2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

That's nice, but if the NCAA doesn't receive federal dollars, then Title IX does not apply to it no matter how it defines its mission. Further, the NCAA doesn't meet the definition of an "educational institution" as provided in the law:



As usual, I'll just refer people 34 CFR 106 to check out the actual regulations, which spell the above out in more detail.

I don't see the "as a result" part necessarily following from the bullet points you posted, but I'm glad the NCAA wants to abide by the spirit of the law.

Still disagree. "Educational institutions" have appointed the NCAA to organize and manage their athletics. That doesn't mean that they can skirt title ix. As such, the NCAA blowing off title ix would make it accomplice to breaking the law.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Still disagree. "Educational institutions" have appointed the NCAA to organize and manage their athletics. That doesn't mean that they can skirt title ix. As such, the NCAA blowing off title ix would make it accomplice to breaking the law.

You can have whatever opinion you want, but when it's contradicted by the actual regulations, it doesn't mean anything. The fact is, what institutions they apply to is spelled out concretely and the NCAA does not meet the definition. Before you keep arguing, look up the case NCAA v. Smith.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

I love the 'you can have your opinion, but your wrong' position. And I still disagree.

NCAA vs. Smith tested only that the NCAA did not receive federal funds.

"The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that the NCAA’s receipt of dues from federally funded member institutions would suffice to bring the Association within the scope of Title IX. We reject that determination as inconsistent with the governing statute, regulation, and this Court’s decisions."

It did not test whether the NCAA was held to title ix under law. The decision goes on...

"Dues payments from recipients of federal funds, we hold, do not suffice to render the dues recipient subject to Title IX. We do not address alternative grounds, urged by respondent and the United States as amicus curiae, in support of Title IX’s application to the NCAA in this litigation, and leave resolution of those grounds to the courts below on remand."

Hence a 9-0 decision which appears to go against the law itself...as it does not. Title ix is the law of the land.

 

[ARM]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Feel free to start a Title IX thread, for those of you who are into all the legalese.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

I read recently that Title IX does not apply to the organization called the NCAA.

Without context that is a rather interesting statement.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Since the title of this thread is "2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions", lets get back to that topic.

The predictions from the seven prognosticators sofar read like this:


MIN – RIT Votes: 7 – 0 ; Scores: 4-1, 7-1, 4-1, 6-2, Mercy, Minn, Minn
BC – CLA Votes: 4 – 3 ; Scores: 3-1, 5-1, 2-3, 2-3, BC, BC, CLA
HAR – QU Votes: 5 – 2 ; Scores: 1-2, 3-2, 4-1, 3-1, 2-1, QU, HAR
WIS – BU Votes: 3 – 4 ; Scores: 1-2, 3-1, 2-4, 4-3, 3-2, BU, BU

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Not really sure where to put this since the Pairwise thread he devolved into politics, so here is my tournament preview:

http://www.bcinterruption.com/ncaa-...ew-boston-college-minnesota-wisconsin-harvard

Well Done TTT, but copied this into the prediction section where it belongs...

Question for you on this great line from the article:
"So for the Eagles, it's certainly 3 wins to glory, but on the flip side, it's one loss to infamy. "

Do you think that would rival the Infamy of the 1940 loss to Montreal ?

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

I think it would be one of the biggest disappointments in BC sports history.

Also you can feel free to include my predictions in there in your tally lol

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Also you can feel free to include my predictions in there in your tally lol

LOL....The 7 voters in the poll from your article on a BC centric site are way to BC centric. Would skew the voting too much.

 

[ne7minder]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

"So for the Eagles, it's certainly 3 wins to glory, but on the flip side, it's one loss to infamy. "

Ya know, a team can have a great season & many have but somehow ending the season ruins everything. Wisconsin a couple years back, MN last year, syracuse nd BU recently also. Had great seasons, season that would make 99% of the teams in DI thrilled to death but one crappy loss, just in the last game somehow undoes all that & is reason for remorse. I get it but its sad.

 

[D2D]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

LOL....The 7 voters in the poll from your article on a BC centric site are way to BC centric. Would skew the voting too much.

More importantly, we all want to see Grant return next season.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

More importantly, we all want to see Grant return next season.

For sure. To put your comment in context, Directly quoted from the BC Interuption article:

"Predictions:

Grant Salzano: BC over Minnesota
Joe Gravellese: Harvard over BU
Brian Favat: BC over Minnesota
AJ Black: Minnesota over Harvard
Dan "New Guy" Rubin: BU over BC /Grant dies
Kwani Lunis: BC over Minnesota
HoyaEagle: BC over Minnesota, 98 to 4
CoachJF: Minnesota over Harvard"

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Ya know, a team can have a great season & many have but somehow ending the season ruins everything. Wisconsin a couple years back, MN last year, syracuse nd BU recently also. Had great seasons, season that would make 99% of the teams in DI thrilled to death but one crappy loss, just in the last game somehow undoes all that & is reason for remorse. I get it but its sad.

Listen. If you go undefeated for 28 games and then win *nothing*, that is a monumental disappointment.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

More importantly, we all want to see Grant return next season.

He's got to be out of eligibility by now.

 

[ne7minder]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Listen. If you go undefeated for 28 games and then win *nothing*, that is a monumental disappointment.

Disappointment, sure I suppose. monumental? Probably not. 28 wins is a great season, one worthy of celebration even if there is no trophy gathering dust in a cabinet from it.

 

[dave1381]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Disappointment, sure I suppose. monumental? Probably not. 28 wins is a great season, one worthy of celebration even if there is no trophy gathering dust in a cabinet from it.

Is there not a Hockey East regular season champions trophy?

But yeah, I agree that if this season ends with no Beanpot, no Hockey East championship, no NCAA championship, then that's a huge disappointment.

 

[KTDC]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

I think if the Gophers had lost in 2013 being 40-0 going into the last game the disappointment would have been pretty monumental. BC isn't unbeaten going into the tourney, but on the other hand they are getting hungry for their first one.

But I think you don't want to get like Steinbrenner and the Yankees, "the season's a failure if you don't win it all".

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Is there not a Hockey East regular season champions trophy?

Yeah, but, please lol.

We call that the UNH Memorial Championship round these parts because their men's team always won it but never won anything else. There's a negative stigma.

But yeah, I agree that if this season ends with no Beanpot, no Hockey East championship, no NCAA championship, then that's a huge disappointment.

This -- I'm not saying you have to WIN IT ALL every year, but you gotta win SOMETHING *this* year.

 

[KTDC]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

But I think you don't want to get like Steinbrenner and the Yankees, "the season's a failure if you don't win it all".

I'm not saying you have to WIN IT ALL every year, but you gotta win SOMETHING *this* year.

FWIW-I wasn't talking about TTT with my comment, I was more talking to myself and maybe some others who are tempted to fall into the trap!

 

[ARM]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

This -- I'm not saying you have to WIN IT ALL every year, but you gotta win SOMETHING *this* year.

I don't get how you can be that dismissive of a championship that your team had never won until last year. A lot of work goes into winning a regular season title, and it sets up your shot a winning the NCAAs. I get the disappointment, but to count it as nothing? The kids battle for four months for the chance to take that trophy, so I want to always respect that. Once they do, it sets up a shot at the other two tourneys, where a couple of good weekends earn a reward.

Looking back, it was probably good that Minnesota didn't win last year for the Gophers and their fans. It was all getting too commonplace and people weren't valuing each single title, and even each game won, like they should. Now, they know the sting of losing again and have a better appreciation of what it means to win. It's not the kill; it's the thrill of the chase.