• Attention: Register today to view CanesInSight Ad-Free for 7 days.

OT: Clemson wants fewer black students

db305

doodoo brown
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
3,393
Are tennis, golf, swimming, and soccer revenue sports? None of the Olympic sports are. Even baseball isn't a revenue sport at a majority of schools.

People see only the narrative they want to see.

they lose revenue but are also title ix buffer sports so they can't be cut. do you think we have a rowing team because we want to be good at rowing? we have it to allow our athletic department to exist. same reason we don't have men's soccer, golf, or swimming when we could probably do really well in all of those sports.

notice that clemson is only cutting the men's track and cross country program? if they cut the women's team they'd mess up their title ix compliance.
 

Number1CanesFan

Sophomore
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Messages
5,902
they lose revenue but are also title ix buffer sports so they can't be cut. do you think we have a rowing team because we want to be good at rowing? we have it to allow our athletic department to exist. same reason we don't have men's soccer, golf, or swimming when we could probably do really well in all of those sports.

notice that clemson is only cutting the men's track and cross country program? if they cut the women's team they'd mess up their title ix compliance.
That was a given and I know all about Title 9. They have to have the same scholarships for women as men which is why I didn't coment on any women's Olympic sports.

It's just sad because the money is there in the athletic program. You think Clemson could dpend $2 million less on football? It not a about football being the top revenue sport so that they spend all the money on footbal facilities and coaches. Spread some of the money around.

I do think there's a racial imbalance here. Track and Cross Country have zero upkeep of facilities. The track is already there. The women have a track team. Hell, have the women's coach handle both teams as many schools do. As I pointed out there are plenty of other men's Olympic sports teams that don't bring in revenue that they are not touching. This just smells.
 

db305

doodoo brown
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
3,393
That was a given and I know all about Title 9. They have to have the same scholarships for women as men which is why I didn't coment on any women's Olympic sports.

It's just sad because the money is there in the athletic program. You think Clemson could dpend $2 million less on football? It not a about football being the top revenue sport so that they spend all the money on footbal facilities and coaches. Spread some of the money around.

I do think there's a racial imbalance here. Track and Cross Country have zero upkeep of facilities. The track is already there. The women have a track team. Hell, have the women's coach handle both teams as many schools do. As I pointed out there are plenty of other men's Olympic sports teams that don't bring in revenue that they are not touching. This just smells.

same scholarships for men and women is not what title ix mandates, so you're already wrong. it requires equal opportunity and money proportional to participation for scholarships, and those numbers are based on the undergraduate student body's gender makeup. i know this because i've been working in higher ed for almost a decade now, half of those years for a d1 athletic program, and the other half also requiring title ix reporting based on the student orgs that i was responsible for. a lot of title ix as applied to athletics is up for interpretation because it's a very nebulously-written rule.

why would clemson spend less on football when it's bringing the university money hand over foot? college football is an arms race and every dollar matters. you're also not privy to how many donations are given exclusively for the football team.

how is there a racial imbalance when over half of the guys losing out in track are white? there's a really easy explanation for track over their other men's olympic sports: there are twice as many guys on track/cross country than tennis and golf combined. the only other sport that could be argued is soccer, and that team is 1/3 black.
 

Number1CanesFan

Sophomore
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Messages
5,902
same scholarships for men and women is not what title ix mandates, so you're already wrong. it requires equal opportunity and money proportional to participation for scholarships, and those numbers are based on the undergraduate student body's gender makeup. i know this because i've been working in higher ed for almost a decade now, half of those years for a d1 athletic program, and the other half also requiring title ix reporting based on the student orgs that i was responsible for. a lot of title ix as applied to athletics is up for interpretation because it's a very nebulously-written rule.

why would clemson spend less on football when it's bringing the university money hand over foot? college football is an arms race and every dollar matters. you're also not privy to how many donations are given exclusively for the football team.

how is there a racial imbalance when over half of the guys losing out in track are white? there's a really easy explanation for track over their other men's olympic sports: there are twice as many guys on track/cross country than tennis and golf combined. the only other sport that could be argued is soccer, and that team is 1/3 black.
They don't need to spend all thst money on football. You think they wouldn't get the same results with a few million less spent?

