UDPride Discussion Forums    
     

Go Back   UDPride Discussion Forums > UDPRIDE SPORTS FORUMS > Mens Basketball

» Log in
User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!
» Advertisement
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-06-2008, 10:53 AM
San Diego Flyer's Avatar
San Diego Flyer San Diego Flyer is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Dallas
Posts: 14,788
Thanks: 10,086
Thanked 10,502 Times in 4,704 Posts
San Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond reputeSan Diego Flyer has a reputation beyond repute
When a scholarship is not a scholarship, and Title IX

Here's a fascinating article about college scholarships and how they are carved into fractions depending on the sport in an effort to deal with budget pressures while still fielding competitive teams and adhering to Title IX requirements. It's a lengthy article but worth the read.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...1.3b76d39.html

Here's a taste of the subject as written:

"In Division I, baseball teams are allowed to have 35 players – but there are only 11.7 scholarships to divide among the roster. Track and field and cross country teams sometimes have in excess of 50 athletes on their rosters but only 12.6 scholarships.

Rosters of swimming and diving teams in Division I often number more than 30, but there are only 9.9 scholarships available. In tennis and golf, 10 to 12 players often comprise a Division I roster, but there are only 4.5 scholarships."

In short, your kid (or in my case grandkid) just might be 1/4 of an all-star when he gets to college if he plays the wrong sport, or worse yet the wrong position in the right sport.

Last edited by San Diego Flyer; 07-06-2008 at 10:58 AM..
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
  #2  
Old 07-06-2008, 03:13 PM
UACFlyer UACFlyer is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 13,229
Thanks: 3,986
Thanked 4,600 Times in 2,847 Posts
UACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond repute
Title IX & scholarships....

Title IX goes well beyond male/female scholarships and/or equivalents. In fact, "scholarships" are not even mentioned in the legislation. And, Title IX goes beyond athletics, including cheerleading, bands, clubs, etc,....just about any activity associated with colleges and high schools.

Title IX uses language along the vague lines, "substantially equal opportunity" for males and females. It's pretty much up to college/HS legal departments to figure out what that means, although common sense makes it not to difficult.

One of the difficulties encountered is that there is significantly less interest among females than males in athletics, such that even schools that pioneered in the area of gender equity have sometimes found it difficult to have roughly the same perecentage of males and females participate in athletics even when the "opportunities" for females are the same as for males. That situation arises most often at schools that have the funds to support just about any sport you can think of for both men and women, e.g., the Ivies. That's when female lack of interest surfaces.

For schools like UD that have limited sports offerings for males it's relatively easy to select sports for females that are sufficient to satisfy Title IX requirements. Thus, for schools like Xavier if you really want to have a football team all you need is the money to support a team as well as money to support a roughly equivalent number of female "opportunities". Moreover, the investment is not all that great if football is of the non-schollie variety, meaning that adding female scholarships is not an issue.

What is really needed is for the administration to feel that football is an important element of the overall athletic and educational experience. Often you will hear TK explain that UD feels it is important and beneficial to be able to offer the "experience of playing college football to ~ 100 UD student/athletes",..."as well as the benefit for the entire university community". Obviously, many if not most schools like UD feel otherwise. But, UD's position is clear and the school has made a commitment that has endured the test of time and serves as a model for others.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-06-2008, 07:35 PM
NCkevi's Avatar
NCkevi NCkevi is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,269
Thanks: 327
Thanked 3,076 Times in 1,229 Posts
NCkevi has a reputation beyond reputeNCkevi has a reputation beyond reputeNCkevi has a reputation beyond reputeNCkevi has a reputation beyond reputeNCkevi has a reputation beyond reputeNCkevi has a reputation beyond reputeNCkevi has a reputation beyond reputeNCkevi has a reputation beyond reputeNCkevi has a reputation beyond reputeNCkevi has a reputation beyond reputeNCkevi has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by UACFlyer
Title IX goes well beyond male/female scholarships and/or equivalents. In fact, "scholarships" are not even mentioned in the legislation. And, Title IX goes beyond athletics, including cheerleading, bands, clubs, etc,....just about any activity associated with colleges and high schools.
Correct - we usually hear about Title IX in regards to sports, but it covers 9 other areas:
Access to Higher Education, Career Education, Education for Pregnant and Parenting Students, Employment, Learning Environment, Math and Science, Sexual Harassment, Standardized Testing, and Technology.



