By Jay Jones, June 9, 2008
Today, The Oregonian’s John Canzano addressed the lawsuit filed by the Oregon wrestling team against University of Oregon president Dave Frohnmayer on his sports talk radio show, The Bald Faced Truth.
Here’s the link to the audio. It’s about half-way through the audio file.
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.
By Jay Jones, June 9, 2008
Did you really think the only trials in Oregon’s future were of the Olympic variety?
On Friday, members of the University of Oregon’s wrestling team filed a suit in the Oregon Circuit Court for Marion County seeking to prevent the University from dropping wrestling. Circuit Judge Albin W. Norblad will hear the case.
And is anyone surprised by this?
While I am not surprised by this development, it is a little unexpected at the same time. As dichotomous as that answer is, I’m equally dichotomous in answering some of my own questions regarding this case. Usually, that’s called dissociative identity disorder. But for the purposes of this blog (and the endless discussion to follow), we’ll just call this:
Top 10 Grappling Questions & Answers
1. What does the case say about the Oregon wrestling team?
Oregon wrestling is desperate. And in their desperation, they have resorted to litigation. This is their last, best (and I believe, worst) hope to save Oregon wrestling. But what does this say about the character of Oregon wrestling? On this blog (and elsewhere on the nets), wrestling supporters have championed wrestling as a “character” sport. But is being litigious a “character” thing to do?
If the Oregon wrestling team believes they’ve been grievously and unjustly wronged (and I believe they have been treated unfairly), then legal action might be their only recourse. Do I have to run down a list of recent dramatic legal movies featuring a triumphant underdog? Erin Brockovich. The Rainmaker. Legally Blonde. (This brings up a good point, why isn’t the Oregon wrestling team viewed as a sympathetic underdog? Shoot. Even my answers beget more questions.) Who doesn’t root for the single mom or young lawyer against the big, bad, evil corporation? I know I do.
But to play Devil’s Advocate, this move could also be seen as a “win at all costs” move, not exactly what wrestlers are supposedly known for. While they don’t know the word “quit”, the Oregon wrestling team might get to know the word “backlash” pretty well. For most Duck fans, I believe this move will be viewed upon as a kamikaze like maneuver: the Oregon wrestling team knows they’re going down and they are going to take down as many at the University as they can.
2. What is the Oregon wrestling team’s end game?
What do they want? On the one hand, the Oregon wrestling team’s ultimate goal is reinstatement. Nothing short of that. But on the Red Right Hand, their goal might be to inflict as damage as possible on their way out. And I don’t think that’s going to sit well with Duck fans.
What would it mean for the program if they were to be reinstated under these conditions? How would they be received on campus? Within the Athletic Department? Sure, the program would be back on campus. And some would applaud it as a strike against the out-of-control Casanova Center. But wouldn’t the program kind of be viewed as that kid you don’t like who’s at your birthday party because your mom told his mom it was OK from him to come?
3. What does “discovery” and “discoverable” mean in this case?
Through this lawsuit, the Oregon Wrestling team hopes to discover the University of Oregon’s administrative machinations behind the reasons for cutting wrestling - what were the real reasons for cutting wrestling. However, as they open up this process, they are also going to open themselves up to legal exposure, as well. And do they really want to do that? What I mean is, are there some aspects of the Oregon wrestling program that would be better left “undiscovered”? I certainly hope they’ve chewed on that for a bit. Because if Oregon wrestling believes the University of Oregon to be as unjust of an institution as they claim it to be, doesn’t Oregon wrestling have to know that the University (and their attorneys) are going to go after them with everything they’ve got?
4. Is there a possibility for a settlement?
I don’t believe there is in this case. The Oregon wrestling team wants the sport reinstated. What would there be to settle? What would that look like? Partial reinstatement?
