Remember when UCD and Boise State used to compete against each other in wrestling ? Now neither has a team. Boise State dropped theirs to add...baseball ? Good for them. It must be horribly boring there for sports after basketball is done at the Taco Bell Arena. In fact the Taco Bell Arena is on the site where their field used to be. I am typing Taco Bell Arena to emphasize how ridiculous that sounds, which is almost as ridiculous as The Pavilion. Even "The Stupid Pavilion" (named after Alumnus Alexander Stupid) or "The Smelly Pavilion" would be better. Add an adjective or a surname for pete's sake...must Davis be a weirdo rebel about everything ?"

Goags. I have no idea what you are talking about. “The Pavilion” is ridiculous? As a name? As a site? “Smelly”? Be careful what you say people read this stuff./ . . .

To make the other posts easier to find, post has been deleted.

Goags. Go for the rant! Lord knows i have done it on this site. Good for you!

What wad wrong with Rec Hall?

And numbered exits, and original donor names on tiles?

Nothing was wrong with recreation hall. It at least contained a description of what kind of hall it was.

Back to the starting topic- is there going to be a report or announcement about the new woman’s sport public meeting? Anyone go?

I haven't seen anything on the website or on twitter.

Wasn't the meeting on a Monday at noon? If that is the case I don't think we'll see anything about the meeting.

This will be the first ICA sport that is (entirely?) supported by philanthropic means. So, this is a big test and an issue that we have never encountered before or know what to reasonably expect. Will this be the parents of the players? Alums? I believe that the parents of the field hockey team did pony up for the new hockey field. Apparently it was Berkeley alums who saved the MBB team there from being cut. However we don’t have the alum base by a mile that Berkeley has. Also, this will be a “new team” not an attempt to save an old team with a lot of pride and history (see Jackie Jensen at Berkeley). So my bet is that it will have to be the parents who will mostly pay for this sport at least to get it off the ground. Now the second issue is this (and I don’t know the answer): does TIX required that this new team have funding for an equal number of scholarships to comply with the law? Can philanthropic funds provide this? I don’t think so for a huge team like rowing. So, sorry, i think we are looking at beach volleyball or cheering. Fencing? Hope i am wrong. (How many players on a beach volleyball team? I think 2 that play- i do not know).

Baseball was saved at both Saint Mary's and Cal as both are funded by donors. I think it is a great idea and something we should be striving for with every team. Most Big West gyms have a spot near the front that show which player is being funded by a donor. Great idea and something we should emulate.

Sac State has 14 on Its beach volleyball roster. Most, if not all, are on the fall indoor team. IfUCD followed the same path it likely wouldn't create a sport for additional female student athletes, but rather another opportunity for the existing ones. I don't know if it"s enough that the opportunities are there, or if the number of unique student athletes matters more for Title IX. If the number of unique athletes had more importance then UCD would have to ensure that it's however many different people. The question is how do you recruit for beach volleyball ? You can't just take all the women who didn't make the indoor team.

Yes, its a 2 player team per side. So the numbers will not work out for TIX issues. We will have to put a lot more women in new sport slots (not just more slots from the WVB team). I see the problem in the philanthropy because we just do not have the alumni base that Stanford, cal, or even st Mary’s has. So its probably got to be on the parents to pull this one off. We better figure something out fast, because if we don’t we will have to eliminate a men’s team to comply with TIX.

What Mens sports could have the potential for cuts if the numbers don't match up?

We have a huge gender imbalance issue here. We are close to 60-40 woman to men. in comparison, CP is about 56-44 men to woman. Even sac is slightly better at 56-44 woman’s to men. Stanford 51-49. Cal 52-47 woman to men. I am sure the administration is worried about this. How can a very science/ag/engineering university be so much more attractive to women than men? One could argue that its a good thing. The campus is seen as academically high quality, attractive and safe. The town of davis is very appealing and also safe. This is important to woman and more importantly to their parents. Not so much guys. So (get ready for this!) i think that we will have to be eliminating football in the next 10 years. There’s simply no other way out of this dilemma. OK, so maybe not if we add: woman’s rowing, fencing, beach VB, badminton, squash, sailing like Stanford. Hate to say this stuff. Make me wrong!!!

It's very simple, we could recruit and have an affirmative action program for men. Problem solved. We get tens of thousands of applicants.

