By Jay Jones, June 9, 2008
Ducks Sports News. Fair and balanced.
What a second. I’m thinking of something else.
Regardless, I would like to think we try to be fair and balanced. And I hope everyone involved with Oregon wrestling feels that way. For the most part, I feel like they have treated Duck Sports News pretty well. I could be wrong. We don’t catch everything. But I feel like I’m on good terms with a number of people who support Oregon wrestling, even though we disagree about some aspects of this situation.
So, in the name of fairness, he’s a little something from Oregon wrestling supporters.
Although, I couldn’t resist the temptation to sprinkle a few thoughts throughout the piece
Seven Great Myths Regarding the Elimination of University of Oregon Wrestling
June 9, 2008
We, as members of the University of Oregon wrestling family-team members, coaches, family, and friends-filed suit Friday to prevent the university from dropping wrestling as an intercollegiate sport. We have bound themselves together for this purpose as the Oregon Chapter of Equity in Athletics, whose national arm is engaged in litigation against several universities to oppose elimination of various men’s and women’s sports.
We issue this fact sheet in conjunction with today’s news release. After nearly one year of fruitless negotiation, our differences will now be resolved in court. We consider ourselves to be loyal Ducks, but in this instance we need court intervention to settle our formal dispute with the university. Here is our argument for the court of public opinion.
Myth 1: Because Oregon wanted a baseball team, it had to drop wrestling. Wrestling was unavoidably a victim of Title IX.
That was the reason Athletic Director Pat Kilkenny gave at the July 13, 2007 press conference. The Athletic Department changed its story after correspondence between the university and attorneys who represent wrestling advocacy groups: Save Oregon Wrestling, Equity in Athletics, and the National Wrestling Coaches Association.
Neal Zoumbouklos, Special Assistant to the Athletic Director, told two interviewers earlier this year that Title IX was not a factor in dropping wrestling.
• Daily Emerald article of Feb. 27, 2008
• Ducks Illustrated article of Mar. 6, 2008
For a detailed explanation of why Title IX does not mandate the suspension of Oregon wrestling, and in fact compels the university to keep the sport, see:
• NWCA Letter of Jan. 25, 200
• EIA-Oregon Letter of Apr. 21, 2008
Two prominent members of the Oregon news media, Dwight Jaynes of the Portland Tribune and Matt Smith of Portland’s KPTV, questioned Title IX as a legitimate reason for the University of Oregon’s decision to eliminate wrestling in this video:
[Jay: Title IX makes my head hurt. If you were to draw a schematic of all these issues, it would probably look like a electrical plans. And I'm not an electrical engineer. So, I want to avoid these issues as much as possible, but I do have a question:
Where would the Oregon's wrestling team's case be if Zoomer had not made these comments? Did anyone else at the UO echo his statements? Was he speaking for the UO? Or did Zoomer misspeak?
Myth 2: Oregon wrestling has no place to practice or hold matches.
Two years ago, the Athletic Department remodeled the state-of-the-art wrestling practice facility in the Casanova Center into a glitzy athletic treatment center that primarily benefits the football team. Rachael Bachman's recent Oregonian article recounts several controversial details of this remodeling project, but does not mention the room's prior function. At the time of their eviction, former Athletic Director Bill Moos promised wrestlers that they would be accommodated in a new practice facility that would be built as part of the proposed basketball arena. But when the plans for that building were published, no wrestling room was included. Save Oregon Wrestling discusses that broken promise in the video:
Shortly after being evicted from the Casanova Center, Duck wrestlers found another practice facility, a larger room in Esslinger Hall, which adjoins McArthur Court, where the team competes in dual matches and tournaments. For most of its 55 seasons as an intercollegiate sport, Oregon wrestling has practiced in a facility owned by the Department of Physical Education and Recreation. We now continue that tradition.
Regarding a place to compete, McArthur Court will accommodate Oregon basketball and volleyball teams at least through the 2010 season. Plans for the new basketball area do not include dressing rooms for the wrestling team, a deliberate decision by the Athletic Department.
If we are successful in this litigation, we believe the court will direct the university to provide adequate facilities for wrestling.
[Jay: This really isn't an issue for me.]
Myth 3: Poor attendance at Oregon wrestling matches makes it the prime candidate for cutting among UO varsity sports. Oregon wrestling does not have a dedicated fan base.
Oregon wrestling finished third among the seven UO non-revenue sports for which the athletic department reported attendance figures for the 2007-08 academic year.
| UO Non-Revenue Sport | 2007-08 Average Attendance Per Match/Game/Meet |
| Track and Field | 4,924 (partial season) |
| Women’s Basketball | 2,140 |
| Wrestling | 1,083 |
| Volleyball | 1,025 |
| Soccer | 889 |
| Lacrosse | 292 |
| Softball | 292 |
Source: Attendance figures compiled from box scores derived from the go.Ducks.com web site.
Note: The men’s and women’s tennis, men’s and women’s golf, and men’s and women’s cross country teams do not charge admission nor do they report attendance figures.
The 4,380 fans who attended the National Wrestling Coaches’ All-Star meet on Nov. 19, 2007 at McArthur Court represented the largest paid attendance at any UO sporting event other than football, men’s basketball, or track during the 2007-08 season.
Stated another way, there are three major sports at the University of Oregon: football, basketball, and track. Wrestling leads the remaining sports in attendance. Wrestling draws more fans than volleyball, soccer, lacrosse, softball, men’s and women’s golf, men’s and women’s cross country, and men’s and women’s tennis.
[Jay: Again, this really isn't an issue for me, either.]
Myth 4: Wrestling is a dying sport.
