Realignment talk not going away

[BurntOrange&White 38877]

2 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

 

I hope yall file lawsuit 

[Sbbruin 21588]

40 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

As long as that doesn’t get extended I’d bet good with that if I’m UCLA. You guys going to be required to play them annually OOC?

Yeah, it probably will be the best we can do.  A lawsuit would be like suing ourselves essentially.  No, we will not play them OOC.

[thunderlounge 7636]

12 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

No, we will not play them OOC.

I would….

 

 

 

for a fee. Shall we say $10M/per on a 3 game hitch, extendable up to 6?

 

[gatormarc 902]

7 hours ago, Texas Wahoo said:

UVA and NC State are playing a non-conference home and home in 2025 and 2026.  Probably not realignment related, but you never know.

Something is going on because NCState already had 4 OOC games both of those years.

2025
08/30 - East Carolina
09/06 - Virginia
10/04 - Campbell
TBA - at Notre Dame
TBA - at Appalachian State

2026
09/05 - Florida
09/12 - Richmond
09/19 - at Vanderbilt
09/26 - Appalachian State
TBA - at Virginia

Edited May 16 by gatormarc

[SurlyGator 828]

The interwebs suspect they are working on getting out of that App State deal.  Don't want the embarrassment.

[Evil Bill Obrien 3009]

34 minutes ago, SurlyGator said:

The interwebs suspect they are working on getting out of that App State deal.  Don't want the embarrassment.

Wake Forest apparently had a 3 game series with App State that they are likely gonna weasel out of too. App State in that G5 no mans land where they can’t get any competitive games with lesser big time conference schools

[LTbear 4080]

That's some horseshit. The App St vs UNC games have been fun. 

[TKthunder2 4959]

5 minutes ago, LTbear said:

That's some horseshit. The App St vs UNC games have been fun. 

Not for UNC. You win and you get zero credit, you lose and you get made fun of. App State is the new Boise St putting P4 programs in a no win situation.

[Evil Bill Obrien 3009]

1 hour ago, TKthunder2 said:

Not for UNC. You win and you get zero credit, you lose and you get made fun of. App State is the new Boise St putting P4 programs in a no win situation.

If you are running scared of App State you aren’t a very serious “P4” football program, and it seems like most of the ACC outside Clemson and FSU fall into that category…
 

Head Coach of Wake fucking Forest beating the “we need to stop scheduling G5 games” drum is real rich
 

 

[BigHornedLurker 1883]

53 minutes ago, Evil Bill Obrien said:

If you are running scared of App State you aren’t a very serious “P4” football program, and it seems like most of the ACC outside Clemson and FSU fall into that category…
 

Head Coach of Wake fucking Forest beating the “we need to stop scheduling G5 games” drum is real rich
 

 

In 5 years, Head Count of Wake is going to be complaining P2 teams don't want to play Wake 

[Texas Wahoo 3376]

 

 

[Horn of Gabriel 1580]

1 hour ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

 

LOL what is going on?  I've never seen a TRO that says a Board can't go into closed session

[TKthunder2 4959]

2 hours ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

 

Interesting…more smoke

[LTbear 4080]

7 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Not for UNC. You win and you get zero credit, you lose and you get made fun of. App State is the new Boise St putting P4 programs in a no win situation.

Well no shit my man. I'm not UNC, I'm a college football fan. 

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1262]

Buying out of a game against App State without any sort of major extenuating circumstances should add a loss to your record.

[TrashMaster G 17295]

38 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

Buying out of a game against App State without any sort of major extenuating circumstances should add a loss to your record.

Kinda like opting out of a bowl game when you have a nearly full team.

[msucolt45 3978]

Kind of like aggy ditching Wake Forest a couple years ago. Fng aggy at their finest!

Hook’em!!!

[TKthunder2 4959]

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/40167617/ncaa-settlement-plan-house-v-ncaa-case-irks-non-power-5-schools
 

Smaller conferences pushing back on House settlement proposal.

This was the NCAA’s carrot to the P4 to keep them in the NCAA and the smaller conferences are pushing back.

[msucolt45 3978]

Good luck with that, as that’s exactly how the FCS was created for football. Yes, in spring sports they are considered D1, just not in football.

We’ll see a separation in football within the next decade -IMO. Media $$$ will dictate it.

Hook’em!!!

[bullet 1596]

On 5/14/2024 at 12:15 PM, TKthunder2 said:

CUSA went from the top of the non BCS conferences along with the MWC to now the bottom of all FBS.

It was the fall of the Big East and subsequent formation of the American and CUSA’s backfill strategy of copying the Big Ten’s strategy of going after under performing teams in big markets and having a horrible tv deal with Stadium and Facebook.

