What will it take for UT to start a wrestling program

[SoonerNorth]

Texas High School wrestling has come such a looooong way, the next step is for UT to step up and make it a Varsity sport.

It wouldn't take long before The State of wrestling in Texas is on par with states who have wrestled for years and years!

 

[GuaranteedFresh!]

What would it take? Proof of positive $$$ flow.
It doesn't matter to me with or without because it's not a sport I'm interested in or would follow. We didn't have it at my school growing up so the only wrestling we knew of involved Hulk Hogan & Andre the giant on Saturdays.

 

[speedstrength]

Title IX. We added crew, soccer and softball in 96 because we would have lost badly in court. I just can't see us adding wrestling plus one or two more non revenue sports.

 

[JonBinge]

It would be awesome. It's the toughest collegiate sport there is.

 

[LonghornMM]

Title IX. We added crew, soccer and softball in 96 because we would have lost badly in court. I just can't see us adding wrestling plus one or two more non revenue sports.

This right here is why wrestling won't be added.

 

[MiccoMacey]

It would if there were other women sports that could be added. Wrestling is extremely non-expensive once started, and generally easy to manage due to the small teams (only 9.9 scholarships limit).

It's true wrestling has grown immensely in the northern part of Texas (Dallas and up), and already has a small historical standing in the wrestling community (Brandon Slay from Tascosa High won the Gold medal in the 2000 Olympics, Bo Nickal from Allen jut won the NCAA wrestling national championships this year, plus others). I'd kill to get Texas or Texas A&M into developing a wrestling program.

 

[speedstrength]

Scholarships aren't the biggest expense. Coaching staff, recruiting budget, practice space (would most likely have to rent space from rec sports) travel budget. Then take that and multiply by 2 or 3 and you are looking at a few hundred thousand in losses per year.

 

[mr6369m]

Y'all do know there is both men's AND women's wrestling don't you?

In fact, WOMEN'S wrestling in Texas is honestly recruited harder than guys.

Our Texas girls...they can kick some ass against other wrestlers from other States.

They are recruited heavily.

Jordan Burroughs said if he had a school he would love to coach at he said it would be in Texas....and he was serious.

And the wrestlers in Texas are doing amazing against other wrestlers in other States.

My son wrestled in the Reno Worlds last year and one of the kids he beat was a California State Champion that dropped down to his weight class.

Arizona State's coaches want to look at him right now.......Oh how he would love to stay in Texas.

 

[TX1972]

Do any of you know the role of Hillary Clinton in Title IX ? When Bill was president, Hillary decided that Title IX should meet numerical equality. She chose Brown as a test case. Brown had a long standing policy of helping students participate in almost any sport. No "athletic" scholarships. Problem: men and women, left to their own devices, don't participate in sports in the same proportions. Surprisingly enough, men are much more interested in athletics than women. So, men's sports must not consume more than their share of resources. Thus, men's sports that do not generate revenue to support an equivalent number of female athletes must be cut, or lose federal funds.

 

[mr6369m]

Do any of you know the role of Hillary Clinton in Title IX ? When Bill was president, Hillary decided that Title IX should meet numerical equality. She chose Brown as a test case. Brown had a long standing policy of helping students participate in almost any sport. No "athletic" scholarships. Problem: men and women, left to their own devices, don't participate in sports in the same proportions. Surprisingly enough, men are much more interested in athletics than women. So, men's sports must not consume more than their share of resources. Thus, men's sports that do not generate revenue to support an equivalent number of female athletes must be cut, or lose federal funds.

And I think she did a great thing.

Women DO need more sports opportunities than what is/was given.

It's pretty obvious if we leave it up to the schools that won't happen.

Back then, maybe the interest was not as strong....no way you say that in this day and age.

Women's sports is very strong and participation is very high across the board.

 

[TX1972]

And I think she did a great thing.

Women DO need more sports opportunities than what is/was given.
Have you ever watched a big women's
It's pretty obvious if we leave it up to the schools that won't happen.

Back then, maybe the interest was not as strong....no way you say that in this day and age.

Women's sports is very strong and participation is very high across the board.

 

[TX1972]

So it's okay to kill all men's minor sports so we can have women's rowing? My girls all played elite tennis and it was good for them. They were all 1 or 2 on the team. To prepare for a big match, coach would have them play the 5 or 6 boys. The boys would wax them. After team practice, the girls would study. The boys would play another 2 hours. Brown's policy was far better than Hillary's.

 

[speedstrength]

Hillary Clinton had nothing to do with Brown. They downgraded two women's sports from varsity to club. They were sued in Federal Court under title IX by some of the students at Brown who were on the affected teams and they lost. The department of education office of civil rights offered new guidance based on the judge's ruling.

 

[DrinkToIt]

If we add a women's wrestling team then we can add a mens soccer team. Im down with that.

 

[LonghornMM]

Title IX sucks. There is very little interest in women's collegiate sports and none of them generate any revenue, with the exception of UConn basketball. It is what it is though.