Tell that to the 4,762 Oregonians who competed in high school wrestling during the 2006-07 academic year, the latest data available. That made wrestling the third most popular winter sport in Oregon high schools, ranking behind only boys and girls basketball. Of the 250 high schools that furnished winter sports participation to the Oregon School Activities Association, one-quarter reported more wrestlers than boys basketball players, and more than three-quarters had students who wrestled.
| OSAA Winter Sport | Number of Participants |
| Boys Basketball | 7,019 |
| Girls Basketball | 5,974 |
| Wrestling | 4,762 |
| Girls Cheer | 2,428 |
| Girls Swimming | 2,173 |
| Girls Dance | 1,763 |
| Boys Swimming | 1,622 |
Source: Participation survey numbers compiled by the Oregon Schools Activity Association.
Although indeed the last twenty years have not been kind to intercollegiate wrestling on the Division I level, high school wrestling has grown markedly both in Oregon and across the United States. Nationally, over the past ten years, some 23,127 more high school students wrestled and 1,561 additional schools adopted wrestling as a sport-according to the National Federation of High School Athletic Associations.
We believe a state-supported university should have an obligation to provide athletic scholarships and participation opportunities for its native sons and daughters.
Some 70% of the UO’s varsity wrestlers, averaged over the past three years, graduated from Oregon high schools. Only one other Duck athletic team, women’s cross-country, draws at least 50% of its participants from in-state students.
Save Oregon wrestling discusses this fact in its video:
Oregonians on UO Athletic Teams, 2004-07
| Team | Oregonians | Percentage |
| Wrestling | 55 of 79 | 70% |
| Women’s Cross Country | 18 of 35 | 51% |
| Men’s Cross Country | 28 of 57 | 49% |
| Men’s Track and Field | 70 of 151 | 46% |
| Women’s Track and Field | 44 of 100 | 44% |
| Volleyball | 16 of 38 | 42% |
| Softball | 19 of 52 | 37% |
| Men’s Golf | 14 of 38 | 37% |
| Soccer | 24 of 67 | 36% |
| Women’s Basketball | 10 of 36 | 29% |
| Football | 73 of 285 | 26% |
| Men’s Basketball | 10 of 41 | 25% |
| Men’s Tennis | 7 of 29 | 24% |
| Women’s Golf | 2 of 23 | 9% |
| Lacrosse | 4 of 70 | 6% |
| Women’s Tennis | 1 of 21 | 5% |
Source: Team rosters as found on the GoDucks.com web site.
[Jay: On a DI NCAA level, wrestling is a dying sport. Unfortunately for wrestling, as it grows at the high school level, that is not translating to the intercollegiate level.]
Myth 5: The Pacific-10 Conference does not support wrestling.
Pacific-10 Conference wrestling competition pits ten western universities that are dedicated to both academic and athletic excellence. For the past 20 years, six schools that compete in different conferences in other sports have joined Oregon, Oregon State, Arizona State, and Stanford in dual meets and tournament wrestling competition. This arrangement allows the top three finishers in each weight class at the conference tournament, plus several “wild cards,” to qualify for the NCAA Division I wrestling championships.
Several of these guest schools boast academic reputations that match or exceed the typical Pac-10 member. For example, the University of California at Davis ranked 42nd nationally in undergraduate education in the latest U.S. News rankings of major research universities. (The University of Oregon ranked 112th.) Cal Poly of San Luis Obispo finished No. 4 nationally in rankings of undergraduate engineering programs.
For two decades, this arrangement has never posed a problem for the University of Oregon. We suspect this objection has surfaced as part of an effort to cobble together alternative reasons for dropping UO wrestling, after the athletic department had to abandon its original Title IX rationale.
[Jay: This is the Pac-10 in name only. Cal Poly? UC Davis? Only four (soon to be three, almost two) traditional Pac-10 schools?]
Myth 6. Wrestling backers do not donate to the athletic department.
Duck Athletic Fund donors who restrict their gifts to fund specific sports are penalized in comparison to those who make unrestricted contributions. Sport-specific donations earn fewer points toward donor privileges such as parking and game seating.
Thus, wrestling backers who that donated to the DAF in the past usually didn’t specify a sport. Now they’ll donate like those baseball boosters did for many years. They didn’t give a dime from 1981 until July of 2007.
By the way, Save Oregon Wrestling has received pledges and cash donations of approximately $3 million since that latter day. Not one dime of it is going to the DAF!
[Jay: I haven't heard this myth. But if they think it's out there, OK.]
Myth 7: Oregon can’t afford to maintain a wrestling team.
In a January interview with the Portland Journal, Pat Kilkenny referred to the wrestling program as “fiscally disciplined.” Indeed, no Duck team takes a more miserly approach to finances. Our budget is approximately $650,000 and 70% of our scholarships fund in-state tuition. Our favorite mode of travel is a 15-passenger van.
Nevertheless, we can understand the athletic department’s monetary concerns, in that Mr. Kilkenny’s original estimate for the annual baseball budget, as stated during his July 13, 2007 news conference, was slightly in excess of $800,000. One month later, he hired a head coach for $400,000, and then that budget began swell to a more realistic $1.3 to $1.5 million. We fully comprehend the need for renewed fiscal discipline within the department, now that the original $7 million estimate for the new baseball stadium has been proven to be optimistically low.
By this time, we also assume that Mr. Kilkenny knows that no college baseball program makes a profit. Even LSU loses money these days.
Nevertheless, we would be delighted to see baseball come back to Oregon, provided its return were not predicated upon our demise. To demonstrate our resolve, we’ve committed to raising the entire wrestling budge through donations, and eventually to endow the sport-so that wrestling no longer feeds at the football and men’s basketball trough, as do 15 of the 17 varsity sports at the UO.
Arizona State just did that. Two weeks after the Sun Devils announced the elimination of three non-revenue sports, wrestling boosters in Tempe reversed part of that decision with pledges to raise $8 million. Of course, ASU’s athletic director realized such a sum wouldn’t appear immediately. She accepted the donors’ pledges and set a realistic timetable for funding the endowment.
