[Purple Haize]

But if they wish not to "out" themselves, than why is it any of your business who they are? I know I'm not going to tell some random person who I am.

Especially if they can't even spell your 'fake' name correct!

[Aaron Bruce]

Ok, let me try. Is this your position?

Scenario: I, being a father of a high school son who plays football, want to donate the money to build a weight room and purchase the weights so he and his football teammates can lift after school. I desire to share my gift with the girls but I have one simple request that they must allow my son and his buddies to use it first and then they are more than welcome to use the equipment (as long as they take care of it).

If I understand your position correctly, you are advocating that it is against federal law for me to make such a stipulation on my private donation. Is this correct?

Aaron- I would like to know if you are now or ever have been a member of the communist party? Also, have you stopped sacrificing puppies to the earth god Gaia? I would like to know what my bonus will be at the end of the month. The bottom line is that there are things we don't NEED to know to do our jobs or advocate our position. I believe you said you work construction. That has absolutely NO bearing on this discussion, yet was something you chose to share. Bully for you. But what if I actually DID work for an athletic department? What if it was NC State where they 'saved' wrestling? Would that change your peceptions of my Title IX comments? What if I worked for Mary Baldwin? Would THAT change your perception? What if my name was actually an anagram for Jeff Barber? Or what if I was simply a fry cook at McDonalds? Again, what you do makes no difference on a board. Only the strength or weakness of your arguments.
If you want to know about me then take some time from your wrestling pity party, re read my posts and you will find more information then you need to know about me ranging from my Title IX views, Ranch Road BBQ and why I think Glen Kaiser is the most underrated rock singer in history.

Interesting non answer to my question...ask me if I’m a communist?

I would rather discuss your position on Title IX but if you insist, I will defend my position of asking if you had ever worked for the Liberty athletic department. I disagree that one’s position does not strengthen or weaken ones argument. For example, hearsay is not allowed in a court room, only first hand information. As a construction worker for the last 6 years, all I have is hearsay when it pertains to Title IX wreckage. In my former career, as a male Olympic sport coach, I had firsthand knowledge of the devastation. (not really since I worked at VMI who certainly does not have a proportionality issue but you get my point)

I thought you might have firsthand knowledge of the situation at Liberty. But, as I said in an earlier post, if you didn’t then I trust you-no big deal, sorry I offended you. I especially wanted a number validated. In the interview with “The Mat” on 03-30-2011, Meredith Aker (Liberty Senior Woman’s Administrator) said, “The way it is, right at this very moment, for us to be able to get from where we presently are, with our figures down to our, you know, meet our student population, we actually have to lose 103 male participation opportunities and increase 61 female participation opportunities to get us to proportionality.”

You guys hate me, I get that. Nobody likes the guy who is pointing out the coming devastation. But, how can you not at least ask a few questions about the future plan of our athletic program. Re-read what Meridith said and then add that to the fact that the AD said we are not going to add any more women. If Meridith and Barber are being accurate in their account of the facts and the future plan, they will cut over 100 more males. This is only if the current student population stays the same. It was either Barber or Falwell that told us that the trend is getting worse.

Guys, seriously, please give an explanation as to why you don’t want your university to attempt to make a stand on this issue. Before you guys blast me and call me names, take a moment and try to figure out what our athletic program will look like if you take away 100 males. I guess you could cut 20 from the football team, maybe 5 from the basketball team, 10 from the baseball team, 20 from track, 10 from soccer, a couple from the golf and tennis team…that equals to around 70. Where are the other sacrificial lambs going to come from?

Please separate me from some of the others on this board who have been negative about specific people in our administration. If you take the time, I don’t believe you will find any statement of mine that is critical of Liberty (other than its decision to not attempt to stand up to this law). If I have, you have my humblest apologies as I really don’t want to be mean spirited toward any individual. As a leader myself, I know there are often very difficult decisions that need to be made. Just simply debate me on what our athletic department will look like once it becomes proportional and then whether or not it is a program you will be proud of.

[logic]

I believe the 109 was before wrestling was dropped, and remember that lacrosse, swimming, and field hockey were just added. It is my understanding that we have a few years to get the numbers right. The three new women's programs should be at full roster strength by then, I would guess about 20-25 so there is your 60. So really it is more like 40 males, and when you spread that out it will hopefully hurt a lot less. Obviously it will hurt - what the federal government does not understand is the simple fact that more men want to compete in college sports than females.

Dan P, L Fan, Aaron Bruce - I think you're fighting a losing battle trying to actually take on the full strength of title IX. I think seeking an exemption for football is a better option - it is obviously a different animal and requires 4-5 women's sports just to match the numbers.

[SuperJon]

We have to drop 40 more male participation opportunities and that will be done over the next three years. I posted that last weekend. That's first hand from someone in the athletic department.

