http://www.mlive.com/news/kzgazette/index.ssf?/base/news-7/1070236202155600.xml This is perhaps the best story I have ever seen covering a possible cut at the college level. very good detail on the issues of Division I affiliation, conference requirements, budget issues and gender equity. Some nuggets (could need a password to get in; I got in fine, but Google said subscription required) AD was supposed to get the recommendation this past Monday. Title IX doesn't get sports cut. It just determines which ones go, in some cases. Especially at non-BCS schools who don't get the big football revenue. Lots of things to consider. I never like to see anything get cut, but let's hope a winning soccer team doesn't bite the dust.
Holy *#*#*#*# I didnt' know Bowling Green cut their track program..my buddy almost made it to the Olympics and ran for them.....wow. Didn't Title IX also "cut" or cause the outing of Miami of Ohio's men's soccer team? And that's a very wealthy school...
It's the double whammy of a mid-major D1-A football school. The athletic programs consistently lose money, AND Title IX compliance is virtually impossible because of the number of football scholarships. Frankly, I expect that the MAC will devolve into a football, basketball (and hockey) conference in the not-too-distant future. Most schools will keep the minimum number of men's sports to suit alumni and maintain D1 status, and few olympic sports will remain (and soccer won't be one of those).
Bingo. I think a lot of this can be put at the feet of Marshall football. They put the carrot out there for everyone else. And people made this big investments, then came the new D-I regs (16 sports, at least six male) and the budget problems, which have hit everywhere. Take a look and see how many schools dropping sports belong to BCS conferences.
http://www.wmich.edu/wmu/news/2003/0312/0304-191.html Soccer survives. The men's track triumvirate (indoor, outdoor and cross-country) and women's synchronized skating get the axe. Feel bad for those kids.
Re: Remember More to the point, men's sports are being lost to women's sports because of the financial and Title IX imbalance caused by football and football scholarships respectively.
Actually, I would say the biggest issues right now are budget crises around the country and the new NCAA sport limits (16 for D-I, 6 minimum for men) and the conference shuffling. Title IX is static. Football scholarships are static. But schools have less money to deal with, need to be very conscious of their sport numbers and how they fit within their conference structure. That has to be balanced with Title IX and the football issue (if there is one), but the impact of dwindling funding is the big hammer.
The running triumverate probatly got cut becuse it is three sports with mostly the same people. The outdoor track coach is most likely the coach for the other two. It eliminates three sports while affecting the least amount of people. Dsocc - you are correct. Men's soccer is being lost to the financial imbalance created by football. One thing that I have never understood, why among the BCS conferences do the SEC and Big 12 not have soccer leagues. I think that Kentucky and South Carolina are the only two from the SEC and I am not sure of any from the Big 12, I may be mistaken, but why should these conferences with huge amounts of cash not have mens soccer when smaller conferences who feel the brunt of the division in money caused by BCS conference have teams. Wow that was a really long sentence.
Too bad that football isn't forced to be recognized for what it is...a business...and taken off the college sports table. Then college sports would be more balanced. Of course part of my dream would be that college football also be required to operate as a business, not getting money from the university and having to manage expenses and show a profit. Players would be hired and paid openly, alumni fund raising would be out in the open and profits would be kept by the programs. Schools would have to be paid for the use of facilities. Programs that couldn't survive financially on their own would fold. Bringing alumni support out into the open and allowing recruiting to be based upon business ethics would stop these unfair penalties that are currently levied against schools that are merely trying to have competitive programs. This fiscal survival requirement would winnow out those programs that couldn't achieve BCS support and relieve the growing political pressure against it. Additionally, bringing the financial drivers out into the open and ridding us of programs that can't make money would make it more likely that those playing football are really the best players, that teams have the best coaches, and that we would therefore be able to watch better football. Alums such as myself who went to one of the 'lesser' schools could still delight at the success of our basketball, women's gymnastics and soccer teams, and ski teams...and hope that our schools would start men's soccer programs. Football players, of course, wouldn't have to have their focus on their jobs diluted by having to attend classes. Number of years on the team would be controlled as it is in the NFL...a mixture of better players being recruited and losing players to other teams or to the NFL. The NFL could become a source of revenue through the establishment of transfer fees. Best of all, our stated values of the sanctity of the scholar athelete would have the current source of hypocracy removed as a threat. And schools that couldn't make it in the business of football could always establish a club program to keep rivalries with other schools alive.
Hi im a member of WMU soccer team and this year was one that we all needed. coming off a year where we were 3-14-2 and being one of the teams that could have gotten cut, it was a good year. with that being said i do have friends on the track team, ones from Canada also and it was hard to be extremely happy when people you know would no longer enjoy their sport the same way i do.