Yes. What do I mean by that? Well, I don’t mean this as a settlement solution. But what would happen if the University of Oregon preemptively reinstates wrestling at a life-support level? Are there minimal levels for athletic programs? Is one scholarship good? Can you have a minimal budget? Limits on team numbers? Would one scholarship severely impact Title IX? What would that do to this case? Oregon would have reinstated wrestling. It might not be what the Oregon wrestling team wants, but it’s reinstated. Then, what are we talking about: challenging University of Oregon Athletic Department administrative decisions in court every time? Let’s say the Athletic Department decides to cut a men’s tennis scholarship and limit the number of walk-ons to the team. Do they take the department to court? I don’t think so.
5. Why file the suit in Marion County? Why not Lane County?
The answer to this question could be of a technical nature. Since the Oregon wrestling team is suing state employees, the suit might have to be filed in Salem. I don’t know. Or does the Oregon wrestling team consider Marion county to be more sympathetic to their case? If the answer to this question is not of a technical or procedural nature, then there has to be some advantage Oregon wrestling is trying to gain by filing this case in that court.
[If you're an attorney and would like to anonymously answer this question, please contact us.]
6. Why Circuit Court Judge Albin W. Norblad?
Again, the selection of Judge Norblad could be of a procedural nature. He might have of simply been assigned this case. And, again, I don’t know. But I don’t think it works that way. So, there has to be some advantage to Oregon wrestling. According to his Wikipedia entry, he is known for controversial and unpopular decisions, in addition to being disciplined by the Oregon Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability.
[If you're an attorney and would like to anonymously answer this question, please contact us.]
7. What are the implications of an injunction for Oregon baseball?
In the past, supporters of Oregon wrestling have stated that this is not a “wrestling vs. baseball” issue. with this case, however, that’s exactly what it has become. What if Judge Norblad grants a temporary injunction against eliminating wrestling? On the surface, an injunction would simply mean that during the period of the injunction, the Oregon wrestling team would remain at the University of Oregon. During the period, I don’t think anything would happen with baseball. That train is rolling and gaining steam. However, what would a decision in favor of the Oregon wrestling team mean for the future of Oregon baseball? If Title IX compliance is a key legal argument in this case (I’m not saying it is), how could both baseball and wrestling remain on campus? They might not. And then you’re looking at a potential lawsuit from the baseball folks. Or…
8. What are the implications of an injunction for women’s sports at Oregon?
If somehow the Oregon wrestling team could pull this case out of their…well, you know…the big winner on campus could be women’s sports. Assuming wrestling and baseball were to remain at Oregon in a Title IX world, the Athletic Department would be put in the position of having to add another women’s sports.
[As a side note, I know opinion varies on the implications of Title IX. Oregon could be in compliance and not in compliance, all at the same time. However, once it gets in the courts, all of that is up for interpretation. And who knows what that means.]
9. What will be the public perception of the Oregon wrestling team now?
Not good, I’m afraid. The reality is that most Duck fans don’t care about wrestling. Duck fans mostly care about football and men’s basketball. Now, that doesn’t negate wrestling as a sport. It just means that in the court of public opinion, a majority of Duck fans are indifferent, like they are about many other sports on campus. And I think most wrestling supporters would acknowledge that. However, what that also means is that when the Oregon Wrestling team resorts to a lawsuit, it does not endear them in the hearts of Duck fans. And in this case, taking legal action will quickly move wrestling from a sport of indifference to derision, in the minds of Duck fans.
10. What’s the best solution for the Oregon wrestling team?
The best solution for the Oregon’s wrestling team is to drop this lawsuit and pursue the club sport route for a few years. As wrestling gets dropped from more and more colleges and universities, the club numbers continue to grow. It’s not the NCAA, but it’s on campus. And with the money Save Oregon Wrestling has raised, they could nicely fund a club sports team.
The U.S. Olympic Track & Field Trials are only a few weeks away. With those trials, we know when they will start, and when they will end. And we’ll also know that while only a few will make it on the team, there won’t be any losers at Hayward Field.
In this case, who knows how long it will go on. But one thing is for certain: no one, and I mean one, is going to emerge a winner in this case.
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.
