ADVERTISEMENT

Dismantling Christine Grant's Legacy

FG86

HR MVP
Feb 24, 2014
1,385
3
38
Beth Beglin, former field hockey coach turned attorney, has written an open letter "Dismantling Christine Grant's Legacy," outlining how Grant's 27 years of work at Iowa has been dismantled. She provides many examples of gender inequity under Gary Barta and shows how the badly the athletic department performance has declined under Barta.

Interesting piece. Just by the examples of inequity she provided, it seems Newkirk and those behind the scenes have done quite a bit of homework, and seemingly will have a pretty good case against Barta and UI.
 
Originally posted by Titanhawk2:
Case for what? Is he being charged with something?
Are you being sarcastic or are you just completely clueless what is going on in the UI athletic department?
 
Ok FG, you have finally gone on the record with an opinion, that it is "seemingly...a pretty good case."

So let's hear your analysis. You shouldn't hide behind "just posting the facts" anymore.
 
Originally posted by theIowaHawk:
Ok FG, you have finally gone on the record with an opinion, that it is "seemingly...a pretty good case."

So let's hear your analysis. You shouldn't hide behind "just posting the facts" anymore.
I read the information and there seems to be inequity in pay and how things are handled. Not sure it is necessarily an opinion. Beth has laid out some facts that seemingly give them a pretty good case. She lays out information regarding Barta's restructuring of associate ADs, adding deputy AD, etc. that indicates he violated the 2000 Merger Memorandum.

Here is one example given re: salaries:

The following salary changes occurred during the 15 head coaching transitions in nonrevenue
sports:

o During transitions when the head coach was replaced by the same gender, the
sole increase for a female coach was $2,47 9 as compared to the $19,520 average
increase for five male head coaches. Three female coaches and three male
coaches received salary decreases from their predecessor, with the female
coaches averaging a$3,796 greater decrease than male coaches ($25,995 to
$22,I99 respectively).

o During transitions when the head coach was replaced by the opposite gender,
the lone female coach that replaced a male coach (tennis) received a salary
decrease of $1,851 while the two male coaches replacing female coaches (rowing
and volleyball) averaged a salary increase of $25,402.
 
Originally posted by FG86:


Originally posted by theIowaHawk:
Ok FG, you have finally gone on the record with an opinion, that it is "seemingly...a pretty good case."

So let's hear your analysis. You shouldn't hide behind "just posting the facts" anymore.
I read the information and there seems to be inequity in pay and how things are handled. Not sure it is necessarily an opinion. Beth has laid out some facts that seemingly give them a pretty good case. She lays out information regarding Barta's restructuring of associate ADs, adding deputy AD, etc. that indicates he violated the 2000 Merger Memorandum.

Here is one example given re: salaries:

The following salary changes occurred during the 15 head coaching transitions in nonrevenue
sports:

o During transitions when the head coach was replaced by the same gender, the
sole increase for a female coach was $2,47 9 as compared to the $19,520 average
increase for five male head coaches. Three female coaches and three male
coaches received salary decreases from their predecessor, with the female
coaches averaging a$3,796 greater decrease than male coaches ($25,995 to
$22,I99 respectively).

o During transitions when the head coach was replaced by the opposite gender,
the lone female coach that replaced a male coach (tennis) received a salary
decrease of $1,851 while the two male coaches replacing female coaches (rowing
and volleyball) averaged a salary increase of $25,402.
Could it be because the male sports bring in more revenue? Football, Basketball, Wrestling, are all three money makers. The rest I'm not exactly sure of.

Why report this on the Football board by the way?
 
Originally posted by Aegon_Targaryen:
Originally posted by FG86:


Originally posted by theIowaHawk:
Ok FG, you have finally gone on the record with an opinion, that it is "seemingly...a pretty good case."

