Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Basketball
NCAA's Treatment of Women
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="lv20gt" data-source="post: 791703" data-attributes="member: 2299"><p>The details in the article makes sense, especially the part about the first and second round games being played on campus for the women's tournaments. Keep in mind, with 67 games being played total nearly 78% of the games are played in the first 2 rounds, including play in games. Assuming they can reasonably cut a lot of costs with housing and having a floor by playing on the women's home court, it makes sense that there are usually big savings. Now whether that decision to have the first two rounds of the women's tournaments to be on the campus of the higher seed is another topic probably worth discussing, but I don't think that difference is bad on its face. Personally I wish that was the case for the men's game although there are plenty of reasons against it. (I'm not trying to create a spin off of the spin off I swear). </p><p></p><p>I believe the women are allowed 15 scholarship players correct compared to the 13 for the men? If true that is ~15% increased scholarships and that about the % difference in 16 vs 18 figure which makes sense in creating the bubble (in terms of rough figures). It wouldn't surprise me if that is roughly how they determined the budgets. The devil is in the details though. For instance, even if all the players, men and women, had similar quality hotel rooms, the location difference could drive up the cost of one vs the other. Just one type of example. But let's say that is the case and for a similar room in SA it costs more than in Indy. That means the situation is do they spend more money to provide similar quality, or do they allocate similar money at the price of lower quality for the women. My guess is the lawyers hired will find a way to justify the difference in terms of $ allocation. </p><p></p><p>But I doubt they will justify the situation of the women not having work out equipment at all for two rounds or for the tournament to have no branding at all, or especially if the complaints about inadequate covid testing holds (which if there are more players total for the women the same amount of money spent on that for both doesn't make much sense)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="lv20gt, post: 791703, member: 2299"] The details in the article makes sense, especially the part about the first and second round games being played on campus for the women's tournaments. Keep in mind, with 67 games being played total nearly 78% of the games are played in the first 2 rounds, including play in games. Assuming they can reasonably cut a lot of costs with housing and having a floor by playing on the women's home court, it makes sense that there are usually big savings. Now whether that decision to have the first two rounds of the women's tournaments to be on the campus of the higher seed is another topic probably worth discussing, but I don't think that difference is bad on its face. Personally I wish that was the case for the men's game although there are plenty of reasons against it. (I'm not trying to create a spin off of the spin off I swear). I believe the women are allowed 15 scholarship players correct compared to the 13 for the men? If true that is ~15% increased scholarships and that about the % difference in 16 vs 18 figure which makes sense in creating the bubble (in terms of rough figures). It wouldn't surprise me if that is roughly how they determined the budgets. The devil is in the details though. For instance, even if all the players, men and women, had similar quality hotel rooms, the location difference could drive up the cost of one vs the other. Just one type of example. But let's say that is the case and for a similar room in SA it costs more than in Indy. That means the situation is do they spend more money to provide similar quality, or do they allocate similar money at the price of lower quality for the women. My guess is the lawyers hired will find a way to justify the difference in terms of $ allocation. But I doubt they will justify the situation of the women not having work out equipment at all for two rounds or for the tournament to have no branding at all, or especially if the complaints about inadequate covid testing holds (which if there are more players total for the women the same amount of money spent on that for both doesn't make much sense) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What jersey number did Justin Thomas wear?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Basketball
NCAA's Treatment of Women
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top