Cost Of Attendance proposal

Discuss anything and everything relating to Bobcat Football here.

Moderators: kmax, SonomaCat, rtb

Post Reply
User avatar
luckyirishguy25
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3687
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 7:59 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by luckyirishguy25 » Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:52 pm

utucats wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:16 pm
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:12 am
77matcat wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:49 am
AFCat

Figured it was after 72. I graduated from HS then. Didn’t and don’t really follow girls bb, but I assume there wasn’t a real flock of talent to the game because there weren’t robust programs from first grade up.

If you go back to 72 there weren’t any women presidents or CEOs that I recall. Civil war ended in 1865. There wasn’t a black president till 2008. Some things you do because it’s the right thing do to.

Some folks apparently don’t believe it is.

I’m thinking or was.
Time isn't going to change the physiological differences between male and female sports. That's the point that you seem to keep on missing/avoiding.
Ding ding ding. For some reason 77 seems to believe that since we’ve had an African American President and female CEOs that it’s just a matter of time until we get a female LeBron James.
Well truth be told I'd rather watch women's soccer any day of the week over men's soccer or golf...



bobcat99
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3695
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:11 am

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by bobcat99 » Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:24 pm

luckyirishguy25 wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:52 pm
utucats wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:16 pm
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:12 am
77matcat wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:49 am
AFCat

Figured it was after 72. I graduated from HS then. Didn’t and don’t really follow girls bb, but I assume there wasn’t a real flock of talent to the game because there weren’t robust programs from first grade up.

If you go back to 72 there weren’t any women presidents or CEOs that I recall. Civil war ended in 1865. There wasn’t a black president till 2008. Some things you do because it’s the right thing do to.

Some folks apparently don’t believe it is.

I’m thinking or was.
Time isn't going to change the physiological differences between male and female sports. That's the point that you seem to keep on missing/avoiding.
Ding ding ding. For some reason 77 seems to believe that since we’ve had an African American President and female CEOs that it’s just a matter of time until we get a female LeBron James.
Well truth be told I'd rather watch women's soccer any day of the week over men's soccer or golf...
People who watch golf are weird.



User avatar
RickRund
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4156
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:08 pm
Location: Post Falls ID

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by RickRund » Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:12 pm

utucats wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:11 pm
coloradocat wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 2:05 pm
I think we should go full equality and make all sports co-ed.
Phenomenal idea. For those that believe that we will have “similar outcomes”, I’m sure they’ll enjoy being able to watch Troy Andersen tackle females on Saturdays. I wonder if games will be longer due to injury timeouts 🤔. Probably not. I’m sure after a few years the girls will catch up and everything will be equal.

It will be awesome someday when we reach true equality and there is no difference between men and women!
Running track in high school and college there are VERY few women that have reached the times that I ran. Will be a very long time before equality happens. They are not as fast, not as quick, not as strong.
The American Ninja competition as one example. They might break into the top 30 although they allow them to qualify differently.
This week I think Rory McElroy has a 321 yard average drive. Guessing the women are around 280. I think this stat is dependent upon course.



User avatar
RickRund
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4156
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:08 pm
Location: Post Falls ID

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by RickRund » Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:15 pm

luckyirishguy25 wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:52 pm
utucats wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:16 pm
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:12 am
77matcat wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:49 am
AFCat

Figured it was after 72. I graduated from HS then. Didn’t and don’t really follow girls bb, but I assume there wasn’t a real flock of talent to the game because there weren’t robust programs from first grade up.

If you go back to 72 there weren’t any women presidents or CEOs that I recall. Civil war ended in 1865. There wasn’t a black president till 2008. Some things you do because it’s the right thing do to.

Some folks apparently don’t believe it is.

I’m thinking or was.
Time isn't going to change the physiological differences between male and female sports. That's the point that you seem to keep on missing/avoiding.
Ding ding ding. For some reason 77 seems to believe that since we’ve had an African American President and female CEOs that it’s just a matter of time until we get a female LeBron James.
Well truth be told I'd rather watch women's soccer any day of the week over men's soccer or golf...
For me watching soccer or tennis is close to having my knee replacement without anesthesia. Then there is the nba...



77matcat
Member # Retired
Posts: 2432
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:12 pm

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by 77matcat » Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:38 pm

Physiological differences doesn’t seem to stop female gymnasts from performing equivalent floor routine.

