ND <t>From the way Mike Frank and Coach D talk about it, I don't think Baratti's future as far as playing time is very good.</t>
A very nice article about Charlie Weis and the next stage of his life: http://bleacherreport.com/tb/dg0Gp?...m=newsletter&utm_campaign=notre-dame-football
I read that article and have been trying to think of a response. Charlie is a complex person, when you read about the things he and his wife have done for charity, mostly their foundation, it is impressive and he comes off very well. When he's moved on from something, aka has been fired, after a cooling down period he seems to have accepted things and acknowledges his part in the failure. But when he was at ND, if you remember Fr. Hesburgh had to call him in and talk with him about how he was handling the job. The word was that he was very difficult to work with/for and was quite frankly rude and offensive to staffers. But his old players seem to be fine with him, he's going to be attending Jimmy Clausen's wedding. I never heard Quinn, or Samarzdja say anything negative about Charlie. Complex guy. I don't doubt though that Charlie worked as hard as any coach in the business, but to me he's also been a hard guy to like.
Speaking of hard guys to like.... Brian Kelly still has a lot of balls in the air with regards to the staff going forward. Part of it is due to ND having probably the most rigorous vetting process in college football, no doubt a reaction to the O'Leary debacle. Tod Lyght seems to be onboard although not officially announced. Mike Sanford also onboard but not official. Autry Denson...talked about and supposedly interviewing this week. Jeff Quinn...talked about but nobody knows what he's going to do Mike Elston...moving from DL to LB's talked about but nobody knows. Bob Elliot..moving to administrative staff but nobody knows if he wants to do that. Who's the OCoord? Denbrock? Sanford? Shared Duites? Co-Coord? Denbrock in charge of recruiting? Everybody likes that, he's apparently a good recruiter and a hard worker. Elston is been given a title with regards to recruiting, but I read he's not a good recruiter and doesn't like to work hard at it. Who's going to coach the DL? Bryant Young? Mo Crum coming back as a GA and will work with LB's. If Quinn does come will he be a 3rd OCoord? He's an OL coach so some (Priester) speculate he'll coach TE's and Booker will move to Safety's with Lyght doing the CB's and Bob Elliot to the admin staff. What about ST? Wait those don't matter, do they so no biggie. A lot of balls in the air that's all I can say.
New trend for ND, been done a lot of other places for a long time. But this is a first for ND. A former womens basketball player who played for Muffett McGraw in her early days at ND, and her husband also a former varsity athlete (Tennis) have donated 5M to fund the Womens HC endowment. http://www.und.com/sports/w-baskbl/spec-rel/021615aab.html Now if they could only get the $$$ together to fund a new practice facility for basketball that would be peachy!
ND <r>Terry,<br/> <br/> You're right about the coaching staff confusion right now. I'm hopeful all this clears up one way or another because Spring Ball is only a few weeks away now. <br/> <E></E></r>
Stanford and USC have all 85 of their football scholarships endowed and their HC's salary is endowed. Don't know if they have endowed any womens sports, but at Stanford for sure I'd be surprised if they hadn't.
endowment or not, dollar for dollar, if you spend it on the men then you have to spend it on the women. The way we used to get around Title IX restrictions was to have a 'baseball club', but most athletic departments still tightly regulate such donations and endowments to make sure you aren't totally circumventing Title IX distribution. The problem will always be football, which is why I'd kinda like to see college football break away from the NCAA and become it's own independent athletic entity. I'm all for equality. That's not what we have at the moment. I think it's great that we're seeing the women give back to the programs that have done so much for them though.
Corey I don't follow. Why would football breaking away from the NCAA have any effect on the impact of Title IX?
Since it's an endowment/gift I don't know why the person/person's making the endowment can't specify that it's exclusively for men's or women's programs. The gift doesn't go against the Title IX mandate of equal opportunity for women. They still get their scholarships, it's only impacts the University not having to foot the bill for the scholarship, the endowment does that.
