Women's Golf

Anyone can read this board. However, to post messages, you must register.
Post Reply
GSx
Emerald Circle
Posts: 19957
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 12:18 am
Location: Beautiful Dutchtown

Women's Golf

Post by GSx »

I know it's "just women's golf." It's also a sport in which we were nationally competitive just 2 years ago (and for the previous 5).
But this is ridiculous.
Fall
S Alabama* 1/1 +10
Northwester 15/15 -66
UNC 15/18 -58
San Jose 13/14 -56
Spring
Sugar Bowl 17/17 -69
UCF 16/16 -48
Clemson 14/15 -64
Oregon 17/17 -28
*A bunch of southland and SWAC opponents; the other tournaments were major universities and nationally competitive programs.

Where are the standards at this University?
Are you watching, Troy Dannen?
User avatar
PeteRasche
Cornerstone
Posts: 30922
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:52 am
Location: Cincinnati, OH

Re: Women's Golf

Post by PeteRasche »

So what changed? New coach? Poor recruiting and graduations?

You said it yourself, it's "only". The question is, what matters? And everyone here has different answers. Some love only football. Some like all sports. Some (disproportionately many) here love baseball. Some only care about what will get us to a power conference when the next realignment occurs.

Personally - and this is just my opinion, not claiming it's the "right" one - I believe the latter is all that matters. Eventually there will be another realignment and we need to have our (stuff) straight and our resume sharpened up when it happens, especially because it could be "the big one", the long-discussed secession from the NCAA (and if that happens, if we're not in, we might as well go D3). And if and when anything happens, they're going to look at football success*** at about 75%-85%, MBB success*** at about 13%-23%, and everything else (including VB, WBB, and, yes, baseball) at about 2%.

Not that I don't want Tulane to succeed in every sport, but if Dannen can build a winning football program by channeling funds there at the expense of being bad in those other sports, I'd live with it. The jury is very much out on whether that's working at this point.

*** if the success of one is really great, the other could be less important, i.e., if you play in a New Years Day bowl in football, your MBB could get a pass, and vice-versa if your MBB team regularly goes to the Sweet 16, your football team would only need to be in the "5-7 to 8-4, small bowls 3 of every five years" range.
User avatar
sr
Regent's Circle
Posts: 8018
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 12:54 pm
Location: Dripping Springs

Re: Women's Golf

Post by sr »

GSx wrote:I know it's "just women's golf." It's also a sport in which we were nationally competitive just 2 years ago (and for the previous 5).
But this is ridiculous.
Fall
S Alabama* 1/1 +10
Northwester 15/15 -66
UNC 15/18 -58
San Jose 13/14 -56
Spring
Sugar Bowl 17/17 -69
UCF 16/16 -48
Clemson 14/15 -64
Oregon 17/17 -28
*A bunch of southland and SWAC opponents; the other tournaments were major universities and nationally competitive programs.

Where are the standards at this University?
Are you watching, Troy Dannen?
I'm with you GSx. This cratering is totally on Dannen's watch. All sports need to win or be at least competitive. These results are simply unacceptable.
windywave
Emerald Circle
Posts: 23292
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Women's Golf

Post by windywave »

Women's golf exists to be Title IX compliant for football scholarships. If they are on scholarship they are doing their job. Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football.
Using big words is not a personal attack
#cousins don't count
double d
Coach Level
Posts: 2472
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 10:35 pm
Location: Amarillo by Morning

Re: Women's Golf

Post by double d »

windywave wrote:Women's golf exists to be Title IX compliant for football scholarships. If they are on scholarship they are doing their job. Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football.
By that logic I guess women's basketball and volleyball should be glad they have scholarships too and the AD not spend any money on them either? Those women work just as hard as the football players and deserve to be given the resources needed to compete at the highest level.
windywave
Emerald Circle
Posts: 23292
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Women's Golf