CUSA raided the Sun Belt for FIU, Middle Tennessee, Western Kentucky and LA Tech from the dying WAC; and the teams they did hit on like UNT, UTSA, FAU all got pulled up by the American conference.

Sun Belt added App State, Georgia Southern, Georgia State, and Coastal Carolina and made a MACtion style TV deal with ESPN which built a strong football brand and allowed them to pull Marshall, Southern Miss, and ODU from CUSA.

As a result CUSA has fallen from 3rd tier to 5th tier, while the Sun Belt has moved up 1 tier from 5th to 4th. No other conference, save the PAC12, has done worse for its membership over the last 2 decades.

They should have tried to kill off the Sun Belt in their previous expansion.  Instead they left it alive and kicking to pull up the best of FCS.  And the AAC kept pulling from them, so eventually CUSA was the one pulling from FCS.

[bullet 1596]

On 5/14/2024 at 3:21 PM, 'stache said:

Is Miami really a TV draw anymore? It's been 20 years since they were really good. Nebraska still has a huge fanbase and TV draw, even after 20 years of suck. Miami always felt more like a bandwagon fanbase when they were the "bad boys" of college football but not a super loyal large fanbase through thick and thin. Maybe I'm wrong.

When they are good, people watch.

[bullet 1596]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2024/05/18/house-v-ncaa-settlement-vote/

 

Title IX, future anti-trust.  Big mess even after the settlement.

[ChickenSandwich 9767]

Settlement just kicks the can down the road. Go to trial and lose, pay immediate damages. Let schools who shouldn't be in the big money athletic game file for bankruptcy and shutter their athletic programs.  They can go back to teaching students and club sports for 90% of universities .  
 

Paying the settlement now will just lead them back to court from any of the following: smaller conferences, non revenue sports and title 9. 
 

Rip the bandage off and start from scratch. 

Edited May 19 by ChickenSandwich

[Horn of Gabriel 1580]

Title 9 is going to fuck this whole deal.  When the women's rowers demand to be paid the same as the starting QB, he'll sue for not getting his value.  And they'll sue for equal pay.  Rock and hard place.

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1262]

45 minutes ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

Title 9 is going to fuck this whole deal.  When the women's rowers demand to be paid the same as the starting QB, he'll sue for not getting his value.  And they'll sue for equal pay.  Rock and hard place.

Yeah, the obvious solution would be to decouple football from the universities, but I don't think people would still watch without that affiliation.

[TrashMaster G 17295]

I don't see how Title IX trumps market value

[Al_4_ISU 12326]

25 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

Yeah, the obvious solution would be to decouple football from the universities, but I don't think people would still watch without that affiliation.

If this just turns into the UFL in college towns, it will absolutely take a hit

[Horn of Gabriel 1580]

50 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

I don't see how Title IX trumps market value

Title IX doesn't give a shit about the market.  The university level administrators and their Federal guidance are seeking "equitable" treatment for females vs. males from the university -> student.  That's why we have a women's rowing team with literally dozens of fans that recruits any female willing to sign up on campus; so we can have the same # of scholarships for men and women.  Doesn't matter to the government that there isn't an equivalent female sport to football...85 scholarships are 85 scholarships.  Also won't mater to the government Title IX administrators that the market value of the starting QB is higher than the volleyball libero's...$1 to him has to be $1 to her (note: IF it's coming from the university) or it's not Title IX compliant...

The only way I see to work this out is to pay everyone equal, and establish that as a "floor" to keep the schools from getting sued: "See, we're rev sharing with our athletes!  And yes it's Title IX equal!"  Then, keep the NIL collective structure in place to pay the market value out to those whose market value actually dictates it.  Anyone dreaming all of this will end up under the school umbrella is wrong, there's just no way to manage it save a huge legislative overhaul at the Federal level which won't happen.

Edited May 19 by Horn of Gabriel

[TrashMaster G 17295]

Just now, Horn of Gabriel said:

Tile XI doesn't give a shit about the market.  The university level administrators and their Federal guidance are seeking "equitable" treatment for females vs. males from the university -> student.  That's why we have a women's rowing team with literally dozens of fans that recruits any female willing to sign up on campus; so we can have the same # of scholarships for men and women.  Doesn't matter to the government that there isn't an equivalent female sport to football...85 scholarships are 85 scholarships.  Also won't mater to the government Title IX administrators that the market value of the starting QB is higher than the volleyball libero's...$1 to him has to be $1 to her (note: IF it's coming from the university) or it's not Title IX compliant...

