Uncertainty remains about Oregon Ducks 2020 football season

DerekJohnson

https://registerguard.com/sports/20200706/uncertainty-remains-about-oregon-ducks-2020-football-season

greenblood

"Football generates over 70% of Oregon’s athletic department budget"

"The NCAA does not control football, which means conferences will make their own decisions regarding the 2020 season."

For these reasons, I don't see anyway the PAC 12 doesn't have a football season.

Schools are already in the red, and if you take away 50-70% of an athletic department budget, you'll see multiple sports go away. Sports like, Wrestling, Golf, Soccer, Baseball, Tennis, etc, will be hard press to stay afloat.

We all know the ACC, SEC, and BIG10 are playing, so if the Pac12 decides to sit it out, schools like Oregon and Washington will leave. You can count on that.

RaceBannon

Title 9 is not dependent on economic conditions or pandemics

All men's sports except football will have to go to keep the women's sports

greenblood

RaceBannon said:

Title 9 is not dependent on economic conditions or pandemics

All men's sports except football will have to go to keep the women's sports

Not necessarily. There are already more women's sports than men's because of the football program, so I think they are even in participants. So it will more likely be an even cut. In Oregon's case, they could drop men's baseball and either women's soccer or softball. They could also cut both tennis and golf programs. I think this is a mute point though, because a cancelled or handcuffed Pac12 football season in comparison to the rest of the power 5 will force teams like Oregon and Washington to flee to more lucrative conferences.

We should be thankful that our programs are peaking at the right time. Washington and Oregon have nearly as much power as the LA schools. Since the Pac 12 network doesn't have the LA market, losing both Seattle and Portland would be the final blow. Washington has the largest active Pac12 netowrk TV market outside of Phoenix, and Oregon has the broadest brand outside of USC.

RaceBannon

The problem is that the narrative moved from flattening the curve and making sure this didn't have a 10% death rate to no positive tests ever anywhere

We won't have sports, life, or food with that standard

greenblood

RaceBannon said:

The problem is that the narrative moved from flattening the curve and making sure this didn't have a 10% death rate to no positive tests ever anywhere

We won't have sports, life, or food with that standard

Which is why the standard will shift. In the end, everything is about money. The Pac12 or any conference for that matter only cares for player safety until it effects long term dollars. If the Pac12 restricts their season while the other major conferences don't will have long lasting consequences. It will give the Pac12 even less bargaining power with media negotiations, recruiting will suffer, and the overall product will be even worse. It will be the end of the Pac12 period.

trublue

greenblood said:

RaceBannon said:

Title 9 is not dependent on economic conditions or pandemics

All men's sports except football will have to go to keep the women's sports

Not necessarily. There are already more women's sports than men's because of the football program, so I think they are even in participants. So it will more likely be an even cut. In Oregon's case, they could drop men's baseball and either women's soccer or softball. They could also cut both tennis and golf programs. I think this is a mute point though, because a cancelled or handcuffed Pac12 football season in comparison to the rest of the power 5 will force teams like Oregon and Washington to flee to more lucrative conferences.

We should be thankful that our programs are peaking at the right time. Washington and Oregon have nearly as much power as the LA schools. Since the Pac 12 network doesn't have the LA market, losing both Seattle and Portland would be the final blow. Washington has the largest active Pac12 netowrk TV market outside of Phoenix, and Oregon has the broadest brand outside of USC.

greenblood said:

RaceBannon said:

Title 9 is not dependent on economic conditions or pandemics

All men's sports except football will have to go to keep the women's sports

Not necessarily. There are already more women's sports than men's because of the football program, so I think they are even in participants. So it will more likely be an even cut. In Oregon's case, they could drop men's baseball and either women's soccer or softball. They could also cut both tennis and golf programs. I think this is a mute point though, because a cancelled or handcuffed Pac12 football season in comparison to the rest of the power 5 will force teams like Oregon and Washington to flee to more lucrative.

I don’t think you have an understanding of Title IX and how it effects the allocation of sports scholarships.

The scholarships are not divided 50-50 between men and women’s sports.

They are divided by the percentage of women enrolled at the college, which nowadays is much higher than men.

Football takes 85 scholarships. Take a random number like say 58% of the student body are women. They are supposed to receive 58% of the total number of sports scholarships.

