MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: Pakuni on January 31, 2023, 09:59:22 AM
-
https://marquettewire.org/4091937/sports/marquette-tennis-and-track-field-teams-moving-to-non-scholarship-programs-in-2025-26/
-
https://marquettewire.org/4091937/sports/marquette-tennis-and-track-field-teams-moving-to-non-scholarship-programs-in-2025-26/
Out of curiosity does this have any impact on title 9? Or were both these programs men & women?
-
Out of curiosity does this have any impact on title 9? Or were both these programs men & women?
Both men and women Programs cut.
-
48 scholarships per year, about half of Wojo's buyout per annum.
-
48 scholarships per year, about half of Wojo's buyout per annum.
Not a factor if the rumor about an alum footing the bill for Wojo is true.
-
I would guess it’s getting more and more expensive to fund non-revenue sports and the ROI isn’t there to justify the scholarships.
-
Not a factor if the rumor about an alum footing the bill for Wojo is true.
Not directly a factor. But the same alum could have foot the bill to keep those as varsity sports.
Not saying he should have done so, just saying there's nuance.
For example, it's great that we have the collective for NIL, but some of the same people who donate to that will do so with money that otherwise might have gone to the overall athletic budget or to MU's general fund. That's not "bad." Or even good. It just is.
-
48 scholarships per year, about half of Wojo's buyout per annum.
Where will we park Wally now?
-
So 48 future students will now go elsewhere.
-
Not a factor if the rumor about an alum footing the bill for Wojo is true.
I didn't say it was. I just added that perspective.
Mine: Wojo would still be our coach if Mr. X didn't step up.
-
Billy Packer wuz write, aina?
-
So 48 future students will now go elsewhere.
Marquette has alternative scholarship sources.
-
Marquette has alternative scholarship sources.
So you are saying a student who can get a scholarship playing tennis or track and field at another school will take an alternative scholarship to attend Marquette that does not take their sport seriously? I don't think so.
-
Can't fund tennis, but people want to bring back football.
-
Can't fund tennis, but people want to bring back football.
Once the Warrior name is restored, the massive donation stream will return, funding football will be a no-brainer.
-
Both men and women Programs cut.
No programs were cut. Fully funding scholarships is not a requirement of Title IX.
-
So 48 future students will now go elsewhere.
And be replaced for 48 other future students.
-
And be replaced for 48 other future students.
At least they won’t get shot dead
-
So 48 future students will now go elsewhere.
No they won't. Many of these students were only receiving partial scholarships, if they were receiving any at all.
-
No programs were cut. Fully funding scholarships is not a requirement of Title IX.
Really? Is that not considered part of the investment that is supposed to equal out between men's and women's programs?
-
Really? Is that not considered part of the investment that is supposed to equal out between men's and women's programs?
This impacts both men’s and women’s programs I believe. Doesn’t Marquette already have more women’s scholarships due to volleyball?
-
I can't help but wonder if any of this is related to losing Joe True. The timing is about right.
-
And be replaced for 48 other future students.
Who will have to pay their own way, since the money is not there.
-
Really? Is that not considered part of the investment that is supposed to equal out between men's and women's programs?
I phrased it wrong. Scholarships count, but in this case there isn't a problem.
-
Who will have to pay their own way, since the money is not there.
As pointed out earlier, Marquette has other scholarships besides tennis and track and field partial scholarships. The only difference is that instead of this group of students getting part of their tuition paid for because they are good at tennis or track and field, they will have a different group of students getting part of their tuition paid for because of academics and service.
This move will negatively impact the quality of MU tennis and track and field programs. It will not negatively impact greater enrollment.
-
And be replaced for 48 other future students.
Some of us are interested in more than just the Men's basketbsll team.
-
I can't help but wonder if any of this is related to losing Joe True. The timing is about right.
(https://media.tenor.com/Qa3AU-SVV4MAAAAC/true.gif)
-
As pointed out earlier, Marquette has other scholarships besides tennis and track and field partial scholarships. The only difference is that instead of this group of students getting part of their tuition paid for because they are good at tennis or track and field, they will have a different group of students getting part of their tuition paid for because of academics and service.
This move will negatively impact the quality of MU tennis and track and field programs. It will not negatively impact greater enrollment.
So budget cuts cost athletes their scholarships, but there is money for other scholarships? Go figure, a big middle finger to the student athlete and budget cutting is just a ruse. If the money is there why cut?