The only way I see to work this out is to pay everyone equal, and establish that as a "floor" to keep the schools from getting sued: "See, we're rev sharing with our athletes!  And yes it's Title IX equal!"  Then, keep the NIL collective structure in place to pay the market value out to those whose market value actually dictates it.  Anyone dreaming all of this will end up under the school umbrella is wrong, there's just no way to manage it save a huge legislative overhaul at the Federal level which won't happen.

Yeah, I get all that. But how does Title IX prevent private funds from flowing to athletes per market value, even if it creates inequities in total compensation?

[Horn of Gabriel 1580]

2 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

Yeah, I get all that. But how does Title IX prevent private funds from flowing to athletes per market value, even if it creates inequities in total compensation?

It doesn't/won't just like it doesn't today.  But the revenue sharing system they're discussing as part of this proposal isn't private funds.  It's money coming into the university system via the TV deals.

[TKthunder2 4959]

2 hours ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

Title IX doesn't give a shit about the market.  The university level administrators and their Federal guidance are seeking "equitable" treatment for females vs. males from the university -> student.  That's why we have a women's rowing team with literally dozens of fans that recruits any female willing to sign up on campus; so we can have the same # of scholarships for men and women.  Doesn't matter to the government that there isn't an equivalent female sport to football...85 scholarships are 85 scholarships.  Also won't mater to the government Title IX administrators that the market value of the starting QB is higher than the volleyball libero's...$1 to him has to be $1 to her (note: IF it's coming from the university) or it's not Title IX compliant...

The only way I see to work this out is to pay everyone equal, and establish that as a "floor" to keep the schools from getting sued: "See, we're rev sharing with our athletes!  And yes it's Title IX equal!"  Then, keep the NIL collective structure in place to pay the market value out to those whose market value actually dictates it.  Anyone dreaming all of this will end up under the school umbrella is wrong, there's just no way to manage it save a huge legislative overhaul at the Federal level which won't happen.

Theoretically a court interpretation on Title IX could occur without any new legislation. If sports are self sufficient without any student fees or funding from the university they may be exempt from Title IX. That would also solve the revenue sharing problem too. Only teams that generate revenue share in revenue.

Its still a long shot, but a court ruling is more realistic than new legislation.

[closetohumping 17299]

Wrong threads 

Edited May 19 by closetohumping

[ChickenSandwich 9767]

2 hours ago, TrashMaster G said:

Yeah, I get all that. But how does Title IX prevent private funds from flowing to athletes per market value, even if it creates inequities in total compensation?

 

https://msmagazine.com/2023/12/13/female-athletes-sue-university-oregon-sex-discrimination/#:~:text=Building on a recent groundbreaking,for more than 50 years.
 

Spoiler

On Dec. 1, 32 current and former female student athletes at the University of Oregon filed a Title IX class-action lawsuit, alleging sex discrimination in athletic participation opportunities, financial aid, benefits and publicity, including support for opportunities to receive payments for use of their names, images and likenesses, known as NILs. 

Building on a recent groundbreaking federal court decision, the student athletes are suing for monetary damages connected to these discriminatory practices. The lawsuit is the first ever to seek damages connected to NIL discrimination against women.

“Title IX has been the law for more than 50 years. Oregon needs to comply with it, now,” said Arthur Bryant of the law firm Bailey & Glasser, which represents the plaintiffs. “The history of Title IX has shown: If women want equality, they need to fight for it. So that’s what the women at Oregon are doing.”

 

The complaint alleges that the school treats its male student-athletes “shockingly better” than its female student-athletes. For example, the 85 football players enjoy “palatial locker rooms, their own theatre with seats upholstered in Ferrari leather, nearly-unlimited publicity … and myriad other forms of support that one can hardly imagine,” according to the complaint. Meanwhile, University of Oregon does not provide the women’s varsity beach volleyball team with any practice or competitive facilities, forcing female athletes to practice and compete at a public park that lacks stands for spectators, has bathrooms with no doors on the stalls, and is frequently littered with feces and drug paraphernalia.

“Male athletes are treated incredibly better in almost every respect,” said lead plaintiff Ashley Schroeder, captain of the women’s varsity beach volleyball team. “This week, we could not practice because, sadly and disturbingly, someone died near the public courts we have to use in Amazon Park. We cannot use the restrooms there because they’re not safe and, sometimes, people are in the stalls using drugs. But the men’s teams have full scholarships, multi-million-dollar budgets, and professional-level, state-of-the-art facilities. I love the University of Oregon, but this hurtful, outrageous sex discrimination has to stop.”

The Oregon athletic department offers 20 varsity sports and generated more than $153.5 million in annual revenue in fiscal year 2022, yet they provided no athletic scholarship funding to the varsity women’s beach volleyball team, according to an extensive report in The Oregonian. No other public university among Power Five conferences—the five most prominent and highest-earning athletic conferences in college football—has a varsity team with no athletic scholarships.