[Aaron Bruce]

We have to drop 40 more male participation opportunities and that will be done over the next three years. I posted that last weekend. That's first hand from someone in the athletic department.

So, Meredith “misspoke” in the interview when she gave the public the gravity of the situation? I am NOT trying to accuse ANYONE of lying, the numbers just don’t add up...re-read what she said, or better yet, listen to the interview-I think it is around the 3-4min mark.

[SuperJon]

I know what you quoted. I also know that you're trying to find any type of conspiracy in this whole thing. You claim you ARE NOT trying to accuse anyone of anything but yet all you ever do is accuse people with your questions.

Things change. Information and requirements change on an every day basis at times. You appeal and get a new ruling. New information comes out and it changes the requirements. For someone who claims to have worked in college athletics, you're pretty clueless into a lot of the stuff that goes on.

[jbock13]

To answer Aaron's question earlier, if 3 different people are now saying that you seem to be coming up with conspiracy theories, there must be something you're saying that is making us think that.

[Aaron Bruce]

Things change. Information and requirements change on an every day basis at times. You appeal and get a new ruling. New information comes out and it changes the requirements. For someone who claims to have worked in college athletics, you're pretty clueless into a lot of the stuff that goes on.

Again with the insults? Seriously, have I ever said anything insulting to you? If I have, I am deeply sorry. I truly want to have an intelligent conversation about the facts that surround Title IX and the resulting dropping of wrestling and many more future males at Liberty.

So, on March 30, Liberty was under the impression that they would need to drop 100 men. (Rough numbers, I have never worked out what Meredith’s, “Drop 103 male and add 61 females” scenario would look like if it didn’t include adding women.) Now, new information has come out and they only need to drop 40? This is a pretty substantial change, don’t you think? Any idea on what changed? Your post suggests that we appealed and received a new ruling. Can you elaborate?

[SuperJon]

What changed is we dropped 38 wrestlers. We had to drop roughly 78 male participation spots and add female spots. We have dropped the 38 wrestlers which means we only have around 40 spots left to drop. The addition in female spots that we will be adding over the next few years gets you to your total near 100. It's simple math.

[Aaron Bruce]

I believe the 109 was before wrestling was dropped, and remember that lacrosse, swimming, and field hockey were just added. It is my understanding that we have a few years to get the numbers right. The three new women's programs should be at full roster strength by then, I would guess about 20-25 so there is your 60. So really it is more like 40 males, and when you spread that out it will hopefully hurt a lot less.

That would make sense...but... she said, “The way it is, right at this very moment, for us to be able to get from where we presently are...”

I don’t know; it’s an honest question. As I have been pointing our regularly, I can’t believe the other male sport’s ears didn’t perk up when they heard that quote. Unless no one was paying attention...

[SuperJon]

No one listened to the interview because if they had any questions they could just call Meridith or Jeff or whoever and ask them personally.

You're overanalyzing this stuff waaaaay too much. You're looking at every tiny little quote and not listening to the people who have talked to athletics officials since that quote was made. Stop trying to find a conspiracy and listen to the facts. Your life will suck a whole lot less if you did that.

[Aaron Bruce]

Dan P, L Fan, Aaron Bruce - I think you're fighting a losing battle trying to actually take on the full strength of title IX. I think seeking an exemption for football is a better option - it is obviously a different animal and requires 4-5 women's sports just to match the numbers.

Yes, you are right and thanks for the objective conversation. One of the biggest lines of attack is to take football out of the equation. The Olympic community is trying but really having an uphill battle. We need more people in the general public to be educated on the issue. The problem is that the Olympics are only every 4 years. For a couple of months, America bands together as we try to kick the crud out of the rest of the world but then we forget about the “Chelengas” once it is over. Another way would be for the individual states to pass legislation that universities are not allowed to drop a sport simply to satisfy a quota as this is obviously discriminatory in and of itself.

I am interested to see if the “Tea Party thing” takes off. If it does, the social pendulum might begin to swing back to the middle and we might see some serious challenges to the constitutionality of quotas. You might have seen my links earlier about the college entrance standards in Michigan. There is some information that tends to suggest that giving someone “help” simply because of their race/creed/gender might begin to be challenged.

I would assume that Liberty University would be an instrumental element in this effort to shift our society more conservative. In a similar vein, Liberty was quick to challenge the constitutionality of “Obama Care”. By the way, second to the number of soles saved to Jesus Christ, I have never been prouder as an Alumnus to hear my alma mater is fighting for the constitution.

[jbock13]

Are we talking about politics or wrestling...

[Aaron Bruce]

Are we talking about politics or wrestling...

The politics of wrestling )haha

[Aaron Bruce]

What changed is we dropped 38 wrestlers. We had to drop roughly 78 male participation spots and add female spots. We have dropped the 38 wrestlers which means we only have around 40 spots left to drop. The addition in female spots that we will be adding over the next few years gets you to your total near 100. It's simple math.