For Immediate Release
Oregon Wrestlers File Suit to Save Threatened Team
Contacts:
Ron Finley, Save Oregon Wrestling Foundation (541) 579-7331
Jeremy McLaughlin, University of Oregon ‘09, Wrestler (541) 282-4476
Richard D. Franklin, Attorney at Law, Portland, Oregon (503) 665-9148
Lawrence J. Joseph, Attorney at Law, Washington, D. C. (202) 669-5135
Citation:
Equity in Athletics in Oregon v. Frohnmayer
Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for Marion County
For more information:
http://www.SaveOregonWrestling.com
http://www.EquityinAthletics.org
Eugene, OR (June 9) — Members of the University of Oregon’s wrestling team filed suit Friday afternoon in the Oregon Circuit Court for Marion County, seeking to prevent the University from dropping wrestling as an intercollegiate sport. Circuit Judge Albin Norblad will hear the case.
The complaint alleges that the UO’s plan to eliminate wrestling would violate not only the procedural requirements for dropping an intercollegiate team but also the substantive requirements of the equal privileges and immunities clause of Oregon’s constitution, an Oregon anti-discrimination statute known as Section 659.850, and the Oregon University System’s implementing regulations.
In essence, the University mistakenly believed that gender equity under the federal Title IX statute required UO to eliminate men’s wrestling to enable UO to add men’s baseball, without considering whether that would violate Oregon’s constitution and statutes, as well as established University procedures. After acknowledging that Title IX did not require UO to eliminate wrestling to make room for baseball, UO spokesmen developed several new reasons to justify their original decision to drop wrestling. Like the original Title IX reasoning, however, the University’s new reasons fail to consider violations of Oregon law and University procedures.
The complaint seeks a preliminary injunction that orders UO to defer dropping wrestling until the athletic department completes the required intra-University consultation with UO’s Intercollegiate Athletics Committee and offers the affected students the opportunity for a hearing. Either UO’s president or the Oregon University System’s chancellor would make the final decision after the hearings. If UO still intends to drop wrestling after the required hearings, the parties would return to court to challenge that decision before the preliminary injunction dissolves.
The plaintiff, Equity in Athletics in Oregon, is an Oregon non-profit corporation that represents returning members of the Oregon wrestling team, prospective students who wish to wrestle at the University, and other Oregon citizens interested in the University’s proving an equitable athletic opportunity. The defendants are the University of Oregon, UO President David Frohnmayer, the Oregon University System, OUS Chancellor George Pernsteiner, UO Athletic Director Pat Kilkenny, UO Associate Athletic Directors Reneé Baumgartner and Neal Zoumboukos, and UO General Counsel Melinda Grier.
When Athletic Director Pat Kilkenny announced the resumption of the Oregon baseball program, suspended since 1981, during a press conference on July 13, 2007, he cited the need to comply with the gender equity provisions of U.S. Department of Education policy under Title IX by dropping wrestling and adding women’s competitive cheerleading. Wrestling boosters have argued that Title IX does not require UO to drop men’s wrestling simply because UO intends to add men’s baseball. In response, UO appears to have conceded that its initial Title IX rationale was flawed. On two occasions, in a Feb. 27, 2008, interview in the student newspaper, the Daily Emerald, and in a March 6, 2008, article in the fan publication, Ducks Illustrated, Zoumboukos acknowledged that Title IX did not require UO to drop wrestling.
Instead, Zoumboukos indicated that UO now was dropping wrestling for a combination of four criteria, neither one of which was determinative: (1) UO lacks a wrestling facility; (2) the Eugene area lacks a dedicated fan base; (3) the opportunity to capitalize on an investment; and (4) the lack of support in the Pac-10 and NCAA Division I.
While the plaintiff disagrees that the federal Title IX law even allows UO to cut wrestling, the complaint alleges that UO violated Oregon’s stronger anti-discrimination laws by not applying the same criteria evenly to both men’s and women’s teams. For example, interscholastic wrestling is more popular in Oregon and nationally than women’s lacrosse and competitive cheerleading, the Pac-10 and NCAA Division I support wrestling as much or more than those women’s sports, UO wrestling has higher attendance than several women’s teams, no women’s teams are required to pay their own way, and the wrestling community has offered significant financial contributions to endow UO wrestling.
