That was my point. The argument for keeping the 'lady vols' logo is an isolated phenomenon.
Title IX is not about equality. It's about getting greedy little hands on the football money.
We have rowing, soccer and volleyball teams thanks to Title IX--and yea, thanks to the athletic department spreading around the money so more kids, more women, can participate in collegiate sports. Are you suggesting that the football program doesn't spend enough money already? Get real--SEC football programs are like Roman circuses---quasi-professional programs that are way over the top. Our football defensive coordinator--not the head coach, a coordinator--makes more than $1 million. So I find your comment so wrong-headed as to be humorous.
Not worth arguing with someone like this. The fact is that all non-revenue generating sports, including men's track, cross-country, baseball, wrestling, swimming, draw from the general AD fund and would also be struggling without support.
And thank God for that. Don't know what I'd do without women's crew.We have rowing, soccer and volleyball teams thanks to Title IX--and yea, thanks to the athletic department spreading around the money so more kids, more women, can participate in collegiate sports. Are you suggesting that the football program doesn't spend enough money already? Get real--SEC football programs are like Roman circuses---quasi-professional programs that are way over the top. Our football defensive coordinator--not the head coach, a coordinator--makes more than $1 million. So I find your comment so wrong-headed as to be humorous.
Not worth arguing with someone like this. The fact is that all non-revenue generating sports, including men's track, cross-country, baseball, wrestling, swimming, draw from the general AD fund and would also be struggling without support.
Your missing the point. Women's sports get a disproportionate number of schollies in these non revenue sports because men's football provides so many total scholarships.
If you want to compare, look at the min revenue generating sports and see see how many scholarships are given to men versus women.
The report said the difference was even greater among schools in the top-tier Football Bowl Subdivision, which spent an average of $27.3 million on mens sports in 2015 up from $12.8 million in 2005 and an average of $45,000 more on male athletes than women in 2015. The average spending on womens teams at FBS schools went from $5.5 million to $10.5 million during that same span.
Much of that money is dedicated to the gridiron, with FBS schools dedicating 60 percent of their mens athletic budget on football three times as much as mens basketball.
Disproportionate? Indeed:
http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/ncaa-title-ix-report-spending-up-gender-gaps-remain/
That's why I said non revenue. You're including football and men's basketball. Get rid of football and see how things go.
because I disagree with the decision? Who says my opinions should align with those of others? I'm pretty sure any reputable art designer in the country would say that the logo looks old and not good. Logos, even ones that are well established, get modernized all the time. No organization keeps the same logo, with the same design, for 30+ years. The program needs revitalization in every way. That is merely my opinion.