So let's hear your analysis. You shouldn't hide behind "just posting the facts" anymore.
I read the information and there seems to be inequity in pay and how things are handled. Not sure it is necessarily an opinion. Beth has laid out some facts that seemingly give them a pretty good case. She lays out information regarding Barta's restructuring of associate ADs, adding deputy AD, etc. that indicates he violated the 2000 Merger Memorandum.

Here is one example given re: salaries:

The following salary changes occurred during the 15 head coaching transitions in nonrevenue
sports:

o During transitions when the head coach was replaced by the same gender, the
sole increase for a female coach was $2,47 9 as compared to the $19,520 average
increase for five male head coaches. Three female coaches and three male
coaches received salary decreases from their predecessor, with the female
coaches averaging a$3,796 greater decrease than male coaches ($25,995 to
$22,I99 respectively).

o During transitions when the head coach was replaced by the opposite gender,
the lone female coach that replaced a male coach (tennis) received a salary
decrease of $1,851 while the two male coaches replacing female coaches (rowing
and volleyball) averaged a salary increase of $25,402.
Could it be because the male sports bring in more revenue? Football, Basketball, Wrestling, are all three money makers. The rest I'm not exactly sure of.

Why report this on the Football board by the way?
I guess you didn't really read what I posted. Male coaches coaching FEMALE sports are getting more money. And it also mentions what is occurring in NONREVENUE sports.

I posted it on here because people are always on here hooting and hollering about Barta. If they are able to make a case against him, it is possible, especially with a new president coming in that he may not retain his position at UI.
 
Or, they were replaced with people without as much experience. If an exiting coach has say 10 years of HC experience, and the incoming coach has less than that, at a lower level, why reward this.

Christine Grants legacy includes saddling us with a sport no iowa kid plays, that has no public appeal in this part of the world
 
Originally posted by cecilB:
Or, they were replaced with people without as much experience. If an exiting coach has say 10 years of HC experience, and the incoming coach has less than that, at a lower level, why reward this.

Christine Grants legacy includes saddling us with a sport no iowa kid plays, that has no public appeal in this part of the world
When Grant started field hockey, it was being played in Iowa. I don't know how attendance is now but when Davidson was there, they had as much attendance or more than some of the men's nonrevenue sports.

Field hockey is one of UI's more successful sports. Without field hockey, we'd really be buried in the director's cup.
 
Originally posted by Section8:
I thought he might be talking about rowing (crew).
Well rowing has had I believe 3 appearances in NCAA championships, none under Barta, of course.

How many Iowa high schools have boys' gymnastics?
 
Mans so the relentless drumbeat continues. Keep banging that drum and perhaps people will give in to your demands.

At least provide a link to the letter if not the text.

In curious though where this former coach gains the authority and audacity to speak about any of this. A full investigation was conducted. I wonder how many kids need to complain before it is a real problem? 4 girls have come forward to file this latest claim if discrimination. I hope the players that initially complained about abuse sue the hell out if those girls and this former coach.
 
Originally posted by FG86:

Originally posted by theIowaHawk:
Ok FG, you have finally gone on the record with an opinion, that it is "seemingly...a pretty good case."

So let's hear your analysis. You shouldn't hide behind "just posting the facts" anymore.
I read the information and there seems to be inequity in pay and how things are handled. Not sure it is necessarily an opinion. Beth has laid out some facts that seemingly give them a pretty good case. She lays out information regarding Barta's restructuring of associate ADs, adding deputy AD, etc. that indicates he violated the 2000 Merger Memorandum.
Well you said that Newkirk seemingly had a pretty good case against Barta. Newkirk is the attorney for Griesbaum....so you are apparently giving opinion that her case is a pretty good one.

What about Griesbaum's case is a good one? That there is pay inequality?

Or are you saying there is a "pretty good case", just in general, of inequality? You confuse me with the word "case." What case?
 
You have to look into more than just numbers. What were the qualifications of the people that were hired? You have to look at each individual case of pay to determine if there was inequality. You can't just put out numbers without more information. That doesn't make a good case.
 
