Non-Key Tweets | Page 793 | The Boneyard

Non-Key Tweets

nelsonmuntz said:
This is not how Title IX works. By your logic, women's sports should have full contact practices in pads just because football does it. Here is the text of Title IX:



A really strong case will be made that requiring 2000 mile midweek travel is discriminating against female athletes based on their sex/gender. It may not be a slam dunk, but this is one of those cases where I would much rather be the plaintiff than the defendant. And it is not out of the question that a judge could issue an injunction to prevent the schools from moving conferences.

The easiest solution for the NCAA is to simply amend the rules to let football be in separate conferences.
Expand ...
Please explain how, if the men's and women's soccer teams, basketball teams, swimming, tennis (if either is applicable), men's baseball and women's softball, and any additional sports that the school sponsors are both competing in the same conference and dealing with the same travel that this is discrimination against the women's sports.

You've made some asinine comments in your day (and attempt to defend the indefensible with pompous and dismissive comments) but this may be the most asinine stance you've taken on this board.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
This is not how Title IX works. By your logic, women's sports should have full contact practices in pads just because football does it. Here is the text of Title IX:



A really strong case will be made that requiring 2000 mile midweek travel is discriminating against female athletes based on their sex/gender. It may not be a slam dunk, but this is one of those cases where I would much rather be the plaintiff than the defendant. And it is not out of the question that a judge could issue an injunction to prevent the schools from moving conferences.

The easiest solution for the NCAA is to simply amend the rules to let football be in separate conferences.
Expand ...

LOL...Title IX...non discrimination because of sex....if men's teams have the same travel, no problemo...

By your reasoning, FSU women would have a Title IX grievance about travelling all the way to Boston and Syracuse.

Heck, the Women's Soccer team is in Texas...just played TCU in Fort Worth and now on to College Station to play the Aggies...Title IX, Title IX...the Title IX sky is falling.
 
FfldCntyFan said:
Please explain how, if the men's and women's soccer teams, basketball teams, swimming, tennis (if either is applicable), men's baseball and women's softball, and any additional sports that the school sponsors are both competing in the same conference and dealing with the same travel that this is discrimination against the women's sports.

You've made some asinine comments in your day (and attempt to defend the indefensible with pompous and dismissive comments) but this may be the most asinine stance you've taken on this board.
Expand ...

I'm not a legal expert, but I suspect he's getting at the fact that the size (number of players on scholarships) and the money behind football puts everything out-of whack as there is no comparable women's sport(s). As long as the support provided to women's basketball and soccer is the same as men's basketball and soccer are similar, it's all good. But, if Ohio State's 80-member football team is taking a direct 5-hour charter flight in first or business class seats from Columbus to SJC while it's comparable women's teams say (field hockey and rowing) are taking a pair of commercial flights for 8 hours (heaven help any person over 6' 2" sitting in coach today) or worse (rowing teams often bus due to their gear being way too big for a plane), then their may be an IX issue.
 
billybud said:
LOL...Title IX...non discrimination because of sex....if men's teams have the same travel, no problemo...

By your reasoning, FSU women would have a Title IX grievance about travelling all the way to Boston and Syracuse.

Heck, the Women's Soccer team is in Texas...just played TCU in Fort Worth and now on to College Station to play the Aggies...Title IX, Title IX...the Title IX sky is falling.
Expand ...
Can’t tell if you are being deliberately misleading.

The point - a good one at that - is that for the 100 guys playing one sport and traveling charter on weekends 6 times a year, there are like 7+ women’s teams flying coach mid-week tens of times.

I’m with Nelson. No slam dunk, but I’d be the plaintiff if I had a choice.
 
UConnJim said:
I think it will be a Title IX problem. The issue will be football and basketball fly charter and no other sports do. Thus, somebody could make a stink that women athletes are being discriminated against because they make up the vast majority of non revenue sports athletes (because they offset the 85 football scholarships) and they do not fly charter.
Expand ...
That's how it's always been though. Women's basketball digs for the tournament suck compared to the guys digs because not many people care about women's basketball, they typically don't bring in money.
 
The easiest troll on the Boneyard is getting old men to opine with absolute confidence about women’s sports.
 
.-.
superjohn said:
That's how it's always been though. Women's basketball digs for the tournament suck compared to the guys digs because not many people care about women's basketball, they typically don't bring in money.
Expand ...
are hotels selected by the NCAA or the schools? If its the schools that can be a Title IX issue, if its the NCAA then it isn't. Now, sure the schools could be using the NCAA to do their dirty work but so it goes.
 
.-.
It's funny ... no body wants to leave or add conferences but it's all happening anyways. Well except for UConn. Cal and Stanford will eventually get the votes.
 
CoastAtlantic said:
Expand ...

Not only is that a non-key tweet, it's fictitious. They could join a conference that doesn't play football and play football only in the ACC, but as all conferences have basketball they couldn't join the WCC or Big West for olympic sports and play hoops in the ACC. And why in the world would the ACC dilute their basketball brand and greatly increase their travel to add Cal.

Football only is a theoretical possibilty. Football and basketball is not under current rules.
 
Forte said:
It's funny ... no body wants to leave or add conferences but it's all happening anyways. Well except for UConn. Cal and Stanford will eventually get the votes.
Expand ...
We're just not that useful to conferences I guess. I'll just keep enjoying our trophies and parades while they count their TV money.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
This is not how Title IX works. By your logic, women's sports should have full contact practices in pads just because football does it. Here is the text of Title IX:



A really strong case will be made that requiring 2000 mile midweek travel is discriminating against female athletes based on their sex/gender. It may not be a slam dunk, but this is one of those cases where I would much rather be the plaintiff than the defendant. And it is not out of the question that a judge could issue an injunction to prevent the schools from moving conferences.

The easiest solution for the NCAA is to simply amend the rules to let football be in separate conferences.
Expand ...
If male athletes are being forced to do it, I don't see how there is a credible argument (if you don't care about credulity there is always an argument) that it's discriminatory to make women do it.
 
I hope they don’t get in… I would love for uconn to form a football conference with them… and keep our basketball in the big east
 
Beachview said:
I hope they don’t get in… I would love for uconn to form a football conference with them… and keep our basketball in the big east
Expand ...
who should be in a PAC football conference along with UConn?
 
.-.
noeynox said:
I don't think so. PC and Hall were having good success recruiting the northeast but maybe you are right.
Expand ...


Here's his quote for those who want to make their own judgment. To me it's tongue-in-cheek, especially when you hear how complementary he is of Hurley in the program.
 
CL82 said:


Here's his quote for those who want to make their own judgment. To me it's tongue-in-cheek, especially when you hear how complementary he is of Hurley in the program.
Expand ...

Having just seen this for the first time, I didn't get that same feeling. You can respect Hurley and the school and still not want them in the conference. I didn't see a smile, smirk, giggle or anything else that would make me think he wasn't being completely honest. We have done some damage with the local recruiting, so him voting against us would make perfect sense.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,497
Messages
4,578,584
Members
10,489
Latest member
Djw06001


Top Bottom