PDA

View Full Version : Clemson to add women's golf



jimsumner
07-18-2011, 04:51 PM
From Clemson press release.

"Clemson Athletic Director Terry Don Phillips announced Monday that the school will add women’s golf as a varsity sport beginning with the 2013-14 academic year. Current Head Men’s Golf Coach Larry Penley will serve as Director of Golf for the department.

Penley will hire a women’s head coach who will report to him. He expects to hire the women’s coach within the next couple of months and give the new coach time to recruit the team for the 2013-14 season. Current men’s assistant men’s coach Jordan Byrd will be promoted to Associate Head Men’s Coach."

Starting a program from scratch is not easy. But given the success of their men's program, this bears watching.

BD80
07-18-2011, 05:31 PM
From Clemson press release.

"Clemson Athletic Director Terry Don Phillips announced Monday that the school will add women’s golf as a varsity sport beginning with the 2013-14 academic year. Current Head Men’s Golf Coach Larry Penley will serve as Director of Golf for the department.

Penley will hire a women’s head coach who will report to him. He expects to hire the women’s coach within the next couple of months and give the new coach time to recruit the team for the 2013-14 season. Current men’s assistant men’s coach Jordan Byrd will be promoted to Associate Head Men’s Coach."

Starting a program from scratch is not easy. But given the success of their men's program, this bears watching.

But the wrestling program remains dead, despite far greater interest. Hail Title IX. Shall we dance on the graves of all the men's sports it has destroyed or the men's scholarships lost?

As for any argument that college varsity golf is necessary for gender equality for opportunity in professional sports, of last year's top ten in the LPGA, ZERO played varsity golf in college - I think Michelle Wie was the only to attend college. Four of the top 8 were from South Korea.

I don't see reason for celebration, or even for "watching."

Duvall
07-18-2011, 05:35 PM
But the wrestling program remains dead, despite far greater interest.

Based on what?

jimsumner
07-18-2011, 05:41 PM
But the wrestling program remains dead, despite far greater interest. Hail Title IX. Shall we dance on the graves of all the men's sports it has destroyed or the men's scholarships lost?

As for any argument that college varsity golf is necessary for gender equality for opportunity in professional sports, of last year's top ten in the LPGA, ZERO played varsity golf in college - I think Michelle Wie was the only to attend college. Four of the top 8 were from South Korea.

I don't see reason for celebration, or even for "watching."

With all due respect, I think the Title IX ship has sailed.

BD80
07-18-2011, 05:58 PM
Based on what?

I'll assume you man the basis for the representation that there is FAR greater interest in men's wrestling than women's golf, rather than the assertion that the men's wrestling at Clemson is still dead. It can be difficult to properly interpret such snippy responses.

Although it is difficult to imagine you are seriously challenging the issue, my general contention on the popularity of wrestling is based upon my personal experience at the high school and college levels, as well as the popularity of Olympic wrestling. Try going even to COUNTY high school meets and you might find a clue. State high school meets and NCAA meets are amazing and well attended. I have also attended a few women's amateur and pro golf events, including a college meet. It may not be a statistically relevant sampling, but I am confident in my conclusion.

As for the popularity of wrestling at Clemson, I am basing my conclusion on the uproar that resulted from the decision to terminate the program and reports of the efforts of alumni to fund the program privately, which the drafters (or judicial interpreters) of Title IX have cleverly foreclosed. I have not saved my research or kept track of my reading list on the issue; if you doubt my veracity: fine. I have seen nothing that would indicate one way or another that there is enthusiasm for women's golf at Clemson - except that it would be a way to deal with Title IX.

sagegrouse
07-18-2011, 06:11 PM
I'll assume you man the basis for the representation that there is FAR greater interest in men's wrestling than women's golf, rather than the assertion that the men's wrestling at Clemson is still dead. It can be difficult to properly interpret such snippy responses.

Although it is difficult to imagine you are seriously challenging the issue, my general contention on the popularity of wrestling is based upon my personal experience at the high school and college levels, as well as the popularity of Olympic wrestling. Try going even to COUNTY high school meets and you might find a clue. State high school meets and NCAA meets are amazing and well attended. I have also attended a few women's amateur and pro golf events, including a college meet. It may not be a statistically relevant sampling, but I am confident in my conclusion.

As for the popularity of wrestling at Clemson, I am basing my conclusion on the uproar that resulted from the decision to terminate the program and reports of the efforts of alumni to fund the program privately, which the drafters (or judicial interpreters) of Title IX have cleverly foreclosed. I have not saved my research or kept track of my reading list on the issue; if you doubt my veracity: fine. I have seen nothing that would indicate one way or another that there is enthusiasm for women's golf at Clemson - except that it would be a way to deal with Title IX.