“We love this school, but, in addition to treating its women athletes unfairly, it is also depriving us and other women of equal opportunities to participate,” said plaintiff Elise Haverland, captain of the women’s club rowing team, which does not have varsity status or scholarships. “Oregon’s own numbers show it needs to add at least 94 varsity women athletes to reach proportionality. That includes a women’s rowing team and more.” 

According to the university’s Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act figures, women are over 55 percent of the undergraduate student body and 49 percent of the student-athletes, but Oregon spends only 25 percent of its athletics dollars and 15 percent of its recruiting dollars on them. To make up for the unequal athletic aid it offered its female student-athletes from 2017-18 through 2021-22—the past five years for which data is publicly available—Oregon would have to pay more than $4.5 million in damages to its female athletes, the suit states.

 

The complaint alleges inequalities in gear and equipment. Oregon’s football players receive new gear four to six times each season, including six unique football helmets for their 12 regular-season games, six jerseys, six pairs of pants, multiple pairs of cleats and socks, four pairs of sweatsuits, pads and arm sleeves, according to the suit. The football equipment room includes an “athlete fitting room” where each player has a personal appointment during the preseason to be measured and sized for shoes, pants, jerseys, pads and all other equipment. 

Meanwhile, the Oregon women’s beach volleyball team is provided all their athletic gear once at the beginning of the school year and does not receive new or additional gear throughout the season, the suit claims. The gear given at the beginning of the year is often used and does not fit because Oregon makes no effort to ensure that the gear is obtained in the players’ sizes, the suit claims.

Athletes experience differences in hotel accommodations as well. According to the complaint, the women’s beach volleyball team does not have the option to stay in hotel rooms before home games as does the football team, and even for many of their away tournaments, female athletes have been hosted by players’ families, often sleeping in cramped and shared quarters or on air mattresses. If the beach volleyball team members are fortunate enough to receive hotel rooms, they are often required to sleep up to four a room, including with student team managers, and the hotels are low quality or in unsafe areas, state the plaintiffs.

The complaint also alleges that football team members are given so much publicity and university-driven NIL support that three of the team’s players are listed among On3’s NIL 100 list. Conversely, the complaint notes that no Oregon female athlete is listed. 

“Oregon’s female student-athletes are given so much less publicity and NIL support that no female student-athlete receives anywhere near the amounts mentioned on that list,” states the complaint.

Due to the damages claims and the inclusion of NIL income inequalities, the case could have significant implications for the finances of college athletics and the future of Title IX.

“We are proud to represent these courageous women who have decided to stand up and fight for the equality Title IX requires and against the sex discrimination that Title IX prohibits,” said co-counsel Lori Bullock. “These young women did not go to school imagining they would sue their university, but they are committed to fighting for what is right.”

“The complaint alleges that the school treats its male student-athletes “shockingly better” than its female student-athletes. For example, the 85 football players enjoy “palatial locker rooms, their own theatre with seats upholstered in Ferrari leather, nearly-unlimited publicity … and myriad other forms of support that one can hardly imagine,” according to the complaint. Meanwhile, University of Oregon does not provide the women’s varsity beach volleyball team with any practice or competitive facilities, forcing femaleathletes to practice andcompete at a public park that lacks stands for spectators, has bathrooms with no doors on the stalls, and is frequently littered with feces and drug paraphernalia.”

 

“The complaint also alleges that football team members are given so much publicity and university-driven NIL support that three of the team’s players are listed among On3’s NIL 100 list. Conversely, the complaint notes that no Oregon female athlete is listed. 

“Oregon’s female student-athletes are given so much less publicity and NIL support that no female student-athlete receives anywhere near the amounts mentioned on that list,” states the complaint.”

Edited May 19 by ChickenSandwich

[TrashMaster G 17295]

2 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

 

https://msmagazine.com/2023/12/13/female-athletes-sue-university-oregon-sex-discrimination/#:~:text=Building on a recent groundbreaking,for more than 50 years.
 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

On Dec. 1, 32 current and former female student athletes at the University of Oregon filed a Title IX class-action lawsuit, alleging sex discrimination in athletic participation opportunities, financial aid, benefits and publicity, including support for opportunities to receive payments for use of their names, images and likenesses, known as NILs. 

Building on a recent groundbreaking federal court decision, the student athletes are suing for monetary damages connected to these discriminatory practices. The lawsuit is the first ever to seek damages connected to NIL discrimination against women.