That’s all we’ve asked for the past year, as we struggled to raise nearly $3 million despite constant discouragement from the Duck athletic department. Mr. Kilkenny was quoted several times expressing his doubts that we could raise enough money to survive. But he never stated a figure. Understandably, it’s hard to raise money for a hopeless cause, which is what one assumes when the athletic director says we won’t be back. Donors are not willing to part with their money under those circumstances. Nevertheless, we have substantial pledges.
We believe that, if given a reasonable target and assurances of survival if that goal were met, we’d succeed in endowing the wrestling program.
We’re asking the courts to extend our existence as a Duck sport long enough to do that and ask our fellow Ducks to understand our motives.
Go Ducks!
The University of Oregon Wrestling Family
Jay, here. I believe Oregon could afford to keep wrestling if they wanted to. But they have decided not to.
And that brings me to the question that all of this comes down to: can Oregon simply decide to eliminate a sport?
Let’s say there were procedures for eliminating a sport that the UO did not follow. OK. What would’ve happened if Oregon did follow those procedures and still eliminated wrestling? Could that still happen? Could Judge Norblad impose an injunction and rule that the UO did not follow proper procedure? Doesn’t that mean that all the UO has to do is go back, go through the proper channels, and eliminate wrestling anyway?
If that’s not possible, then this case strikes at the heart of athletic departments being autonomous. And that has big, national implications.
Get all your sports news on the Oregon Ducks at DuckSportsNews.com.
Innappropriate comment? Let us know.
Spam filters are set on high. Please be patient for your comments to be posted.
Tags: oregon, University of Oregon, Wrestling
David C. Nelson Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 6:37 am
Jay,
First of all, thank you for running this letter, our appeal to the court of public opinion. I’ll try to answer some of your concerns.
Jay: “Where would the Oregon’s wrestling team’s case be if Zoomer had not made these comments? Did anyone else at the UO echo his statements? Was he speaking for the UO? Or did Zoomer misspeak?”
I think we’d still be in a strong position to prove that Title IX did not force the UO to drop wrestling. Our attorneys made that point succinctly in their correspondence with Malinda Greer, although as this story demonstrates, the correspondence was rather one directional.
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/tailgate/index.ssf?/base/sports/1213066508305990.xml&coll=7
Jay, you seem to be suggesting that Zoomer is something of a loose cannon, that he misspoke not once but twice, at a two-week interval. My response is that he’s the only one who seems to have read the mail.
If he had “stepped on it” the first time in the Emerald article, and been sufficiently chastised, would he have said it again, this time in stronger terms to Ducks Illustrated?
After Neal surrendered the Title IX card twice, Kilkenny told the Oregon Statesman, once again, that gender equity was indeed the issue. We believe Pat’s background ill equips him to understand Title IX, and that he’s still stuck back in the days when Malinda Greer told him the UO could substitute one men’s sport for another. He’s also stubborn.
Jay: “On a DI NCAA level, wrestling is a dying sport. Unfortunately for wrestling, as it grows at the high school level, that is not translating to the intercollegiate level.”
One of our attorneys put it this way: “The claim that wrestling is “dying” begs the question whether wrestling teams have disappeared for natural causes or as the result of gender discrimination. The women’s teams that have grown the most nationally (such as women’s crew, equestrian, lacrosse) are demonstrably less popular than wrestling, which suggests that schools are not using gender-neutral criteria to assess athletic interest. For example, the University sponsors a women’ lacrosse team but does not cite a lack of interest in that team. Nationally, 54,771 girls played lacrosse and 257,246 boys wrestled interscholastically in 2006-07, while no girls played lacrosse and 4,659 boys wrestled interscholastically in Oregon that year. This year, 14 out of 18 University wrestlers came from Oregon, while none of the University’s women’s lacrosse players came from Oregon. If it assessed interest with gender-neutral criteria, the University would keep wrestling.”
Still, everybody sees your point, Jay. The turning point may have come last month, when Arizona State boosters saved wrestling. We’re asking for the same chance. At one time, ten years ago, high school wrestling was on the decline in the United States. Now it has rebounded.
We at Oregon want to be part of the rebound of college wrestling.
One additional thought: The factor that may cause a rise in popularity for college wrestling is the rise of mixed martial arts. Now college wrestlers don’t necessarily have to conform to the current NCAA television, and “go pro in something else.”
Jay: “And that brings me to the question that all of this comes down to: can Oregon simply decide to eliminate a sport?
Let’s say there were procedures for eliminating a sport that the UO did not follow. OK. What would’ve happened if Oregon did follow those procedures and still eliminated wrestling? Could that still happen? Could Judge Norblad impose an injunction and rule that the UO did not follow proper procedure? Doesn’t that mean that all the UO has to do is go back, go through the proper channels, and eliminate wrestling anyway?”
Yes. But Oregon’s lack of adherence to procedure
is the strategic card we’re playing in order to get a preliminary injunction. That accomplished, we’re free to play the other cards in our hand.
You referred to Title IX as a complex electrical wiring diagram. That’s a great metaphor. If you’ve taken the time to read the two letters our attorney wrote to Malinda Greer, you know that the heart of our argument, the mother board so to speak, is our belief that the university (and others) have misapplied the so-called Three-Part Test, conceived in 1995, to interpret what Title IX really means.
There’s a court case in Virginia that is up for decision soon that will test this assumption. If EIA wins, the law goes back to it’s 1970s construction–which emphasizes participative interest over gender equality.
Then, Oregon will have a very difficult time dropping wrestling.
Hey, litigation wasn’t our preferred road to our goals. We would have rather settled this through negotiation. But Oregon forced our hand.
They did, unless you believe we should have just rolled over and died.
David C. Nelson Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 6:47 am
One other response:
Jay: “This is the Pac-10 in name only. Cal Poly? UC Davis? Only four (soon to be three, almost two) traditional Pac-10 schools?”
This has been okay for 20 years. Why the sudden objection, unless, as I suggested above, Oregon was cobbling together after-the-fact justification for dropping wrestling once the Title IX excuse had evaporated under the intense heat of legal scrutiny.
