LHU adding Women's Wrestling

[Mikefln]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

Waited all day for that exact comment.

Money talks. Wrestling walked.

As for baseball ... so long as they treat it like an intramural sport ... so be it.

Name 1 program in the PSAC that actually turns a profit from operating. Tuition from the players do not count. I bet there are less than 10 that actually turn profits and I am willing to bet that the Wrestling team of Lock Haven is at the top of the list.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

Name 1 program in the PSAC that actually turns a profit from operating. Tuition from the players do not count. I bet there are less than 10 that actually turn profits and I am willing to bet that the Wrestling team of Lock Haven is at the top of the list.

Most athletic departments in D1 don't even turn a profit.

In the Lock Haven example ... they could (should) have cut football 20 years ago. They could have pumped all that money in to wrestling. Instead, they keep putting that dumpster fire of a team out there year after year.

Keep in mind this is D2. Outside the few of us on here who actually care ... the rest of the world views this level as glorified high school sports.

You could name a few 'programs' within the PSAC that are probably (technically) profitable -- IUP basketball, Slippery Rock football, etc. They both have very large followings and have some real heavy donors. But, as a whole, none of the 'athletic departments' operate in the black. D2 sports are financial losers. The 'non-revenue' sports are a total drain on the athletic budget. But, overall, they keep kids enrolled.

[Mikefln]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

Most athletic departments in D1 don't even turn a profit.

In the Lock Haven example ... they could (should) have cut football 20 years ago. They could have pumped all that money in to wrestling. Instead, they keep putting that dumpster fire of a team out there year after year.

Keep in mind this is D2. Outside the few of us on here who actually care ... the rest of the world views this level as glorified high school sports.

You could name a few 'programs' within the PSAC that are probably (technically) profitable -- IUP basketball, Slippery Rock football, etc. They both have very large followings and have some real heavy donors. But, as a whole, none of the 'athletic departments' operate in the black. D2 sports are financial losers. The 'non-revenue' sports are a total drain on the athletic budget. But, overall, they keep kids enrolled.

Exactly, that was my point. So I don't want to hear crap that Money Talks, because if that was the case there would be no sports at all outside of P5 football and basketball. There would be no D2 or D3 sports. There would be no womens sports unless there was literally like a 6-10 team Womens Basketball league. There would be no other college sport other than P5 football and D1 mens Basketball. All the other sports would have less than 10 schools participating. So since Title IX is not about profitability but opportunity, then they are destroying opportunity from one group and giving it to another group. I think that sucks, the law should have been written in a way that encourages more opportunity for women without destroying it for men. Exempting football or only partially counting the numbers would have helped a lot in that. Again in my example about the hospitality industry, they made exemptions for bars. It is not out of the realm to do so.

[Fightingscot82]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

If profits was the goal, then outside of a program here and there, there would be no sports outside of P5 football and men's basketball. There literally would not be a D2 or D3 division, and there would be no womens' sports, because too few would field teams as again most lose money upfront. They only make money through tuition that would not otherwise be there. At best most sports break even or come close to that for net profit (i.e. the actual profit, not back end profit like tuition). Also Duquesne got rid of their wrestling, baseball, and I forget what else and all of them had support. Also this law gets rid of tools the bolster male enrollment figures. Brilliant. When talking about D2 and D3, football and these other sports, they are profitable for the schools through tuition that it would not otherwise have. Most college teams in D2 and D3 have over 100 players, and most players (probably 75 or more of them) get next to nothing in athletic aid. Schools like Seton Hill, Wheeling Jesuit (football/wrestling) and St. Vincent (football) have added men's sports to bolster male enrollment so they can get the tuition money. Title IX is taking a tool away from schools at a time enrollment is going down.

Seton Hill added football as a strategy to transition from all female to co-ed. Wheeling Jesuit and St. Vincent added football to boost enrollment. Private schools are really different though because its generally less work to start a sport because they don't have to go out and raise the scholarship money. Every scholarship dollar at IUP is a real dollar raised by donations or some other revenue stream. Every scholarship dollar at Wheeling Jesuit is merely a discount scheme like "recent college grad" $500 off at the local Chevy dealer.

[Fightingscot82]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

Exactly, that was my point. So I don't want to hear crap that Money Talks, because if that was the case there would be no sports at all outside of P5 football and basketball. There would be no D2 or D3 sports. There would be no womens sports unless there was literally like a 6-10 team Womens Basketball league. There would be no other college sport other than P5 football and D1 mens Basketball. All the other sports would have less than 10 schools participating. So since Title IX is not about profitability but opportunity, then they are destroying opportunity from one group and giving it to another group. I think that sucks, the law should have been written in a way that encourages more opportunity for women without destroying it for men. Exempting football or only partially counting the numbers would have helped a lot in that. Again in my example about the hospitality industry, they made exemptions for bars. It is not out of the realm to do so.