“Title IX has been the law for more than 50 years. Oregon needs to comply with it, now,” said Arthur Bryant of the law firm Bailey & Glasser, which represents the plaintiffs. “The history of Title IX has shown: If women want equality, they need to fight for it. So that’s what the women at Oregon are doing.”

 

The complaint alleges that the school treats its male student-athletes “shockingly better” than its female student-athletes. For example, the 85 football players enjoy “palatial locker rooms, their own theatre with seats upholstered in Ferrari leather, nearly-unlimited publicity … and myriad other forms of support that one can hardly imagine,” according to the complaint. Meanwhile, University of Oregon does not provide the women’s varsity beach volleyball team with any practice or competitive facilities, forcing female athletes to practice and compete at a public park that lacks stands for spectators, has bathrooms with no doors on the stalls, and is frequently littered with feces and drug paraphernalia.

“Male athletes are treated incredibly better in almost every respect,” said lead plaintiff Ashley Schroeder, captain of the women’s varsity beach volleyball team. “This week, we could not practice because, sadly and disturbingly, someone died near the public courts we have to use in Amazon Park. We cannot use the restrooms there because they’re not safe and, sometimes, people are in the stalls using drugs. But the men’s teams have full scholarships, multi-million-dollar budgets, and professional-level, state-of-the-art facilities. I love the University of Oregon, but this hurtful, outrageous sex discrimination has to stop.”

The Oregon athletic department offers 20 varsity sports and generated more than $153.5 million in annual revenue in fiscal year 2022, yet they provided no athletic scholarship funding to the varsity women’s beach volleyball team, according to an extensive report in The Oregonian. No other public university among Power Five conferences—the five most prominent and highest-earning athletic conferences in college football—has a varsity team with no athletic scholarships.

“We love this school, but, in addition to treating its women athletes unfairly, it is also depriving us and other women of equal opportunities to participate,” said plaintiff Elise Haverland, captain of the women’s club rowing team, which does not have varsity status or scholarships. “Oregon’s own numbers show it needs to add at least 94 varsity women athletes to reach proportionality. That includes a women’s rowing team and more.” 

According to the university’s Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act figures, women are over 55 percent of the undergraduate student body and 49 percent of the student-athletes, but Oregon spends only 25 percent of its athletics dollars and 15 percent of its recruiting dollars on them. To make up for the unequal athletic aid it offered its female student-athletes from 2017-18 through 2021-22—the past five years for which data is publicly available—Oregon would have to pay more than $4.5 million in damages to its female athletes, the suit states.

 

The complaint alleges inequalities in gear and equipment. Oregon’s football players receive new gear four to six times each season, including six unique football helmets for their 12 regular-season games, six jerseys, six pairs of pants, multiple pairs of cleats and socks, four pairs of sweatsuits, pads and arm sleeves, according to the suit. The football equipment room includes an “athlete fitting room” where each player has a personal appointment during the preseason to be measured and sized for shoes, pants, jerseys, pads and all other equipment. 

Meanwhile, the Oregon women’s beach volleyball team is provided all their athletic gear once at the beginning of the school year and does not receive new or additional gear throughout the season, the suit claims. The gear given at the beginning of the year is often used and does not fit because Oregon makes no effort to ensure that the gear is obtained in the players’ sizes, the suit claims.

Athletes experience differences in hotel accommodations as well. According to the complaint, the women’s beach volleyball team does not have the option to stay in hotel rooms before home games as does the football team, and even for many of their away tournaments, female athletes have been hosted by players’ families, often sleeping in cramped and shared quarters or on air mattresses. If the beach volleyball team members are fortunate enough to receive hotel rooms, they are often required to sleep up to four a room, including with student team managers, and the hotels are low quality or in unsafe areas, state the plaintiffs.

The complaint also alleges that football team members are given so much publicity and university-driven NIL support that three of the team’s players are listed among On3’s NIL 100 list. Conversely, the complaint notes that no Oregon female athlete is listed. 

“Oregon’s female student-athletes are given so much less publicity and NIL support that no female student-athlete receives anywhere near the amounts mentioned on that list,” states the complaint.

Due to the damages claims and the inclusion of NIL income inequalities, the case could have significant implications for the finances of college athletics and the future of Title IX.

“We are proud to represent these courageous women who have decided to stand up and fight for the equality Title IX requires and against the sex discrimination that Title IX prohibits,” said co-counsel Lori Bullock. “These young women did not go to school imagining they would sue their university, but they are committed to fighting for what is right.”

 

“The complaint also alleges that football team members are given so much publicity and university-driven NIL support that three of the team’s players are listed among On3’s NIL 100 list. Conversely, the complaint notes that no Oregon female athlete is listed. 

“Oregon’s female student-athletes are given so much less publicity and NIL support that no female student-athlete receives anywhere near the amounts mentioned on that list,” states the complaint.”

🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

[Hurtlocker 2208]

23 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Theoretically a court interpretation on Title IX could occur without any new legislation. If sports are self sufficient without any student fees or funding from the university they may be exempt from Title IX. That would also solve the revenue sharing problem too. Only teams that generate revenue share in revenue.

Its still a long shot, but a court ruling is more realistic than new legislation.

Title IX occurs at the University level of federal funding, regardless of the amount of money the athletic department makes.  If the university takes federal research grants, you have to follow Title IX regulations.

[Horn of Gabriel 1580]

11 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

 

https://msmagazine.com/2023/12/13/female-athletes-sue-university-oregon-sex-discrimination/#:~:text=Building on a recent groundbreaking,for more than 50 years.
 

  Reveal hidden contents

On Dec. 1, 32 current and former female student athletes at the University of Oregon filed a Title IX class-action lawsuit, alleging sex discrimination in athletic participation opportunities, financial aid, benefits and publicity, including support for opportunities to receive payments for use of their names, images and likenesses, known as NILs. 

Building on a recent groundbreaking federal court decision, the student athletes are suing for monetary damages connected to these discriminatory practices. The lawsuit is the first ever to seek damages connected to NIL discrimination against women.

“Title IX has been the law for more than 50 years. Oregon needs to comply with it, now,” said Arthur Bryant of the law firm Bailey & Glasser, which represents the plaintiffs. “The history of Title IX has shown: If women want equality, they need to fight for it. So that’s what the women at Oregon are doing.”

 

The complaint alleges that the school treats its male student-athletes “shockingly better” than its female student-athletes. For example, the 85 football players enjoy “palatial locker rooms, their own theatre with seats upholstered in Ferrari leather, nearly-unlimited publicity … and myriad other forms of support that one can hardly imagine,” according to the complaint. Meanwhile, University of Oregon does not provide the women’s varsity beach volleyball team with any practice or competitive facilities, forcing female athletes to practice and compete at a public park that lacks stands for spectators, has bathrooms with no doors on the stalls, and is frequently littered with feces and drug paraphernalia.

“Male athletes are treated incredibly better in almost every respect,” said lead plaintiff Ashley Schroeder, captain of the women’s varsity beach volleyball team. “This week, we could not practice because, sadly and disturbingly, someone died near the public courts we have to use in Amazon Park. We cannot use the restrooms there because they’re not safe and, sometimes, people are in the stalls using drugs. But the men’s teams have full scholarships, multi-million-dollar budgets, and professional-level, state-of-the-art facilities. I love the University of Oregon, but this hurtful, outrageous sex discrimination has to stop.”

The Oregon athletic department offers 20 varsity sports and generated more than $153.5 million in annual revenue in fiscal year 2022, yet they provided no athletic scholarship funding to the varsity women’s beach volleyball team, according to an extensive report in The Oregonian. No other public university among Power Five conferences—the five most prominent and highest-earning athletic conferences in college football—has a varsity team with no athletic scholarships.

“We love this school, but, in addition to treating its women athletes unfairly, it is also depriving us and other women of equal opportunities to participate,” said plaintiff Elise Haverland, captain of the women’s club rowing team, which does not have varsity status or scholarships. “Oregon’s own numbers show it needs to add at least 94 varsity women athletes to reach proportionality. That includes a women’s rowing team and more.” 

According to the university’s Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act figures, women are over 55 percent of the undergraduate student body and 49 percent of the student-athletes, but Oregon spends only 25 percent of its athletics dollars and 15 percent of its recruiting dollars on them. To make up for the unequal athletic aid it offered its female student-athletes from 2017-18 through 2021-22—the past five years for which data is publicly available—Oregon would have to pay more than $4.5 million in damages to its female athletes, the suit states.

 

The complaint alleges inequalities in gear and equipment. Oregon’s football players receive new gear four to six times each season, including six unique football helmets for their 12 regular-season games, six jerseys, six pairs of pants, multiple pairs of cleats and socks, four pairs of sweatsuits, pads and arm sleeves, according to the suit. The football equipment room includes an “athlete fitting room” where each player has a personal appointment during the preseason to be measured and sized for shoes, pants, jerseys, pads and all other equipment. 

Meanwhile, the Oregon women’s beach volleyball team is provided all their athletic gear once at the beginning of the school year and does not receive new or additional gear throughout the season, the suit claims. The gear given at the beginning of the year is often used and does not fit because Oregon makes no effort to ensure that the gear is obtained in the players’ sizes, the suit claims.