-
It was already challenging enough before with some of the non-revenue sports. Top level performers in those sports expect full rides or close to it. It is common to combine partial athletic and partial academic scholarships and so forth for some of the other participants. The quality and quantity will drop significantly (obviously) without the athletic scholarships.
-
So budget cuts cost athletes their scholarships, but there is money for other scholarships? Go figure, a big middle finger to the student athlete and budget cutting is just a ruse. If the money is there why cut?
Maybe the university thought it more important to award scholarships based on need and academic accomplishments than ability to hit a tennis ball or heave a shotput?
-
Maybe the university thought it more important to award scholarships based on need and academic accomplishments than ability to hit a tennis ball or heave a shotput?
And, elsewhere, they can do both.
-
Marquette eSports still goin strong tho?
I’m getting pretty good at Fortnite. Squad up w me, bois
-
So budget cuts cost athletes their scholarships, but there is money for other scholarships? Go figure, a big middle finger to the student athlete and budget cutting is just a ruse. If the money is there why cut?
I’msure everyone who was promised a scholarship is getting one. No one is going to lose their athletic scholarship.
-
Maybe the university thought it more important to award scholarships based on need and academic accomplishments than ability to hit a tennis ball or heave a shotput?
Student athletes are not in need?
-
I'd guess these sports aren't very competitive and are losing the school money.
-
I know of at least one track scholarship that is endowed; I wonder what is going to happen to scholarships like that.
-
So you are saying a student who can get a scholarship playing tennis or track and field at another school will take an alternative scholarship to attend Marquette that does not take their sport seriously? I don't think so.
Very few people get full rides from track or tennis. For most the effect will be minimal.
-
Student athletes are not in need?
Some, sure. Not most. Athletes in non-revenue sports disproportionately come from wealthier families.
Which makes sense. Families with lower incomes generally can't afford top-level travel programs, private coaches, summer camps, and the other things that increase a kid's chance of becoming a scholarship athlete.
-
Some, sure. Not most. Athletes in non-revenue sports disproportionately come from wealthier families.
Which makes sense. Families with lower incomes generally can't afford top-level travel programs, private coaches, summer camps, and the other things that increase a kid's chance of becoming a scholarship athlete.
There are many more athletes than you may think or know about that get that financial assistance at younger ages via youth scholarships and aid in their sport. They most certainly expect and need that to continue at the college level. And they will go where they can get that. There are lots and lots of non-wealthy non revenue sports families.
Separately, even families that are more able to pay more, seek the best financial offer they can get. Recent example of a lost soccer recruit who received a very good offer, but not a full ride. That player chose a comparable program elsewhere. I know the family. They were not one of the many athletes with financial needs. It’s super competitive out there.
-
Student athletes are not in need?
If they are they would qualify for financial aid.
-
Some of us are interested in more than just the Men's basketbsll team.
As am I. I'm responding to the notion that this will somehow cause drop in enrollment
-
So budget cuts cost athletes their scholarships, but there is money for other scholarships? Go figure, a big middle finger to the student athlete and budget cutting is just a ruse. If the money is there why cut?
There is money, they are using it for other things. No one who was promised a scholarship is losing one, they just won't offer anymore either the future. Is MU not offering equestrian or fencing or wrestling scholarships a middle finger to student athletes?
This will negatively impact these programs. That's inarguable. It will not negatively impact the health of the university.
-
There are many more athletes than you may think or know about that get that financial assistance at younger ages via youth scholarships and aid in their sport. They most certainly expect and need that to continue at the college level. And they will go where they can get that. There are lots and lots of non-wealthy non revenue sports families.
Separately, even families that are more able to pay more, seek the best financial offer they can get. Recent example of a lost soccer recruit who received a very good offer, but not a full ride. That player chose a comparable program elsewhere. I know the family. They were not one of the many athletes with financial needs. It’s super competitive out there.
This is the kind of student Marquette will not get any longer, and Lovell is trying to recruit students to Marquette at Basketball pre-game gatherings?
-
There is money, they are using it for other things. No one who was promised a scholarship is losing one, they just won't offer anymore either the future. Is MU not offering equestrian or fencing or wrestling scholarships a middle finger to student athletes?
This will negatively impact these programs. That's inarguable. It will not negatively impact the health of the university.
