National Media -- ESPN's Gene Woj

[AO]

Why is any and all criticism of Title IX automatically labelled "trite bashing"?
Sounds like we have a forbidden topic. One that, in modern America, if you talk about this we can label it "hate speech" and vilify the critic without a substantial argument. Sort of like labeling someone racist, sexist, or homophobic. You call them those names because you can't make a decent argument against the criticism leveled against the protected group.

My family is a direct benefactor of Title IX as my sister was a hell of an athlete and Ithaca added teams while she was there. But I also see failure stories where schools shut down men's programs rather than open new avenues for women. Of course this kind if balanced observation is hate speech because we know that Title IX has been double plus good and only double plus good. Only Goldstein and his evil hidden minions would dare think otherwise.

It's trite because it was:

A. Irrelevant to the topic at hand. This is not the venue for Title IX issues.
B. We've heard it all before. There was no new information.

Sounds like someone is prickly...adjust your tin foil, sir.

I would think you would be at risk of a Title IX lawsuit if the Grambling built a new Football facility and left the girls in the building with the mold, mildew and broken floors.

In one specific instance, Title IX was instrumental in a court case involving Louisiana State University (LSU). In 1996, a federal court referenced Title IX in ruling that LSU violated the civil rights of female athletes by refusing to fund a trip to a women's volleyball tournament in Hawaii, when earlier in the year, travel for a men's basketball tournament was funded.[25] Since this ruling, LSU has made changes in its athletic programs to achieve compliance.

[mattvsmith]

Why is any and all criticism of Title IX automatically labelled "trite bashing"?
Sounds like we have a forbidden topic. One that, in modern America, if you talk about this we can label it "hate speech" and vilify the critic without a substantial argument. Sort of like labeling someone racist, sexist, or homophobic. You call them those names because you can't make a decent argument against the criticism leveled against the protected group.

My family is a direct benefactor of Title IX as my sister was a hell of an athlete and Ithaca added teams while she was there. But I also see failure stories where schools shut down men's programs rather than open new avenues for women. Of course this kind if balanced observation is hate speech because we know that Title IX has been double plus good and only double plus good. Only Goldstein and his evil hidden minions would dare think otherwise.

Nice rant.  Of course, totally off-topic for smed's point.

Grambling as an institution is in severe danger of going belly-up very soon.  Title IX is the least of their worries.  One thing I think they are grossly underutilizing is their name recognition among older folks.  Their fb team could make millions in guarantees from big-time schools to serve as cannon-fodder; and who knows, they might pull an Appalachian State!

Mrs Ypsi. I knew I could count on the gelding of the UP to chime in. Your blouse has a stain on it. You must have spilled some sauce while dining with your red hat club. I think it's on your skirt, too. Schmendrick.

[wabndy]

Motion to close.

[mattvsmith]

Motion to close.

Second.

[smedindy]

Why is any and all criticism of Title IX automatically labelled "trite bashing"?
Sounds like we have a forbidden topic. One that, in modern America, if you talk about this we can label it "hate speech" and vilify the critic without a substantial argument. Sort of like labeling someone racist, sexist, or homophobic. You call them those names because you can't make a decent argument against the criticism leveled against the protected group.

My family is a direct benefactor of Title IX as my sister was a hell of an athlete and Ithaca added teams while she was there. But I also see failure stories where schools shut down men's programs rather than open new avenues for women. Of course this kind if balanced observation is hate speech because we know that Title IX has been double plus good and only double plus good. Only Goldstein and his evil hidden minions would dare think otherwise.

It's trite because it was:

A. Irrelevant to the topic at hand. This is not the venue for Title IX issues.
B. We've heard it all before. There was no new information.

Sounds like someone is prickly...adjust your tin foil, sir.

I would think you would be at risk of a Title IX lawsuit if the Grambling built a new Football facility and left the girls in the building with the mold, mildew and broken floors.

In one specific instance, Title IX was instrumental in a court case involving Louisiana State University (LSU). In 1996, a federal court referenced Title IX in ruling that LSU violated the civil rights of female athletes by refusing to fund a trip to a women's volleyball tournament in Hawaii, when earlier in the year, travel for a men's basketball tournament was funded.[25] Since this ruling, LSU has made changes in its athletic programs to achieve compliance.

Well, there's no way they'd do that, of course. They don't want a new football facility - just some laundry and general maintenance.

I'm sure the other sports have the same complaints.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Motion to close.

Second.

Third. 

I like all you guys.  Don't start fighting. 

[AO]

Well, there's no way they'd do that, of course. They don't want a new football facility - just some laundry and general maintenance.

I'm sure the other sports have the same complaints.

Not all sports are created equally.  This would not get to ESPN if the women's soccer team was the one with the complaints.  Without Title IX, the women's soccer program might be a club team and Grambling might be able to better maintain their buildings.  Obviously Grambling is struggling for a variety of reasons, but with a stressed budget you have to look at the value of all your teams compared to their expenses.

I still think the SWAC could make it in D3.  How long can they stand to be completely uncompetitive in their division?  Are they like the NESCAC and content to only measure themselves against their own conference?

[jknezek]

Not all sports are created equally.  This would not get to ESPN if the women's soccer team was the one with the complaints.  Without Title IX, the women's soccer program might be a club team and Grambling might be able to better maintain their buildings.  Obviously Grambling is struggling for a variety of reasons, but with a stressed budget you have to look at the value of all your teams compared to their expenses.

