Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

namssa

FBS conferences ask NCAA to relax Division I requirements

Recommended Posts

Five major football conference commissioners have asked the NCAA to relax requirements to compete in Division I for four years, including the minimum number of sports a school must sponsor.

A letter from the commissioners of the American Athletic Conference, Mountain West Conference, Mid-American Conference, Sun Belt Conference and Conference USA to NCAA president Mark Emmert asked for temporary relief from financial aid requirements, along with average football attendance. The request was made on behalf of all 350 Division I schools. The commissioners also asked that a moratorium be placed on schools moving into Division I for the length of the waiver.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29037022/five-fbs-conferences-including-aac-c-usa-ask-ncaa-relax-division-requirements

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed.  There shouldn’t be a minimum number of sports anyway. Let the schools And conferences decide what they want to sponsor.  If we all end up only offering 4 sports for men and 5 for women then so be it. Everyone else can just go play club sports and pay for it themselves 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, brillio said:

Agreed.  There shouldn’t be a minimum number of sports anyway. Let the schools And conferences decide what they want to sponsor.  If we all end up only offering 4 sports for men and 5 for women then so be it. Everyone else can just go play club sports and pay for it themselves 

Unless we repeal Title IX (and CalNow for CA), there will always be a lot of women's sports.  If SDSU kept just FB and BB, there would still be 4 or 5 women's sports to balance out football.  But I also like baseball, so tack on more.

And for a public university, if you are doling out scholarships for men, you do need to dole out a similar amount for women.  Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the OP is interesting and it isn't necessary to go into a long tangent about title IX.

Title IX requires that a school's overall student population be reflected in the number of women's sports and men's sports.  Not that long ago women's sports weren't really a thing.  Universities comply with this in different ways but it provides a convenient scapegoat for any men's sport without significant alumni and donor support at a particular university. 

The California State University was the defendant in a case where the university continually defied the Court and ultimately had to agree to a more specific settlement agreement with California NOW that is a problem specific to SDSU, Fresno State and San Jose State.  Unless NOW ceases to exist to defend the settlement, all Cal State campuses should find a different scapegoat.

Perhaps add a poll to the OP about whether to grant a waiver or not grant a waiver?  My suspicion is that it may be possible for students to return to campus in the fall in the West but East and Southern states are less likely. 

It would be cool if the Pac 12 and the Mountain West were the only college football conferences playing (intra conference round robin schedules).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/15/2020 at 3:20 PM, brillio said:

Agreed.  There shouldn’t be a minimum number of sports anyway. Let the schools And conferences decide what they want to sponsor.  If we all end up only offering 4 sports for men and 5 for women then so be it. Everyone else can just go play club sports and pay for it themselves 

The main issue is that everyone would offer 1 sport for men (Men's Basketball) in order to get a share of NCAA money.  That's why there are so many basketball schools now.  So many D1 schools who don't take it seriously but use the money to fund their department.  They don't want more schools jumping in on the cash cow. (But yes, they can legislate around that)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big if here. 

The WAC is potentially screwed if this moratorium proposal is accepted. Cal Baptist is safe as they have already begun their transition, but Tarleton State and Dixie State are not.  Any moratorium that blocks D2 callups prior to July 1st, the WAC loses those two, as they would be forced to remain where they are.  

@Bruininthebay and @CPslograd

UC San Diego would also be blocked by a moratorium.  With the Tritons held down, I suspect Cal State Bakersfield's Big West invite is rescinded (remember, Cal State / UC balance) and thus the Roadrunners have to stay with the WAC.

Could get ugly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt that the moratorium will be accepted because it isn't actually in the self interest of these particular universities to delay decision making about their own budgets.  Usually this is the time of year annual budgets are being planned for cities and counties so I presume a bunch of ADs need cover right now because they are taking a lot of heat to cut sports and to make program altering decisions about the size of the overall budget.  What else can the conference commissioners do but try and save athletic programs? Hair product ain't cheap.