Women may well never catch up with men physically, although I think more time is required before a reasonable assessment can be made. Women athletes are still making strides in virtually all sports.

If women never do catch up physically still doesn’t mean that T9 is a bad idea.
Last edited by 77matcat on Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.



bobcat99
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3695
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:11 am

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by bobcat99 » Sun Feb 16, 2020 7:38 pm

77matcat wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:38 pm
Physiological differences doesn’t seem to stop female gymnasts from performing equivalent floor routine.

Women may well never catch up with men physically, although I think more time is required before a reasonable assessment can be made. Women athletes are still making strides in virtually all sports.

If women never do catch up physically still doesn’t mean that T9 is a bad idea.
Physiological differences make women more adept at most aspects of gymnastics.

Are thousands of years not enough time? How much do you need, man?!



BobcatDel
BobcatNation Team Captain
Posts: 376
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2015 4:54 pm

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by BobcatDel » Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:17 pm

77matcat wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:49 am
AFCat

Figured it was after 72. I graduated from HS then. Didn’t and don’t really follow girls bb, but I assume there wasn’t a real flock of talent to the game because there weren’t robust programs from first grade up.

If you go back to 72 there weren’t any women presidents or CEOs that I recall. Civil war ended in 1865. There wasn’t a black president till 2008. Some things you do because it’s the right thing do to.

Some folks apparently don’t believe it is.

I’m thinking it was.
Being from that era, there were a couple world leaders that were women in the 60s and 70s that I remember. Golda Meier the Prime Minister of Israel was in power in late 60s. Margaret Thatcher rose to power in the Conservative party in Britain in early to mid-70s....ultimately Prime Minister in later part of decade. Both strong women who deserved the roles they were elected to not just ”because it was right thing to do”. Jeanette Rankin was elected as first woman in House of Representative as a Republican in 1916. And I did look up there were a couple CEO women in 70s...Katherine Graham at Washington Post and Marion Sandler at Golden West Financial. Certainly a small number but I am sure each got there because they deserved to be there.

At our small school there would have easily been 10 young ladies who would have “flocked” to the game if we would have had a Women’s BB team then. There were some competitive young women. We a had a strong womens track team (top 3 in state 2 consecutive years when I graduated) and had good women’s softball teams. My dad coached little league baseball and our community was so small there were years we had several young girls playing baseball... this was 20 years before the young lady played in the Little League World Series that created all the hub but. And I did watch some of the early BB games which at times was painful....the Womens BB game today is a much different story (as you point out all those 1st grade girls are now learning skills at a young age and playing high school or college ball with good skills) with play at a high level.

For me Title IX is about giving resources to allow competition for young men and women to participate in a sport they love. Something that was ignored in the past. I am not interested and have no time for the argument that says we have to expect women BB teams to compete against men at any level....or run the 100meter dash at the same speed....or do the rings routine in gymnastics....or power lift the same weights....or rise to the level of men’s wrestling in the state of Montana....etc etc.etc. what I like is having a good women’s basketball team that can kick the behind of a Grizzly women’s BB team or a good women’s volleyball team so I can watch someone spike it against the Griz or Idaho or whoever. And I still think it was wrong to shut down men’s baseball and wrestling to accommodate the new rules. And I wished we had a women’s soccer team and softball team....both of which I coached when my daughters were little...and I still enjoy watching.

Oh well....



MSU01
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:21 pm

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by MSU01 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:29 pm

Really interesting discussion going on here about that FCOA proposal.


Go Bobcats! 24-17 31-23 29-25 48-14

User avatar
PapaG
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6355
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 11:44 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by PapaG » Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:10 pm

luckyirishguy25 wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:52 pm
utucats wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:16 pm
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:12 am
77matcat wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:49 am
AFCat

Figured it was after 72. I graduated from HS then. Didn’t and don’t really follow girls bb, but I assume there wasn’t a real flock of talent to the game because there weren’t robust programs from first grade up.

If you go back to 72 there weren’t any women presidents or CEOs that I recall. Civil war ended in 1865. There wasn’t a black president till 2008. Some things you do because it’s the right thing do to.

Some folks apparently don’t believe it is.