T, It's about allocation. If you are truly compliant with Title IX, every dollar spent on men must be spent on women. That's not to say everyone does that, but not everyone has been sued either. There's a difference. Once the suit has been filed and they bring in the Title IX people to review spending, it's a dollar for dollar match. Gip, As stated above, it's about allocation of athletic department funds. If football were to break away from the athletic department, it would technically fall outside the realm of Title IX enforcement. It's an idea that I've seen several schools, and their legal departments, kick around but no one has the balls to do it because football (despite being more of an anchor than a cash cow) is the reason to spend across the board in women's sports. In the past 30 years, we've seen men's sports cut across the board and some schools are literally making women's sports up. (Wasn't it just a few years ago Terry was talking about Texas having a women's rowing team?) In the larger picture, people tend to look at things through DI big conference budgets, but that's not the reality in the macro. When I worked at UMD, they had just gone through an exhaustive Title IX lawsuit. The end result was the loss of their wrestling, skiing, track & field and I believe one or two more men's programs. The women's programs were fully funded top to bottom, which means every women's team received the maximum amount of scholarships that can be provided at the DII level. Meanwhile, those men's teams who survived the chopping block were forced to share 1 or 2 scholarships spread across the entire team. The elephant in the room that even the best and most ardent supporters of Title IX will tell you is that there is no equivalent for football. There just isn't, and nor will there be. There's not enough interest in women's football, even from the women, to justify that sort of spending. If you walk the halls of these athletic departments, Title IX enforcement is just one of those things people have learned to live with as unfair as it is. It's just the sad reality of it. However, it doesn't have to be. You can break it down further to make the comparison between softball and baseball. There aren't as many players in softball as there are in baseball. However, the NCAA considers them to be the same. One has at a minimum 28 roster sports and the other has 22. The smaller is usually fully funded while the larger is forced to make due with 2 to 3 rides. That's quite literally the difference between attending school for free vs getting half your books paid for by the school. Hockey translates well. Track and field is another solid comparison.. basketball etc. There are sports in which it works, but the law is not applied equally when there is genuine difference/inequality unless that inequality benefits the women's athletic department. Again, a lot has to do with whether or not you've been sued (and lost, because you will lose, it's almost impossible to be fully compliant unless it's mandated). We don't really take an even approach to Title IX. I understand that 'we have to pay for past sins' but I'd make the argument that we're god damned near there. We need to assess how this is done/applied because what we're doing now is madness. However, they won't do that now.. because like the men in the past, the women hold the power and aren't going to give it up. Removing football would do that.
Corey So if football were "outside the athletic department" would that somehow make scholarships awarded for football "non athletic?" I don't think so. It seems to me that as long as schools are awarding scholarships for football they will have to grand the same number to women even if football isn't part of the athletic department. If it came to a law suit, I can't see any court concurring with the argument that football scholarships aren't athletic scholarships.
Gip, You're not seeing this all the way through using the lenses of the NCAA. If football pulls out, they're gone. No more NCAA ********. No more scholarship restrictions. No more silly compliance rules that apply to some, but not all. Football would be different. You'd be removing it from the equation entirely. It would be outside the athletic department. It's more doable than you think, but people are too afraid to let go of that cash cow. I know you guys think I'm full of it, but the NCAA has been close to going 'poof' in the past year and I told you both times it was coming. You can think it's ********. You can disagree. We're not actually at odds in our opinions on this... but it's certainly possible and may well happen in your lifetime. You're missing the very real possibility of semipro football at the colleges. That's where this is going.
Good win for the Irish women last night, when I turned the game on they were down 10-2 to Duke, at home. I thought uh oh.. But they got going and at 20-19 Duke was done. They cruised home to a 13 point win. They have played or will play before the end of the season 6 of the current top 10. They have beaten #5 Maryland, #6 Tenn, #9 FSU and #10 Duke...still have game with #8 Louisville. Of course lost to UConn. UConn is the clear #1 in women's basketball and after they destroyed So. Carolina they are the overwhelming favorite for another NCAA title. Men play Wake Forrest tonight, Wake came within an eyelashs of upsetting UVA this past weekend. Hopefully our 6 days off has refreshed our players and they will come out ready to play.
Now being reported that Autry Denson is in at ND as the RB coach and that Keith Gilmore a DL coach at UNC is in line to be our next DL coach with Mike Elston moving to coach the LB's with BVG. Bob Elliot to Admin role.
ND <t>Looks like Autry Denson is a done deal for our next RB coach. From what I read and hear he should help us in recruiting Florida a lot. With Sanford, Lyght and Denson, I'm starting to feel a lot better about losing Alford.</t>
I hope we get somebody, maybe Lyght, who can do a good job in Texas. Cooks was responsible for Texas and was doing a good job. We need our top guys in Texas, Fla, and California/West Coast. The new guy we are apparently bringing in, Gilmore, should be a big help with the Mid Atlantic and Tidewater Area. Now that we're in the ACC those are big area's for us.