It will negatively affect anyone past, present, or future who has been, is, or would have been affiliated with those programs in any way.
-
This is the kind of student Marquette will not get any longer, and Lovell is trying to recruit students to Marquette at Basketball pre-game gatherings?
What?
-
It will negatively affect anyone past, present, or future who has been, is, or would have been affiliated with those programs in any way.
What event did you do for track?
-
What event did you do for track?
Shoothoops did Archery
-
It will negatively affect anyone past, present, or future who has been, is, or would have been affiliated with those programs in any way.
I don't think I said otherwise
-
If they are they would qualify for financial aid.
That they would have to pay back, unlike an athletic scholarship.
-
There is money, they are using it for other things. No one who was promised a scholarship is losing one, they just won't offer anymore either the future. Is MU not offering equestrian or fencing or wrestling scholarships a middle finger to student athletes?
This will negatively impact these programs. That's inarguable. It will not negatively impact the health of the university.
Like what? If the money is there why take it away from a future student who is good at Tennis or Track? So you admit they are not really cutting the budget, they're just cutting a program because it does not bring value to Marquette and now they can offer financial aid to 48 other students who will have to pay it back.
-
Shoothoops did Archery
Gotta be tough (and sad) to carry around so much angst to somehow find a way to post it in a thread about Marquette tennis and track.
I support all of Marquette’s Women’s and Men’s teams.
-
That they would have to pay back, unlike an athletic scholarship.
Not necessarily. Marquette makes institutional financial aid grants.
-
Like what? If the money is there why take it away from a future student who is good at Tennis or Track? So you admit they are not really cutting the budget, they're just cutting a program because it does not bring value to Marquette and now they can offer financial aid to 48 other students who will have to pay it back.
1. They are cutting a budget. The budget for athletic scholarships.
2. I would hope Marquette cuts anything that doesn’t bring value.
3. Not all financial aid has to be paid back.
-
Like what? If the money is there why take it away from a future student who is good at Tennis or Track? So you admit they are not really cutting the budget, they're just cutting a program because it does not bring value to Marquette and now they can offer financial aid to 48 other students who will have to pay it back.
You understand that universities have more than one budget right?
-
You understand that universities have more than one budget right?
...and you are telling me that MU could not find cost cutting measures somewhere else without harming students access to an education? The price of an Marquette education is all too high as it is, then they do this.
-
I'd guess these sports aren't very competitive and are losing the school money.
Can't speak for tennis, but for track, the women were Big East CHAMPS in both the indoor and outdoor track seasons in 2016 & 2017, and the men were Big East CHAMPS during the outdoor season in both 2016 & 2018. Not sure how many Marquette programs can say they won >1 league title in the past 10 years.
This track & field program has had six athletes go on to compete in the Olympics in nine different events. MU athletes have collected four silver, one bronze and one gold medal. The program is in its 100th year in 2023, and is rewarded with a major budget cut.
-
Max allowed scholarships per NCAA D1:
Men's tennis - 4.5
Women's tennis - ~8
Men's T&F - 12.6
Women's T&F - 18
Men's soccer - 9
Women's soccer - 14
Baseball - 11.7
Softball - 12
-
Max allowed scholarships per NCAA D1:
Men's tennis - 4.5
Women's tennis - ~8
Men's T&F - 12.6
Women's T&F - 18
Men's soccer - 9
Women's soccer - 14
Baseball - 11.7
Softball - 12
So title IX is not equal per sport.
-
...and you are telling me that MU could not find cost cutting measures somewhere else without harming students access to an education? The price of an Marquette education is all too high as it is, then they do this.
They didn't harm a student's access to an education.
-
So title IX is not equal per sport.
Nothing in Title IX requires a school to have an equal number of men's and women's scholarship for each sport. If it did, we would have D1 women's football and Marquette would be out of compliance for not having men's volleyball.
-
I think every women's sport had more scholarships allowed than men's sports, football excluded.
-
Nothing in Title IX requires a school to have an equal number of men's and women's scholarship for each sport. If it did, we would have D1 women's football and Marquette would be out of compliance for not having men's volleyball.
I thought there had to be an equal number for men and women scholarships. So which mens sport make up the difference at Marquette. According to this if a school does not have a D1 football team Title IX really screws the men as the women are allowed more scholarships then men.
https://www.athleticscholarships.net/division-1-colleges-schools.htm
-
So you are saying a student who can get a scholarship playing tennis or track and field at another school will take an alternative scholarship to attend Marquette that does not take their sport seriously? I don't think so.