Originally posted by David1979:
You have to look into more than just numbers. What were the qualifications of the people that were hired? You have to look at each individual case of pay to determine if there was inequality. You can't just put out numbers without more information. That doesn't make a good case.
Given that Beth is a former field hockey coach at UI and now an attorney, I am sure she and Newkirk have put together all those details.
 
Beglin discusses the following:

Six female HC turnovers in 7 years. How many male?
There would obviously be: Fran, baseball, golf....(iirc) gymnasitcs, tennis, any more? That would be 5 in 7 years, and 50% of male sports. Females have 12 sports.

Does this prove, or disprove, anything? Of course not, neither does showing it in a one-sided maner.

Her going in to more detail on it simply confused me, feel free to help me out. But, it seems to say that, from 2007-2014 the UI lost 6 female HCs, and 11 male HCs....but then distinguishes it by saying that 5 females were "fired" as opposed to 2 males being "fired." Just for an unnecessary emphasis she turns it into a percentage...2 out of 11 male coaching changes = 18%, WHILE 5/7 IS A WHOPPING 83%!

Seems like a simplistic determination. That doesn't show gender inequality (imo) amongst coaches, it, in theory, could show inequality amongst coaches who no longer work for the UI. These are coaches who are moving on, the obvious inference the author wants one to take is that, but for them voluntarily moving on they would still be coaching there. Except there isn't any support for that contention. Take Alford for example.

Look for yourself at her chart, it doesn't even begin to show inequality.

I can't really comment on her next issue: males coaching female sports. I am not involved in enough of a way with female athletics to comment, BUT, it seems to fly in the face of the Title IX complaint that claims female athletes should be able to have the best coach available..............not female coach. The question would, largely, be qualifications and "fit." Sure we would all love Stringer to come back to Iowa, but we'd take Auriemma, wouldn't we? This doesn't prove inequality. Newkirk, specifically, has lost on the issue of hiring-statistic inequality before.

Although I'm not entirely sure what you, FG, are trying to say with regards to salaries, but I think you misunderstand the facts.

In female sports: female - female pay increased in only one instance, by $2400.
in MALE sports: male - male pay increased by nearly $20k.

3 male and 3 female new HCs received decreases in salary. This is NOT a $20k increase when going from a female coach in a female sport to a male coach in a female sport. The big increase came in volleyball going from Dingman to Shymansky, a raise of 31% - nearly $40k. Someone with more knowledge of volleyball can chime in regarding them and their qualifications.

Again, I don't see it lending much support either way....except in bare statistics.

I do think that it would be wise to have the female "SWA" or whatever be second in charge. Saying that is MUST be a female just circles back to my earlier discussion. Should it be "best available", or should it be best available female? I'm not sure I have an opinion on that. I think the t9 complainants have made their thoughts clear, they want best available...not best female available.

Closing thought: Any time you end your "This person is ruining _________" rant with an ALLEGATION by somebody as proof of failure it is fairly weak. You could do this with anything. Look, Obama is the worst POTUS ever! A guy filed a lawsuit claiming he isn't American!

It doesn't appear to discuss director's cup standings for women's teams prior to Barta. Were they substantially different? Other than Stringer I can't, off the top of my head, remember any powerhouse programs. As the graph shows, certainly OVERALL director's cup finishes have been concerning under Barta.
 
Originally posted by FG86:

Originally posted by theIowaHawk:
https://www.facebook.com/reinstateTG
I guess I just assume if people want more information they will look it up themselves.
Ok, so you walk in to your bosses office, or a meeting, or whatever, you stand up, get out your laser pointer and then say:

"Last year we quintupled our profits, but it was because of the Chinese.....go ahead and look it up."

Brilliant.
 