The implementation of Title IX (beginning in 1972) crushed opportunities for men in minor sports while opening the door for (long overdue opportunities) women in sports.

Problem is in an effort to reach the hypothetical 58%, Oregon has had to add women’s teams in lacrosse, competitive cheer, etc.

Women have approximately twice as many scholarships as men in track & field and most likely softball (vs. baseball).

It’s not the total number of teams (men vs. women) that matters, it is the “equitable” distribution of the total number of sports scholarships.

greenblood

trublue said:

greenblood said:

RaceBannon said:

Title 9 is not dependent on economic conditions or pandemics

All men's sports except football will have to go to keep the women's sports

Not necessarily. There are already more women's sports than men's because of the football program, so I think they are even in participants. So it will more likely be an even cut. In Oregon's case, they could drop men's baseball and either women's soccer or softball. They could also cut both tennis and golf programs. I think this is a mute point though, because a cancelled or handcuffed Pac12 football season in comparison to the rest of the power 5 will force teams like Oregon and Washington to flee to more lucrative conferences.

We should be thankful that our programs are peaking at the right time. Washington and Oregon have nearly as much power as the LA schools. Since the Pac 12 network doesn't have the LA market, losing both Seattle and Portland would be the final blow. Washington has the largest active Pac12 netowrk TV market outside of Phoenix, and Oregon has the broadest brand outside of USC.

greenblood said:

RaceBannon said:

Title 9 is not dependent on economic conditions or pandemics

All men's sports except football will have to go to keep the women's sports

Not necessarily. There are already more women's sports than men's because of the football program, so I think they are even in participants. So it will more likely be an even cut. In Oregon's case, they could drop men's baseball and either women's soccer or softball. They could also cut both tennis and golf programs. I think this is a mute point though, because a cancelled or handcuffed Pac12 football season in comparison to the rest of the power 5 will force teams like Oregon and Washington to flee to more lucrative.

I don’t think you have an understanding of Title IX and how it effects the allocation of sports scholarships.

The scholarships are not divided 50-50 between men and women’s sports.

They are divided by the percentage of women enrolled at the college, which nowadays is much higher than men.

Football takes 85 scholarships. Take a random number like say 58% of the student body are women. They are supposed to receive 58% of the total number of sports scholarships.

The implementation of Title IX (beginning in 1972) crushed opportunities for men in minor sports while opening the door for (long overdue opportunities) women in sports.

Problem is in an effort to reach the hypothetical 58%, Oregon has had to add women’s teams in lacrosse, competitive cheer, etc.

Women have approximately twice as many scholarships as men in track & field and most likely softball (vs. baseball).

It’s not the total number of teams (men vs. women) that matters, it is the “equitable” distribution of the total number of sports scholarships.

So instead of cutting at a 50-50 split, it’s 58-42.

trublue

Last years undergraduate enrollment at UO was 54% female/ 46% male.

That would be how sports scholarships are distributed.

Football takes 85 men’s scholarships . . . That does not leave a lot for the rest of men’s “minor” sports.

creepycoug

RaceBannon said:

The problem is that the narrative moved from flattening the curve and making sure this didn't have a 10% death rate to no positive tests ever anywhere

We won't have sports, life, or food with that standard

But we will always have each other, and Hard Core Husky. That's good enough for me.

SFGbob

greenblood said:

trublue said:

greenblood said:

RaceBannon said:

Title 9 is not dependent on economic conditions or pandemics

All men's sports except football will have to go to keep the women's sports

Not necessarily. There are already more women's sports than men's because of the football program, so I think they are even in participants. So it will more likely be an even cut. In Oregon's case, they could drop men's baseball and either women's soccer or softball. They could also cut both tennis and golf programs. I think this is a mute point though, because a cancelled or handcuffed Pac12 football season in comparison to the rest of the power 5 will force teams like Oregon and Washington to flee to more lucrative conferences.