I’ve seen it happen many times. There are a lot of advantages to that path. For an athlete, it can be fantastic to not have your financial aid money/scholarship tied to a sport. Many students still use non-profit sports as a means to and end — getting in to college and getting it paid for. Sometimes it’s even better if you can use it to get in — but use other dollars to get it paid for.
Being an a D1 athlete is a full-time job and a grind. To have the freedom to drop the sport and still have your education paid for can be a wonderful thing for some kids.
*Edited to add: nothing above is intended to suggest that this move won’t detract from the competitiveness of the affected programs. Undoubtedly, it will.
-
The good news is the programs themselves are not being dropped . Scholarship counts go up and down in these minor sports at many schools.
An enterprising young student journalist did the research to bring this policy change out in the open.
If someone wants to participate in Track and Field at the D-1 Level , with all the training and health support ,they can still do it MU.
-
I thought there had to be an equal number for men and women scholarships. So which mens sport make up the difference at Marquette. According to this if a school does not have a D1 football team Title IX really screws the men as the women are allowed more scholarships then men.
https://www.athleticscholarships.net/division-1-colleges-schools.htm
You thought incorrectly and no it doesn't screw men. Marquette's gender ratio is 56% women, 44% men. There should be more opportunities available for women than men at Marquette because there are more women in need of opportunity.
-
Very few people get full rides from track or tennis. For most the effect will be minimal.
Honestly, it sounds more like the Ivy League model. I know of students who were recruited for Yale for Track & Field. My daughter's friend went to NYU for Shot Put and Discus as she was recruited and was given other scholarships. I'm guessing this is more common than most people think.
-
As was stated in the article, NCAA funding was down considerably due to COVID as was general athletic and university operations revenue. In this case, the Blue & Gold fund which is the funding mechanism for athletic scholarships. If you care, give.
As Scholl states, MUAD can always add back these athletic scholarships but they had to prioritize.
-
Can someone explain what makes a sport D1? I thought part of it was offering athletic scholarships?
If that isn't a requirement, why didn't Marquette just make wrestling non-scholarship instead of ending the program in the early 2000s?
Could the Marquette club swimming and diving or club men's volleyball be D1 non-scholarship programs?
-
Can someone explain what makes a sport D1? I thought part of it was offering athletic scholarships?
If that isn't a requirement, why didn't Marquette just make wrestling non-scholarship instead of ending the program in the early 2000s?
Could the Marquette club swimming and diving or club men's volleyball be D1 non-scholarship programs?
A sport isn't division one. A school is. To be division one, a school must offer at least seven sports for men and women. Right now, Marquette is at that minimum - basketball, cross country, lacrosse, track, tennis and soccer for both. Golf for men. Volleyball for women. There are scholarship maximums for each sport, but no minimums. A school can be division one and offer no athletic scholarships at all. There are also requirements as to minimum roster size and minimum number of games. There is also some sort of financial aid requirement, but that doesn't need to be funded specifically through athletic scholarships.
Could they have kept wrestling? Can they take up men's volleyball or swimming and diving? They answer to all of those is yes. But unless there is a clear recruitment strategy around those, they may end up just being money losers for the University.
Put it this way, if they ever dropped the number of sports needed to be eligible for Division One, I have no doubt Marquette would drop additional sports entirely.
-
You thought incorrectly and no it doesn't screw men. Marquette's gender ratio is 56% women, 44% men. There should be more opportunities available for women than men at Marquette because there are more women in need of opportunity.
So Marquette accepts more women because there are more available scholarships to offer? Are you saying Marquette can have more women on athletic scholarships than men?
-
Could they have kept wrestling? Can they take up men's volleyball or swimming and diving? They answer to all of those is yes. But unless there is a clear recruitment strategy around those, they may end up just being money losers for the University.
I don't disagree with anything you're saying in your post...but I think that it's pretty clear that virtually all sports other than Football and MBB are money losers for the University (and even a lot of those two outside the P6). I suspect that the number of non-FB/MBB programs that actually earn money for a University are very few and far between.
-
So Marquette accepts more women because there are more available scholarships to offer? Are you saying Marquette can have more women on athletic scholarships than men?