In fact, Tulsa is going through a planning process now that imperils the future of the Golden Shower itself.  https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/education/university-of-tulsa-announces-furloughs-as-financial-losses-grow-due-to-covid-19/article_9db8d7fe-d622-5f32-b47b-e3c83aaeb6f2.html  This article from yesterday's local newspaper indicates that most of the staff other than the faculty are furloughed and they are considering deep cuts to the athletic department; apparently there isn't a whole lot of research money coming in, nor many online course offerings so the absence of physical students is killing that university.  Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of feshistist's - bless their hearts 

Neither ESPN or the NCAA can save the athletic departments from their own university's budget process based on the amount of money I've seen reported that Disney will pay them to broadcast on ESPN2, ESPNU and ESPN+.  I never thought the NCAA might seriously enforce the attendance requirement but now that the five conference president's raised the issue the NCAA can more easily enforce this seemingly unenforceable rolling two year actual or paid attendance requirement.

Most importantly, the MWC has a new TV deal that will put games on broadcast CBS and Fox (if they are played) and it looks more likely that students will return to campuses in states like California, Nevada, Utah, Idaho and Colorado so the MW could play games this year while other conference's with far flung geographies do not.  Its possible CBS and Fox could pick up additional MW and Pac 12 games if the ACC, SEC or the Big Ten don't have students back in classes but western states do.

The American, Conference USA and  independents schedule exposes athletes to large populations they otherwise would not encounter and that increase their chance of acquiring a covid infection and of transmitting it to others.  The American is probably the most dangerous conference in terms of exposing student athletes to risks of infection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bruininthebay said:

I doubt that the moratorium will be accepted because it isn't actually in the self interest of these particular universities to delay decision making about their own budgets.  Usually this is the time of year annual budgets are being planned for cities and counties so I presume a bunch of ADs need cover right now because they are taking a lot of heat to cut sports and to make program altering decisions about the size of the overall budget.  What else can the conference commissioners do but try and save athletic programs? Hair product ain't cheap.

In fact, Tulsa is going through a planning process now that imperils the future of the Golden Shower itself.  https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/education/university-of-tulsa-announces-furloughs-as-financial-losses-grow-due-to-covid-19/article_9db8d7fe-d622-5f32-b47b-e3c83aaeb6f2.html  This article from yesterday's local newspaper indicates that most of the staff other than the faculty are furloughed and they are considering deep cuts to the athletic department; apparently there isn't a whole lot of research money coming in, nor many online course offerings so the absence of physical students is killing that university.  Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of feshistist's - bless their hearts 

Neither ESPN or the NCAA can save the athletic departments from their own university's budget process based on the amount of money I've seen reported that Disney will pay them to broadcast on ESPN2, ESPNU and ESPN+.  I never thought the NCAA might seriously enforce the attendance requirement but now that the five conference president's raised the issue the NCAA can more easily enforce this seemingly unenforceable rolling two year actual or paid attendance requirement.

Most importantly, the MWC has a new TV deal that will put games on broadcast CBS and Fox (if they are played) and it looks more likely that students will return to campuses in states like California, Nevada, Utah, Idaho and Colorado so the MW could play games this year while other conference's with far flung geographies do not.  Its possible CBS and Fox could pick up additional MW and Pac 12 games if the ACC, SEC or the Big Ten don't have students back in classes but western states do.

The American, Conference USA and  independents schedule exposes athletes to large populations they otherwise would not encounter and that increase their chance of acquiring a covid infection and of transmitting it to others.  The American is probably the most dangerous conference in terms of exposing student athletes to risks of infection.

I think you're being pretty optimistic on this.  I'd agree on Idaho, but I'm growing more skeptical about most of the governors allowing students to return to campus.  Just not how I'm reading the situation.  The CO governor has already said schools won't open in the fall without a vaccine or a cure.  Narrow minded for sure, but it is what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know much about Colorado but I believe the governor was referring to public school students and not university undergraduates.

UCLA might actually be able to play football games on campus at Drake Stadium if there are no crowds too - Pasadena is about an hour away with traffic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sports requirement request denied.  The FBS mininum number remains 16.  A waiver to drop below that will only be decided case by case.

The FBS and Division 1 moratorium remains on the table, will be considered in the following weeks. 

https://apnews.com/d027100d06715e95e6555a40e10c8320

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/15/2020 at 12:20 PM, brillio said:

Agreed.  There shouldn’t be a minimum number of sports anyway. Let the schools And conferences decide what they want to sponsor.  If we all end up only offering 4 sports for men and 5 for women then so be it. Everyone else can just go play club sports and pay for it themselves 

 

STRONGLY disagree, that would be a death sentence for the oly/non-revenue sports at a majority of D-1A schools.  