That fact is that those established Pac-10 schools have been wrestling the likes of Cal Poly and UC Davis under the conference banner for two decades–ever since the late 70s and early 80s spate of wrestling cutting by the likes of Washington, WSU, Cal., etc.
Did Oregon’s administration wake up one day and discover that Cal. State Bakersfield was defiling the Pac-10 image by participating in our conference wrestling tournament?
I think it’s a little too late to wake up and say, “Yuch!”
Jay Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Dave -
Re: Zoomer’s comments
I’m still not sure what to make of his comments. If he did not misspeak, then that seems to negate a bit of the Title IX claim. Sure, that supposedly lead them down that path. But it wasn’t the real reason. And to a certain extent, he might have done them a favor by diminishing the the importance of Title IX in this case.
Re: Wrestling is a dying sport
I know it’s a little bit of the chicken and the egg. But regardless of the reasons it’s disappearing, it is going away. And I don’t see that tide changing, even if things get turned around at Oregon.
Re: ASU
ASU has been given a reprieve. One more year. And I have a feeling after next, year they are gone.
Re: Pac-10
Yes, this is the way that the conference has been constituted for a while. But ASU is down to one year. Oregon might get one more year because of an injunction. And then I would say it’s gone. Stanford has one scholarship. That doesn’t sound like a healthy conference to me.
Dave, here’s what I think happened. I think the UO bumbled and stumbled (as perceived by the public) their way through trying to justify the elimination of wrestling. But even if they did, I think the UO has the right to terminate any sport. And I think this case challenges that notion.
I’m not a fan of Title IX. But I don’t think that’s the real reason they cut wrestling. They just didn’t like it (or some aspects of the program). Right or wrong. And fair or unfair, I think they have the institutional right cut their own programs.
Jay
DSN
truth seeker Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 8:34 am
Email from 2 days before the cut, think he wants a do-over on “decisions that are in the best interest of the department”.
Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts about the University of Oregon wrestling program. I am aware that discussions are underway regarding the appropriate mix of intercollegiate sports at the UO. I have asked Pat Kilkenny, Director of Athletics, to review the intercollegiate athletic program and make decisions that are in the best interest of the University of Oregon. I am confident that the director will conduct a careful assessment and make the proper choices for the future of intercollegiate athletics at the University of Oregon.
Sincerely,
Dave Frohnmayer
Dave Frohnmayer
President
1226 University of Oregon
Eugene OR 97403-1226
Phone: (541) 346-3036
Fax: (541) 346-3017
pres@uoregon.edu
Richard Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 8:58 am
ASU is not down to one more year. They already have enough money to operate for the next 5-7 yrs, while they raise their endowment fund. Where did you get one more year? ASU was given a number and they will reach it because their AD was smart enough to be willing to work with them. Ever hear of Art Martoni or Jerry Coangelo? that’s who’s involved with that fight. I give them maybe two years before they fully endow it at $8 million.
Stanford offers to the range of 4 scholarships now, but has full support from the AD, Bowlsby. He’s the old AD at wrestling powerhouse Iowa.
People in the athletic dept knew there were no Title 9 problems the day Kilkenny made his statement to the public, but he made them anyways. This came from people who actually understood Title 9 and not a person like Renee who has a vendetta against the sport because its not some country club sport.
He really thought we were just going to roll over and die with this issue.
Programs are disappearing, not because of lack of interest, but use the cut as a way to fall into Title 9 compliance. It has absolutely nothing to do with lack of interest. The same could be said about baseball as Title 9 has ripped through that sport as well. The two most dropped sports that use Title 9 as an excuse are wrestling and baseball. Nevermind the fact that a crapload of people play those sports in the US.
Hank Hosfield Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 9:00 am
I also think the UO has an institutional right to cut their own programs. But I also that such decisions deserve fair hearing and should conform to the educational mission of the university and the public interests of our state. For a few administrators with an ax to grind against wrestling to secretly do away with a sport that conforms so perfectly with the educational mission of the university and the public interests is precisely the kind of decision that I feel my duty as a citizen compels me to prevent.
David C. Nelson Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 9:07 am
“And fair or unfair, I think they have the institutional right cut their own programs.”
They may or they may not. If they do, they must do it properly. So far, they have shown no inclination to do so. They obviously thought they had much more leeway than they did.
I take issue with something you said earlier, the assertion of the athletic department’s “autonomy.” This seems to be a claim that the AD rolls out when it’s convenient, when he wants to do something in an autocratic manner. Then, when he wants taxpayer backstopping of his arena bonds, the “autonomy” card gets shoved back into the deck.
If the business school were to obtain 100% of its funding from private donors, would it cease to be part of a state-supported university, while the journalism school still relies on public funding? Would the business school have more autonomy? Probably so. Would it be autonomous of the university, and of the state laws that govern it? Probably not.
The Athletic Department is still a state agency, like it or not. They’re finding that out as they head to state court next month. Maybe this will be a slam dunk for them, maybe not. We’ll see.
Finally, I have no idea how you came up with the idea that ASU probably has only one more year of wrestling. Is that wishful thinking in order to bolster your antipathy toward Oregon wrestling?
As I heard the story, there are some powerful money people behind Sun Devil wrestling, with ties going all the way up to Jerry Colengalo.
Jay Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 9:22 am
Perfunctory disclaimers:
- Oregon should not have cut wrestling.
- Oregon treated wrestling unfairly.
- Not a Title IX fan.
David -
I think you know that I do not have antipathy towards Oregon wrestling. If I did, these issues would not get any real estate on this blog or DSN at all. And outside of obscure (for most sports fans) wrestling message boards and forums, DSN has been good about giving wrestling a place amongst other news items for thousands of Duck fans every day.
The ASU thing was just a guess because even though they claim to have that $8 million, I’ve also heard that they don’t. We’ll see.
