Rutgers Fencing will be gone in a year.

[AndrewH]

What's happening at Rutgers sucks though. Pure and simple. Cutting the team really can't be enough of a savings to make that much impact, and it's terrible that fencing goes, while the super successful football takes no impact (as far as I'm aware). But when the state's got no money, the state's got no money, and like others have said, fencing doesn't make a dime. Very few people make donations to the school based on fencing (you guys may have a few, but not a lot), and the school is certainly willing to gamble that those people will still donate to the school.

Actually the football team's budget is being increased by 1 million, after cutting 1.2 million by eliminating the other teams. So it's not really an issue of not having enough money, it's an issue of where the money is going. No sports make money except football and men's basketball (and at RU they don't even make money). The school still has a duty to support a variety of sports even though they may not make money. In our case, we make results and scholar-athletes instead of money.

We do have some substantial alumni donations, but they get put into a fund which is distributed amongst the sports, so it doesn't all go to fencing.

[keropie]

Well, then it sucks even more. I hope you guys have some success bringing this to people's attention and getting it rectified.

[Mr Epee]

Jesus Christ, people... it's time to get real.

Go make you're club better.

That's it... I'm starting a new thread.

[campb1pr]

Fencing is fairly expensive. Basic equipment is at least $200-$300/fencer, plus the cost of maintaining blades and lam'es. It's not as expensive as other sports, but the school doesn't get anything out of fencing.

Maybe you're right and the administrations just consistently use title 9 as an excuse to cut fencing. A convenient out or not, it still hurts fencing. I'd rather they not have the convenient out, especially since I haven't seen Title 9 help anyone anyway.

I've snipped out a lot of what you said, but I only want to address the two separate points above, and I don't think that anything in the rest of your post needs to be put there... That said:

Fencing is expensive on the individual level, but let me give you an example of the university level differences. When I was the coach of a Div. 1 varsity program (a small one, and women only, but I'd say within striking distance of larger programs budgets), our total yearly budget was approx. $16,000. That was the amount of money that I was authorized to spend during the regular season, on everything. That meant all equipemnt purchases, travel, entry fees, food, recruiting, phone, etc.

To give you a few comparisons, at my institution, a Div I-AA football school, more than my budget was spent on a single charter plane flight and weekend hotel/food bill for the football team to travel to a conference game. One of 11 games in a season. And that was just the plane, the hotel and the food for one weekend.

Our women's basketball team just returned from a trip to Italy. I would imagine that more than $16,000 was spent on airfare, a week's worth of hotels in various parts of Italy, buses, food, etc.

Our softball team was started while I was still coaching. Their first year's budget was something like $10,000 just for recruiting, with everything else on top of that.

So, from top to bottom, fencing is one of the least expensive sports for schools to sponsor. When you just consider $$ in the budget. However, what Rutgers is going through, and what many other schools went through, was the overall tightening of the belt. Beyond the dollars on the budget line, there are support personnel (trainers, equipment room, academic advisors, secretaries, etc.), scholarship dollars, space that could be utilized for something else, or given to another department, insurance, supervision, etc. All these things add up. When trying to cut a budget, all those behind the scenes dollars add up. And when you cut 10 sports, all of a sudden, the numbers of all those other things get smaller. That is what administrators see. It is not animosity towards fencing, or a vendetta, or personal. If you look back on the history of sports cutting at NCAA schools since 1973, it is very rare to see a single sport be cut, and most of those examples are wrestling, or football. Men only sports that have high injury risk, related insurance and related support costs. Without checking facts, I feel confident that you could not find a single instance of fencing being cut by itself. When it comes to money, we are just too small to worry about, but big enough to make a difference in the bottom line. The biggest reason fencing gets cut is that the stink from the fencing community is not big enough for schools to worry about. Cut soccer? Are you kidding? You'd have a firestorm, stirred by angry soccer fans, alums, etc. Cut fencing? We had a fencing team?

As for Title IX, it is a convenient scapegoat, rather than budgets, but as for your argument that it has not helped anyone, ask Mia Hamm, Jennie Finch, Lisa Leslie, Cheryl Swoopes, or any others of a host of well known female athletes if they would have had the same opportunities if it hadn't been for Title IX. Ask just about any female soccer player, tennis player, softball player in college if Title IX has had a positive impact on them. Not because of any decisions or actions now, but because of actions that were required 30 years ago.

Don't get me wrong, I can go on even longer about the horrendous decision it is to cut your fencing program. I've been doing this stuff for 20+ years, but I jsut want people to understand that its not our money or Title IX that threatens our sport at the collegiate level. It's our expendibilty and lack of resistence.

[mrbiggs]

...

I've already adressed your whole post. I was wrong on some points. (Sometimes second and thirdhand information is incorrect.) See my above post.

Also, to clarify, I don't know the circumstances about the lack of a men's varsity team at the college I'm attending right now. Title 9 may or may not have come into effect.

[AndrewH]

However, what Rutgers is going through, and what many other schools went through, was the overall tightening of the belt.

Yes, we do have to deal with budget cuts. But when $1.2 million is cut, and $1 million of that is then given to the football team, one has to wonder how much was necessary to cut in the first place.

[bigdawg2121]

I agree wholeheartedly bro. Shady dealings are going on and it's total BS. I can't say anything about the quality of your football team (they certainly beat us) but on the bright side they consume concessionnary goods at a rate much much higher than fans of most other places apparently. What's the extra million going to? Anyone say?

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

Hookers and blow.

[bigdawg2121]

Dude that's why they have sorority houses. What's the real answer?

[AndrewH]

What's the extra million going to? Anyone say?

Well the AD has gone on record as saying that he sees two paths for the football team: either become a div I powerhouse or drop out of the Big East entirely. There's no middle ground. So the $1 million, it's going towards higher coaching salaries, more amenities (tutors, TV's, training equipment), more travel time, etc.

Now obviously a successful football team is a major draw for a university which is struggling to improve its image among in-staters. It could even turn around and start bringing in money and some point. But I think there are different ways that it could be accomplished without cutting 6 other sports. The other sports were never asked to reduce their budgets. Fencing could eliminate scholarships, cut out the NAC in december and save lots of money.

[keropie]

And whatever else you may say, at least Rutgers this year is opening well. 2-0 so far, and looked reasonably good doing it.

Though I still say the whole situation stinks ><

[KD5MDK]

I was going to make a comment about the score in the last game, and how I guess I have to stop suggesting they give it up.

[chefencer]

Philly.com
Boosters of six sports scheduled to be cut by Rutgers after this semester have raised $650,000 in an effort to try and save their teams, according to a report published in The Record, of Bergen County. The sports to be eliminated, because of state cuts, are heavyweight and lightweight crew, men's swimming and diving, men's and women's fencing and men's tennis.

[AndrewH]

There was a BOG meeting yesterday. They said no to the money and no to the state legislature resolution. Effectively this is the final nail in the coffin, because the next BOG meeting isn't til July (and I don't think they'd be changing their minds then, either...)