Post by windywave »

double d wrote:
windywave wrote:Women's golf exists to be Title IX compliant for football scholarships. If they are on scholarship they are doing their job. Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football.
By that logic I guess women's basketball and volleyball should be glad they have scholarships too and the AD not spend any money on them either?
Pretty much yeah. Do you disagree with my premise?
Using big words is not a personal attack
#cousins don't count
windywave
Emerald Circle
Posts: 23292
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Women's Golf

Post by windywave »

double d wrote:
windywave wrote: Those women work just as hard as the football players and deserve to be given the resources needed to compete at the highest level.
What resources are they being denied? Who said anything about denying them resources?
Using big words is not a personal attack
#cousins don't count
User avatar
Poseidon
Regent's Circle
Posts: 5360
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 8:43 pm
Location: Baton Rouge

Re: Women's Golf

Post by Poseidon »

double d wrote:
windywave wrote:Women's golf exists to be Title IX compliant for football scholarships. If they are on scholarship they are doing their job. Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football.
Those women work just as hard as the football players and deserve to be given the resources needed to compete at the highest level.
Garbage men work just as hard as attorneys. The should get paid as much. Giving people what they deserve is pretty precarious. There are athletes that don't deserve to be at Tulane because of their mediocre academic credentials. However, the university is a better place for having those athletes represent the school on the field. "Work just as hard;" how many Golfers, male or female, get concussions, blow out knees and shoulders, and otherwise get injuries that will affect their ability to live a normal functional life 30-40 years down the road. It's not a fair comparison and its probably the case that title IX gets golfers on scholarship a better deal than they deserve.
Quote:The Good - TULANE
The Bad - LSU
THe Ugly - USM
Honorable mention - Navy
ml wave
Emerald Circle
Posts: 14419
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: Women's Golf

Post by ml wave »

windywave wrote:Women's golf exists to be Title IX compliant for football scholarships. If they are on scholarship they are doing their job. Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football.
This is incredibly short-sighted thinking. What could we possibly spend on the margin to make the postseason in golf, 20k (most probably way less)? Golfers tend to come from money, that 20k could wind up being a very wise investment down the road. Not to mention, unless it's your contention that we are intentionally bad in golf, there's no reason to tolerate this level of performance.
windywave
Emerald Circle
Posts: 23292
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Women's Golf

Post by windywave »

ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:Women's golf exists to be Title IX compliant for football scholarships. If they are on scholarship they are doing their job. Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football.
This is incredibly short-sighted thinking. What could we possibly spend on the margin to make the postseason in golf, 20k (most probably way less)? Golfers tend to come from money, that 20k could wind up being a very wise investment down the road. Not to mention, unless it's your contention that we are intentionally bad in golf, there's no reason to tolerate this level of performance.
How is it short sighted? Not caring if they don't make the post season doesn't mean rich kids won't still be on the team. I invite you to read what I wrote
Using big words is not a personal attack
#cousins don't count
ml wave
Emerald Circle
Posts: 14419
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: Women's Golf

Post by ml wave »

windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:Women's golf exists to be Title IX compliant for football scholarships. If they are on scholarship they are doing their job. Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football.
This is incredibly short-sighted thinking. What could we possibly spend on the margin to make the postseason in golf, 20k (most probably way less)? Golfers tend to come from money, that 20k could wind up being a very wise investment down the road. Not to mention, unless it's your contention that we are intentionally bad in golf, there's no reason to tolerate this level of performance.
How is it short sighted? Not caring if they don't make the post season doesn't mean rich kids won't still be on the team. I invite you to read what I wrote
If you provide them with a positive experience while playing at your school they/their families will be more likely to donate money. If instead, you treat them like 3rd class citizens only there to check off a Title 9 box then...good luck.
windywave
Emerald Circle
Posts: 23292
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Women's Golf

Post by windywave »

ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:Women's golf exists to be Title IX compliant for football scholarships. If they are on scholarship they are doing their job. Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football.
This is incredibly short-sighted thinking. What could we possibly spend on the margin to make the postseason in golf, 20k (most probably way less)? Golfers tend to come from money, that 20k could wind up being a very wise investment down the road. Not to mention, unless it's your contention that we are intentionally bad in golf, there's no reason to tolerate this level of performance.
How is it short sighted? Not caring if they don't make the post season doesn't mean rich kids won't still be on the team. I invite you to read what I wrote
If you provide them with a positive experience while playing at your school they/their families will be more likely to donate money. If instead, you treat them like 3rd class citizens only there to check off a Title 9 box then...good luck.
Your post is beyond stupid. Read what I wrote and it become clear why your post is imbecilic
Using big words is not a personal attack
#cousins don't count
tjtlja
Regent's Circle
Posts: 8566
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 11:07 pm

Re: Women's Golf

Post by tjtlja »

Why do you constantly insult people who are trying to engage in conversation with you? You are the stupid one for talking down to some very nice people. The way you converse with people sucks.
windywave
Emerald Circle
Posts: 23292
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Women's Golf

Post by windywave »

tjtlja wrote:Why do you constantly insult people who are trying to engage in conversation with you? You are the stupid one for talking down to some very nice people. The way you converse with people sucks.
Getting defensive and making ad hominem attacks is a sure indicator someone is losing an argument. You're both with your post.
Using big words is not a personal attack
#cousins don't count
ml wave
Emerald Circle
Posts: 14419
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: Women's Golf

Post by ml wave »

windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:Women's golf exists to be Title IX compliant for football scholarships. If they are on scholarship they are doing their job. Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football.
This is incredibly short-sighted thinking. What could we possibly spend on the margin to make the postseason in golf, 20k (most probably way less)? Golfers tend to come from money, that 20k could wind up being a very wise investment down the road. Not to mention, unless it's your contention that we are intentionally bad in golf, there's no reason to tolerate this level of performance.
How is it short sighted? Not caring if they don't make the post season doesn't mean rich kids won't still be on the team. I invite you to read what I wrote
If you provide them with a positive experience while playing at your school they/their families will be more likely to donate money. If instead, you treat them like 3rd class citizens only there to check off a Title 9 box then...good luck.
Your post is beyond stupid. Read what I wrote and it become clear why your post is imbecilic
If by "Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football" you mean something other than "it's good that we're not good in golf" then your writing is not nearly as clear as you imagine it to be. If you just don't care about the golf team, that's fine but not a reason to tolerate the current performance. Dannen is in charge of the entire athletic department, not just the football team. If we're going to do something, we should strive to do it well. Not caring is a loser mentality that I doubt Dannen shares.
windywave
Emerald Circle
Posts: 23292
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Women's Golf

Post by windywave »

ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:Women's golf exists to be Title IX compliant for football scholarships. If they are on scholarship they are doing their job. Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football.
This is incredibly short-sighted thinking. What could we possibly spend on the margin to make the postseason in golf, 20k (most probably way less)? Golfers tend to come from money, that 20k could wind up being a very wise investment down the road. Not to mention, unless it's your contention that we are intentionally bad in golf, there's no reason to tolerate this level of performance.
How is it short sighted? Not caring if they don't make the post season doesn't mean rich kids won't still be on the team. I invite you to read what I wrote
If you provide them with a positive experience while playing at your school they/their families will be more likely to donate money. If instead, you treat them like 3rd class citizens only there to check off a Title 9 box then...good luck.
Your post is beyond stupid. Read what I wrote and it become clear why your post is imbecilic
If by "Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football" you mean something other than "it's good that we're not good in golf" then your writing is not nearly as clear as you imagine it to be.
See, you read it an all was revealed (although indifference is more accurate than thinking it is good). Now do you see why Ibtook exception to you putting words in my mouth?
Using big words is not a personal attack
#cousins don't count
ml wave
Emerald Circle
Posts: 14419
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: Women's Golf