Originally posted by FG86:

Originally posted by David1979:
You have to look into more than just numbers. What were the qualifications of the people that were hired? You have to look at each individual case of pay to determine if there was inequality. You can't just put out numbers without more information. That doesn't make a good case.
Given that Beth is a former field hockey coach at UI and now an attorney, I am sure she and Newkirk have put together all those details.
And there it is.

Don't know the answer, yet pretending to be objective? "I'm sure the plaintiff's lawyer has done all that....I'll just trust him."
 
Interesting that these people all willingly, freely and enthusiastically accepted employment at the offer price from the UI. Maybe the offers represented market value for the sports involved. No one put a gun to their head to accept an under market offer if that is their contention (after the fact). Going public usually represents an attempt to intimidate because the facts do not support the shakedown - err, I mean complaint.
 
Originally posted by FG86:

Originally posted by cecilB:
Or, they were replaced with people without as much experience. If an exiting coach has say 10 years of HC experience, and the incoming coach has less than that, at a lower level, why reward this.

Christine Grants legacy includes saddling us with a sport no iowa kid plays, that has no public appeal in this part of the world
When Grant started field hockey, it was being played in Iowa. I don't know how attendance is now but when Davidson was there, they had as much attendance or more than some of the men's nonrevenue sports.

Field hockey is one of UI's more successful sports. Without field hockey, we'd really be buried in the director's cup.
No, in reality it is not. At one time perhaps, but not now.

Your judgement is clouded by a gender bias that you have perpetuated on here for way too long, Pretender.

clown.r191677.gif
 
Originally posted by FG86:

Originally posted by Section8:
I thought he might be talking about rowing (crew).
Well rowing has had I believe 3 appearances in NCAA championships, none under Barta, of course.

How many Iowa high schools have boys' gymnastics?
Rowing? Is that the sport where students are actively recruited right up until the start of fall classes in Iowa City? For such a successful and highly regarded activity, you might think that females would be lining up well in advance to participate.

As for the question regarding gymnastics, there are several programs throughout the state that offer training and participation/competition in the sport. How many schools in Iowa have girls' crew? How many youth programs are there in that sport within the state boundaries?

clown.r191677.gif
 
Originally posted by theIowaHawk:
Beglin discusses the following:

Six female HC turnovers in 7 years. How many male?
There would obviously be: Fran, baseball, golf....(iirc) gymnasitcs, tennis, any more? That would be 5 in 7 years, and 50% of male sports. Females have 12 sports.

Does this prove, or disprove, anything? Of course not, neither does showing it in a one-sided maner.

Her going in to more detail on it simply confused me, feel free to help me out. But, it seems to say that, from 2007-2014 the UI lost 6 female HCs, and 11 male HCs....but then distinguishes it by saying that 5 females were "fired" as opposed to 2 males being "fired." Just for an unnecessary emphasis she turns it into a percentage...2 out of 11 male coaching changes = 18%, WHILE 5/7 IS A WHOPPING 83%!

Seems like a simplistic determination. That doesn't show gender inequality (imo) amongst coaches, it, in theory, could show inequality amongst coaches who no longer work for the UI. These are coaches who are moving on, the obvious inference the author wants one to take is that, but for them voluntarily moving on they would still be coaching there. Except there isn't any support for that contention. Take Alford for example.

Look for yourself at her chart, it doesn't even begin to show inequality.

I can't really comment on her next issue: males coaching female sports. I am not involved in enough of a way with female athletics to comment, BUT, it seems to fly in the face of the Title IX complaint that claims female athletes should be able to have the best coach available..............not female coach. The question would, largely, be qualifications and "fit." Sure we would all love Stringer to come back to Iowa, but we'd take Auriemma, wouldn't we? This doesn't prove inequality. Newkirk, specifically, has lost on the issue of hiring-statistic inequality before.

Although I'm not entirely sure what you, FG, are trying to say with regards to salaries, but I think you misunderstand the facts.

In female sports: female - female pay increased in only one instance, by $2400.
in MALE sports: male - male pay increased by nearly $20k.