Marquette accepts more women because there are a LOT more women who attend college.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/236360/undergraduate-enrollment-in-us-by-gender/
-
I don't disagree with anything you're saying in your post...but I think that it's pretty clear that virtually all sports other than Football and MBB are money losers for the University (and even a lot of those two outside the P6). I suspect that the number of non-FB/MBB programs that actually earn money for a University are very few and far between.
I'm going to disagree with you slightly on this. If participation in a sport is the difference between attending Marquette or another school, having a coach show a place for them might be enough to get them to choose Marquette. Especially in individualized sports like Track and Field / Cross Country. It's hard to measure sure, but there are about 80-90 track athletes at MU that are currently dividing about 30 scholarships. How many of that other 50-60 of FTE would have come to Marquette at all without a track & field program?
-
I'm going to disagree with you slightly on this. If participation in a sport is the difference between attending Marquette or another school, having a coach show a place for them might be enough to get them to choose Marquette. Especially in individualized sports like Track and Field / Cross Country. It's hard to measure sure, but there are about 80-90 track athletes at MU that are currently dividing about 30 scholarships. How many of that other 50-60 of FTE would have come to Marquette at all without a track & field program?
I think that's fair. But, I also think that if those 80-90 track athletes choose to not attend Marquette, they likely will be replaced by 80-90 other students. If we want to surmise that they will be replaced by 80-90 track athletes, then that likely would be a cost savings for the University in terms of scholarship expenses (and almost certainly a savings for the Athletics Department). If the program is cut entirely and they are replaced by 80-90 non-athletes, there will be a scholarship-based cost savings for the University and an additional cost savings in terms of the other costs of the program (e.g., salaries, equipment, travel, etc.). I suspect that on average, universities spend considerably less money on non-athletes than on athletes.
I think that where this kind of thing (i.e., using sports to drive admissions) really comes into play is in lower divisions. I think Mount Union in Ohio is a good example. They have 200+ kids on their football roster. That's damn near 10% of their total enrollment. If those kids suddenly stopped attending Mount Union their total enrollment likely would dip. I don't think Marquette's total enrollment would be affected if 80-90 track athletes chose not to attend. If they keep the track program, they'll probably get 80-90 track athletes who, as a group, are somewhat less talented than the prior 80-90. If they cut the program entirely, they'd probably get 80-90 other students.
-
I think that's fair. But, I also think that if those 80-90 track athletes choose to not attend Marquette, they likely will be replaced by 80-90 other students. If we want to surmise that they will be replaced by 80-90 track athletes, then that likely would be a cost savings for the University in terms of scholarship expenses (and almost certainly a savings for the Athletics Department). If the program is cut entirely and they are replaced by 80-90 non-athletes, there will be a scholarship-based cost savings for the University and an additional cost savings in terms of the other costs of the program (e.g., salaries, equipment, travel, etc.). I suspect that on average, universities spend considerably less money on non-athletes than on athletes.
I think that where this kind of thing (i.e., using sports to drive admissions) really comes into play is in lower divisions. I think Mount Union in Ohio is a good example. They have 200+ kids on their football roster. That's damn near 10% of their total enrollment. If those kids suddenly stopped attending Mount Union their total enrollment likely would dip. I don't think Marquette's total enrollment would be affected if 80-90 track athletes chose not to attend. If they keep the track program, they'll probably get 80-90 track athletes who, as a group, are somewhat less talented than the prior 80-90. If they cut the program entirely, they'd probably get 80-90 other students.
Why do you think those athletes would be replaced by 80-90 other students? Marquette isn't at capacity by any means. They would take those 80-90 students right now - assuming they are qualified.
-
Why do you think those athletes would be replaced by 80-90 other students? Marquette isn't at capacity by any means. They would take those 80-90 students right now - assuming they are qualified.
That's a fair question. It's an assumption I'm making and it absolutely could be wrong. As I look back to the initial post of yours that I referred to, you were referencing sports that we do not have -- so you were talking about cutting (or not having programs). In that context, I think you may be correct. Once you cut wrestling, those wrestlers are gone and that might well result in a net reduction of students.