¿What other Division One requirements do you want to do away with?

Considering we all have football pgms, how do you propose carrying 4-men's & 5-women's squads.  F'ball's 85-schollies throw the Title IX equations complete out-of-wack.  What women's sport carries 68-ish scholarship'd athletes to make your 4/5 ratio work.

Back in 1991 when CSU cut Baseball & Softball simultaneously, the SCotUS found Los Rammies non-compliant w/Title IX, despite fielding 6-men's & 8-women's pgms at-the-time.  Since then we added back softball & women's h2o polo as a new sport to CSU to become closer to Title IX compliance & get to the new 16-sports minimum, for our current ratio of:  6-men's/10-women's.  Believe it or not, having 4-more women's sports than men's, CSU is still NON-COMPLIANT given the Supreme Court running in the '90's, which is heavy tied to scholarship numbers. 

Women's h2o polo, which beat out woman's equestrian at the time when it was first added, was eventually replaced by women's fútbol/soccer.  This is a MUCH BETTER fit given w/Colorado's HS Athletics demographics.  The h2o Polo roster was chock-full-o' chicas from my homeland in SoCal.  Woman's fútbol is a much better cultural fit for ole Colorado A&M & the Centennial State.

 

¡¡¡ GO STATE !!!

 

========================================

EDIT:  @Jack Bauer - ¿So which of my pts above earned me your idiot button?  ¿Am I an "idiot" because I presented the nearly 50-yr reality of Title IX -or- CSU's US Supreme Ct history w/the statue...or is it because you disagree with my bold declaration that women's h2o Polo is a better cultural fit in northern Colo that soccer?

I fail to see what's so controversial about this post.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/15/2020 at 3:51 PM, East Coast Aztec said:

Unless we repeal Title IX (and CalNow for CA), there will always be a lot of women's sports.  If SDSU kept just FB and BB, there would still be 4 or 5 women's sports to balance out football.  But I also like baseball, so tack on more.

And for a public university, if you are doling out scholarships for men, you do need to dole out a similar amount for women.  Just my opinion.

 

The US Supreme Ct shares your opinion.

Given that revenue producing sports sports like F'ball, m&w Hoops, Baseball, V'ball, etc... pay the freight for all the other oly sport fare, I'd like to see a Title IX scholarship compliance model that takes into account the differences between revenue & non-revenue sports, and the fact that the revenue sports provide the life-blood for oly/non-revenue production athletics.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/18/2020 at 4:36 PM, Bruininthebay said:

I don't know much about Colorado but I believe the governor was referring to public school students and not university undergraduates.

UCLA might actually be able to play football games on campus at Drake Stadium if there are no crowds too - Pasadena is about an hour away with traffic.

 

It's a shame CSU-Diego no longer has the option of playing f'ball on campus at Aztec Bowl.  A majority of it was filled-in to house the 'tecs current basketball barn formerly know as Cock's Arena.  I used to live in a brand-new apt building in 1988-ish built on the site of the old ATO Fraternity House (nxt-door to Fiji) right above the south/closed-end of the frmr Aztec Bowl.  I loved the old architecture & use of real river rocks in its construction.  My heart & waistline miss running the stairs off that old girl.  It was a real nice nod to San Diego State College sports history, how they kept a section of stands on the far north/open-end of Aztec Bowl when they built the new hoops barn.  It's very cool that CSU-Diego undergrads can still run the same Aztec Bowl stairs like I did back in the mid/late-'80's

 

Drake would be WAY cheaper & much more convenient for the f'ball pgm, however if their honest goal is to maximize social distancing I think the R'Bowl would be much safer.  The crowds trying to peek through the proverbial knot hole to watch the game at Drake would be HUGE in my opinion.  

 

An-hr w/traffic is GENEROUS.  As I'm sure you know, that stadium is in a box cyn with every exit going through very windy tiny residential streets.  If you don't milk the post-game tailgate, you are looking at an 1-hr min just to get from your prk'g space to your freeway of choice:  210, 134, 110, etc...  Chk that...add another :15-:30 mins for my route of choice:  The 110 Harbor Frwy to the SoBay.  