3 male and 3 female new HCs received decreases in salary. This is NOT a $20k increase when going from a female coach in a female sport to a male coach in a female sport. The big increase came in volleyball going from Dingman to Shymansky, a raise of 31% - nearly $40k. Someone with more knowledge of volleyball can chime in regarding them and their qualifications.

Again, I don't see it lending much support either way....except in bare statistics.

I do think that it would be wise to have the female "SWA" or whatever be second in charge. Saying that is MUST be a female just circles back to my earlier discussion. Should it be "best available", or should it be best available female? I'm not sure I have an opinion on that. I think the t9 complainants have made their thoughts clear, they want best available...not best female available.

Closing thought: Any time you end your "This person is ruining _________" rant with an ALLEGATION by somebody as proof of failure it is fairly weak. You could do this with anything. Look, Obama is the worst POTUS ever! A guy filed a lawsuit claiming he isn't American!

It doesn't appear to discuss director's cup standings for women's teams prior to Barta. Were they substantially different? Other than Stringer I can't, off the top of my head, remember any powerhouse programs. As the graph shows, certainly OVERALL director's cup finishes have been concerning under Barta.
Dingman had a great deal of experience and successful experience at that.

One area you perhaps dismissed was the violation of the 2000 merger memorandum.

I am sorry you can't remember, but under Christine Grant and even Bowlsby there was success in women's sports. Field hockey was a national champion, cross country had some very good seasons with NCAA appearances as did track, softball had CWS appearances....
 
Originally posted by theIowaHawk:
Originally posted by FG86:

Originally posted by theIowaHawk:
https://www.facebook.com/reinstateTG
I guess I just assume if people want more information they will look it up themselves.
Ok, so you walk in to your bosses office, or a meeting, or whatever, you stand up, get out your laser pointer and then say:

"Last year we quintupled our profits, but it was because of the Chinese.....go ahead and look it up."

Brilliant.
Um, no this is a message board. Apparently, you were motivated to look it up.
 
Originally posted by hawkedoff:
Mans so the relentless drumbeat continues. Keep banging that drum and perhaps people will give in to your demands.

At least provide a link to the letter if not the text.

In curious though where this former coach gains the authority and audacity to speak about any of this. A full investigation was conducted. I wonder how many kids need to complain before it is a real problem? 4 girls have come forward to file this latest claim if discrimination. I hope the players that initially complained about abuse sue the hell out if those girls and this former coach.
First Beth is an attorney now and involved in this whole situation as are quite a few, including Grant.

A full investigation was conducted and revealed there were no violations of university policy.

LOL on the player who complained suing the girls who filed the complaint with Dept of Ed and Civil Rights.
 
Originally posted by 5Fan5:
Originally posted by FG86:

Originally posted by cecilB:
Or, they were replaced with people without as much experience. If an exiting coach has say 10 years of HC experience, and the incoming coach has less than that, at a lower level, why reward this.

Christine Grants legacy includes saddling us with a sport no iowa kid plays, that has no public appeal in this part of the world
When Grant started field hockey, it was being played in Iowa. I don't know how attendance is now but when Davidson was there, they had as much attendance or more than some of the men's nonrevenue sports.

Field hockey is one of UI's more successful sports. Without field hockey, we'd really be buried in the director's cup.
No, in reality it is not. At one time perhaps, but not now.

Your judgement is clouded by a gender bias that you have perpetuated on here for way too long, Pretender.

clown.r191677.gif
I have no gender bias. Sorry to burst your bubble. Field hockey has a lot of Big Ten titles, NCAA appearances and a NCAA championship.
 
Originally posted by theIowaHawk:
Originally posted by FG86:

Originally posted by David1979:
You have to look into more than just numbers. What were the qualifications of the people that were hired? You have to look at each individual case of pay to determine if there was inequality. You can't just put out numbers without more information. That doesn't make a good case.
Given that Beth is a former field hockey coach at UI and now an attorney, I am sure she and Newkirk have put together all those details.
And there it is.

