Another well thought out article at TOM.
http://news.theopenmat.com/college-...ail&utm_term=0_0b256fb8bf-189c3da2ce-33153125
http://news.theopenmat.com/college-...ail&utm_term=0_0b256fb8bf-189c3da2ce-33153125
FC: Opinion TOM: Jay Bilas comments following football NC
- Thread starter dunkej01
- Start date
Dan LeBatard had a funny comment about the situation. He commented that instead of massive bonuses, Dabo should just be able to take all the free grad courses he wants at Clemson. And free room and board, too.
I have been thoroughly enjoying the Oregon Ducks football program falling short of national championships since the university cut wrestling. I hope that program and its wasteful use of uniform-helmet combos eventually declines to the bottom of the Pac-12 and dwells there perpetually.
I've liked Jay Bilas since the days of the Duke Lacrosse fiasco. He was one of the few to stand up and defend Coach Pressler BEFORE all the the facts came out. He makes great points here just as he did when he wrote a piece to the Duke student newspaper telling them school officials were wrong in the coaches firing and why. He was doing this when everyone else in the world wanted the heads of the coach and all of his players.
I've thoroughly enjoyed their failures ever since their a-hole fans chanted "You're Number Two" at the end of the 1995 Rose Bowl, just to spite us because we couldn't face Nebraska.
Too bad Mark Helfrich was the coach that fell flat -- he seems like a good guy. Chip Kelly would've been more fitting.
Dabo has done a great job at Clemson. However, everytime he opens his mouth on any subject other than Xs and Os, I cringe and plug my ears. It hurts going into my ears and it hurts twice as much as my brain cells evaporate through my ears from hearing it.
Thing is, if Chipster was still coaching Oregon the Ducks wouldn't be sinking. If you aren't a Kelly fan then you should be happy enough. Chip didn't find humility in Eugene Oregon, but humility has certainly found chip in Philly and San Fran.
I agree Banger. I remember the early 80's when title IX hit hard. My dream was to wrestle at Tennessee under Grey Simmons but program dropped under this guise. How many women's sports have been added since then and why so few wrestling programs one of the original Olympic sports.
In the bigger picture, other sports have been affected too, besides wrestling. Here's a 1981-82 to 2011-12 comparison;
In 1981-82, there were 2778 Men's Teams across all D1 Sports, excluding a couple of emerging sports. In 2011-12 (30 years later), there were 2910, with the biggest jump being football (53 more teams). Many sports have suffered, with the following being the numbers and % decrease in those 30 years;
1981-82 to 2011-12 (a 30 year comparison, Men's Sports ONLY)
Fencing (43 teams to 21 teams), a 51% drop
Gymnastics (59 teams to 16 teams), a 73% drop
Rifle (49 teams to 17 teams), a 65% drop
Swimming/Diving (181 teams to 134 teams), a 26% drop
Volleyball (33 teams to 23 teams), a 30% drop
Wrestling (146 teams to 77 teams), a 47% drop (Note: we are currently at 76 teams)
In the same time frame (30 years, 1981-82 to 2011-12), Women's Sports have flourished, with a 72% increase in D1 Teams across all sports (3467 Teams in 2011-12 vs 2011 Teams in 1981-82), while Men's Teams had a 5% increase overall during the same time period (despite the reductions noted above).
I personally follow all sports, Women's Teams included, so the above isn't bashing at all, it's just data, or facts from the NCAA. The progress in Women's Sports has been amazing, and good for female athlete's. My sadness lies deep within the data, if the laws caused the drops noted above for Men's Sports. If a sport's popularity causes a decrease, that's one thing, but for several of the sports, wrestling included, that does not appear to be the case.
Note: I wish the data went back to 1972, when some of these laws were passed. Earliest available is 1981-82.