Originally Posted by UACFlyer
One of the difficulties encountered is that there is significantly less interest among females than males in athletics, such that even schools that pioneered in the area of gender equity have sometimes found it difficult to have roughly the same perecentage of males and females participate in athletics even when the "opportunities" for females are the same as for males.
actually, there are three options to comply with Title IX and sports and in this situation a school would be in compliance under the third option


Title IX requires that schools allocate participation opportunities nondiscriminatorily.
A school can meet this requirement if it can demonstrate any one of the following:

(1) that the percentages of male and female athletes are substantially proportionate to
the percentages of male and female students enrolled
OR
(2) that it has a history and continuing practice of expanding athletic opportunities for the
underrepresented sex
OR
(3) that its athletics program fully and effectively accommodates the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex.

Last edited by NCkevi; 07-06-2008 at 07:42 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-06-2008, 07:48 PM
Sea Bass Sea Bass is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,406
Thanks: 866
Thanked 6,301 Times in 3,004 Posts
Sea Bass has a reputation beyond reputeSea Bass has a reputation beyond reputeSea Bass has a reputation beyond reputeSea Bass has a reputation beyond reputeSea Bass has a reputation beyond reputeSea Bass has a reputation beyond reputeSea Bass has a reputation beyond reputeSea Bass has a reputation beyond reputeSea Bass has a reputation beyond reputeSea Bass has a reputation beyond reputeSea Bass has a reputation beyond repute
I would work toward trying to get an academic schoarship
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-06-2008, 08:17 PM
AustinFlyer's Avatar
AustinFlyer AustinFlyer is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 796
Thanks: 452
Thanked 187 Times in 95 Posts
AustinFlyer is a glorious beacon of lightAustinFlyer is a glorious beacon of lightAustinFlyer is a glorious beacon of lightAustinFlyer is a glorious beacon of lightAustinFlyer is a glorious beacon of lightAustinFlyer is a glorious beacon of light
Originally Posted by Sea Bass View Post
I would work toward trying to get an academic schoarship
Where the spelling part of the academics isn't stressed so much. Sorry Sea Bass, I couldn't resist.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-06-2008, 08:29 PM
UACFlyer UACFlyer is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 13,229
Thanks: 3,986
Thanked 4,600 Times in 2,847 Posts
UACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond repute
Brown & Title IX

NCkevi lists three criteria, satisfying any one of which is sufficient to demonstrate compliance with Title IX. In theory, true,..in reality, no way.

In the `90s Brown University was challenged re its compliance with Title IX and took its case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court,....and lost. Brown's loss stunned colleges across the country because Brown had been a well recognized pioneer of gender equity well before Title IX was enacted;...and Brown clearly satisfied two of the three criteria; yet Brown lost its case because the percentage of women participating in intercollegiate progams was less than the percentage of women in the student body.

Brown's problem arose because it offered so many sports for both men and women, about 30-35 total, that no matter how hard it tried it could not entice enough women to participate. Schools like UD typically offer about 15-20 sports total so that it's much easier to find enough female interest so that the percentage of female athletes mirrors that of the student body as a whole.

The Brown verdict scared the pants of ADs across the nation, prompting schools to drop mens sports, clearly an unintended consequence of Title IX.

For sure there are schools that are not in compliance and get away with it. When the stuff hits the fan is when a female sues a school claiming noncompliance. In such cases the school invariably loses and is forced to make changes it had not anticipated. To be safe most schools are very careful re Title IX compliance because experience has shown that meeting one of the three criteria referred to as the "three prongs" is not enough. If sued the school will lose 99% of the time.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-07-2008, 03:58 AM
224 L St's Avatar
224 L St 224 L St is offline
2nd Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: on campus
Posts: 83
Thanks: 8
Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
224 L St is on a distinguished road
as a cross country runner at UD, i can attest to the paucity of athletic scholarship aid for non-profitable sports such as mine. i remember during freshman year at the first-year athlete class we had to take, Ted Kissel bluntly stating how sports like cross country, tennis, track and field, and golf make no money and that mens basketball holds the athletic program squarely on its shoulders. thats a plain fact, and i won't dance around that point either, but for a private school like UD it makes it very hard to get the best to compete at your sport. i believe our sport is getting 2-3 full scholarships to divvy up among the 14 or so guys on the team, and that includes 3 guys who have broken the school record time as it stood when i came onto UD's team. we compete in the A10 with teams like Lasalle and Duquesne who have 12 guys on full scholarship every year.