 

[speedstrength]

Title IX sucks. There is very little interest in women's collegiate sports and none of them generate any revenue, with the exception of UConn basketball. It is what it is though.

That has to be the stupidest thing you have ever pounded out of your keyboard. As a father of two girls I can tell you that Title IX does not suck and is one of the most important pieces of legislation ever enacted for women. What is says is that education programs can't discriminate against them based on their gender. In the 50's and 60's women didn't really play sports because it was thought that they didn't have an interest in sports, they were too fragile or that they couldn't thrive in a competitive environment. Well what we saw was that once given the opportunity young girls and women did want to compete, they weren't too fragile and they could thrive in competitive environments.

Post Title IX the number of girls who participated in sports exploded and we discovered some really interesting things about how sports can facilitate the character development of young women. Did you know that young women who regularly participate in sports delay their first sexual encounter longer than women who don't participate in sports. They are also less likely to get pregnant before they get married, and are less likely to become victims of domestic and sexual violence and they are more likely to complete high school and college. And yes the implementation of title IX has negatively impacted some men's programs but as a whole its overall negative impact on men has been dwarfed by the positive impact on growth and development of girls and women.

 

[LonghornMM]

That's your opinion and we can agree to disagree. Maybe it's stupid to you, but to most of people it isn't. Title IX very much negatively affected men's collegiate sports because of the requirements and financial burden that it placed on collegiate athletic programs. Fact is, people want to see meaningful sports played at the highest level, not women's rowing, bowling, field hockey, lacrosse, soccer, water polo, equestrian, or rugby.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that women's sports aren't important. Traditional women's sports like basketball, volleyball, track, golf, softball, tennis are fine, but to force schools to add obscure women's sports just to meet a quota, while eliminating men's sports, is absurd. 99% of women's sports are non-revenue generating and there is very limited public interest/support. IMO, there was nothing wrong with the balance of men's/women's collegiate sports before Title IX. Sadly and unfortunately, it is a reflection of the times and political correctness.

 

[UTGrad87]

I've always been of the opinion that if the free market doesn't support a sport financially then an administration or student body should have the right to sheet can it. Don't MAKE one group of people pay for another group . . . hell, put it up for a vote to the student body and detail out the costs and impacts to each student if they have the sport and if they don't.

 

[HornsRuleU]

That's your opinion and we can agree to disagree. Maybe it's stupid to you, but to most of people it isn't. Title IX very much negatively affected men's collegiate sports because of the requirements and financial burden that it placed on collegiate athletic programs. Fact is, people want to see meaningful sports played at the highest level, not women's rowing, bowling, field hockey, lacrosse, soccer, water polo, equestrian, or rugby.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that women's sports aren't important. Traditional women's sports like basketball, volleyball, track, golf, softball, tennis are fine, but to force schools to add obscure women's sports just to meet a quota, while eliminating men's sports, is absurd. 99% of women's sports are non-revenue generating and there is very limited public interest/support. IMO, there was nothing wrong with the balance of men's/women's collegiate sports before Title IX. Sadly and unfortunately, it is a reflection of the times and political correctness.

Well, your opinion is dead wrong. Sports are all about all people, not just males. You don't have to know the significance of "261" to know that.

 

[LonghornMM]

Well, your opinion is dead wrong. Sports are all about all people, not just males. You don't have to know the significance of "261" to know that.

Don't put words in my mouth. Where did I ever say that sports is all about males? My point is that having a quota on women's sports just to have the exact same number of men's and women's sports, is absurd. I'm all for the core/traditional women's sports mentioned above, but to add additional, obscure women's sports that no one cares about and no one supports makes no sense.

 

[HornsRuleU]

Don't put words in my mouth. Where did I ever say that sports is all about males? My point is that having a quota on women's sports just to have the exact same number of men's and women's sports, is absurd. I'm all for the core/traditional women's sports mentioned above, but to add additional, obscure women's sports that no one cares about and no one supports makes no sense.

Fair enough. I hadn't read your whole post. But I still think that Title IX is vital to fairness for women, and protects their interests. The sports people care about can change. We could be caring about wrestling in a decade or three.

Do many of us care about swimming and diving, other than that it lights up the tower orange?

 

[mr6369m]

So it's okay to kill all men's minor sports so we can have women's rowing? My girls all played elite tennis and it was good for them. They were all 1 or 2 on the team. To prepare for a big match, coach would have them play the 5 or 6 boys. The boys would wax them. After team practice, the girls would study. The boys would play another 2 hours. Brown's policy was far better than Hillary's.

What on earth are you talking about??

Who said kill men's minor sports???

Have you seen how many different sports, both men and women that schools like Stanford have?

I am pretty sure UT can afford bringing on a sport that covers both men AND women's equally.

