LINKS
Home
Up
In Memoriam
What's the Buzz?
Embezzlement in Athletic Department
OU Sports Financials 2005-2006
Equity in Athletics - Great Lakes Chapter
Big Collegiate Sports vs All Other Sports
Reporting Suspected Violations
Title IX Information
AD Boeh: OU Compliant with Title IX
Unanswered Letters
Important Info for Athletes
Rallies and Other Actions
We're Organized - Join Us!
HELP US TAKE ACTION!
$277,550 Over Budget Spent In Mobile
VA Legislators Angry
The Issues
Developments
Articles and News Reports
Who are these dropped athletes?
Class, Dignity & Competitive Spirit
Lacrosse
Swimming & Diving
Track & Field
"Vision Ohio"
Reinstatement Success Stories
Parallel Efforts at Other Universities
Resources
OU Compliance
Links
PETITION
Please
sign our petition to save dropped OU sports. Click
here. If
your current circumstances or position with Ohio University do not require
anonymity, we
request that you sign with your name rather than as "Anonymous"
as some have. Thank you and thanks to the Women's Lacrosse blog
for setting up this petition.
MORE
LINKS
EMAIL
CONTACT FOR THIS SITE: SaveOUSports ATgmailDOTcom
| |
OFFICIAL REACTIONS TO OU'S DECISION TO
DROP VARSITY SPORTS
Whitten Blasts Ohio University President,
Athletics Director for "Bogus" Attempt to Cut Men's Swim Team -- February 2,
2007
An Interview with Phil Whitten, Executive Director of the
College Swimming Coaches Association of America.
[Bold type and font color emphasis, aside from paragraph
headings and questions, was inserted by SaveOUSports.Org]
By Jason Marsteller
PHOENIX, Arizona, February 2. TODAY, SwimmingWorldMagazine.com sat down with
Phil Whitten, the Executive Director of the College Swimming Coaches Association
of America (CSCAA), to discuss the recent decision announced by the Ohio
University administration to cut its men's swimming program along with men's
indoor and outdoor track and field and women's lacrosse.
What was your initial reaction to the cuts at Ohio University as we first
reported on Jan. 25?
My initial reaction was that it made absolutely no sense whatsoever. On
further investigation and refection, that initial reaction has been reinforced.
The University said [the cuts] were being done to comply with Title IX, and
because of a $4 million deficit the department has accumulated over the years.
Yes, that's what they said. Now let's look at the facts. Actually, there are
two major reasons why this decision fails to stand up to scrutiny. Let's look at
each of them.
First, the University is not out of compliance with Title IX according to
the Women's Sports Foundation, probably the leading advocate for Title IX
adherence. Last year, Ohio University ranked first out of the 119 Division I
schools in Title IX compliance. This year, it ranks 21st – still better than
more than 80 percent of Division I schools. So why does the athletic director
maintain that his department is not in compliance? I believe there are only two
possible explanations: Either his analysis was seriously flawed or there was a
deliberate attempt to misstate the facts.
As for the issue of the budget deficit, the second rationale: Yes, the Ohio
University Athletic Department has built up a $4 million deficit over the years.
This is not something that happened overnight. Didn't anyone notice?
Aside from that, you have to ask: what impact would cutting men's swimming have
on the deficit? It turns out that the incremental cost of having a men's swim
team -- in addition to the women's team -- comes to roughly $35,000 a year.
Let's see: at $35,000 a year, it would only take a bit more than 114 years to
erase the deficit. And, that's assuming zero inflation and zero interest on the
debt.
On top of that, we have learned that even as the A.D. is crying
"poverty," he plans to move on with building a $20 million indoor
football practice facility. When asked, he says "most" of the $20
million will come from "private donations." But he's unclear about how
much "most" is. It could be just pennies more than $10 million. Or it
might be 11 to 12 million, or maybe even 15. Whatever it is, it will only add to
the deficit, perhaps doubling or even tripling it.
As a former college professor, I would have to give the OU administration an
"F" for research and transparency.
There has been talk that the process by which the decision was made was
flawed. Is that so, and can you enlighten our readers on the issues with the
process as well as the reaction to those problems?
Sure. The process has been seriously flawed from the get-go. Like all
universities these days, OU has a specified, institutionalized process for
dealing with this type of issue. That process includes representation of the
students. At OU, that representation comes through its Student Athlete Advisory
Council. Yet, the administration ignored its own policy and deliberately
excluded the student-athlete reps. Why?
I understand that the students are so angry about both the decision, and the
deliberate exclusion of student input in the process, that they plan to hold a
rally today in support of the four teams and then march on the president's
residence.
In addition, the student government has stated that it will withhold the $1
million it contributes to the athletics budget if the sports are not reinstated.
The students are angry. Yes, they support the teams that the administration
wants to kill, but they are even angrier by the fact that they were cut out of
the process.
What is the CSCAA doing about this issue?