See the bigger picture.
 

db305

doodoo brown
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
3,393
They don't need to spend all thst money on football. You think they wouldn't get the same results with a few million less spent?

See the bigger picture.
i think that the money spent on college football is absurd and should be reigned in, but they're free to do what they think is best for the school and the athletic department as a whole. but nice way to keep shifting your argument and grasping at straws.

at the end of the day, the only people that care about men's track at clemson are the guys at clemson that are having their sport cut and apparently some canes fans. i hope that they're not stupid enough to actually take this to court when the department of education laughs their complaint into the trash can. it's not like they're getting kicked out of school when the sport is cut.
 

Number1CanesFan

Sophomore
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Messages
5,902
i think that the money spent on college football is absurd and should be reigned in, but they're free to do what they think is best for the school and the athletic department as a whole. but nice way to keep shifting your argument and grasping at straws.

at the end of the day, the only people that care about men's track at clemson are the guys at clemson that are having their sport cut and apparently some canes fans. i hope that they're not stupid enough to actually take this to court when the department of education laughs their complaint into the trash can.
Obviously they've free to do whatever they want to do.

Whether there is a racial component to the decision making is debatable. The net outcome isn't. As an African American, I can tell you this won't sit well in the state of South Carolina that's over 1/3 African American.
 

db305

doodoo brown
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
3,393
Obviously they've free to do whatever they want to do.

Whether there is a racial component to the decision making is debatable. The net outcome isn't. As an African American, I can tell you this won't sit well in the state of South Carolina that's over 1/3 African American.

the net outcome is what? a sport that a handful of people followed got cut for financial reasons and clemson football remains the second best program in the country? 1/3 of the state of south carolina clearly doesn't give a **** because this was decided in november and hasn't been in the news since then.
 

Empirical Cane

We are what we repeatedly do.
Joined
Sep 3, 2018
Messages
10,738
same scholarships for men and women is not what title ix mandates, so you're already wrong. it requires equal opportunity and money proportional to participation for scholarships, and those numbers are based on the undergraduate student body's gender makeup. i know this because i've been working in higher ed for almost a decade now, half of those years for a d1 athletic program, and the other half also requiring title ix reporting based on the student orgs that i was responsible for. a lot of title ix as applied to athletics is up for interpretation because it's a very nebulously-written rule.

why would clemson spend less on football when it's bringing the university money hand over foot? college football is an arms race and every dollar matters. you're also not privy to how many donations are given exclusively for the football team.

how is there a racial imbalance when over half of the guys losing out in track are white? there's a really easy explanation for track over their other men's olympic sports: there are twice as many guys on track/cross country than tennis and golf combined. the only other sport that could be argued is soccer, and that team is 1/3 black.
Adult👆
 

MainLineCane

No More Excuses / Flush ALL the 🤡 Lawyers
Joined
Oct 11, 2017
Messages
3,368
Thought Clemson had a well funded athletic department. Wrong again. Cutting track and field seems pretty core. HSs even pay for that. 🤔

Hmmm the cost of track shoes, skimpy air resistant uniforms, plus the one time costs of some hurdles, discus, hammer, equals a couple of grand....probably can be considered sunk costs

Greyhounding or Ubering those speedy twits to various meets equals another couple of grand.

The running track is already a sunk cost as is the weight rooms

🤔

Hmmm So basically was the choice between an ENTIRE SPORTS PROGRAM. VERSUS the cost of ONE BAG for a 4 star football prospect.

Guess that loss in last year's playoffs stung Clemson more than we realized......especially if they thought one additional good player was the difference between them being an also ran or National Champions. Seems real chintzy.

But Who knows??

Anyway its doubtful that the Tigers will be missed in track competition. Also, it's a help when recruiting speedy or cockstrong athletes helping them stay in shape during the offseason so basically ...SO ANYTHING that can slow Clemson's football recruiting advantages is a plus in my mind.
 
Top