 

@Bruininthebay - What a shame Cal Trans never finished connecting CA-110 to US-210 near the Rose Bowl, or the north end of US-710 near Cal State-LA a lil' south of Pasadena.  What's up w/CA Rte-90 MDR Frwy only being like 4-mi long from The Marina at PCH/Lincoln/CA-Rte 1 -to- Culver City at I-405 & Slauson Blvd? It's so goofy driving the entire length of an 8-lane fray in-less-than 5:00-mins was orignialy called the Slauson Frwy, officially changed to the Richard M. Nixon Frwy for a short period in the '70's, before finally being called the "Marina Frwy" by Cal Trans.  To-this-day, I've only heard it called the Marina del Rey Frwy, never the Marina Frwy of The 90.  It might be the only frwy in SoCal not call "The #."  ¿Have you seen how much abandoned real estate Cal Trans is sitting on for that aborted north-end completion of Long Bch Frwy.  In most places, that wouldn't be any big deal, however given the chronic real estate shortages SoCal & the Bay Area are experiencing, it's almost criminal. For example, the small apt I had in a former building originally built by Paramount Studio to house starlets under contract w/the studio back-in-the-day, for $850/mo (2008-2010) is now +$1,500/mo (pre-CV-19 rent).  I ran into a guy last Fall that claimed the building is now owned by the Gotti Family.  

I really miss living in the Hollywood Hills 'hood known as Franklin Village between US-101 & Los Feliz.  My frmr home w/sweet exposed brick walls & wlk-in closets big enough for a twin bed was:  only a stone's throw from the old world castle looking frmr hotel that now houses the Scientology Celebrity Cntr promptly seen as you drive down US-101/Hollywood Frwy, adjacent to LA's main UBC Theater* & the Bourgeois Pig Coffee House where Gunter from Friends was discovered^, and a few blocks down Franklin Blvd from the dinner used to shoot the opening scene of "Swingers," the film that launched Vince Vaughn & Jon Favreau's career.  I never saw any of them, but Brad Pitt's main LA residence is in the same subdivision, as is the house used for Season-2 of Dr Drew's Sober House.  A lil' further up our cyn (one cyn east of Hollywood Sign & one cyn west of the Griffith Prk Observatory), at the end of my old street you'll find Kevin Spacey's crib & the Bat Cave used in the opening credits and every time Bruce Wayne & Robin left Wayne Manor to fight crime in the 1960's Batman TV series w/Adam West.  There was a small scandal while was living in the 'hood.  Kevin put up BIG ole prison style razor wire along the top of his wall & one of our other neighbors, current LA Police Chief Charlie Beck had to go over & inform his same block neighbor Kevin, that 3' circumference NATO razor wire was not even close to being to code in LA's Silver Oaks Subdivision.  Mr Spacey's proclivity of young boys, that was recently discovered in the early-days of the #MeToo movement, makes what we originally assumed was his desire for privacy, more of a need of security to keep ppl in, rather than keep ppl out.  :-(

 

 

*  If you are ever in SoCal or NYC you must try to visit one of the Upright Citizen Brigade's (UBC) improv/sketch theaters.  You can see show for $4-12 each 7-days-wk.  Especially considering the price, the quality of the comedy is extremely high.  In roughly 3/4-of-the-shows I've seen there, I've recognized at least one-cast member from TV or films.  The original NYC theatre was founded by the likes of Matt Besser & Amy Poehler, and has basically been a pipeline to "the Daily Show.  Both NYC & the LA-Franklin Village UCB have place multiple alumni on SNL & former SoCal frmr members like Zach Galifianakis, Aubrey Plaza, Sarah Silverman & David Cross still drops randomly to this day to preform.  There's a GREAT new much larger LA location 10-mins for the oringal Franklin Theater on Sunset in East Hollywood, which is a convent option if you can get tickets to the original more intimate LA location in Franklin Village.