Well, in addition to suggesting to the coach, athletes and alumni ways of
responding to this threat, we plan on obtaining a number of documents and
e-mails regarding the decision, going back 17 months when this process first
began under the Ohio Public Records Act.
It should be interesting. During the last 17 months, the University has
consistently said it would not cut teams if the school was out of compliance
with Title IX. For almost a year-and-a-half, the A.D. told coaches it would
reduce roster sizes proportionally if there were a Title IX problem.
Apparently, that was not at all what he was planning.
What about other potential alternatives to making these cuts?
Well, the athletics department stated that it looked at every possible
alternative, and that this was the only one that could solve the problems.
As we have seen, there is no Title IX problem, though there is a real deficit.
But the AD's "solution" is no solution at all. Maybe it would be in a
world constructed by Franz Kafka.
You know, it reminds me of an incident during the Vietnam War when one U.S.
officer explained: "We had to destroy the village to save it." That's
akin to the action the OU administration would take citing Title IX. "We
had to cut three men's teams and a women's team to increase opportunities for
women." Can you hear "The Twilight Zone" music?
Tell me, how does cutting a women's team -- not to mention three men's teams --
increase opportunities for women? Does OU have Kafka writing its pres releases
As for there being no other alternatives, that is pure rubbish. It took me 20
seconds to come up with a better one to the alleged Title IX issue: How about
creating a women's water polo team with the available athletes you already have
on the women's swimming team? That is, if you are even out of compliance with
Title IX. Greg Werner, the swim coach, has experience coaching water polo
experience and he's already on staff, and you don't have any additional facility
costs.
With that one move, you don't cut women's lacrosse which, like water polo, is an
emerging women's sport. And you, have added 25-30 women athletes at a
rock-bottom, minimal cost.
As for exploring all other possibilities, that's a joke. Ohio University did not
even take the first step. Here's what Myles Brand,
the President of the NCAA, said recently.
‘I certainly hope no University cuts sports to comply with Title IX. There are
always alternatives. The NCAA is always ready and able to work with an athletics
department to identify acceptable alternatives to cutting sports. It should not
be the case that men's participation opportunities are diminished to comply with
Title IX."'
Here, we have the president of the NCAA, Dr. Brand, saying don't cut teams and
we will work with you if you come to us. Then, we have OU claiming to have
explored every possibility when it didn't bother to take even a first baby step.
More NCAA remarks:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
|
CONTACT:
|
Friday, July 11, 2003
|
Jeff Howard
Managing Director of Public and
Media Relations
317/917-6222
|
http://www.ncaa.org/releases/miscellaneous/2003071101ms.htm
STATEMENT BY MYLES BRAND ON TITLE IX
INDIANAPOLIS---I am very pleased by the letter issued today, July 11, 2003,
by Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Gerald Reynolds concerning Title IX. Mr.
Reynolds makes clear that Title IX will continue to provide opportunities in
intercollegiate athletics for young women as well as young men. Mr. Reynolds
also makes clear that the implementation of Title IX will not be changed.
This letter provides an excellent platform for the future implementation of
Title IX. It acknowledges past concerns and sets firm and fair directions for
the future.
This clarification letter emphasizes, rightly, that an institution of higher
education can satisfy Title IX using any of the three prongs: substantial
proportionality; a continuing history of program expansion for the
underrepresented sex; or fully accommodating the interests of the
underrepresented sex. Each of these three prongs is individually sufficient for
compliance.
This clarification also emphasizes that cutting men's sports to meet the
first prong is a disfavored practice. This is a victory for men's sports,
especially Olympic and nonrevenue sports, as well as for women's sports.
Further, there will be consistent enforcement by the Office for Civil Rights
(OCR) across regions, and OCR will enhance its education and assistance to
institutions in helping them to comply with Title IX.
All young women and men engaged in athletics have reason to cheer today.
And all of us who support their athletics endeavors, myself proudly included,
should join in their celebration.
I compliment Secretary Paige and the Commission on Opportunities in Athletics
for their hard work and for setting the stage for this letter of clarification.
I also compliment Mr. Reynolds and others involved in the final decisions for
being judicious and future-directed.
The NCAA will work closely with its member universities and colleges and with
OCR to implement Title IX within the context of this clarification letter. We
will assist in educational activities and use all other means at our disposal to
support the intent and goals of Title IX.
JH:mel
[Bold type emphasis inserted by SaveOUSports.Org]
AMERICAN LACROSSE CONFERENCE STATEMENT
FOLLOWING OU DECISION TO "DISCONTINUE LACROSSE"
ALC Statement on Ohio Decision
Effective following the 2007 season.
