Fran is done
- Thread starter Hawktheworld
- Start date
ISU just grabbed the hammer and put another nail in Frans coffin. The “but Lickleiter” excuse is now gone for Frans fanboys.
Your first paragraph all but obliterated your own argument.
Title IX requires EXACTLY equal opportunity for men and women in athletics. There is no "work-around", especially when it comes to diverting media money.
NCAA and P5 loved the NIL concept exactly for that reason. It literally avoided Title IX at the institutional level.
A couple of things I clearly mentioned the 12 year thing correct? Seems like I did and secondly. Greg Gard certainly hasn't been great at Wisconsin considering what the job could be and was under his predecessor
Opportunity could simply mean providing equal number of scholarships for men and women. It does not necessarily mean paying women’s volleyball or men’s golf the same as football. No court has weighed in on the language. Its gonna have to be a court that weighs in because the law was made in the 70’s and well before these programs became the revenue producing machines they are. These schools will probably play scaredy-cat though (because management would never want to jeopardize its own massive payday).
It is pathetic that Iowa State has become a better basketball program than Iowa.
Iowa State has been as good of a basketball program or better than Iowa for the last 20 years or longer. They have made the NCAA tournament ten times since 2000. Iowa has made the tournament nine times during this time period.
iowa has become paralyzed about making any changes since lick.
BirdistheWord
HB Legend
We tried the slow it down, ugly ball with Lick, obv failed. Then the uptempo with optional defense with Fran.
Do we land somewhere in the middle now?
One common denominator with Fran is his inability to consistently recruit elite guards. There are a few exceptions like Marble, Jok, Wieskamp and Gatens. None of which were great defenders. Jok was a fantastic scorer, but a bit one dimensional (nitpicking). Wieskamp was sneaky athletic but more of a wing. Gatens was a pure shooter, and a big body, but limited quickness. Marble was the most multi dimensional.
JBo has excellent stats and huge coconuts but was a below average athlete. Clemmons and Gessel were good but not great.
The guard play becomes so critical in the NCAA tourney and we just did not have the goods in most years.
Bob, you are completely wrong. The correct language appears in 20 USC 1681 (a). Title IX only prohibits "discrimination" based on sex. That is nowhere like a requirement of precise equality. The school would not be discriminating by giving greater funding to the one program that costs more than any other athletic program but also brings in far more revenue than any other program or maybe all of the other athletic programs collectively (think "rational basis" as if a Constitutional question was involved).
Congress should just cut football out of Title IX, while creating some language that doesn't let a school eliminate lesser profile and revenue programs just to feed football.
What is your educational or experiential basis for disputing my statement of the law, which cites you directly to the statute in question? You obviously know nothing about Title IX, the law of equal opportunity, the standards of review applied in Title IX cases, or the tests applied to the substantive Title IX litigation itself. You're just arguing. Sometimes you just have to acknowledge you don't no and just STFU. I wouldn't show up on a building site and start telling the skilled tradesmen how to plumb, wire and build the structure. I wouldn't go to Best Buy and argue with the Geek Squad. Jesus isn't life too short for just pointlessly disagreeing.
Makes me feel like singing an old jingle. Gonna wash that Fran right outta my hair.