The AD is a state agency. And if there were proper channels for eliminating a sport, the UO should have followed them. And if they did not, I can very easily see them doing that in the future to cut wrestling again (if they are still on campus through whatever means).
But I find the notion that the UO can not cut a program very troubling. Because all of a sudden, wrestling would then assume the same position of that tenured professor that can’t be fired. Or that state employee who can’t be downsized.
If that’s the case, then regardless of the economics of the future, every single athletic program at the UO is safe. And for fear of adding another program that can’t be cut, the UO will not add any more programs.
Is that wrestling’s position?
Jay
DSN
Richard Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 9:32 am
If proper procedures aren’t followed for the firing of, say a professor, then yes, that professor can sue the school. This instance is no different.
I think what you’re going to find with this case as it gains more national news(and it is), you’re going to find them getting backing from sports like gymnastics, swimming, tennis, golf, or any other sport that has been unjustly cut because of “Title 9.” This case could very well be monumental.
I, too, also want to say that I appreciate the opportunity to let our voices be heard, even if we don’t agree on things.
Hank Hosfield Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 9:59 am
No, Jay, wrestling’s position is more in alignment with the belief that wrestling and other programs at the UO belong to the people of the state as part of a public trust, and that administrators are the stewards of those programs. Any decisions regarding the elimination of a sport deserve fair hearing and equitable consideration across the board. The greater interests of the state should prevail, and criteria for inclusion or exclusion should be evenly applied.
Jay Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Hank -
That’s what I’m saying. Let’s say that the court says that the UO did not do its due diligence and requires that they go back and do it right. I’m not sure that’s an option, but let’s say it is.
I have a feeling that those same administrators, stewards would give wrestling a hearing and consideration…and still cut it.
And then I’m hearing from wrestling supporters that even if the UO did that, they would probably return to the courts and sue again.
Jay
DSN
David C. Nelson Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 10:09 am
Well, Jay, considering your comments yesterday, I respectfully differ with regard to your attitude toward Oregon wrestling. Your initial analysis of the Oregon wrestlers’ lawsuit yesterday was rather mean and spiteful, by my reading of it.
These kids are not suing because of a character flaw on their part. Read Jeremy McLaughlin’s comments in this morning’s Oregonian and tell my you can’t feel some respect for his position.
Hopefully, the subsequent dialog which has occurred here has furnished you with enough information to mellow your position.
Regardless of how you really feel about wrestling, I also think you have displayed genuine antipathy toward any position that challenges the autocratic rule of the current athletic administration. A state university is not a corporation and must mix economic reality with other considerations.
Can sports be cut? Of course they can. But a state university has obligations that don’t allow it to exercise the degree of autonomy that Pat Kilkenny became used to in private industry.
Wrestling’s position is that it enjoys certain equities as part of a community of Oregonians that makes the cutting of its sport much more difficult than, for example, the mid-80s elimination of men’s gymnastics–which had little tradition or local ties. Bill Ballester’s gymnastics team was staffed with Illinois kids, and there were few high school gymnasts in Oregon at the time.
Wrestling’s position is that it deserves, because of its ties to the citizens of the state of Oregon, a longer period to raise the money it needs to become self-sufficient. It also deserves the consideration given the Sun Devil wrestlers by AD Lisa Love: a realistic target and assurance that if it is met the sport will survive.
Can it still be cut? Yes, under certain conditions.
When Oregon cut baseball in 1981, the athletic department faced a severe economic crisis. Were there comparable conditions today, the AD would have a more compelling case–although he might have to first cut programs with less historical and local equity.
Speaking of cutting sports for economic necessity: The way that baseball’s projected costs have multiplied, which can only be attributed to lack of sufficient research and preparation on the part of the athletic department, may indeed provoke such a crisis some day.
Jay, I commend your willingness to post opposing viewpoints here. However, your own positions can hardly be classified as “fair and equitable,” unless you embrace the Fox News definition of that term.
That’s the way I feel. Your mileage may vary.
Hank Hosfield Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 10:41 am
From my perspective, I think it would be very difficult for the UO to justify cutting wrestling before it cutting some other sports given its current rationale. A fair hearing would spotlight their inconsistent application of criteria, as presently understood. So, employing the proper procedure to inequitably facilitate the elimination of wrestling would still be objectionable.
Jay Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 10:46 am
Dave -
No hate here. Just debate.
Jay
DSN
David C. Nelson Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 11:03 am
Jay: “I have a feeling that those same administrators, stewards would give wrestling a hearing and consideration…and still cut it.
“And then I’m hearing from wrestling supporters that even if the UO did that, they would probably return to the courts and sue again.”
Probably so, if there are other substantive issues. You seem to have this all boiled down to a matter of the University of Oregon not following the proper procedures, and have assumed there are no subsequent legal points.
This is a lot bigger than the wrestling team at the University of Oregon. EIA, the national organization, challenges the Three-Part Test used since 1995 to redefine Title IX. In the Virginia case awaiting decision now, the plaintiffs contend that that particular interpretation is invalid.
If we win in Virginia but lose on narrow legal points in Marion County Court, we may indeed have reason to contend that Title IX protects the wrestling team from being cut–for reasons going beyond whether Oregon held the proper round of hearings.
You seem to abhor litigation, at least in this matter. We see it as our right.
Reasonable people can differ.
Jay Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 11:57 am
Frank -
Received your post. Not going to post it. Slightly rude and violent. Tried to email you. But you either made a mistake in your email address or you didn’t have the courage to leave a valid email address.
And that behavior has not been typical of wrestling supporters and these discussions.
If you think it is, I’d say you’re the one that is clueless.