Don't know the answer, yet pretending to be objective? "I'm sure the plaintiff's lawyer has done all that....I'll just trust him."
I have been following the situation. Beth put together some information that was not brought out before. I think it is interesting and I feel that the information could help them make a case. I didn't say they would win, but it appears to me they have gathered information about gender inequity in several areas to make their case.
 
Originally posted by 5Fan5:
Originally posted by FG86:

Originally posted by Section8:
I thought he might be talking about rowing (crew).
Well rowing has had I believe 3 appearances in NCAA championships, none under Barta, of course.

How many Iowa high schools have boys' gymnastics?
Rowing? Is that the sport where students are actively recruited right up until the start of fall classes in Iowa City? For such a successful and highly regarded activity, you might think that females would be lining up well in advance to participate.

As for the question regarding gymnastics, there are several programs throughout the state that offer training and participation/competition in the sport. How many schools in Iowa have girls' crew? How many youth programs are there in that sport within the state boundaries?

clown.r191677.gif
There are over 60 student-athletes on the UI rowing team.

I missed your answer. How many high schools have boys' gymnastics?
 
Please site one community or one HS in iowa that has ever fielded a Field Hockey team. Just one, EVER.

Originally posted by FG86:

Originally posted by cecilB:
Or, they were replaced with people without as much experience. If an exiting coach has say 10 years of HC experience, and the incoming coach has less than that, at a lower level, why reward this.

Christine Grants legacy includes saddling us with a sport no iowa kid plays, that has no public appeal in this part of the world
When Grant started field hockey, it was being played in Iowa. I don't know how attendance is now but when Davidson was there, they had as much attendance or more than some of the men's nonrevenue sports.

Field hockey is one of UI's more successful sports. Without field hockey, we'd really be buried in the director's cup.
 
What exactly makes Beth the arbitrator of Christine grants legacy?

Seems to me that some young women had their head turned by a couple of former field hockey coaches. One of which was fired and the other that is an attorney. Predatory is a word that comes to mind. Go read Beth's letter back in August. Amazing how much of what thes four young women allege is laid out in Beth's letter. Amazing really how Beth was so thoroughly able to anticipate exactly what these poor oppressed young women were going to claim in their filing in civil rights. Did Beth perchance win the lottery the other night.

Funny how easy it is for some of you to simply dismiss the complaints of the young women that dared come forward and describe an abusive environment. An investigation was completed. Barta fired the coach. Barta is likely barred from going into too much detail on the particulars.

Love the bribed by iPads angle that was put forward. Except of course the majority of athletes received iPads and the athletes don't get to keep them.

The young women that initially complained should sue Beth for defamation. Who the hell is she to dismiss the concerns of these young women and the abuse they endured by their coach.
 
Originally posted by cecilB:
Please site one community or one HS in iowa that has ever fielded a Field Hockey team. Just one, EVER.

Originally posted by FG86:

Originally posted by cecilB:
Or, they were replaced with people without as much experience. If an exiting coach has say 10 years of HC experience, and the incoming coach has less than that, at a lower level, why reward this.

Christine Grants legacy includes saddling us with a sport no iowa kid plays, that has no public appeal in this part of the world
When Grant started field hockey, it was being played in Iowa. I don't know how attendance is now but when Davidson was there, they had as much attendance or more than some of the men's nonrevenue sports.

Field hockey is one of UI's more successful sports. Without field hockey, we'd really be buried in the director's cup.
Leave it to Pretender.... she found one, I believe a private school east of Iowa City that offered Field Hockey. That is all Pretender needs to perpetuate her obsessive hatred of all things (male) at the University of Iowa Athletics Department.

clown.r191677.gif
 
Originally posted by FG86:

Dingman had a great deal of experience and successful experience at that.
Please post Iowa Volleyball records (overall and conference) while under the direction of Sharon Dingman. TIA.

clown.r191677.gif
 
Originally posted by hawkedoff:
What exactly makes Beth the arbitrator of Christine grants legacy?