Athletes experience differences in hotel accommodations as well. According to the complaint, the women’s beach volleyball team does not have the option to stay in hotel rooms before home games as does the football team, and even for many of their away tournaments, female athletes have been hosted by players’ families, often sleeping in cramped and shared quarters or on air mattresses. If the beach volleyball team members are fortunate enough to receive hotel rooms, they are often required to sleep up to four a room, including with student team managers, and the hotels are low quality or in unsafe areas, state the plaintiffs.

The complaint also alleges that football team members are given so much publicity and university-driven NIL support that three of the team’s players are listed among On3’s NIL 100 list. Conversely, the complaint notes that no Oregon female athlete is listed. 

“Oregon’s female student-athletes are given so much less publicity and NIL support that no female student-athlete receives anywhere near the amounts mentioned on that list,” states the complaint.

Due to the damages claims and the inclusion of NIL income inequalities, the case could have significant implications for the finances of college athletics and the future of Title IX.

“We are proud to represent these courageous women who have decided to stand up and fight for the equality Title IX requires and against the sex discrimination that Title IX prohibits,” said co-counsel Lori Bullock. “These young women did not go to school imagining they would sue their university, but they are committed to fighting for what is right.”

“The complaint alleges that the school treats its male student-athletes “shockingly better” than its female student-athletes. For example, the 85 football players enjoy “palatial locker rooms, their own theatre with seats upholstered in Ferrari leather, nearly-unlimited publicity … and myriad other forms of support that one can hardly imagine,” according to the complaint. Meanwhile, University of Oregon does not provide the women’s varsity beach volleyball team with any practice or competitive facilities, forcing femaleathletes to practice andcompete at a public park that lacks stands for spectators, has bathrooms with no doors on the stalls, and is frequently littered with feces and drug paraphernalia.”

 

“The complaint also alleges that football team members are given so much publicity and university-driven NIL support that three of the team’s players are listed among On3’s NIL 100 list. Conversely, the complaint notes that no Oregon female athlete is listed. 

“Oregon’s female student-athletes are given so much less publicity and NIL support that no female student-athlete receives anywhere near the amounts mentioned on that list,” states the complaint.”

It's kinda B.S. that they have to play in a public park and they have a point about the facilities differences.

It's also true that they're mixing up correlation and causation with regard to NIL popularity.

[ChickenSandwich 9767]

Is it really much different than UT rowing using Town Lake?  Oregon can’t help the campus is not on the beach. 

Edited May 19 by ChickenSandwich

[Horn of Gabriel 1580]

19 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Is it really much different than UT rowing using Town Lake?  Oregon can’t help the campus is not on the beach. 

I think it is.  I have a daughter and get the point of Title IX...women's sports have never received the level of investment of men's sports.  That is _part of_ but not the only reason they aren't as popular.  However t9 doesn't concern itself with popularity of a sport.  It's about ensuring equal access for women and men.  You can argue with a lot of truth that without Title IX we wouldn't have women's sports opportunities at nearly the level we do today - many, many universities would never invest in it while they were remodeling their men's football locker rooms for the umpteenth time.  In a world where the universities are providing amateur athletes opportunities to compete as part of their education, that makes a ton of sense to me.  

There are also a lot of things that make less sense and unintended consequences: UT doesn't do men's soccer for example even though there are a ton of great players in the state - because we'd have to find more sports on the women's side.  Only so much non-rev even UT chooses to support.  The mirroring of sports makes sense: men/women's swimming/diving, m/w tennis, golf, basketball, baseball/softball.  But then we get women's only soccer, rowing, etc essentially b/c of football which doesn't have a female counterpart.  Title IX calls that an inequity that must be balanced out.  Fair?  Some say yes; but if we took football off the table a lot of women's sports would disappear too without the mandate of Title IX.

[bullet 1596]

2 hours ago, closetohumping said:

Wrong threads 

This is extremely relevant to realignment.

A lot of schools won't make it.

[bullet 1596]

2 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Title IX occurs at the University level of federal funding, regardless of the amount of money the athletic department makes.  If the university takes federal research grants, you have to follow Title IX regulations.

It would seem that if they gave everyone 22% of media, ticket and sponsorship money of their sport, it would be logical and should be compliant.  But Title IX is not the least bit about logic.

Logically, you could have 3 pools and give everyone in each pool only from their own sport's money:

Men's football and basketball

Women's basketball

All other sports

These are the 3 class action categories in the House lawsuit.

 

[bullet 1596]

Based on the recent NCAA championships TV deal, women's basketball ($65 of $115 million) is more valuable than all the other miscellaneous sports combined.

[statsman 5355]

I’m in favor of letting markets decide. For a lot of non-revenue sports, the scholarship (and preferred admission) is compensation enough. 