In 1981-82, there were 2778 Men's Teams across all D1 Sports, excluding a couple of emerging sports. In 2011-12 (30 years later), there were 2910, with the biggest jump being football (53 more teams). Many sports have suffered, with the following being the numbers and % decrease in those 30 years;
1981-82 to 2011-12 (a 30 year comparison, Men's Sports ONLY)
Fencing (43 teams to 21 teams), a 51% drop
Gymnastics (59 teams to 16 teams), a 73% drop
Rifle (49 teams to 17 teams), a 65% drop
Swimming/Diving (181 teams to 134 teams), a 26% drop
Volleyball (33 teams to 23 teams), a 30% drop
Wrestling (146 teams to 77 teams), a 47% drop (Note: we are currently at 76 teams)
In the same time frame (30 years, 1981-82 to 2011-12), Women's Sports have flourished, with a 72% increase in D1 Teams across all sports (3467 Teams in 2011-12 vs 2011 Teams in 1981-82), while Men's Teams had a 5% increase overall during the same time period (despite the reductions noted above).
I personally follow all sports, Women's Teams included, so the above isn't bashing at all, it's just data, or facts from the NCAA. The progress in Women's Sports has been amazing, and good for female athlete's. My sadness lies deep within the data, if the laws caused the drops noted above for Men's Sports. If a sport's popularity causes a decrease, that's one thing, but for several of the sports, wrestling included, that does not appear to be the case.
Note: I wish the data went back to 1972, when some of these laws were passed. Earliest available is 1981-82.
You always give us brain food to ponder Roar. Good analysis. I'm not one wishing to sacrifice a women's sport for a male one, but shouldn't the rising football tide raise all the ships on the sporting ocean? Is greed and fame a factor? How much is too much? I'm certain that Paterno had a great perspective on this as I've heard many stories coaches of other Penn State sports have told stating of how supportive the football program was in helping their programs. In addition, I believe JF is of this bent as well.
that depends
football can increase revenues, which would benefit all programs.
however, it costs a great deal of money to run a football program, and only ND & P5 conference schools have a chance to turn a profit from football. the others run a deficit.
there's also the issue of scholarships. a football program provides a crazy number of scholarships, but again that's primarily at the Div. 1 level (FBS), where there are 85 full scholarships. For Title IX compliance, a university will need a lot of female sports programs to balance the football scholarship block.
(Roar's stats deal with Div. 1, but the argument has different applications at other levels. At the Div. 2 level, football scholarships are partial. Schools can provide the equivalent of 36 full-rides, and slice and dice them how they'd like. That's a much smaller block of scholarships to have to balance for Title IX balance. Div 3 programs are prohibited from granting athletic scholarships.)
All good points Tom but I was not just referring to scholarships. The nearly obscene salaries, bonuses and facilities for football (I know it's an arms race) have siphoned off monies for other programs. Just something to consider.
Schools use football games as a platform to generate university wide revenue by soliciting wealthy alumni and schmoozing politicians. If that makes football a loss leader, they're perfectly content to cut athletics elsewhere to "balance the books."
In wrestling coverage, Steen is the best new development of the past year hands down.
The other limiting factor even among FBS schools that run sognificant annual surpluses, the football program tends to want to cannibalize those surpluses by spending on facilities upgrades and other outlays that will significantly benefit recruiting. Additionally, only the top half of P5 Programs generate any significant surplus.
Balance of scholarships must not be a critical factor when evaluating Title IX compliance. If it were, PSU would be in big trouble. Assuming that we give out the maximum scholarships for all of our sports, PSU is providing 206.9 for men and 158 for women.
Oregon might not have cratered if Kelly had stayed, but likely would not have continued to dominate. His offense is no longer a competitive advantage -- it's become so widespread across college football, and adopted by so many Pac12 teams, that defenses are better prepared for it. Conference has upgraded its coaching staffs, dramatically so at Washington and WSU. Plus his, ahem, recruiting tactics were exposed.
Gotta nitpick slightly: karma got Kelly. Humility might see him with a high-powered telescope. Maybe.