Seems to me that some young women had their head turned by a couple of former field hockey coaches. One of which was fired and the other that is an attorney. Predatory is a word that comes to mind. Go read Beth's letter back in August. Amazing how much of what thes four young women allege is laid out in Beth's letter. Amazing really how Beth was so thoroughly able to anticipate exactly what these poor oppressed young women were going to claim in their filing in civil rights. Did Beth perchance win the lottery the other night.

Funny how easy it is for some of you to simply dismiss the complaints of the young women that dared come forward and describe an abusive environment. An investigation was completed. Barta fired the coach. Barta is likely barred from going into too much detail on the particulars.

Love the bribed by iPads angle that was put forward. Except of course the majority of athletes received iPads and the athletes don't get to keep them.

The young women that initially complained should sue Beth for defamation. Who the hell is she to dismiss the concerns of these young women and the abuse they endured by their coach.
Beth is aware what has gone in in the athletic dept.

The investigation showed there was no violation of UI policy. After the investigation Barta met with the field hockey staff and they discussed improvements and moving forward. Then shortly after she was fired.

As far as the ipads, isn't it rather odd that the team meets with Barta and in the middle of conversation, he just states you are getting ipads? Kind of odd.

When did Beth defame the initial complainant?
 
Originally posted by 5Fan5:
Originally posted by FG86:

Dingman had a great deal of experience and successful experience at that.
Please post Iowa Volleyball records (overall and conference) while under the direction of Sharon Dingman. TIA.

clown.r191677.gif
The discussion was not about Dingman's record at UI. The discussion was if she had experience prior to being hired. She did and plenty of it.
 
Originally posted by FG86:

Originally posted by 5Fan5:
Originally posted by FG86:

Dingman had a great deal of experience and successful experience at that.
Please post Iowa Volleyball records (overall and conference) while under the direction of Sharon Dingman. TIA.

clown.r191677.gif
The discussion was not about Dingman's record at UI. The discussion was if she had experience prior to being hired. She did and plenty of it.
Wrong again, Pretender. The discussion was/is about justified termination of University of Iowa employees.

Dingman was provided opportunities to coach at Iowa and failed miserably. Fact is, she was retained too long - changes were warranted long before this past year.

(Maybe you can contact her and let her in on your 'wisdom'.... you know, about how good the big xii is in comparison to the Big Ten in volleyball!)

clown.r191677.gif
 
Originally posted by 5Fan5:
Originally posted by FG86:

Originally posted by 5Fan5:
Originally posted by FG86:

Dingman had a great deal of experience and successful experience at that.
Please post Iowa Volleyball records (overall and conference) while under the direction of Sharon Dingman. TIA.

clown.r191677.gif
The discussion was not about Dingman's record at UI. The discussion was if she had experience prior to being hired. She did and plenty of it.
Wrong again, Pretender. The discussion was/is about justified termination of University of Iowa employees.

Dingman was provided opportunities to coach at Iowa and failed miserably. Fact is, she was retained too long - changes were warranted long before this past year.

(Maybe you can contact her and let her in on your 'wisdom'.... you know, about how good the big xii is in comparison to the Big Ten in volleyball!)

clown.r191677.gif
Actually you are wrong. The question posed by another poster was: The big increase came in volleyball going from Dingman to Shymansky, a raise of 31% - nearly $40k. Someone with more knowledge of volleyball can chime in regarding them and their qualifications.
 
I hate Title IX....we gets sports no one in Iowa plays and I fail to see how it equalizes anything.

Another reason to spin off football teams into separate corporations, get them out of Title IX requirements.

Its a joke we don't have a men's soccer team in 2015 but have women's rowing and field hockey.
 
ADVERTISEMENT