“The way it is, right at this very moment, for us to be able to get from where we presently are, with our figures down to our, you know, meet our student population, we actually have to lose 103 male participation opportunities and increase 61 female participation opportunities to get us to proportionality.” – Meridith Aker, Liberty University Senior Woman’s Administrator. March 30, 2011

Please re-read her quote, it is not simple math. Simply dropping 40 wrestlers along with another 40 random men does not fit her scenario. If you are saying she simply misspoke, that’s fine, believe me I have been known to make a mistake once or twice in my life (haha) I would think, if this is the case, she probably should let the interviewer know that her numbers were grossly exaggerated.

I suspect that Logic is correct. Meridith didn’t mean, “right at this very moment” but “before we had added the women’s sports.” If she had, I suspect the interviewer might have responded something like, “All you need to do is add one more female team, trim 40 male walk-ons and you would make it.”

[NG33]

If you are saying she simply misspoke, that’s fine

Meredith misspoke. Alright, now we can move on

[SuperJon]

I'm done with the conspiracies. Thank God for the foe feature.

[Schfourteenteen]

Mystery solved. Good job Scooby!

[Purple Haize]

AARON SAID:
I would rather discuss your position on Title IX but if you insist, I will defend my position of asking if you had ever worked for the Liberty athletic department. I disagree that one’s position does not strengthen or weaken ones argument. For example, hearsay is not allowed in a court room, only first hand information. As a construction worker for the last 6 years, all I have is hearsay when it pertains to Title IX wreckage. In my former career, as a male Olympic sport coach, I had firsthand knowledge of the devastation. (not really since I worked at VMI who certainly does not have a proportionality issue but you get my point)

As for asking if you are a communist, that, and along with the puppies was a facetious comment to demonstrate the leading nature of some questions
You sell yourself waayyy to short my friend. You are more then capable of being an 'expert' on Title IX if you would just research the topic. Heck, with these new fangled internets anyone can be an expert! There is TONS of information, both pro and con on the subject. You do not need to be a member of any athletic staff, or even an athletic supporter, to bone up. Thus, ones profession is rendered moot in regards to internet chat boards.
On a different note, your arguments are remeniscent of the carnival favorite Whack A Mole Game. You may not even realize it but you are actually talking about 3 different topics and lumping them all into one. So when one point on one subject gets refuted, you try to rebut using the same argument but on a different topic all together. Therefore, let me try to order your thoughts and hopefully keep one and all on task.
Topic 1 - The elimination of Wrestling at Liberty University
You are dealing with a SPECFIC act of one university, even though the stated reason by this university is TITLE IX, you can NOT lump them together.

Topic 2 - Title IX intended and unintended consequences
This topic deals with specfic constitutional and legal issues that don't all relate to Topic 1. There is not thread that connects these topics in a logical manner. (i.e. Some might SUPPORT Title IX AND wish the wrestling team was not downgraded)

Topic 3 - The Decay of America and it values.
To paraphrase this is how we solve the problem of those wicked feminists and their assault on manhood, combat sports and the metrosexualizing of the male population. Arguements on this topic in NO WAY affect the first 2.

Hope that helps and if you can stick to one specific topic, I think it might make life easier on all.

[jbock13]

Aaron, the thing that annoys my friend is how you set up a false dilemna between wrestling and Title XI. If you agree with the AD, then somehow you're a supporter of Title XI.

At this point, I'm tired of hearing "we (Liberty) need to sue the Fed on Title XI". You know the famous saying, "If it is to be, it is with me"? Go ahead and do it. Surely the Liberty Counsel would back you up.

[olldflame]

The "I" comes before the "X" jbock. You were typing eleven instead of nine.

[jbock13]

The "I" comes before the "X" jbock. You were typing eleven instead of nine.

You're right. Thanks for the correction. I'll fix that.

[Aaron Bruce]

Aaron, the thing that annoys my friend is how you set up a false dilemna between wrestling and Title XI. If you agree with the AD, then somehow you're a supporter of Title XI.

So, we are all in agreement? Title IX stinks, and it needs a total overhaul. I guess were done. My mission is complete. I am glad we can end this in agreement.

[jbock13]

Aaron, the thing that annoys my friend is how you set up a false dilemna between wrestling and Title XI. If you agree with the AD, then somehow you're a supporter of Title XI.

So, we are all in agreement? Title IX stinks, and it needs a total overhaul. I guess were done. My mission is complete. I am glad we can end this in agreement.

We've agreed on this for 3 weeks now. I'm just telling you that I believe wrestling had to be cut because of it, and you believed something else should be cut.

[Sly Fox]

Wait, wait, wait ... there was FlameFan in Texas and no one told me?