I’m thinking or was.
Time isn't going to change the physiological differences between male and female sports. That's the point that you seem to keep on missing/avoiding.
Ding ding ding. For some reason 77 seems to believe that since we’ve had an African American President and female CEOs that it’s just a matter of time until we get a female LeBron James.
Well truth be told I'd rather watch women's soccer any day of the week over men's soccer or golf...
I assume you mean aesthetically, because the Dallas MLS U-15 boys’ team beat the USWNT 5-2 in an exhibition a few years ago.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsspo ... mmage/amp/


Greg K.

User avatar
PapaG
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6355
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 11:44 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by PapaG » Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:14 pm

77matcat wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:38 pm

Women may well never catch up with men physically, although I think more time is required before a reasonable assessment can be made. Women athletes are still making strides in virtually all sports.

If women never do catch up physically still doesn’t mean that T9 is a bad idea.
More time other than the entire existence of humankind? What? I’m not sure you understand the basics of human physiology.


Greg K.

User avatar
PapaG
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6355
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 11:44 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by PapaG » Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:15 pm

bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 7:38 pm
77matcat wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:38 pm
Physiological differences doesn’t seem to stop female gymnasts from performing equivalent floor routine.

Women may well never catch up with men physically, although I think more time is required before a reasonable assessment can be made. Women athletes are still making strides in virtually all sports.

If women never do catch up physically still doesn’t mean that T9 is a bad idea.
Physiological differences make women more adept at most aspects of gymnastics.

Are thousands of years not enough time? How much do you need, man?!
Other than the rings and pommel horse? Other than floor, you’re talking about two different sports.


Greg K.

MSU01
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:21 pm

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by MSU01 » Tue Feb 18, 2020 8:31 am

This thread sets a new record for men trying desperately to cover up their own insecurities by diminishing the accomplishments of female athletes.


Go Bobcats! 24-17 31-23 29-25 48-14

Cataholic
Member # Retired
Posts: 2320
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2014 10:09 pm

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by Cataholic » Tue Feb 18, 2020 9:28 am

MSU01 wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 8:31 am
This thread sets a new record for men trying desperately to cover up their own insecurities by diminishing the accomplishments of female athletes.
That is awesome 👏



rivercat
BobcatNation Letterman
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 11:26 am
Location: Bozeman

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by rivercat » Tue Feb 18, 2020 9:44 am

Cataholic wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 9:28 am
MSU01 wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 8:31 am
This thread sets a new record for men trying desperately to cover up their own insecurities by diminishing the accomplishments of female athletes.
That is awesome 👏
Thanks MSU01, it had to be said. D*ck measuring contest get complicated if you include lady parts.


"...get in 21 personnel and pound people and take their souls and have fun doing that..." coach Choate

bobcat99
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3695
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:11 am

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by bobcat99 » Tue Feb 18, 2020 9:47 am

MSU01 wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 8:31 am
This thread sets a new record for men trying desperately to cover up their own insecurities by diminishing the accomplishments of female athletes.
And somehow, you still miss the point.

It's not about men's sports vs women's sports. I'll fully admit that I would rather watch our women's basketball team than our men's. They play better. It's not about the aesthetical appeal. It's the money.

Sports, especially at the FCS level, are a drain on resources. Now some sports are able to do a lot better than others (football). Even then, look at EWU, it's hard.

The point is that it's an undeniable fact that Title IX makes it much more difficult for universities to be financially solvent, and for what? Make tennis and golf club sports, and for the students, hardly anything changes. I bet more people go to the lacrosse games (club sport) than the tennis or golf matches. I just think things could be done a whole lot better.



AFCAT
Member # Retired
Posts: 2775
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2016 3:25 pm

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by AFCAT » Tue Feb 18, 2020 9:50 am

MSU01 wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 8:31 am
This thread sets a new record for men trying desperately to cover up their own insecurities by diminishing the accomplishments of female athletes.
Image


Want to pledge or donate to the Bobcat facilities plan?!
http://www.msuaf.org/msuathleticcomplex
Contact the Alumni Foundation at:
Phone - 406-994-2092
Mail - P.O. Box 172750, Bozeman, MT 59717

MSU01
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:21 pm

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by MSU01 » Tue Feb 18, 2020 10:00 am

bobcat99 wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 9:47 am
MSU01 wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 8:31 am
This thread sets a new record for men trying desperately to cover up their own insecurities by diminishing the accomplishments of female athletes.
And somehow, you still miss the point.

It's not about men's sports vs women's sports. I'll fully admit that I would rather watch our women's basketball team than our men's. They play better. It's not about the aesthetical appeal. It's the money.