Money talks from an alumni donations perspective. Minor college athletics survive in spite of P/L redness because of two things: they drive enrollment and they drive alumni engagement. On the budget sheet athletics on the small scale look like money losers but that's also additional students choosing Slippery Rock and bringing their tuition dollars with them. On the flipside, a lot of alumni will send in $100 to the football team before they send $100 without strings attached. For example, athletic fundraising accounts for 10-20% of all fundraising in a given year and an even greater share of smaller donations.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

Exactly, that was my point. So I don't want to hear crap that Money Talks, because if that was the case there would be no sports at all outside of P5 football and basketball. There would be no D2 or D3 sports. There would be no womens sports unless there was literally like a 6-10 team Womens Basketball league. There would be no other college sport other than P5 football and D1 mens Basketball. All the other sports would have less than 10 schools participating. So since Title IX is not about profitability but opportunity, then they are destroying opportunity from one group and giving it to another group. I think that sucks, the law should have been written in a way that encourages more opportunity for women without destroying it for men. Exempting football or only partially counting the numbers would have helped a lot in that. Again in my example about the hospitality industry, they made exemptions for bars. It is not out of the realm to do so.

Yes, but at IUP money did talk. It walked over to football and men's basketball. The other sports were cut or just ignored.

All the other sports you're talking about put paying customers (students) on campus. That's the real reason they exist ... not for the 23 people who watch a wrestling match at UPJ.

BTW, money ALWAYS does the talking.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

Seton Hill added football as a strategy to transition from all female to co-ed. Wheeling Jesuit and St. Vincent added football to boost enrollment. Private schools are really different though because its generally less work to start a sport because they don't have to go out and raise the scholarship money. Every scholarship dollar at IUP is a real dollar raised by donations or some other revenue stream. Every scholarship dollar at Wheeling Jesuit is merely a discount scheme like "recent college grad" $500 off at the local Chevy dealer.

That's worked out pretty well so far for Wheeling Jesuit. Or, so I hear.

[iupgroundhog]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

BTW, money ALWAYS does the talking.

Money and Title IX. But not necessarily in that order.

[Mikefln]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

Yes, but at IUP money did talk. It walked over to football and men's basketball. The other sports were cut or just ignored.

All the other sports you're talking about put paying customers (students) on campus. That's the real reason they exist ... not for the 23 people who watch a wrestling match at UPJ.

BTW, money ALWAYS does the talking.

Again, exactly what I said only stated in a different manner.

[Mikefln]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

Money talks from an alumni donations perspective. Minor college athletics survive in spite of P/L redness because of two things: they drive enrollment and they drive alumni engagement. On the budget sheet athletics on the small scale look like money losers but that's also additional students choosing Slippery Rock and bringing their tuition dollars with them. On the flipside, a lot of alumni will send in $100 to the football team before they send $100 without strings attached. For example, athletic fundraising accounts for 10-20% of all fundraising in a given year and an even greater share of smaller donations.

Basically what I stated, only in a different manner and with a few more details.

[iupgroundhog]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

Women's Wrestling named as an Emerging Sport by the NCAA for all 3 NCAA divisions.

http://intermatwrestle.com/articles/21986

http://intermatwrestle.com/articles/21985

[Horror Child]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

In my experience schools have cut programs that are under supported. Not under performing - under supported. So when IUP cut wrestling it wasn't because IUP wrestling had the worst record - it was because it wasn't drawing the type of support IUP basketball or football gets. If IUP's enrollment continues to shift toward more women (and demographic data suggests that its likely) expect baseball to be next.

[iupgroundhog]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

That's a static view. When I was growing up in the '60's and '70's I was socialized to play sports. All the guys were, pretty much. Not too many girls, though, just the "tomboys."

Fast forward 20 years, it's all changing. Another 20 years it changes more. And on and on.

That is actually one of the key objectives for Title IX as it applies to sports participation. To increase it for the girls.

[Mikefln]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

That is actually one of the key objectives for Title IX as it applies to sports participation. To increase it for the girls.

I (and most people I know) have no problem with that. The problem is the way it is written allowed it to be at the expense of men sports opportunities.

[Fightingscot82]

Re: LHU adding Women's Wrestling

I (and most people I know) have no problem with that. The problem is the way it is written allowed it to be at the expense of men sports opportunities.

It was always meant to be at the expense of men's opportunities. Equal protection means equal access and women were getting significantly less access and treatment.

I actually thought about it over the weekend while reading a book that mentioned the interpretations of Title IX. Equality should mean that a school has around the same number of participation numbers for men and women. However, most schools have been using an equity measure to resemble enrollment (most schools are ~55% female). The federal law only says equal but case law has successfully shifted it to equitable.

So schools either have to get more men to enroll (using the equity model) or argue for a full split of opportunity (using the equality model). I feel like its a Catch 22 situation - who do you want to piss off? The bitter baseball and wrestling alumni are less likely to sue than the women wanting their interpretation to become practice.