the amount of competitiveness and success that the athletic program achieves in general is remarkable, given our resources. without a monster d-1 football program raking in millions and enabling maximum athletic funds to be offered to the best athletes coming in, we nevertheless hold our own against the best in several sports. you have to give props to the administration and the coaching, especially recognizing the great job they do bringing in the right kind of student-athletes who put in work to maximize their talent (such as me ).

Last edited by 224 L St; 07-07-2008 at 04:11 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-07-2008, 08:40 AM
DetroitFlyer DetroitFlyer is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,867
Thanks: 2,939
Thanked 1,452 Times in 781 Posts
DetroitFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeDetroitFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeDetroitFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeDetroitFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeDetroitFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeDetroitFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeDetroitFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeDetroitFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeDetroitFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeDetroitFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeDetroitFlyer has a reputation beyond repute
The Dukes....

Originally Posted by 224 L St View Post
as a cross country runner at UD, i can attest to the paucity of athletic scholarship aid for non-profitable sports such as mine. i remember during freshman year at the first-year athlete class we had to take, Ted Kissel bluntly stating how sports like cross country, tennis, track and field, and golf make no money and that mens basketball holds the athletic program squarely on its shoulders. thats a plain fact, and i won't dance around that point either, but for a private school like UD it makes it very hard to get the best to compete at your sport. i believe our sport is getting 2-3 full scholarships to divvy up among the 14 or so guys on the team, and that includes 3 guys who have broken the school record time as it stood when i came onto UD's team. we compete in the A10 with teams like Lasalle and Duquesne who have 12 guys on full scholarship every year.

the amount of competitiveness and success that the athletic program achieves in general is remarkable, given our resources. without a monster d-1 football program raking in millions and enabling maximum athletic funds to be offered to the best athletes coming in, we nevertheless hold our own against the best in several sports. you have to give props to the administration and the coaching, especially recognizing the great job they do bringing in the right kind of student-athletes who put in work to maximize their talent (such as me ).
How does Duquesne do it? Not only do they seem to offer more scholarships in non-revenue sports, they are now moving to scholarship football.... Frankly, I am not convinced that UD's model for funding athletics is completely correct. Time and time again we hear that men's basketball has to be the sole source of virtually all athletic revenue.... If that were true at Duquesne, their athletic department and maybe their university would be out of business.... To me, it simply appears as though athletics have a higher overall priority at Duquesne as compared to Dayton. Maybe this is good maybe this is bad, you can decide on your own. Being as UD is typically at the tail end of the A10 in number of athletic scholarships offered, one could certainly conclude that athletics are a lower priority at UD versus most other A10 schools....

Now, having said that, I wonder if UD does not balance it out a bit with non-athletic aid.... I was talking with a guy last week concerning college golf. Both his daughter and son have been groomed for years to obtain college scholarships. Both were recruited for college golf teams. Schools like MIT and Brown were prominently in the mix.... Neither of which offer "athletic scholarships". But, both kids were excellent students and both were essentially offered full rides on academics, ( understanding that they would also play golf ). Of course with academic aid, if they quit the team, they would still maintain their aid.... UD certainly has a very large number of excellent student-athletes when compared to the majority of the A10. Maybe we "recruit" kids that can land that academic aid that offsets the athletic scholarship aid a school like Duquesne can offer?

As for the golfers, they both ended up at Stetson in Florida, with full rides, ( 100% academic ). Interesting....
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-07-2008, 09:50 AM
The Chef The Chef is offline
Brigadier General
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,084
Thanks: 112
Thanked 435 Times in 190 Posts
The Chef will become famous soon enoughThe Chef will become famous soon enough
A couple of thoughts on the subject of Title IX and in responses to previous posts.