Or add crew, and if need be something else. I wonder if the international students are unbalanced numerically?

Assuming every team is fully funded, what is our current scholarship breakdown?

Movie, wish we could but we can’t. Prop 209 prohibits affirmative action based on race, ethnicity, OR gender. So, i think were back to woman’s rowing; but the real question is who PAYS FOR IT? Cal has 67 women on its roster, including 15 foreign. Even if most are not on full schollies, thats a very expensive sport to fund and probably why it was cut in the first place. 6th, your question is a good one and the answer is that it is probably the most highly classified piece of information on the campus. But you have to know the breakdown is not close to being even because of the need to add this new woman’s sport. I think its also a valid to question to ask under TIX whether ICA can even require this sport to be “self funded” when others (no men’s sport) are not. This is Dr. Blue’s big problem and is why he gets the big bucks. I wish him well.

Don't we still have AA programs, if not under other names? Different ethnic groups having different grades and test scores. And there is this continual push to get women into the STEM field, marketing, outreach. It is young men who are falling behind.

Hard to imagine it being "classified" as we are a public institution using public money AND the department already lost a TIX lawsuit six years ago that is now cited in other TIX lawsuits.

The sport would have to be relatively cheap in terms of facilities, start up costs, maintenance, etc. while women's rowing has the ability to generate a large number of scholarships it is not a cheap sport to operate. We lack a body of water bigger than the "lake" in "Lake" Alhambra Estates in town so everything would have to be moved from campus to West Sacramento. Every time the needs meets.

Sand volleyball seems like it is the easy answer.

Who would have thought that the so-called "liberal"and so called "conservative" positions on AA would be flipped esp impacting a traditionally conservative sport like football (in the traditional sense). Not trying to inject politics into it, but if you think for a minute it is actually quite funny.

As far as which sport might be cut it will likely be either football or baseball. An additional question to ask is in what sports does the conference require participation ?

Obviously the Big West couldn't give a hoot about football. They've sent some mixed messages about baseball:

In the 90's into 2001 SAC State was an affiliate member for baseball. They were booted after the season with the official reason being that they didn't want affiliate members. However everybody knew it was because the Hornets were usually cellar- dwellers, and their abysmal records made the conference look weaker.

Prior to the Aggies' entry into the Big West the conference had members that did not have baseball programs. These were Idaho and Utah State. Also there were a couple of decades where UC Irvine did not have a baseball program. These schools were allowed to remain. Could it be because the credibility their men's basketball teams lent the conference outweighed the inconvenience of having to schedule additional non- conference games ?

When Bakersfield was making it's transition to D1 it was told by the Big West it had to have baseball to join. To its credit Bakersfield went out of its way to comply. It even funded and built its own stadium (with lights), rather than copping out and trying to do a time- sharing agreement with the Class A Bakersfield Blaze in 70+ year- old Sam Lynn Ballpark, where they can't play until the sun goes down because the park was built facing the wrong direction. They did all of this, and CSUB was still denied, until just recently.

I believe UCD will do everything it can to stay in the Big West. It not only saves on travel costs, but also limits how long the students have to be away from classes. Can you imagine the scheduling nightmares of the WAC/Big Sky ?

So let's say the Big West allows a non- baseball member again. Then it becomes a question of scholarships. Baseball has at most 11.7, probably less. Football has how many ? If there's a big scholarship imbalance it will either be football or baseball AND other sports. Men's golf would probably be on the chopping block too...possibly Men's water polo as well. It wpuldn't be just baseball. Cutting baseball would relieve some of the strain on the athletic budget, but it wouldn't resolve the Title IX issue on It's own.

Regardless of where that is going I think baseball will see cuts to balance the books. It won't be to the coaching staff, as I believe only Vaughn and Acosta are paid employees. They could see a reduction in games, especially home games. I don't know what the minimum # of games is, but you look at the Ivy League..most of those schools seem to play at least 10- 12 games less. Gonzaga hosts at most a handful of non- conference games. Lastly the school may flat out tell Vaughn he can only keep so many players, scholarship or not. I know the school probably doesn't pay travel expenses for some walk- on players, but there's more costs involved than that. I remember in 2014 SAC State only had 27 players on It's roster. Do you think Reggie Christiansen left 8 roster spots vacant because all the other players that tried out were terrible ? Think he would've liked to have had more than 1 reserve middle infielder ? It's clear the administration dictated those limits, and something similar will probably affect UCD as well.