Title IX was passed in 1972 -- 39 years ago. So not only has that ship sailed, but it has been around the world about 25 times in the meantime. Here is the text:


"No person in the U.S. shall, on the basis of sex be excluded from participation in, or denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving federal aid."

Pretty much all equal rights legislation and court rulings have downsides, which many people think are justified given the equality of representation, opportunity, and economic benefits received. As an attorney you may even agree with this in the abstract.

I won't accuse you of Neanderthal thoughts because the trade-offs are indeed painful in this and other areas. But I would think women's golf would have some benefit to the students of Clemson.

sagegrouse

BD80
07-18-2011, 06:13 PM
With all due respect, I think the Title IX ship has sailed.

Would that it had. Sigh.

If Clemson adding women's golf is an issue for discussion here, shouldn't the reason for the addition be relevant? I think each new injustice should be discussed.

Title IX can be reigned back in to where it was intended instead of allowing it to continue to wreak havoc as interpretted by "progressive" judges. Just accepting things the way they are won't make things better.

Duvall
07-18-2011, 06:20 PM
Although it is difficult to imagine you are seriously challenging the issue, my general contention on the popularity of wrestling is based upon my personal experience at the high school and college levels, as well as the popularity of Olympic wrestling. Try going even to COUNTY high school meets and you might find a clue. State high school meets and NCAA meets are amazing and well attended.

In the midwest, perhaps. But I don't recall high school wrestling getting much attention in South Carolina - certainly no more than any other non-football/basketball sport.

BD80
07-18-2011, 06:27 PM
Title IX was passed in 1972 -- 39 years ago. So not only has that ship sailed, but it has been around the world about 25 times in the meantime. Here is the text:


"No person in the U.S. shall, on the basis of sex be excluded from participation in, or denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving federal aid."

Pretty much all equal rights legislation and court rulings have downsides, which many people think are justified given the equality of representation, opportunity, and economic benefits received. As an attorney you may even agree with this in the abstract.

I won't accuse you of Neanderthal thoughts because the trade-offs are indeed painful in this and other areas. But I would think women's golf would have some benefit to the students of Clemson.

sagegrouse

I think you know I do not oppose the legislation as written, or the intent behind it. I abhor the implementation. Let's focus on the trade-offs, was it "justified" to terminate the wresting team to add women's golf? Over-simplified? Yes. But should legislators and judges be making such social engineering decisions? If Clemson has 57% female student body, shouldn't they be giving more scholarships to men to equalize the opportunities rather than worrying that 57% of the athletic budget goes to women? (I made up the 57% figure for the purpose of discussion).

sagegrouse
07-18-2011, 06:32 PM
I think you know I do not oppose the legislation as written, or the intent behind it. I abhor the implementation. Let's focus on the trade-offs, was it "justified" to terminate the wresting team to add women's golf? Over-simplified? Yes. But should legislators and judges be making such social engineering decisions? If Clemson has 57% female student body, shouldn't they be giving more scholarships to men to equalize the opportunities rather than worrying that 57% of the athletic budget goes to women? (I made up the 57% figure for the purpose of discussion).

How about admission of African-Americans to Duke and other southern colleges in the 1960's when the size of the undergrad schools, med schools and law schools did not change. Someone got left out. How about equal admission policies regarding women in many colleges, including Duke? One person's "social engineering" is another person's life line.

We should just agree to disagree.

sagegrouse

jimsumner
07-18-2011, 09:25 PM
Would that it had. Sigh.

If Clemson adding women's golf is an issue for discussion here, shouldn't the reason for the addition be relevant? I think each new injustice should be discussed.

Title IX can be reigned back in to where it was intended instead of allowing it to continue to wreak havoc as interpretted by "progressive" judges. Just accepting things the way they are won't make things better.

Perhaps we don't all agree that Title IX is a series of injustices wreaking havoc at the behest of "progressive" judges.

Reilly
07-18-2011, 10:11 PM
1. Clemson can give up federal aid if it doesn't want to live by title IX.

2. The people created the Constitution, which set up a legislature, which passed title IX. It's not a plot by a cabal or some made up law by a judge out of thin air. BD80, how would you suggest equality be measured, how should the law be implemented? I ask this in all seriousness, as I've never paid attention to title IX (all I care about is Duke football and Duke men's b'ball, and those aren't threatened ... though it did feel like football went missing there for awhile).

hurleyfor3
07-18-2011, 11:20 PM
So much for this thread being about Clemson and women's golf.