1. The Title IX legislation does not even makes a direct reference to athletics. The law simply says that there should be no discrimination on the basis of sex of any educational activities. It is self-apparent that collegiate (and high school) athletics qualify as such activities.

2. Title IX passed in 1972. It wasn't until the Carter Administration (1979) gave policy definition (not the law itself, just an interpretation as to how the executive branch would enforce the law) to how Title IX should be implemented. That is where the vague lines of "substantially equal opportunity" that UAC refers to came from as well as the three-prong approach that NCkevi mentions. However, the Cohen v. Brown U. ruling that UAC mentioned as well (which SCOTUS simply decided not hear, thus allowing the appeals court ruling to stand) essentially invalidated prongs 2 and 3 as means to ensure that educational instituitions stay out of legal trouble because their are inherently unprovable as things you can continuously show you are doing when there is a challenge to it. While this decision has substantially clarified what is and what isn't in legal jeopardy, it has had the net effect of institutionalizing what people abhor not when it comes to Affirmative Action: a quota-based system. What we are seeing are the benefits and limitations of such a system play out. Note that there are both here. (BTW, because the "three prong" approach was a policy writ, it means that the current POTUS has the authority to redefine Title IX differently, and in some respects, he has. But that's a story for another day.)

3. With the previous said, I do have to wonder how a challenge to Title IX on the basis of reverse discrimination ( i.e., by a man who has lost a men's athletics program because of "budget cuts") would turn out today, especially in the current judicial environment that we sit in. The Bush Administration, through its appointments, has moved the federal judicial system in a much more conservative direction than it was in the mid-90's, to the point where a challenge to Title IX like Cohen v. Brown might have come down much differently if it were brought today. Would stare decisis truly hold here? If it would, the schools would essentially win their case by proving that they are holding their quotas. Interesting that such an argument would have been completely struck down in any court as Unconstitutional (Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment) if this were a challenge to Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. (ala the Gruetter v. Bollinger case, the challenge to the affirmative action policy of the Michigan Law School, a 2003 SCOTUS decision where UM successfully argued that while their policy did account for race as one of a number factors considered for admission, the policy did not amount a quota based system). More interestingly to me, if SCOTUS actually got a chance, then actually did strike down Title IX as unconsitutional, how would the politicians react?

Sorry to go so deep.

Last edited by The Chef; 07-07-2008 at 10:17 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-07-2008, 10:09 AM
UACFlyer UACFlyer is offline
Committed to this Web Site and Your Enjoyment!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 13,229
Thanks: 3,986
Thanked 4,600 Times in 2,847 Posts
UACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond reputeUACFlyer has a reputation beyond repute
UD scholarships and Priorities...

As of 2005-2006 UD was near the bottom of the A10 in scholarships offered. One has to omit the large public schools when making the comparison.

UD offered 87 scholarships, St. Joes 87, Xavier 89, Lasalle 90,.....no significant difference. SLU was at 94. Then there was a significant jump with Fordham at 108 and Duquesne at 109, unusual to say the least. And, DU is now offering football scholarships. Go figure!

So, it does appear as if DU places a higher priority on athletics than UD. But, I don't think their team performance is any better; and perhaps they offer more sports; I haven't checked. If UD were to offer just a few more scholarships it would be in the middle of the pack of its A10 peers. And, as DF points out there may be bookkeeping issues here if UD has a more generous need-based aid policy.

TK has pointed out that about the dumbest thing a school can do is spread its money around like peanut butter, without prioritization. UD does not do that; it has a strategy for excellence based on putting its money in areas where it can compete at the very highest level nationally, i.e., men's/women's BB; men's/women's soccer, volleyball.

It doesn't make a lot of sense for a private school in Ohio where there is snow on the ground in March/April to invest heavily in baseball, softball, outdoor track and field, golf, etc.

As for facilities, across the board UD has invested heavily; our facilities are superb, even for the sports that are not emphasized.

Every school has its own approach to the way it conducts its affairs. Living in New England and having kids that attended Ivy League schools, I know something about Ivies. There are many similarities among the Ivies, but even more differences. The differences among Ivies is just as great as the differences among A10 schools. We just focus on what we know best and our beloved alma mater.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement System V2.6 By   Branden

     
 
Copyright 1996-2012 UDPride.com. All Rights Reserved.