The Gophers have the makings of a very formidable team this season, provided of course there is a season. It will take a little time for the very talented freshman class to adjust to the faster pace of D1, but once they do they should make strong contributions to the team's overall success.
Interesting that her two older sisters thought Minnesota was the place they could see her playing at...
Not sure about Jessica, but Jincy would have had a lot of indirect experience with the Gophers program, having been coached by Muzz, Milica, and Westy, as well as JJ with USA U-18s. Maybe Josey just likes mascots where a lot of things spin?
"... And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;" -- Rudyard Kipling
Seems inevitable this will affect women's sports as well.
I doubt that it will. Almost every paragraph in the statement mentions Title IX, and they were recently audited for Title IX compliance. It would seem that they were not in compliance for percentages of participation that matches the U's student population (54% women). The two options would be to add women's teams or reduce men's. Covid probably killed any discussions about increasing teams, so this is the alternative. The fact that the number of male athletes cut is 58 suggests they would have needed to add at least 70 women's slots if they didn't cut men's. I'm not aware of any one sport that would have that many spots, so that means multiple teams with coaches and support staffs and facilities. Tough to do in a pandemic.
You doubt the revenue shortfall won't affect women's sports?
Hah! You are trying to trip me up with a double negative. So, rather than answering the question, I will state that I very much doubt that any women’s sport will be cut.
My reasons for saying this rest primarily on two factors. One is Title IX. If they cut any women’s sport, they will then be back in the position of having to cut another men’s sport. I do not think they want to cut any sports.
The second reason for saying that they will not cut more sports arises from the obscure science of accounting. Most, if not all, of the Athletic Department is set up as a non-profit. This allows us to deduct donations we made to the Department from our taxable income. But in order to qualify as a non-profit, they have to come up with “expenses” that offset their revenue. Athletic scholarships are a nice vehicle for this. You will notice that the amount “charged” from the academic side of the U, for example, is higher than the amount an average student would pay for the same classes and services. This allows the University to move money around the institution in such a way that the non-profits can continue to claim non-profit status. When the AD says they saved X dollars by cutting scholarships, the net savings to the University is zero.
I do not know what percent of the $75 million is donations, but I think that further cutting of sports puts that amount at risk. Of course, by cutting some sports to reach Title IX requirements, they now have an opportunity to approach donors in other sports and ask them to maintain their donations even without actual events in order to save those other sports.
Comment