To the extent the conversation then shifted to track and field -- a sport that will continue as a non-scholarship sport -- I suspect that MU will still attract the athletes to fill the program. As I understand it, the majority of the athletes are non-scholarship even now (although it's an equivalency sport so it's hard to know how many have partials). I suspect most track athletes who have the talent level to justify an athletic scholarship will elect to go somewhere else in the future. I also suspect that they will be replaced by non-scholarship athletes who find Marquette to be a more appealing non-scholarship opportunity than some other schools. I think athletes in non-revenue sports -- particularly those with limited scholarship -- are still often looking to go to bigger and better schools.
On a somewhat related note, I wonder if anyone on 'Scoop knows if MU has historically fully funded all of its non-revenue sports with max scholarships (aside from an occasional open scholarship due to unforeseen circumstances).
-
On a somewhat related note, I wonder if anyone on 'Scoop knows if MU has historically fully funded all of its non-revenue sports with max scholarships (aside from an occasional open scholarship due to unforeseen circumstances).
Currently, Marquette funds the equivalent of 96 full-tuition scholarships on an annual basis through revenues generated by annual giving and proceeds from athletic endowed scholarships. The NCAA permits Marquette to offer the equivalent of 136 full athletic scholarships and we have not yet reached our potential to maximize our aid to our student-athletes.
https://mubbgameday.com/fund-mission.html
-
Currently, Marquette funds the equivalent of 96 full-tuition scholarships on an annual basis through revenues generated by annual giving and proceeds from athletic endowed scholarships. The NCAA permits Marquette to offer the equivalent of 136 full athletic scholarships and we have not yet reached our potential to maximize our aid to our student-athletes.
Thank you. I appreciate that. The obvious next question if anyone knows: what sports are not fully funded. That's 40 scholarships -- roughly 30% -- that are not being funded. That makes me curious if the funding for T&F and Tennis was already not being used and this is just making it official. Or if this means that the 96 that historically funded is going to be reduced by another 30.
The scholarship limits are below.
Men's Sports
BB - 13
XC/T&F - 12.6
Golf - 4.5
LAX - 12.6
Soccer - 9.9
Tennis - 4.5
Total Men's Available: 57.1
Women's Sports
BB - 15
CC/T&F - 18
LAX - 12
Soccer - 14
Tennis - 8
VB - 12
Total Women's Available: 79
-
So Marquette accepts more women because there are more available scholarships to offer? Are you saying Marquette can have more women on athletic scholarships than men?
To your first question, no. They accept more women because there are a lot more women going to college than men. IIRC, in 2021 almost 60% of college students in the states were female.
To your second question, yes. Title IX doesn't require equality in sports, they require equity in sports. If a university enrolls more women they can offer more athletic scholarships to women. The opposite is also true.
-
To your first question, no. They accept more women because there are a lot more women going to college than men. IIRC, in 2021 almost 60% of college students in the states were female.
To your second question, yes. Title IX doesn't require equality in sports, they require equity in sports. If a university enrolls more women they can offer more athletic scholarships to women. The opposite is also true.
...and how is capping 4 scholarships for men and 8 for women in golf equitable. The cap has no correlation to enrollment demographics. It appears discriminatory on the face of it to me.
-
...and how is capping 4 scholarships for men and 8 for women in golf equitable. The cap has no correlation to enrollment demographics. It appears discriminatory on the face of it to me.
Log off
-
...and how is capping 4 scholarships for men and 8 for women in golf equitable. The cap has no correlation to enrollment demographics. It appears discriminatory on the face of it to me.
Are you arguing just to argue again?
-
There goes our national ranking.
-
Are you arguing just to argue again?
The new Scoop motto
-
...and how is capping 4 scholarships for men and 8 for women in golf equitable. The cap has no correlation to enrollment demographics. It appears discriminatory on the face of it to me.
First, the correct numbers are 4.5 for men and 6 for women which translates out to approximately 57% of the golf scholarships going to women and 43% to men which actually means that men are overrepresented compared to the overall college population.
Second, Title IX requires overall equity between all of a university's athletics. Not equity within individual sports. Again, if we required equity in individual sports, we would have women's football and MU would be punished for not having men's volleyball.
-
I thought about this move a little more. I bet Gonzaga is joining the conference.
-
This is disappointing.
Anyone who tries to spin this as anything other but a kick in the balls for these programs and the athletes/alumni associated with them is being disingenuous.
-
This is disappointing.
Anyone who tries to spin this as anything other but a kick in the balls for these programs and the athletes/alumni associated with them is being disingenuous.
I don't think anyone is spinning it any such way.