Sports, especially at the FCS level, are a drain on resources. Now some sports are able to do a lot better than others (football). Even then, look at EWU, it's hard.

The point is that it's an undeniable fact that Title IX makes it much more difficult for universities to be financially solvent, and for what? Make tennis and golf club sports, and for the students, hardly anything changes. I bet more people go to the lacrosse games (club sport) than the tennis or golf matches. I just think things could be done a whole lot better.
My comment was not directed at anything you have posted on this thread.


Go Bobcats! 24-17 31-23 29-25 48-14

bobcat99
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3695
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:11 am

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by bobcat99 » Tue Feb 18, 2020 10:40 am

MSU01 wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 10:00 am
bobcat99 wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 9:47 am
MSU01 wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 8:31 am
This thread sets a new record for men trying desperately to cover up their own insecurities by diminishing the accomplishments of female athletes.
And somehow, you still miss the point.

It's not about men's sports vs women's sports. I'll fully admit that I would rather watch our women's basketball team than our men's. They play better. It's not about the aesthetical appeal. It's the money.

Sports, especially at the FCS level, are a drain on resources. Now some sports are able to do a lot better than others (football). Even then, look at EWU, it's hard.

The point is that it's an undeniable fact that Title IX makes it much more difficult for universities to be financially solvent, and for what? Make tennis and golf club sports, and for the students, hardly anything changes. I bet more people go to the lacrosse games (club sport) than the tennis or golf matches. I just think things could be done a whole lot better.
My comment was not directed at anything you have posted on this thread.
Fair enough. My apologies then.



MSU01
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:21 pm

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by MSU01 » Tue Feb 18, 2020 10:51 am

bobcat99 wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 10:40 am
MSU01 wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 10:00 am
bobcat99 wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 9:47 am
MSU01 wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 8:31 am
This thread sets a new record for men trying desperately to cover up their own insecurities by diminishing the accomplishments of female athletes.
And somehow, you still miss the point.

It's not about men's sports vs women's sports. I'll fully admit that I would rather watch our women's basketball team than our men's. They play better. It's not about the aesthetical appeal. It's the money.

Sports, especially at the FCS level, are a drain on resources. Now some sports are able to do a lot better than others (football). Even then, look at EWU, it's hard.

The point is that it's an undeniable fact that Title IX makes it much more difficult for universities to be financially solvent, and for what? Make tennis and golf club sports, and for the students, hardly anything changes. I bet more people go to the lacrosse games (club sport) than the tennis or golf matches. I just think things could be done a whole lot better.
My comment was not directed at anything you have posted on this thread.
Fair enough. My apologies then.
No worries! To clarify, the two posts earlier on this page that mainly prompted me to post that were Uncle Rico letting us know that women can't beat his track times from back in high school, followed by the comment that women's soccer is only worth watching for "aesthetic" reasons.


Go Bobcats! 24-17 31-23 29-25 48-14

User avatar
luckyirishguy25
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3687
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 7:59 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Cost Of Attendance proposal

Post by luckyirishguy25 » Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:19 pm

PapaG wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:10 pm
luckyirishguy25 wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:52 pm
utucats wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:16 pm
bobcat99 wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:12 am
77matcat wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:49 am
AFCat

Figured it was after 72. I graduated from HS then. Didn’t and don’t really follow girls bb, but I assume there wasn’t a real flock of talent to the game because there weren’t robust programs from first grade up.

If you go back to 72 there weren’t any women presidents or CEOs that I recall. Civil war ended in 1865. There wasn’t a black president till 2008. Some things you do because it’s the right thing do to.

Some folks apparently don’t believe it is.

I’m thinking or was.
Time isn't going to change the physiological differences between male and female sports. That's the point that you seem to keep on missing/avoiding.
Ding ding ding. For some reason 77 seems to believe that since we’ve had an African American President and female CEOs that it’s just a matter of time until we get a female LeBron James.
Well truth be told I'd rather watch women's soccer any day of the week over men's soccer or golf...
I assume you mean aesthetically, because the Dallas MLS U-15 boys’ team beat the USWNT 5-2 in an exhibition a few years ago.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsspo ... mmage/amp/
I like women's soccer better because they play harder than the men's soccer teams and it makes it fun to watch. They leave the field bloody and dirty, whereas the men have grass stains from flopping on the ground and crying like babies. Women soccer players are 10x tougher than the men.



Post Reply