty scar!"</p>

<p>If you like the spawning salmon look, I'm your guy. :)</p>

<p>On the outside not really visable anymore, inside a bump. Still beats being able to put four fingers through it when I did it. After that, I bought 3 more mouth pieces and put them everywhere. </p>

<p>"But the situation of dad's kid facing cuts for no good reason, simply because wrestling is a scapegoat for Title IX inflexibility, is grossly unfair."</p>

<p>Absolutely in agreement with you, except for the inflexibility part. Schools made a choice or choices based on what they wanted to accomplish. </p>

<p>"you were led to believe could help you gain admission to or $ for college, or to be on a college team,"</p>

<p>I have seen this far too often. I ran soccer programs serving upwards of 15,000 kids in my county. If I had a nickle for every body who bought into sports as the best way to pay for college, I could move in next door to bill gates. </p>

<p>Parents and kids bought this like snake oil, paid for special trainers, tournaments and travel to play a sport that has limited scholarships anyway.
As I said we've also experienced atheletic scholarships in my family as well, so I have a good idea of what it takes to be at that level. I</p>

<p>"and suddenly have it shut down to make room for a women's team that the women don't want!"</p>

<p>Which women? isn't this just an assumption? I know we looked at schools that didn't have a men's soccer program and crossed them off our list, so I would venture to guess the current student body wouldn't care if soccer was there or not because it wasn't there before. But what about 5 years from now? </p>

<p>At one time people thought women didn't want to vote either, did things change after the vote was established? </p>

<p>"After all, if the rep had lost out to the class brain in the 3rd grade spelling bee, he might carry a deep-seated grudge and put the kabosh on the NMFs and vals, too. But I doubt it."</p>

<p>That could be entirely possible. We are a collection of our experiences. Bad experiences in our past form a sublevel bias. So someone might look at an individual with a more critical eye in that situation.</p>

162

<p>"From the standpoint of a federal taxpayer, why should the federal government subsidize the athletic activities of educational institutions when that subsidy is being used to help pay for escalating coaches' salaries, costly chartered travel and state-of-the-art athletic facilities?" asked Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Calif., chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee"</p>

<p>Interesting. :) I wonder if he'll get around to churches and religion too. :)</p>

163

<p>StickerShock,</p>

<p>The judging committe (usually the principle chair, music director, and one to 3 others) don't have to recognize "every" musician behind the curtain, only the one(s) they want to advance (their pet project). If they have a bias towards their protege (male or female), they will fight agressively for that one musician whether or not s/he is the player who will complement the section (and whole orchestra) the best. </p>

<p>This is the political nature of the orchestra beast, like it or not. The curtain just gives the appearance of an unbiased decision to the unwashed masses. BTW, I used to play viola myself and actually beat my (4 year older) brother in a competition when I was 13. I gave it up because the working for money part of it just took the fun out of it.</p>

164

<p>Still haven't seen any argument here about the loss of women's 'things'/programs - it has happened - really!!!!! cuz of T9 - just the poor guys are getting all the sympathy.</p>

<p>The gals just have to keep fightin for equality I guess - and the 37 word definition of the T9 law.</p>

165

<p>
[quote]
wisteria: Here's what Notre Dame did with their football revenue:</p>

<p><a href="http://science.nd.edu/jordan/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://science.nd.edu/jordan/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>"Notre Dame now has the most innovative science and teaching facility of any university in the nation.</p>

<p>With our new $70 million Jordan Hall of Science, we are preparing the next generation of leaders in science and technology. Ready to impact the future of research, Notre Dame's premier science education helps students to "dream big" and to make a difference in the world."</p>

<p>I'm only familiar with ND because I'm a huge fan. I'm sure other programs pump sports $$$ back into the school in ways that academically benefit the entire student body.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The University of Tennessee's athletic department funds several dozen academic scholarships for the university with the excess money raised from the athletics program (primarily from football seat and TV revenue, mens and womens basketball - yes the women's basketball team nets a profit!, and licensing revenue). They also built huge student athletics center (couple hundred thousand sq feet) and have a new swim stadium under construction - all from the self-supporting athletic program.</p>