I still think the SWAC could make it in D3.  How long can they stand to be completely uncompetitive in their division?  Are they like the NESCAC and content to only measure themselves against their own conference?

Actually yes. The SWAC, like the NESCAC and Ivy League, does not send it's football champion to the FCS playoffs. Many SWAC schools, however, do play the paycheck game annually that helps boost revenues. Grambling seems to do that less frequently. The MEAC, also made up primarily of HBCUs, does send teams to the playoffs.

[smedindy]

Well, there's no way they'd do that, of course. They don't want a new football facility - just some laundry and general maintenance.

I'm sure the other sports have the same complaints.

Not all sports are created equally.  This would not get to ESPN if the women's soccer team was the one with the complaints.  Without Title IX, the women's soccer program might be a club team and Grambling might be able to better maintain their buildings.  Obviously Grambling is struggling for a variety of reasons, but with a stressed budget you have to look at the value of all your teams compared to their expenses.

I still think the SWAC could make it in D3.  How long can they stand to be completely uncompetitive in their division?  Are they like the NESCAC and content to only measure themselves against their own conference?

Oh, they would get to Deadspin and the Big Lead, no doubt. The reason it's a story is not necessarily because it's football. It's GRAMBLING football, home of Eddie Robinson - and Doug Williams. Williams was a big part of the story. For those other blogs, it would be a sports story and there'd be outrage, sure, about a walkout, etc. If, say, a team at Hamline or Whitworth went on strike for similar issues, it'd be a story. It was a big story because it's Grambling.

The Bayou Classic is a game that the SWAC chooses instead of the playoffs. Since it's always November 30, and features two SWAC teams, the league doesn't go to the playoffs lest Grambling or Southern are their representatives. They also have their own league championship in December since 1999, when the SWAC split into divisions.

[smedindy]

Not all sports are created equally.  This would not get to ESPN if the women's soccer team was the one with the complaints.  Without Title IX, the women's soccer program might be a club team and Grambling might be able to better maintain their buildings.  Obviously Grambling is struggling for a variety of reasons, but with a stressed budget you have to look at the value of all your teams compared to their expenses.

I still think the SWAC could make it in D3.  How long can they stand to be completely uncompetitive in their division?  Are they like the NESCAC and content to only measure themselves against their own conference?

Actually yes. The SWAC, like the NESCAC and Ivy League, does not send it's football champion to the FCS playoffs. Many SWAC schools, however, do play the paycheck game annually that helps boost revenues. Grambling seems to do that less frequently. The MEAC, also made up primarily of HBCUs, does send teams to the playoffs.

They're not really un-competitive in D-1AA. In most sports, the SWAC and MEAC are tomato cans during the non-conference season to make money. They play an insane amount of road games. But in football, against D-1AA teams, they're OK.

[AO]

Not all sports are created equally.  This would not get to ESPN if the women's soccer team was the one with the complaints.  Without Title IX, the women's soccer program might be a club team and Grambling might be able to better maintain their buildings.  Obviously Grambling is struggling for a variety of reasons, but with a stressed budget you have to look at the value of all your teams compared to their expenses.

I still think the SWAC could make it in D3.  How long can they stand to be completely uncompetitive in their division?  Are they like the NESCAC and content to only measure themselves against their own conference?

Actually yes. The SWAC, like the NESCAC and Ivy League, does not send it's football champion to the FCS playoffs. Many SWAC schools, however, do play the paycheck game annually that helps boost revenues. Grambling seems to do that less frequently. The MEAC, also made up primarily of HBCUs, does send teams to the playoffs.

They're not really un-competitive in D-1AA. In most sports, the SWAC and MEAC are tomato cans during the non-conference season to make money. They play an insane amount of road games. But in football, against D-1AA teams, they're OK.

Unlike the Ivy League and NESCAC, the SWAC used to allow teams to accept at large bids.  They are 0-19 in the playoffs.  I suppose you can consider them "ok" if you compare them to the non-scholarship leagues.

[smedindy]

Is that record relevant? Last playoff appearances:

Alcorn State 1994
Grambling 1989
Jackson State 1997
Miss. Valley St. 1984

I don't think any results in the last decade are really relevant as to the strength of the conference.

[AO]

Is that record relevant? Last playoff appearances:

Alcorn State 1994
Grambling 1989
Jackson State 1997
Miss. Valley St. 1984

I don't think any results in the last decade are really relevant as to the strength of the conference.

They don't have anybody rated in the top 25 and Massey puts their top rated team Jackson St. at #62 out of 127 and ranks the conference only above the non-scholarship Pioneer league.  The playoffs were at 20 teams until expanding to 24 this year; I'd say it's unlikely they would have won any games had they continued to keep playing them.  Deciding not to send teams to the playoffs certainly didn't improve their teams.

[smedindy]

It doesn't mean that they don't belong in 1-AA.

Again, they would LOSE a lot of revenue moving to D-3 from the NCAA basketball tournament AND being tomato cans in hoops. If their champ can pull an upset, that's big money for the league.

[AO]

It doesn't mean that they don't belong in 1-AA.

Again, they would LOSE a lot of revenue moving to D-3 from the NCAA basketball tournament AND being tomato cans in hoops. If their champ can pull an upset, that's big money for the league.

ESPN ranked Grambling dead last today in hoops.  351 out of 351.  http://insider.espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9859613/projections-all-351-division-teams-college-basketball. Now that would be an upset!