 

^  James Michael Tyler, has been a member of Friend's Cast ever since the 1994 pilot.  Three-yrs-out-of UGA Drama School's grad pgm, Micheal was paying the rent freelancing as a video editor & PA'g on various productions around the TMZ, in addition to moonlighting at my corner coffee house.  During a shift barista-ing at the Bourgeois Pig Coffee House, he was recruited by one of the show's originally EPs (Exec Producer) as behind-the-counter background (extra) on the Daily Perk set.  Obviously the pilot was picked-up by NBC and several-seasons into Friend's 10-yr-run on Thursday Night Must See TV, my neighbor & fellow bar-fly buddy at our corner bar Bird's Micheal, transitioned from background to a speaking roll.  He played Rachel's Boss at The Perk, and the story-line of his fatal attraction for Jennifer Aniston's character took-off & carried Micheal all the way through the run-of-show, from the Pilot to the Series Finale.  When I was hanging-out w/Micheal he was making a good living with a career as a voice-over actor.  Several-yrs-ago, he made the jump to pro wrestling, which he had to put on hold last-yr when he made a living making personal appearances at City Perk pop-ups all-around-the-world promoting the 25-yr Anniversary of Friends, for the company the re-sells the shows syndication rights.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GoState99755 said:

 

STRONGLY disagree, that would be a death sentence for the oly/non-revenue sports at a majority of D-1A schools.  

¿What other Division One requirements do you want to do away with?

Considering we all have football pgms, how do you propose carrying 4-men's & 5-women's squads.  F'ball;s 85-schollies throw the Title IX equations complete out-of-wack.  What women's sport carries 68-ish scholarship'd athletes to make your 4/5 ratio work.

Back in 1991 when CSU cut Baseball & Softball simultaneously, the SCotUS found Los Rammies non-compliant w/Title IX, despite fielding 6-men's & 8-women's pgms at-the-time.  Since then we added back softball & women's h2o polo as a new sport to CSU to become closer to Title IX compliance & get to the new 16-sports minimum, for our current ratio of:  6-men's/10-women's.  Believe it or not, having 4-more women's sports than men's is still NON-COMPLIANT given the Supreme Court running in the '90's, which is heavy tied to scholarship numbers. 

Women's h2o polo, which beat out woman's equestrian at the time when it was first added, was eventually replaced by women's fútbol/soccer.  This is a MUCH BETTER fit given w/Colorado's HS Athletics demographics.  The h2o Polo roster was chock-full-o' chicas from my homeland in SoCal.  Woman's fútbol is a much better cultural fit for ole Colorado A&M & the Centennial State.

 

¡¡¡ GO STATE !!!

 

 

So maybe the best solution is to reduce football scholarships down to 70, and make corresponding cuts to the women's programs.

How come we never hear this type of solution?

It would certainly be a boon for G5 programs and even out the talent levels a little.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, renoskier said:

So maybe the best solution is to reduce football scholarships down to 70, and make corresponding cuts to the women's programs.

How come we never hear this type of solution?

It would certainly be a boon for G5 programs and even out the talent levels a little.

Well, 63 puts you at FCS level…

Is it fitting or irony that possibly the most versatile word in the English language is also of unknown origin?

5810036134_cb4d739b38_b.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, renoskier said:

So maybe the best solution is to reduce football scholarships down to 70, and make corresponding cuts to the women's programs.

How come we never hear this type of solution?  I---> I think you answered your own question below.

It would certainly be a boon for G5 programs and even out the talent levels a little.    I---> It would decrease the HUGE TV $$$ driven budgetary advantage the P-5s have over the G-5s.  Guessing the Temp CV-19 4-Sport Waiver went down in flames for the very same reason.  As usual I have nothing official to base this on, just my own feeble logic & limited knowledge of the current NCAA D-1A landscape.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, bornsilverandblue said:

Well, 63 puts you at FCS level…

 

And IIRC, those are full scholarships too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GoState99755 said:

 

STRONGLY disagree, that would be a death sentence for the oly/non-revenue sports at a majority of D-1A schools.  

¿What other Division One requirements do you want to do away with?

Considering we all have football pgms, how do you propose carrying 4-men's & 5-women's squads.  F'ball;s 85-schollies throw the Title IX equations complete out-of-wack.  What women's sport carries 68-ish scholarship'd athletes to make your 4/5 ratio work.

Back in 1991 when CSU cut Baseball & Softball simultaneously, the SCotUS found Los Rammies non-compliant w/Title IX, despite fielding 6-men's & 8-women's pgms at-the-time.  Since then we added back softball & women's h2o polo as a new sport to CSU to become closer to Title IX compliance & get to the new 16-sports minimum, for our current ratio of:  6-men's/10-women's.  Believe it or not, having 4-more women's sports than men's is still NON-COMPLIANT given the Supreme Court running in the '90's, which is heavy tied to scholarship numbers. 