Jay
DSN
BleedGreen&Yellow Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Wrestling is just not a popular sport, by any measure. Pointing to high school participation is misleading. It’s a sport kids play when they aren’t good enough to play another sport, or it is a secondary sport to them. Having grown up a swimmer, I would openly admit that swimming is largely the same. They both have big teams that can carry as many people as want to compete, at least at the JV level. But you don’t see swimming or wrestling on television, and I would challenge you to find one person that follows swimming or wrestling that has not competed in it or been related to someone competing. It, like many other men’s sports on the periphery, gets cut in the name of adding additional women’s sports. That’s the bottom line. The U of O doesn’t have an obligation to provide a wrestling program anymore than it does swimming, which was cut years ago for the same reasons. Filing a lawsuit to “ensure that the University followed proper procedures” is just wasting taxpayer money. Just because you have the right to file suit does not mean you should exercise that right. Lawyers should be realistic and outcome-based. Assuming you prevail, what good does it do to seek an injunction only to have the University turn around and follow the proper procedures to get rid of wrestling? All it does is feed your family and the families of the lawyers at the DOJ at the expense of your client and the state.
Richard Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Yet another uninformed opinion, made out to look like a fact.
Kids play wrestling because they aren’t good enough to do other sports? Are you kidding? We have more people quit wrestling because its TOO HARD, than anything. As a coach, that is the #1 reason kids give.
Wrestling is on TV throughout the year. ESPN shows the finals. ESPN2 shows the quarters, semis and all the placing rounds. The Big Ten Network has duals on TV every week during the season. CBS College has college and international wrestling on air. The Pac-10 tournament has been online for the past several years, live and next year is planned to be aired on Fox Sports.
Please if you’re going to post, do some research first before you make your arguement and try to pass it off as a fact.
Dave Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Bleed Green and Yellow,
The wrestlers just want a place to compete. They do not want any money just an opportunity. Explain to me what is wrong with that. The only reason wrestling is dropped is because the administration has some beef with the sport. With your argument we should just drop all sports but football and basketball. Is that what you want to see? The wrestling community will support this team if they get reinstated. If they are going to self fund themselves and Title IX is not an issue why should they not let them compete?
Alumni Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Taxpayer money?? How so? The UO athletic department is self sufficient, didn’t you know that,LOL. That is what gives them the right do do whatever the heck they want, not jump through estabilished hoops, etc. Why would be be wasting taxpayer money? Oh, is it because they really are not and just like to say that when it is convenient? Please explain. And you Mr. green and yellow should understand the feeling. Again, do not be pulled in by the machine. Just because you got cut, does not make it right.The number of fans that you get or who watches on TV is not the only measuring stick to determine if a program is worthy. Otherwise we would have only football and basketball, really if it were about attendance. we surely would not have soccer, lacrosse, competitive cheer, I mean Stunts or whatever. And we would not have softball, who averaged less than 300 fans for their home schedule.
BleedGreen&Yellow Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Richard - My mistake in stating that swimming and wrestling are not on TV as an absolute. Clearly we have all seen wrestling and swimming on TV when they have championships, but the coverage is minuscule compared to football, basketball, baseball and softball. And make no mistake about it, I don’t believe that wrestling is easy, nor do I believe that swimming is easy. I think wrestling, swimming, and water polo are some of the hardest sports. But that does not make them popular, and it does not entice the best athletes to participate in them. Perhaps only some of the most dedicated.
Dave - I think if you carefully read what I said, you’ll see I did not imply that the wrestlers wanted money. I know what an injunction is. My point is that the lawsuit is ultimately pointless, because the University could follow procedure and properly get rid or wrestling regardless of an injunction over the present decision. Is that not necessarily true? Is it possible not only to enjoin the University from enforcing an improperly made decision, but to also enjoin then in the future from cutting wrestling? If not, then the wrestlers have no opportunity, but the lawyers all have more money. I don’t think that football and basketball should be the only sports, but I do think that there are a variety of fringe sports that could be cut and replaced, like swimming or wrestling, and I don’t think there is much cause to whine about it. Sure the athletic department should provide a variety of opportunities, but which ones in particular is very debatable. Why not have men’s lacrosse instead of wrestling? It’s the fastest growing sport in the nation… and blah blah blah, you could make a case for any sport.
Alumni - I’m not sure you understand how state government functions, but when someone sues the state, the state employs this magical branch called the Department of Justice. They have lawyers that defend against the lawsuits. Then the lawyers bill the state agencies that got sued. Then those state agencies have less money in their respective budgets to utilize for activities besides defending pointless lawsuits.
Richard Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
How about this? Instead of looking for a cop out, add all the sports so ALL athletes have a chance to compete in the sport they love and get an education in the process. Why not do what a college is supposed to do and work to benefit all the student-athletes and not just a select few.
Why not model conferences like the Big 10 which offer damn near every sport imaginable? Heck, why not just let common sense take over? Instead, these guys are only interested in being entertained. Guess, what you rich fat cats? College athletes aren’t in place to entertain you. They are for the student athletes and thats it.
Here’s a question I’d like to know. Of all the people on here that are against wrestling’s fight to survive, how many of you have actually competed in college athletics? And how many of you are just fans because you played a sport at one time, but never really got into it?
The point I’m making is in order to really understand how important this is to them and why they are fighting for it, you have to have been in their shoes as a college athlete.
I think that’s part of the problem. Too many fans with opinions and not enough people who have actually been a student athlete at a college. To think that if it were you in this situation and you’d just sit back and do nothing is simply ludicrous. You’d fight like hell and you’re lying to yourself if you think otherwise.
Dave Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
BleedGreen& Yellow
If the Ducks want lacrosse I am all for it. What would you do if you were about to lose something you really cared for? I would hope your experience as an athlete would of taught you to fight with all you got. I am sure the courts is the last place all of us want this. However, when the man will not work with you, sometimes this is the last stop.
I feel sorry for all the kids in America who are not playing the revenue sports. If all we care about in college sports is turning a profit so the football and basketball teams can become an even bigger cash hog ,the world of college athletics has sold it soul.
