SoCal_Pony wrote:The athletic department owes it to all of us to tell us exactly how much money we are saving annually by cutting our track team.
The DMN says-
"Athletic director Jim Copeland said SMU will save an estimated $5.4 million over the next four years by eliminating track and cross country."
Who has the address that would actually get a letter in the hands of the Board of Trustees? Who should it be addressed to?
I certainly think everyone needs a better explanation. Why did it happen so suddenly? Why couldn't they wait till the end of the track season? Why didn't they give them notice?
The $5.4M savings has two components. The first component is the savings in the actual cost of running a men's track program (scholarships, salaries, uniforms, travel expenses). The second component is the savings in not starting up another women's sport to remain in compliance with Title IX.
Please recall that Title IX ompliance requires equivalent funding, 'ships for women and men, or progress to be made in that direction. If we kept track, the only way to get into complaince with Title IX or make progress toward it is to add yet another women's sport.
At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