It's difficult for me to envision the football team going anywhere, especially with the newish stadium and the fact that it brings in the most money per game of any of the sports, but is that revenue even that great ? I can't imagine they even come close to covering all the expenses. I see you guys talking a lot about empty seats, and there are only 5- 6 home games a year ? If there were no football, what would Aggie Stadium be used for ? I can only guess the soccer teams would use it + The field @Dobbins Baseball Complex would just be for practice.

Great post as always. Well reasoned. There's a difference between a member not having Baseball and dropping the sport. I think it would be difficult for them to drop Baseball because the BW views itself as a Baseball/Soccer/VB conference that competes for championships. Football would be easier to cut, but chopping football would meat heavy opposition. So hard because Baseball is my favorite sport, but I can't imagine UC Davis without football. Traditionally that was our identity in athletics. Mind you, as opposed to Sac State's identity of mediocrity in football paired with an academic program which is ranked lower than ours.

Blue isn't going to want to be the AD that is at the helm when football is dropped. He's going to find every possible way to keep sports.

I agree with 6th and zythe. I also reread some of the press clippings of the 2011 judges decision on the UC Davis wrestling case. I think i may be off base in getting the scholarship issue mixed up with TIX requirements. The judge in the wrestling case clearly stated that compliance with TIX can be done by offering athletic opportunities to woman in proportion to their share of overall enrollment. The key word bring “opportunities.” He did not say that any given woman’s sport has to be funded in any particular proportional way. I read that to say that if we bring back woman’s rowing we do not have to necessarily grant scholarships to all or even any of the participants because they will be provided the opportunity to participate. I understand that there might be more clarifying language in the final settlement papers but i did not read them. That could change things obviously.

Also keep in mind that there are three prongs to Title IX and every university has to adhere to at least one of them.

I may be mistaken, but at one point I think we were adhering to all three (yikes) which put immense financial strain on the department.

The more sports Blue can fund with donor dollars the better! Now might be a good time to push the athletic endowment fund!

I agree. Still wonder why no announcement on how the initial public meeting went. Is there a next one set?

Football should never be cut. Facilities costs low for crew, but big participation numbers?

I still say we need to recruit more male students. They have lots of flexibility, look at the international students they bring onto campus. I doubt they are all fluent in English.

Wonder why not a lot of discussion on this topic or any kind of news release from the AD? I did find out that Cal woman’s rugby has petitioned for full varsity status per TIX some time ago. Cal men’s rugby is a varsity sport. No response yet. Many schools in the east already have varsity woman’s rugby but none in the west. So this is probably a nonstarter for a new sport. On another related topic the Cal men’s rugby team was able to get varsity status mostly through the major philanthropic efforts of the Witter (as in Dean-Witter) family. Rugby field is “Witter Field” and seats 5000. Well, we can only dream. . . .

Yes, Cal rugby has significant donor support which has prevented them from being cut as a Varsity sport in the past. I suppose the Aggies could add varsity womens rugby, while there are no varsity opponents on the west coast there are plenty of club opponents. Cal varsity mens rugby is one of the few varsity programs around, so their schedule is made up mostly of club programs at other colleges. Rugby could have a big roster which would help with Title 9 issues. Probably makes sense to consider adding a team.

It is an interesting question that woman’s rowing and rugby would both bring in a lot of participants which is what we need for TIX. The problem with rugby is that there are no varsity opponents in the west. But as davis bear points out, this is not a problem for the cal rugby team as they just play “club teams” out in the west. The big plus with woman’s rugby is that it is a relatively cheap sport to play, it will by played on campus, it at least has the possibility of some revenue be it tickets or local philanthropic support and THE BIG ONE is that’s the Lady Ags are very good at this sport, in fact champions lately in their league. The big plus with rowing is that all the pieces are in place in terms of equipment etc. the big negative is that this a very expensive sport all played off campus. Travel with the boats and all the girls is very expensive. Absolutely no impact on the campus and no prospects for revenue. So i am reconsidering- maybe woman’s rugby is the way to go. PLUS, we would be the first in the west! Good luck AD Blue.