BleedGreen&Yellow Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
I played NCAA water polo at a good liberal arts college in Southern California just two years ago. I loved my experience, and appreciate the opportunity that my school provided me. The reason that I had to go to a smaller school was to find a school that funded its athletics well and valued providing a variety of options for students. Being a private school however, they were in a unique position to do this, as they were not accountable to an entire state when they made budget decisions about what sports to fund. If the U of O provided every sport imaginable, I can only imagine the whining that would come from some of the U’s faculty (who should be taken outside and beaten about the head with one our new baseball program’s Nike aluminum bats).
Richard Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
Your exactly right Dave. An even sadder thing is the best response someone will have to your arguement is “that’s the way it is so deal with it,” or something to that effect. Instead of just saying what it really is, “wrong.”
JD Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
Title IX in it’s simplest form mandates equal opportunity. If the wrestling team fully funds their program it should not count twards either side of the title IX argument. After all it won’t cost the university anything so it’s not taking anything away from anybody. More importantly everyone or every group could have the same equal opportuniy to fully fund the activity they are passionate about.
Dave Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
Bleed
Not sure I understand you last statement about the bat beating. What in my mind that always stuck out to me about U of O was the anti-establishment people who resided there. To see what this free thinking campus is turning into is just a microcoism(sp) of the real world. Big business just swallowing up the little guys. This fight is not just about saving wrestling but a battle of David taking on Goliath. What is scary is that the many people who are consumed by Phil Knight and do not even know it. I believe even Kilkenny has no idea of what a puppet he is to Phil and the Nike machine.
Richard Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Whining? I haven’t read about the Big 10 schools having an issue with offering all the sports they do. As a matter of fact, if you look at other major conferences like the the Big 10 they all offer a wide variety off sports. As a matter of fact, they actually look at Title 9 as it was intended for, to add programs and not subtract them. Heck, even OSU’s AD is interested in adding and being progressive. Thus, the reason why you’ll see OSU Mens Track real soon.
Nice comment though. Don’t agree with what you think so they need their head beat in with a baseball bat. Hmmm…. Isn’t the sole reason why athletics even exist at the college level is because an institution of learning was there to begin with? I’m thinking its time to head back to school for an education, son and stay out of The Pit.
Jay Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
Frank -
Another cowardly comment that won’t get posted. Sleep tight in San Jose.
Jay
DSN
Zachary Vishanoff Says:
June 10th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
Just a quick reminder for any save civic/ no field of schemes in my tailgaters paradise types out there . Tommorrow at 5 pm at Eugene city hall will be UO trying to get a permit for the Autzen baseball project. The permit should be held up and denied on the details which UO has a pattern of ignoring and dozing.
Alumni Says:
June 11th, 2008 at 7:00 am
Quoting Mr. Bleed:
“But that does not make them popular, and it does not entice the best athletes to participate in them. Perhaps only some of the most dedicated.”
Well, thanks I guess. Is that a bad thing, to be one of the most dedicated? And I would like you to know, wrestling has a fair amount of phenominal athletes. A sport that showcases a great blend of speed, strength, raw power, skill, toughness. Add in arguably some of the most overall well conditioned athletes walking on campuses, and you have an elite wrestler. You may not care to know, but you should. Hop a jet to Las Vegas this week and witness the best of the best in the 2008 Olympic Trials.
As a swimmer, it is hard to believe that you have been swooped up by the Oregon argument. By your irrational thinking, only sports that are “popular” to the masses should exist. As Richard said, why don’t we just have Football and men’s basketball at Oregon then? And at most places around the country, maybe other schools should get rid of the great sport of Track and Field, because not more than a few hundred people go to these meets in a lot of places. Then Oregon can use the argument that it is a “dying” sport and justify dropping it. They won’t have anyone to compete against. Except, I guess that is the case with the fledging Cheer program (which I am fine with, it is just not fitting with the UO company line used for cutting wrestling). Didn’t athletics teach you anything about standing up for what is right, being strong willed , etc? How about the liberal arts education? That is the great thing about athletics, and education, which for many college athletes are intertwined. You develop skills- critical thinking, etc. And you sometimes develop some guts and fight for what you feel is good.
If the UO wants to do away with all these sports, NCAA champ cross country, lacrosse, soccer, softball…….they should drastically change their mission statement. I am sure someone like Hank H or Dave can right a new mission statement for them.
Brian Says:
June 11th, 2008 at 7:18 am
Bleed,
It’s a sport kids play when they aren’t good enough to play another sport, or it is a secondary sport to them. Are you serious? Wrestling is a sport that doesn’t discriminate on size. Wrestlers are amazing athletes. Stephen Neal of the New England Patriots never played college ball, but was a 2x NCAA champ, and world champ. He got drafted in the NFL for his athletic ability. The NFL is loaded with former wrestlers. Dave Schultz could do 6o pull ups. Greg Gibson shattered the marine obstacle cours record without knowing there was a record to break. Wrestlers are easily the best, and most well rounded athletes walking around. So most can’t slam dunk a basketball. Who cares? I think you have too much water in your brain.
Curtis Sexton Says:
June 11th, 2008 at 8:21 am
It is only natural that we gravitate to sports, activities and classes that we are talented in. Most people are looking for their sport and the passion it generates. When I first turned out for wrestling, my motive was different. As the youngest of three brothers, I was determined to “never be picked on again!” After watching a Wheaties commercial of 125.5 lb Olympic Champion Terry McCann, I told my parents that “When I get to high school, I am going out for wrestling”.
I did, it involved really hard work for three years, then in the fourth year it became an exercise in joy! I became a proud warrior searching for everything I could learn about this highly technical sport. My last national level competition was at age 28. The journey was well worth every moment of commitment and sacrifice.
There is a big difference between a sportsman and a fan. Central to those differences is a deep love of sport and a respect for all sports and sportsmen. An athletic department is supposed to be filled with smart sportsmen sharing the love of all sports. That is what is so offensive to me about the U of O’s behavior.
Robin Pilger Says:
June 11th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
BleedGreen&Yellow typed, “Wrestling is just not a popular sport, by any measure. Pointing to high school participation is misleading. It’s a sport kids play when they aren’t good enough to play another sport, or it is a secondary sport to them. Having grown up a swimmer, I would openly admit that swimming is largely the same.”