<p>Now having said that, a lot of universities do not have that revenue stream to share. And many spend like the big boys and don't have the product to generate the necessary revenue. Just because Pat Summit earns a generous salary doesn't mean that every womens basketball coach deserves a 6 figure income. She's won 800 more games than most of them.</p>

<p>It's easy to be Title IX compliant when the athletic department has the money and spends it wisely. University presidents who are not so lucky, need to take more care, but can do a good job.</p>

166

<p>Well said Goaliedad :)</p>

167

<p>
[quote]

Now having said that, a lot of universities do not have that revenue stream to share

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Indeed, universities with that revenue stream to share appear to be distinctly in the minority.</p>

<p>James Madison U (the place that started this thread 12 pages ago!) is losing 2 million dollars a year on their football program (with most of that loss made up from student fees. According to the article I posted earlier, JMU used $18 million in student fees to fund 84% of the cost of athletics overall and the article also mentioned that even the most profitable program, football, would have run a $2 million dollar loss last year, had it not been for the student fees.)</p>

<p>And this despite the fact that JMU was the 2004 National Division I-AA champion!!!</p>

<p>If the National Champion in Division I-AA can't make a profit (despite what I suspect are plenty of clever cost-accounting tricks that likely disguise the full cost of the program), then I imagine JMU is the tip of the iceberg of money-losing athletic programs that are costing students and/or taxpayers a lot of money at the great bulk of colleges which are not Notre Dame or Tennessee.</p>

<p>Here's another source on James Madison's athletics finances:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031782425807%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031782425807&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>According to the Times Dispatch, all JMU sports together generated $400K in gate receipts. </p>

<p>Apparently they aren't getting money for TV broadcast rights, but fans throughout Virginia can tune in on their radios to hear the games and games are also webcast for free:
<a href="http://www.jmusports.com/Team/Stories/2_4335.asp?TeamID=2%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.jmusports.com/Team/Stories/2_4335.asp?TeamID=2&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

168

<p>Notre Dame is a gang of one in terms of revenue/profit from football. They are the only school with a national tv package. All their home games are on NBC. NBC paid a nice sum for those rights. All their away games are televised by other networks.
By the way I wrestled my brother wrestled and coaches the sport his son wrestled my other nephew wrestles- title 9 did not kill college wrestling. What did -too many football scholarships cut the number so the same 25 programs can not hoard all the top talent. With less scholarships the kids will go to lesser programs and improve those teams</p>

169

<p>


I believe Coach Pat is the first women's coach in any sport anywhere whose total package is over a million dollars a year. She's worth every penny. Good Ol' Rocky Top. Go Lady Vols.</p>

<p>Kim Mulkey-Robertson (KMR) at Baylor will be the next great women's coach. They are the real deals.</p>

170

<p>D-1AA has nothing much in common with D-1 except that the best 1aa teams probably lose as much as the worst teams in D-1.
Real D-1 football is now the BCS schools which is about 60 teams. Most of them make money from football--some make quite a bit--like $10,000,000+ that covers the rest of the sports.</p>

171

<p>The NCAA itself is just a conduit for the money most of which is sent back to the schools or used to host the championships in non-revenue events. There is nothing much left to tax. It's more like a co-op. In the overall scheme of federal spending the NCAA is chump change and would not make a dent in Medicare or anything else. But the coaches do pay taxes on their "high" salaries so the government is already getting their cut.</p>

172

<p>I don't know the specifics about how JMU manages to lose so much money, whether it be yearly cost control, carring too much debt, or not generating adequate revenue streams.</p>

<p>However, I'd venture a guess that somebody in the administration there is probably juggling the accounting numbers to make the athletic department look bad so they can hack at the sports expenses.</p>