We should be thankful that our programs are peaking at the right time. Washington and Oregon have nearly as much power as the LA schools. Since the Pac 12 network doesn't have the LA market, losing both Seattle and Portland would be the final blow. Washington has the largest active Pac12 netowrk TV market outside of Phoenix, and Oregon has the broadest brand outside of USC.

greenblood said:

RaceBannon said:

Title 9 is not dependent on economic conditions or pandemics

All men's sports except football will have to go to keep the women's sports

Not necessarily. There are already more women's sports than men's because of the football program, so I think they are even in participants. So it will more likely be an even cut. In Oregon's case, they could drop men's baseball and either women's soccer or softball. They could also cut both tennis and golf programs. I think this is a mute point though, because a cancelled or handcuffed Pac12 football season in comparison to the rest of the power 5 will force teams like Oregon and Washington to flee to more lucrative.

I don’t think you have an understanding of Title IX and how it effects the allocation of sports scholarships.

The scholarships are not divided 50-50 between men and women’s sports.

They are divided by the percentage of women enrolled at the college, which nowadays is much higher than men.

Football takes 85 scholarships. Take a random number like say 58% of the student body are women. They are supposed to receive 58% of the total number of sports scholarships.

The implementation of Title IX (beginning in 1972) crushed opportunities for men in minor sports while opening the door for (long overdue opportunities) women in sports.

Problem is in an effort to reach the hypothetical 58%, Oregon has had to add women’s teams in lacrosse, competitive cheer, etc.

Women have approximately twice as many scholarships as men in track & field and most likely softball (vs. baseball).

It’s not the total number of teams (men vs. women) that matters, it is the “equitable” distribution of the total number of sports scholarships.

So instead of cutting at a 50-50 split, it’s 58-42.

Football should be exempt from Title 9.

There is no female equivalent sport that has 85 scholarships and football is the only revenue generating sport at most colleges.

creepycoug

SFGbob said:

greenblood said:

trublue said:

greenblood said:

RaceBannon said:

Title 9 is not dependent on economic conditions or pandemics

All men's sports except football will have to go to keep the women's sports

Not necessarily. There are already more women's sports than men's because of the football program, so I think they are even in participants. So it will more likely be an even cut. In Oregon's case, they could drop men's baseball and either women's soccer or softball. They could also cut both tennis and golf programs. I think this is a mute point though, because a cancelled or handcuffed Pac12 football season in comparison to the rest of the power 5 will force teams like Oregon and Washington to flee to more lucrative conferences.

We should be thankful that our programs are peaking at the right time. Washington and Oregon have nearly as much power as the LA schools. Since the Pac 12 network doesn't have the LA market, losing both Seattle and Portland would be the final blow. Washington has the largest active Pac12 netowrk TV market outside of Phoenix, and Oregon has the broadest brand outside of USC.

greenblood said:

RaceBannon said:

Title 9 is not dependent on economic conditions or pandemics

All men's sports except football will have to go to keep the women's sports

Not necessarily. There are already more women's sports than men's because of the football program, so I think they are even in participants. So it will more likely be an even cut. In Oregon's case, they could drop men's baseball and either women's soccer or softball. They could also cut both tennis and golf programs. I think this is a mute point though, because a cancelled or handcuffed Pac12 football season in comparison to the rest of the power 5 will force teams like Oregon and Washington to flee to more lucrative.

I don’t think you have an understanding of Title IX and how it effects the allocation of sports scholarships.

The scholarships are not divided 50-50 between men and women’s sports.

They are divided by the percentage of women enrolled at the college, which nowadays is much higher than men.

Football takes 85 scholarships. Take a random number like say 58% of the student body are women. They are supposed to receive 58% of the total number of sports scholarships.

The implementation of Title IX (beginning in 1972) crushed opportunities for men in minor sports while opening the door for (long overdue opportunities) women in sports.

Problem is in an effort to reach the hypothetical 58%, Oregon has had to add women’s teams in lacrosse, competitive cheer, etc.

Women have approximately twice as many scholarships as men in track & field and most likely softball (vs. baseball).

It’s not the total number of teams (men vs. women) that matters, it is the “equitable” distribution of the total number of sports scholarships.

So instead of cutting at a 50-50 split, it’s 58-42.

Football should be exempt from Title 9.

There is no female equivalent sport that has 85 scholarships and football is the only revenue generating sport at most colleges.

absolutely. most large schools don't have massive endowments that allow them to just pay for extra-curricular shit. football is the great benefactor to literally all the other sports, both genders, save for men's basketball at many, but not all, schools.

No bucks, no Buck Rodgers. Football makes it all go.

creepycoug

Christ, the quote function thingy is on the fritz again. Derek!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!