 

[mr6369m]

That's your opinion and we can agree to disagree. Maybe it's stupid to you, but to most of people it isn't. Title IX very much negatively affected men's collegiate sports because of the requirements and financial burden that it placed on collegiate athletic programs. Fact is, people want to see meaningful sports played at the highest level, not women's rowing, bowling, field hockey, lacrosse, soccer, water polo, equestrian, or rugby.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that women's sports aren't important. Traditional women's sports like basketball, volleyball, track, golf, softball, tennis are fine, but to force schools to add obscure women's sports just to meet a quota, while eliminating men's sports, is absurd. 99% of women's sports are non-revenue generating and there is very limited public interest/support. IMO, there was nothing wrong with the balance of men's/women's collegiate sports before Title IX. Sadly and unfortunately, it is a reflection of the times and political correctness.

Well genius, you do understand MOST sports PERIOD do not generate much if at all money with the exception of.....football.

How much money do you think our mens baseball team brings in?
How about basketball or even golf or track?

Again...UT can afford to add sports.

It's backward ass thinking that keeps us from keeping for the Director's cup year end and year out.

 

[Bwilk55]

Well genius, you do understand MOST sports PERIOD do not generate much if at all money with the exception of.....football.
How much money do you think our mens baseball team brings in?
How about basketball or even golf or track?

I have heard that the basketball team makes a modest profit while baseball breaks even. All other sports take a loss.

 

[LonghornMM]

Well genius, you do understand MOST sports PERIOD do not generate much if at all money with the exception of.....football.

How much money do you think our mens baseball team brings in?
How about basketball or even golf or track?

Again...UT can afford to add sports.

It's backward ass thinking that keeps us from keeping for the Director's cup year end and year out.

Settle down there, Sparky. Yes, I do understand that most sports, other than football, and sometimes basketball, aren't revenue generating. The amount of revenue from sport to sport varies from school to school.

 

[speedstrength]

Has title IX hurt men's sports? It's killed gymnastics and hurt wrestling. That's about it. For the most part schools are adding sports.

Are thier quotas for women's sports? No. The NCAA requires member instutions to sponsor a minimum number of sports based on classification. Title IX requires schools to offer opportunities based on the proportions of the student body.

 

[LonghornMM]

Title IX has effected men's sports. While it increased athletic opportunities for women, it reduced them for men. With the NCAA requiring institutions to add numerous women's non-revenue generating sports, it has taken away money that would have been available to core men's sports, which generally are much more popular, generate TV contracts and put fans in the seats. Instead, those funds now must be spread around to sports that drain the revenue of the athletic fund.

Between 1981 and 1999 university athletic departments cut 171 men's wrestling teams, 84 men's tennis teams, 56 men's gymnastics teams, 27 men's track teams, and 25 men's swimming teams. The most-dropped men's sports between 1987 and 2002 were as follows: Cross country (183), indoor track (180), golf (178), tennis (171), rowing (132), outdoor track (126), swimming (125) and wrestling (121).

Baseball has been affected as well:

University of Akron (discontinued 2015)
American University (discontinued 1986)
Boston University (discontinued 1995)
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga (aka "Chattanooga") (discontinued c. 1976)
Colgate University (discontinued 1996)
Colorado State University (discontinued 1992)
DePaul University
University of Denver (discontinued 1999)
Duquesne University (discontinued 2010)
Eastern Washington University (discontinued 1990)
Hampton University (discontinued 1972)
Howard University (discontinued 1999)
University of Idaho (discontinued 1980)
Idaho State University (discontinued 1974)
Iowa State University (discontinued 2002)
IUPUI (discontinued 2001)
Loyola University Maryland (discontinued 1979)
Loyola University Chicago
Marquette University
University of Missouri-Kansas City
University of Montana (discontinued 1972)
Morgan State University (discontinued 2001)
University of New Hampshire (discontinued 1998)
University of North Dakota (discontinued 2016)
University of North Texas (discontinued 1999)
University of Northern Iowa (discontinued 2009)
Northern Arizona University (discontinued 1981)
Portland State University (discontinued 1998)
Providence College (discontinued 1999)
St. Francis College (New York) (discontinued 2006)
Saint Francis University
Southern Methodist University (discontinued 1981)
Southern Utah University (discontinued 2012)
University of South Dakota (discontinued 2004)
Syracuse University (discontinued 1972)
Temple University (discontinued 2014)
Tennessee State University (discontinued 1993)
University of Tulsa (discontinued 1980)
University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP; discontinued 1985)
University of Vermont (discontinued 2009)
Weber State University (discontinued 1975)
University of Wisconsin–Madison (discontinued 1992)
University of Wyoming (discontinued 1996)

 

[speedstrength]

Look at the universities on that list. Football programs at some of those schools lose more money than all other sports combined. There are only a handful of football programs that make money. There are even fewer basketball progams that make money. If you really want to blame something for killing other sports it's football. No other sports comes close to the number of scholarships that football has.

 

[speedstrength]

Title IX has reduced opportunities for men. Myth.
In 71 there were 170k male athletes in 2012 there were 256k.

Title IX has eliminated men's programs. Myth
Approximately 2700 men's teams have been eliminated but 3700 teams have been added for a net gain of 1000 teams.

The truth is more men are participating on more teams than before title IX.

 

[LonghornMM]

Speed, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Hook'em!