<p>I think the secret to success of the major programs is product licensing. At Tennessee and most of the other major (profit making) university athletic programs, the athletic department owns the rights to the popularized logos and trade marks that most people associate with the university. So every time a fan buys a trinket or flag or whatever, a percentage of the wholesale price of that item goes to the athletic department.</p>

<p>And because the athletic department owns the intellectual rights to that stuff and receive the revenue from that stuff, they work awfully hard to sell a lot of that stuff. And lets face it, most non-students buy university affiliated appearal to show support of the athletic teams, so this is probably a justified ownership of these logos, etc. that the schools create. </p>

<p>Now just because you field a good team, even a national championship team, doesn't guarantee that revenue stream. You've gotta have a catchy product and get the fans to identify the product with the success of the team (and that positive feeling people get from being affiliated with a champion). I'd guess this is where JMU probably dropped the ball.</p>

<p>I don't know if the athletic department at JMU has any control or gets any revenue from licensing and perhaps that is the reason they can't balance their budget.</p>

<p>Look at Green Bay Wisconsin - a town probably about as big as the area around JMU. They win a superbowl, somebody starts wearing a cheesehead and it becomes seen everywhere. Not that the Packers get revenue from that (I believe somebody else owns those rights), but everyone associates cheesehead and wearing a Packers jersey, so of course those people buying cheeseheads buy Packers jerseys and other stuff. Now the Packers get some money.</p>

<p>And I'm sure there are plenty of people in that part of Virginia with money to buys stuff. Last time I drove that way, gas was a good 10 cents a gallon cheaper than anything for 300 miles in any direction.</p>

<p>Fix the revenue problem and JMU and the athletics problem will go away. Perhaps their business students could work on this?</p>

173

<p>Yes, Notre Dame is a gang of one. Some other schools are cashing in by forcing fans to buy season tickets if they want a ticket to the home game against Notre Dame. I know that loyal Notre Dame fans with the cash to spare are even buying season tickets to their opponents programs! We are a loyal bunch, that's for sure.</p>

<p>goaliedad makes excellent points about the financial management of JMU perhaps being the source of the problem. It seems as if they TRY to lose money. </p>

<p>goaliedad: My d is moving to the dark side, I'm afraid. She's starting to get addicted to the cash she earns from her music gigs.</p>

174

<p>
[quote]
goaliedad: My d is moving to the dark side, I'm afraid. She's starting to get addicted to the cash she earns from her music gigs.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So much for her amateur status with the NCAA. LOL</p>

<p>I remember those days. At first it was a big ego boost being a kid who gets paid to play. Then it became a chore when they started throwing Richard Strauss at you, giving you only 2 rehearsals. Burnout ensues shortly therafter when you feel the pressure for perfection that you get when you are that kid who gets paid. </p>

<p>Hope it works out better for her.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Yes, Notre Dame is a gang of one. Some other schools are cashing in by forcing fans to buy season tickets if they want a ticket to the home game against Notre Dame. I know that loyal Notre Dame fans with the cash to spare are even buying season tickets to their opponents programs! We are a loyal bunch, that's for sure.

[/quote]

And they are buying even more merchandise!</p>

175

<p>It it silly to think that men and women are going to be equally interested in competitive college sports no matter "what is built". Sure, more will become interested, but it is in the gene pool that it will never become an equal interest.</p>

<p>The facts are that men are more interested. They also watch competitive sports at a far greater percentage than women do. (They even watch sports at a higher percentage than women who actually play sports!!!! Women who play sports are less likely to watch sports than the average male!). Women's sports magazines have a much, much smaller readership. MORE men watch FEMALE sports then women do!!!!</p>

<p>Colleges have been forced to add female sports that are not in demand just so they won't have to cut men's sports. Colleges should become either all male or all female and let the cards fall as they may.</p>