Women's h2o polo, which beat out woman's equestrian at the time when it was first added, was eventually replaced by women's fútbol/soccer.  This is a MUCH BETTER fit given w/Colorado's HS Athletics demographics.  The h2o Polo roster was chock-full-o' chicas from my homeland in SoCal.  Woman's fútbol is a much better cultural fit for ole Colorado A&M & the Centennial State.

 

¡¡¡ GO STATE !!!

 

 

I agree. We need to field more teams that drain the budget that no one watches or cares about.  Good point 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jdgaucho said:

 

And IIRC, those are full scholarships too?

Correct.  It’s at the D-II level that you start dealing with partial scholarships.

Is it fitting or irony that possibly the most versatile word in the English language is also of unknown origin?

5810036134_cb4d739b38_b.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, GoState99755 said:

 

STRONGLY disagree, that would be a death sentence for the oly/non-revenue sports at a majority of D-1A schools.  

¿What other Division One requirements do you want to do away with?

Considering we all have football pgms, how do you propose carrying 4-men's & 5-women's squads.  F'ball;s 85-schollies throw the Title IX equations complete out-of-wack.  What women's sport carries 68-ish scholarship'd athletes to make your 4/5 ratio work.

Back in 1991 when CSU cut Baseball & Softball simultaneously, the SCotUS found Los Rammies non-compliant w/Title IX, despite fielding 6-men's & 8-women's pgms at-the-time.  Since then we added back softball & women's h2o polo as a new sport to CSU to become closer to Title IX compliance & get to the new 16-sports minimum, for our current ratio of:  6-men's/10-women's.  Believe it or not, having 4-more women's sports than men's, CSU is still NON-COMPLIANT given the Supreme Court running in the '90's, which is heavy tied to scholarship numbers. 

Women's h2o polo, which beat out woman's equestrian at the time when it was first added, was eventually replaced by women's fútbol/soccer.  This is a MUCH BETTER fit given w/Colorado's HS Athletics demographics.  The h2o Polo roster was chock-full-o' chicas from my homeland in SoCal.  Woman's fútbol is a much better cultural fit for ole Colorado A&M & the Centennial State.

 

¡¡¡ GO STATE !!!

 

 

3 hours ago, brillio said:

I agree. We need to field more teams that drain the budget that no one watches or cares about.  Good point 

 

#1 - Who's proposing fielding "...more teams that drain the budget, that no one watches or cares about?"  I missed where a proposed expanding oly/non-revenue sports 

#2 - I don't disagree w/you because cause I'm a HUGE oly/non-revenue sports proponent.  I'm just pointing out the realities of Title IX, which I don't see going anywhere soon.

¿Am a getting your snarky disingenuous response because you are holding me responsible for your distain for Title IX?

I don't see your argument that oly/non-revenue sports are "...drain(ing our A-Dept) budgets," is a reality like you claim.  Yes they have budgets, however when comparing them to the $$$ being spent on regular travel, over-seas & int'l tournaments 'n' tours, recruiting & outfitting the major sports, the oly redhead step-children are relatively operating on meager pittances.  ¿Have you seen the  economic constranits these pgms operated under: sharing partial scholarships, traveling frequently by vans & busses, putting 4-girls to a room, etc...  ¿Do I have an unrealistic impression of how these minor sports operate & or does UNR run thing much differently than CSU?  From where I sit, these minor sports existing on the $$$ generated by f'ball & hoops budgets give many kids a wonderful opportunity upgrade their college choice in many cases to a university they couldn't attend basis on their academic profile or their family's geography or financial situation.  When I donate to CSU A-Dept scholarship fund, I'm glad I can spread my contributions around to both major & minor pgms, and rotate a small percentage of my donations amongst different non-revenue sports.  These pgms operate on a shoe string compared to the revenue producers.  ¿Is it really that big of a "drain" on your A-Dept's budget? when you can outfit an entire college fútbol team, for the same price as one football player on a team w/well over a 100-players on the roster?  ¿All P-5 are operating under relatively the same budgetary constrains, thus where is this HUGE "drain" of which you speak?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...