Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

University of New Mexico kills men's soccer

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    University of New Mexico kills men's soccer

    part of this is simply to save $$$, part is claimed to be for Title IX compliance.

    https://www.socceramerica.com/public...owerhouse.html

    Cue usual flamewar.

    #2
    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
    part of this is simply to save $$$, part is claimed to be for Title IX compliance.

    https://www.socceramerica.com/public...owerhouse.html

    Cue usual flamewar.
    Schools have to make decisions to balance the opportunities. They could have ADDED another women's sport but, instead, decided to eliminate a men's sport. Not a Title IX problem, it's school problem.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
      Schools have to make decisions to balance the opportunities. They could have ADDED another women's sport but, instead, decided to eliminate a men's sport. Not a Title IX problem, it's school problem.
      Just a result of Title IX compliance, per the university regents board. It's a shame, but Title IX has to be enforced in the public education setting. Why do they have to destroy quality and replace it with crap? Seems like better solutions could be sought out.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
        Schools have to make decisions to balance the opportunities. They could have ADDED another women's sport but, instead, decided to eliminate a men's sport. Not a Title IX problem, it's school problem.
        There are few women's sports that can equal the number of a men's soccer team, other than women's soccer. So that means possibly adding two sports, extra staff, travel etc. Football is what gets schools into the most trouble with Title 9. You need to be in a big conference and be successful to get more TV $ and many schools are not. Mens soccer is a money loser for probably everyone. I wouldn't call it a trend but some schools have cut football or have cut how many scholaships they give for football. Schools have to decide what is best for the university as a whole, not just athletics

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
          There are few women's sports that can equal the number of a men's soccer team, other than women's soccer. So that means possibly adding two sports, extra staff, travel etc. Football is what gets schools into the most trouble with Title 9. You need to be in a big conference and be successful to get more TV $ and many schools are not. Mens soccer is a money loser for probably everyone. I wouldn't call it a trend but some schools have cut football or have cut how many scholaships they give for football. Schools have to decide what is best for the university as a whole, not just athletics
          Just an FYI American Football funds the athletic Departments at all Major D1 Schools.

          The reputation and branding provided by big time prominent American Football is the university's wet dream.

          Roll Tide!!

          Go Ducks!!

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
            Just an FYI American Football funds the athletic Departments at all Major D1 Schools.

            The reputation and branding provided by big time prominent American Football is the university's wet dream.

            Roll Tide!!

            Go Ducks!!
            There's a lot of not-so-major D1 schools that don't see that kind of revenue from football. Bug schools absolutely it's a cash cow.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
              Just an FYI American Football funds the athletic Departments at all Major D1 Schools.

              The reputation and branding provided by big time prominent American Football is the university's wet dream.

              Roll Tide!!

              Go Ducks!!
              Not so much. Even some very big programs are hemorrhaging money (link). With pressure on schools to not to keep raising tuitions 5-7% every year I think more schools will be evaluating their athletic departments. If a school really wants to keep football then other men's sports will may get hit. As it is there's about 100 fewer men's D1 soccer programs than women's.

              https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...crippling-debt

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                There's a lot of not-so-major D1 schools that don't see that kind of revenue from football. Bug schools absolutely it's a cash cow.
                Here is the list of schools that dont have American Football..But I am guessing here, nearly all of have Mens Soccer?https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...tball_programs

                All the Schools left that field American Football are tied to conference tv deals that bring in Bank...Even the handful of Independents.

                TV revenue is the big money maker..Not to mention boosters.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                  Just a result of Title IX compliance, per the university regents board. It's a shame, but Title IX has to be enforced in the public education setting. Why do they have to destroy quality and replace it with crap? Seems like better solutions could be sought out.
                  No shame in complying with the law. The law is a 42-year success.
                  The school made its choice. The students m ade their choice to go there. Consideration of risks are part of the process. The first question evey potential student athlete has to be able to answer is, "Would you go to school here is you weren't playing a sport?"

                  Comment


                    #10
                    There's about 250 D1 football programs with just over 28,000 players. Men's D1 soccer has 205 programs with about 6,000 players http://www.scholarshipstats.com/

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                      No shame in complying with the law. The law is a 42-year success.
                      The school made its choice. The students m ade their choice to go there. Consideration of risks are part of the process. The first question evey potential student athlete has to be able to answer is, "Would you go to school here is you weren't playing a sport?"
                      That always should be the first question. Anything could happen - cut, quit, coach leaves and the new cleans house. The school (academic fit, locations, size, social scene) should always be the driving criteria.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                        No shame in complying with the law. The law is a 42-year success.
                        The school made its choice. The students m ade their choice to go there. Consideration of risks are part of the process. The first question evey potential student athlete has to be able to answer is, "Would you go to school here is you weren't playing a sport?"
                        The law? Risks? Choice?

                        The fundamental question is why are sports tie to higher education?

                        The rest of the free world doesn't marry these two as bedfellows.

                        Jus sayin.

                        It is a shame that in trying to administer a initiative/legislation based on equality, that outstanding men's programs continue to be destroyed.

                        But, if you don't care, that says more about you.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                          The law? Risks? Choice?

                          The fundamental question is why are sports tie to higher education?

                          The rest of the free world doesn't marry these two as bedfellows.

                          Jus sayin.

                          It is a shame that in trying to administer a initiative/legislation based on equality, that outstanding men's programs continue to be destroyed.

                          But, if you don't care, that says more about you.
                          No. That is your fundamental question. You are so far behid the times with the collegiate competitive experience. As in 1852, with the Yale v Harvard row teams, 1859 baseball, 1879 track and field, and so on.

                          Well, Jus sayin, it took aout 116 years before the law brought women's collegiate athletics into the USA. Was a shame that it took that long for this ooportunity.

                          Again. If you're picking a school for a men's program instead of the academics then it says more about you caring for the sport over the education and trying to blame it on one legally-recognized class of people.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                            No. That is your fundamental question. You are so far behid the times with the collegiate competitive experience. As in 1852, with the Yale v Harvard row teams, 1859 baseball, 1879 track and field, and so on.

                            Well, Jus sayin, it took aout 116 years before the law brought women's collegiate athletics into the USA. Was a shame that it took that long for this ooportunity.

                            Again. If you're picking a school for a men's program instead of the academics then it says more about you caring for the sport over the education and trying to blame it on one legally-recognized class of people.
                            Welcome to America a collegiate landscape drive by American Football. Which begs the real question why are athletics even tied to academics? The world over this isn't the case. Jus sayin.

                            Women's program's in the states were never destroyed or taken away, they didn't have a platform yet, now they do. Maybe you want to revisit slavery and how that was a shame too?

                            I guess payback is a bitch, in your strange book.

                            Got it, pure genius.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Remember the golden rule: A college's quality of education is inversely proportional to the success of it's football team.

                              Comment

                              Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
                              Auto-Saved
                              x
                              Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
                              x
                              Working...
                              X