Jan. 29, 2007
[Bold type emphasis inserted by
SaveOUSports.Org]
Statement from the American Lacrosse Conference on the
Announcement by Ohio University Bobcats to drop sponsorship of women's
lacrosse at the varsity level following 2007 season:
On Thursday, Jan. 25, The Ohio Department of Athletics has announced that
men's indoor and outdoor track & field, men's swimming & diving, and
women's lacrosse will no longer be offered as varsity sport programs,
effective at the conclusion of their respective 2007 seasons. The Ohio
University's women's lacrosse team is a charter member of the American
Lacrosse Conference, a lacrosse-only conference that consists of
the University of Florida, Johns Hopkins University, Northwestern University,
Ohio University, The Ohio State University, Penn State University, and
Vanderbilt University. These schools' respective conferences do not
sponsor lacrosse and in 2001 coaches from these institutions met to form a
lacrosse-only conference.
"While we understand that this is a difficult decision for the university
administration, we are disappointed for the student-athletes and coaches
affected by such," said ALC Commissioner Peggy Pruitt. "Lacrosse
is one of the fastest-growing sports in the nation at both the high school and
collegiate levels, and we are proud to offer an opportunity, through the
conference, for lacrosse student-athletes, coaches, and other enthusiasts.
We as a conference are committed to enhancing a quality experience for the
student-athletes on the lacrosse teams of our member institutions."
The ALC is one of the top conferences in the nation, according to the RPI
published by the NCAA following the 2006 season.
ALC member Northwestern has captured the last two NCAA Division I titles,
and conference institutions appear regularly in national polls.
Student-athletes from ALC member institutions are prominent members of both
USA National Teams and have also earned significant national recognition,
including NU's Kristen Kjellman, the recipient of the Honda Award for women's
lacrosse in each of the last two years. In June of 2006 the University of
Florida announced it was adding women's lacrosse as a varsity sport and in
October was accepted into the American Lacrosse Conference, a testament to the
strength and development of the conference.
US OLYMPIC COMMITTEE'S RESPONSE TO SPORTS
CUTS AT JAMES MADISON UNIVERSITY
USOC
Troubled with Board's Decision
Source:
US Olympic Internet Network
Letter
from Jim Scherr, CEO of the USOC:
October
10, 2006
Mr.
Linwood H. Rose, President
James
Madison
University
MSC
7608
Harrisonburg
,
VA
22807
and
Mr.
Jeff Bourne, Athletics Director
James
Madison
University
Godwin
Hall 206-A
MSC
2301
Harrisonburg
,
VA
22807
Gentlemen:
This
letter is being sent to you on behalf of the United States Olympic Committee
and our National Governing Bodies in response to the recent decision by
James
Madison
University
to eliminate 10 sports from its intercollegiate athletic program beginning
in 2007:
.
men's and women's archery
.
men's cross country
.
women's fencing
.
men's and women's gymnastics
.
men's indoor track
.
men's outdoor track
.
men's swimming
.
men's wrestling
This
decision is particularly troubling to the United States Olympic Committee
and our National Governing Bodies because all of the sports you have chosen
to discontinue have a direct connection to the Olympic Movement.
It
is well documented that the spirit of the Title IX law is to ensure opportunities
for participation in sport are proportional and fair for men and women. The
intent of the law is not to discontinue sport programs for men or to
eliminate Olympic sports from a university's athletic program.
James
Madison
University
has a long and honorable tradition of supporting a
diverse range of intercollegiate athletic opportunities for its student body.
We have seen universities across the nation inappropriately use Title IX as
an excuse to justify the elimination of sport programs, and far too often
the programs dropped are Olympic sports. In a society that is faced with
critical challenges such as character development, alarming rates of obesity and
an increasingly sedentary lifestyle among
America
's youth, should we not be looking for ways to increase sport activity, rather
than curtailing it?
Your
decision may allow
James
Madison
University
to get closer to its proportionality goals, but it does great harm to the
hundreds of student-athletes who currently represent your university so
proudly as they participate in these sports. In addition, your decision
damages the hopes and dreams of the next generation of athletes who aspire
to one day represent our country in the Olympic Games.
The
more we limit opportunities for our youth, the more difficult it will be
to instill the positive values that are derived from participation in sport.
On behalf of the United States Olympic Committee and our National Governing
Bodies, we respectfully ask that you reconsider your decision to drop these
sports. The leaders of the National Governing Bodies for the sports you
plan to discontinue, in addition to the United States Olympic Committee,
would welcome the opportunity to work with you in identifying viable
alternatives to keep these intercollegiate sports alive at
James
Madison
University
.
We
appreciate your attention in this matter and look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
James
E. Scherr, Chief Executive Officer
Rich
Bender, Executive Director,
USA
Wrestling
Brad
Camp, Executive Director,
USA
Archery
Craig
Masback, Executive Director,
USA
Track & Field
Michael
Massik, Executive Director,
U.S.
Fencing
Steve
Penny,
CEO
,
USA
Gymnastics
Chuck
Wielgus, Executive Director,
USA
Swimming
cc:
Peter Ueberroth, Chairman of the Board, USOC Board
of Directors, National Governing Body Executive Directors
| |
DROPPED
TEAMS
2006
Women's Lacrosse Team
Swimming
and Diving
and
Track
and Field
|