“Since we all agree that federal law does not require UO to cut wrestling,” said attorney Richard Franklin, “the question is whether Oregon law allows UO to use a one-sided analysis to cut wrestling.” Last month, the Oregon Supreme Court held that the Oregon State Activities Association violated Section 659.850 by failing to schedule basketball playoff games around the Saturday Sabbath of athletes of the Seventh Day Adventist faith.
The plaintiff alleges that UO’s mistakes were compounded by the athletic department proceeding without the required hearings and consultations. “Oregon does not require administrative procedures to make people feel good,” said Franklin, “we require it because it helps agencies make better, more informed decisions when they publicly air an issue and allow the affected public to voice their concerns.” In 1987, when Frohnmayer served as Oregon’s Attorney General, he authored an interpretation of the Oregon Administrative Procedures Act that required universities to provide students who failed a drug test the opportunity for a hearing before terminating the right or privilege of participating in athletics. The plaintiff argues that the same rationale applies to terminating an entire team. “If UO had held a pre-termination hearing, it would have become obvious before UO took any final action that the athletic department had misconstrued Title IX and failed to consider Oregon law at all,” added Franklin.
Since Kilkenny announced the planned elimination of Oregon wrestling last year, a coalition of alumni led by former UO wrestling coach Ron Finley formed the Save Oregon Wrestling Foundation and has raised more than $3 million in cash and pledges to endow UO wrestling. Such efforts have succeeded at other schools. Last month, Arizona State University announced plans to drop intercollegiate wrestling, but ASU reversed the decision two weeks later after boosters promised enough money to endow the sport. To date, however, Duck athletic department officials have shown little interest in working with the Save Oregon Wrestling Foundation.
According to statistics furnished by the Oregon School Activities Association, wrestling is the second most popular boys’ winter sport in Oregon high schools. For the 2006-07 school year, the latest figures available, some 4,659 boys wrestled on Oregon scholastic teams. This number does not include the 55 girls, 31 home schoolers, and 17 foreign exchange students who also participated in wrestling on the high school level.
Some 70% of University of Oregon wrestlers, averaged over the past three seasons, are graduates of Oregon high schools. This represents the largest percentage of native Oregonians on an UO intercollegiate athletic team. Only one other Duck athletic squad, the women’s cross country team, has more than 50% Oregonians on its roster. The University sponsors intercollegiate sports, such as women’s lacrosse, in which Oregonians do not compete on the high school level.
Wrestling at the University of Oregon has existed since 1913 as a club sport and since 1953 as an intercollegiate sport. Oregon wrestlers have won 32 All-American honors and 69 individual conference championships. Five Ducks have wrestled and one has coached in the Olympic Games.
The plaintiff is the Oregon chapter of Equity in Athletics, which is suing the U.S. Department of Education and James Madison University in Virginia over JMU’s plans to eliminate men’s and women’s archery and gymnastics, women’s fencing, and men’s track, swimming, and wrestling. Equity in Athletics also is working with a foundation formed by parents and alumni to save the Syracuse University men’s and women’s swim teams, which Syracuse had scheduled for elimination next year. In response to those efforts, Syracuse extended the elimination date forward three years to allow all matriculated swimmers to complete their athletic careers at Syracuse, which that foundation hopes will allow enough time to endow the swimming teams.
Equity in Athletics in Oregon is represented by Richard D. Franklin of Portland, Oregon, and Lawrence J. Joseph of Washington, D.C.
Jay, here.
Here’s the commercial from Save Oregon Wrestling that was pulled from ESPN.
For more information about SOW or their continuing efforts, go to saveoregonwrestling.com.
After almost 70 comments on the original post, I don’t why I’m posing these questions. But I feel compelled to.
Wrestling fans, what do you think?
Non-wrestling fans, what do you think?