[msucolt45 3978]

Within a decade there’s going to be a separation of a Top 48-64 football only division. It’ll be treated similar to the NFL. Spring sports will still belong to regional conferences and play for NCAA titles like now.

The football portion will dictate their own terms and get the big $$$, separate from NCAA terms/rules and guidelines. Media (TV $$$) will decide.

If you are a current conference “bottom feeder,” you better pull up your boot straps now or you will be left behind!

Hook’em!!!

[BurntOrange&White 38877]

1 hour ago, msucolt45 said:

Within a decade there’s going to be a separation of a Top 48-64 football only division. It’ll be treated similar to the NFL. Spring sports will still belong to regional conferences and play for NCAA titles like now.

The football portion will dictate their own terms and get the big $$$, separate from NCAA terms/rules and guidelines. Media (TV $$$) will decide.

If you are a current conference “bottom feeder,” you better pull up your boot straps now or you will be left behind!

Hook’em!!!

2036 seems to be the a reference point. Probably about 2032 or so. 

Edited May 20 by BurntOrange&White

[jTower 211]

9 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

If this just turns into the UFL in college towns, it will absolutely take a hit

No. It will kill it. 

[msucolt45 3978]

As much as many people ridicule the LHN or lack there of that channel nationally. Those that actually had access to the LHN saw more women’s sports over this past decade that wouldn’t even compare if you added up all other women’s regular season games combined, not counting NCAA Championships.

As far as Title IX goes, as Longhorn fans, we were spoiled and I will miss the LHN going forward. Hopefully CDC and others will find a form of streaming to showcase the spring sports soon.

Hook’em!!!

[notre dame joe 171]

14 hours ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

Title 9 is going to fuck this whole deal.  When the women's rowers demand to be paid the same as the starting QB, he'll sue for not getting his value.  And they'll sue for equal pay.  Rock and hard place.

 

13 hours ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

Title IX doesn't give a shit about the market.  The university level administrators and their Federal guidance are seeking "equitable" treatment for females vs. males from the university -> student.  That's why we have a women's rowing team with literally dozens of fans that recruits any female willing to sign up on campus; so we can have the same # of scholarships for men and women.  Doesn't matter to the government that there isn't an equivalent female sport to football...85 scholarships are 85 scholarships.  Also won't mater to the government Title IX administrators that the market value of the starting QB is higher than the volleyball libero's...$1 to him has to be $1 to her (note: IF it's coming from the university) or it's not Title IX compliant...

The only way I see to work this out is to pay everyone equal, and establish that as a "floor" to keep the schools from getting sued: "See, we're rev sharing with our athletes!  And yes it's Title IX equal!"  Then, keep the NIL collective structure in place to pay the market value out to those whose market value actually dictates it.  Anyone dreaming all of this will end up under the school umbrella is wrong, there's just no way to manage it save a huge legislative overhaul at the Federal level which won't happen.

I can't tell if NIL is a part of Title IX or not.  The journalists are discussing NIL as though it was a part of the athletic budget.  

 

But otherwise T9 is not an insurmountable problem.  The schools figure out what % they have to pay to the gender racket and cough it up.

[closetohumping 17299]

7 hours ago, jTower said:

No. It will kill it. 

Yea I think you’re right.  

[Al_4_ISU 12326]

8 hours ago, jTower said:

No. It will kill it. 

It will kill it as we know it for sure.

I'm not convinced people who never went to college, but are still huge college sports fans, would care.  But you would disenfranchise the actual alums of these schools, and that would irrevocably alter what this product look likes.

So I think we basically agree.  I think there would still be people playing football and people watching, but far fewer of them, and not enough to matter the way it matters now.  The budgets, the atmosphere, etc all would be dogshit compared to today.

[Wally Fairway 5494]

The solution, in my crazy proposal, is to split the 2 big revenue sports (football & mens basketball) out from the NCAA and out from direct oversight by the universities. You would then create a sports franchise (minor league) that will be located in the home city of these universities, the university would license the school name/mascot/colors etc and also rent facilities for the teams to use for training, practice, residence, and stadiums for competition.  There could be agreements to allow players to attend the school, and I am sure there are alumni groups that would love to fund this set up and have an ownership stake in said affiliated sports franchise. 
I've thought this for a few years, as a way to deal with Title IX issues, but really with the changes brought by NIL we are miles closer to this model being actually viable..

FWIW - this model would only apply to the top divisions of football and hoops at the college level; DII and lower would still be able to maintain being under the Athletic Dept. In all honesty, playoff eligible football and top level mens hoops programs have become defacto minor league sports with NIL money for "salaries"

Lots of bugs and details to something like this, but it isn't as far from what is actually happening as it was only 2 years ago.