Please do not project your personal inadequate motivations onto an entire sport. As a wrestling coach the reason kids turn out for the sport include:
They want to get in better shape/improve fighting skills for other sports, mostly football.
They have a family member/friend who wrestles.
They know wrestling is the most demanding sport on campus and want to take the challenge.
They want to joint the Marines/Army when they get out of school. They know wrestling is to best prep for it. The Marines know this too. They recruit *heavily* at our state tournament.
The want to compete in MMA. Wrestling is a must.
BleedGreen&Yellow also typed,”They both have big teams that can carry as many people as want to compete, at least at the JV level. But you don’t see swimming or wrestling on television….”
MMA is the #1 ticket for pay-per-view television. Pay attention to how many of its competitors are former NCAA wrestlers.
Robin Pilger Says:
June 11th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Jay wrote, “Re: Wrestling is a dying sport
I know it’s a little bit of the chicken and the egg. But regardless of the reasons it’s disappearing, it is going away. ”
There is no chicken and egg question. Wrestling is not a dying sport. It is growing in youth leagues, in junior high and high schools, in NAIA, in college clubs and phenomenally fast for girls and women. The only place it is dying is in the minds of NCAA ADs. They are the ones laying the egg.
David C. Nelson Says:
June 11th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
“Pointing to high school participation is misleading. It’s a sport kids play when they aren’t good enough to play another sport, or it is a secondary sport to them.”
Total baloney. Tell that to Greg Gibson and Anser Haggerty. Both were multi-year football lettermen at the UO, and both wrestled.
Greg played for a short time with the Dallas Cowboys, but it’s in wrestling where he shined. A two-time runner-up at the NCAA heavyweight class, he won acclaim as a Marine Corps wrestler who competed until he was 46 years old. He won an Olympic Silver medal, several world championships, and numerous inter-service championships. He became the most storied wrestler in military history. Let me tell you one of those stories.
During one match, an opponent got his finger nail lodged in Greg’s eye socket. Fortunately, the eyeball wasn’t damaged, but he tore Greg’s skin from the corner of the eye all the way down to the bottom of his cheek.
There was no doctor present, only a “corpsman,” the Navy-USMC equivalent of a medic. The referee wanted to stop the match and forfeit to Greg’s opponent. Greg was having none of that.
He ordered the corpsman to stitch him up, without anesthetic. Then he went back on the mat and got angry. His opponent had been ahead at the time of the injury, but Greg proceeded to whip him like a stepchild.
Now, consider Federal District Judge Anser Hagerty, one of those NCAA athletes who went pro in something else. He won three football letters for the Ducks, and spent three seasons in the wrestling room. Even though he had a very successful football career, he never could win a wrestling letter. He was either injured or just couldn’t beat out the kid who was at his weight class. Nevertheless, the stuck wrestling out.
Something tells me you don’t know much about wrestling. These are the toughest athletes I’ve ever watched, matched only perhaps my marathon runners in the amount of punishment they subject their bodies.
As Dr. Glenn Jarrett, a Duck who was both a wrestling All-American and an academic All-American, once told me:
Other athletes usually have their lifting/conditioning workout each day in addition to practice for their sport. Wrestlers usually have a third daily workout, one to keep their weight down.
While negotiating the pre-med curriculum at the UO, Glenn would often forego eating and restrict his liquid intake on the day of a big calculus or organic chemistry exam. No football or baseball player has to put up with that.
The regimen isn’t much different in high school wrestling. I had the pleasure of interviewing three generations of UO wrestlers who consecutively coached Bend High School wrestlers, Don Hoiness, Buck Davis, and Luke Larwin. They spoke of how the real wrestling practice didn’t begin until 5:10 p.m., when scheduled practice ended. In those subsequent hours, having already been on the mat for two hours, they really learned how to wrestle.
They told me that wrestling season didn’t end when the scholastic “folkstyle” season ended. Then came freestyle and Greco-Roman. Then the summer tournaments. Secondary sport, my butt!
You don’t know what you’re talking about!
Brian Says:
June 11th, 2008 at 8:00 pm
The Navy SEAL’s recruit wrestlers because they know what kind of athlete it takes to be one of them.http://www.theguillotine.com/college/0607/news/61130trident.html
Richard Says:
June 11th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
I guess unless you’ve been around the sport you just don’t really know and then just make assumptions about everything.
Here’s more data for you:
Our governing body at the youth/club level, USA Wrestling, says that OR is one of the top states when it comes to youth numbers. This is regardless of the fact that it only has like 3 mil in population. When compared to CA, NY, OH and so on, that’s pretty good when you consider their pop.
In OR, we are one of the few states that actually has a full blown Jr High State Wrestling Tournament. We have four regional qualifiers, that have around 1200 6-8 graders competing for 4 spots at each weight to go to state the following week. Now keep in mind that a lot of schools don’t even have an organized jr high team and that numbers for these events continue to grow every year but around 100 kids.
60 new college programs have been added in the last 9 yrs at the college level, D1 thru JC.
Something like 24 womens college teams exist in the US and its the fastest growing girls sport at the HS level. One team in in OR and they are quite good. Also, OR had its first girls state wrestling tournament this year.
The military recruits heavily at the wrestling ranks(mainly the Marine Corp) because they know these guys can handle it. Boot camp is usually just like going to a summer wrestling camp. Question-would you rather have a wrestler in the military protecting your country or some one else?
MMA is filled with ex-college wrestlers. Ever hear of Randy Couture? Ex-Oregon State assistant coach and Greco National Champion. Or how about Matt Lindland? Clackamas CC JC National Champion, Greco National Champion and Olympic Silver Medalist. Matt Hughes, Chuck Liddell, Aaron Simpson, Mark Munoz, Brock Lesnar, all were college wrestlers and have had great success in MMA.