Post by ml wave »

windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:Women's golf exists to be Title IX compliant for football scholarships. If they are on scholarship they are doing their job. Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football.
This is incredibly short-sighted thinking. What could we possibly spend on the margin to make the postseason in golf, 20k (most probably way less)? Golfers tend to come from money, that 20k could wind up being a very wise investment down the road. Not to mention, unless it's your contention that we are intentionally bad in golf, there's no reason to tolerate this level of performance.
How is it short sighted? Not caring if they don't make the post season doesn't mean rich kids won't still be on the team. I invite you to read what I wrote
If you provide them with a positive experience while playing at your school they/their families will be more likely to donate money. If instead, you treat them like 3rd class citizens only there to check off a Title 9 box then...good luck.
Your post is beyond stupid. Read what I wrote and it become clear why your post is imbecilic
If by "Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football" you mean something other than "it's good that we're not good in golf" then your writing is not nearly as clear as you imagine it to be.
See, you read it an all was revealed (although indifference is more accurate than thinking it is good). Now do you see why Ibtook exception to you putting words in my mouth?
So, back to my original point that this is incredibly short-sighted thinking. And to answer your question, no for several reasons, not the least of which is because I don't see what words I put in your mouth.
windywave
Emerald Circle
Posts: 23292
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Women's Golf

Post by windywave »

ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:Women's golf exists to be Title IX compliant for football scholarships. If they are on scholarship they are doing their job. Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football.
This is incredibly short-sighted thinking. What could we possibly spend on the margin to make the postseason in golf, 20k (most probably way less)? Golfers tend to come from money, that 20k could wind up being a very wise investment down the road. Not to mention, unless it's your contention that we are intentionally bad in golf, there's no reason to tolerate this level of performance.
How is it short sighted? Not caring if they don't make the post season doesn't mean rich kids won't still be on the team. I invite you to read what I wrote
If you provide them with a positive experience while playing at your school they/their families will be more likely to donate money. If instead, you treat them like 3rd class citizens only there to check off a Title 9 box then...good luck.
Your post is beyond stupid. Read what I wrote and it become clear why your post is imbecilic
If by "Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football" you mean something other than "it's good that we're not good in golf" then your writing is not nearly as clear as you imagine it to be.
See, you read it an all was revealed (although indifference is more accurate than thinking it is good). Now do you see why Ibtook exception to you putting words in my mouth?
So, back to my original point that this is incredibly short-sighted thinking. And to answer your question, no for several reasons, not the least of which is because I don't see what words I put in your mouth.
What is short sighted? There are rich mediocre golfers too.
Using big words is not a personal attack
#cousins don't count
ml wave
Emerald Circle
Posts: 14419
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 4:19 pm

Re: Women's Golf

Post by ml wave »

windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:
ml wave wrote:
windywave wrote:Women's golf exists to be Title IX compliant for football scholarships. If they are on scholarship they are doing their job. Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football.
This is incredibly short-sighted thinking. What could we possibly spend on the margin to make the postseason in golf, 20k (most probably way less)? Golfers tend to come from money, that 20k could wind up being a very wise investment down the road. Not to mention, unless it's your contention that we are intentionally bad in golf, there's no reason to tolerate this level of performance.
How is it short sighted? Not caring if they don't make the post season doesn't mean rich kids won't still be on the team. I invite you to read what I wrote
If you provide them with a positive experience while playing at your school they/their families will be more likely to donate money. If instead, you treat them like 3rd class citizens only there to check off a Title 9 box then...good luck.
Your post is beyond stupid. Read what I wrote and it become clear why your post is imbecilic
If by "Post season play in golf sucks up funds that could be spent on football" you mean something other than "it's good that we're not good in golf" then your writing is not nearly as clear as you imagine it to be.
See, you read it an all was revealed (although indifference is more accurate than thinking it is good). Now do you see why Ibtook exception to you putting words in my mouth?
So, back to my original point that this is incredibly short-sighted thinking. And to answer your question, no for several reasons, not the least of which is because I don't see what words I put in your mouth.
What is short sighted? There are rich mediocre golfers too.
Well, I guess we've gone full circle with this one!
GSx
Emerald Circle
Posts: 19957
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 12:18 am
Location: Beautiful Dutchtown

Re: Women's Golf

Post by GSx »

Finished tied for 3rd to last (or 7th) in AAC tournament.

Title IX has nothing to do with this sad state; neither does football.
Post Reply