TargetTalk

Nevada is shutting down the rifle program...
https://nevadawolfpack.com/news/2018/12 ... ogram.aspx

I fear rifle and fencing will soon be gone completely from the NCAA in favor of more variations of existing sports. Reminds me of the "new sports" in the Olympics while certain historical classics are under constant threat of being cut there too.

The article talks about the issue of travel & costs.
There are only a few schools west of the Mississippi and I know it's hard(er) for them to get the other schools to travel.

AIR FORCE
UAF
UNReno - now gone
UTEP
NEBRASKA
TCU

In terms of travel TCU is right near Dallas, so that mitigates the issue a bit.
UAF is almost a "vacation" match ... lots of folks go there in the 1st half of the season. That school & it's matches are well supported by the other programs ...

For almost all these teams a bus trip is out (or VERY PAINFUL in terms of the travel experience .... miss too much school). They almost always have to fly ... and that is $$$$$$$$

Ah well, there is always rhythm gymnastics for them. :-(

Chip

They have laid out some good excuses to end the rifle program. Just the same I have a hard time believing that it doesn't have more to do with politics. This is the only supported team sport at the school that wasn't allowed to sell team items such as t-shirts in the school store. What other sport involving women would be allowed to be cut to make way for a men's sport? These college programs play a critical role by providing training and support for both female and male athletes that are following their Olympic dream. If it wasn't for the political distaste of shooting people would be demanding that the AD be replaced for even thinking of eliminating a sport that provided a path for females to compete on equal footing with men while providing an Olympic path.
I think we should write to Mr. Marc Johnson let him know what we think instead of just shaking our heads.
Here's the address: 1664 North Virginia Street, Reno, NV 89557

Dan

there are some other schools closing their shooting programs too. one here in Cincinnati, Ohio, Xavier University, closed theirs a number of years ago... forget what they said publicly, but I'm betting it was "political correctness." reminds me of a lady friend who is a card carrying, vehemently protesting, anti-gun advocate. took her to our outdoor smallbore range one day, so she could watch everyone "destroy our world." we sat in the car, 35 feet away from the shooting line, for 10 minutes while they were shooting. finally, she asked, "When are they going to start shooting?" told her they'd been shooting for the last ten minutes.... she was in "shock and awe!" point being, so many people have NO IDEA what's going on, and what's even worse, they don't want to know.

If you have Facebook, you can find additional information from the team to include letters that have been sent from Coach Harvey, alumni, and other supporters to the college and athletic director: https://www.facebook.com/wolfpackrifle/

The students do not realize the power they have. If all would agree to transfer to another university if rifle/pistol is not restored, the university would do an about face. For example, if tuition is say $10,000 a year (for two semesters a year), add in meals, book, and in some cases housing, and the student is a sophomore (again, pick your number) the university will lose at least $25,000 per student. On top of that they forego any chance of these students donating back as alumni after they graduate. Finally, these students will make their opinions known to other students and prospective students, so university loses that potential revenue as well.

It is easy to win these battles once you know how the game is played.

Chip

ChipEck wrote: ↑Thu Dec 27, 2018 1:43 pm The students do not realize the power they have. If all would agree to transfer to another university if rifle/pistol is not restored, the university would do an about face. For example, if tuition is say $10,000 a year (for two semesters a year), add in meals, book, and in some cases housing, and the student is a sophomore (again, pick your number) the university will lose at least $25,000 per student. On top of that they forego any chance of these students donating back as alumni after they graduate. Finally, these students will make their opinions known to other students and prospective students, so university loses that potential revenue as well.

It is easy to win these battles once you know how the game is played.

Chip

I suspect your 25K is potentially at the low end of the scale- haven't been in college in long time, but I remember private colleges were 35-40K a year around the 00's.

Even so, let's say the number is 50K, and they have 10 scholarship spots. What's 500K to the uni? A rounding error, and in this case, for "the better?"

I'd love to believe such would work- but it won't. The numbers aren't going in the right direction. JMO, of course.

Best,
Chase

It will work. HigherEd is in a cut throat market right now because they over-built capacity and the 16-18 year olds coming up have significantly lower numbers because of drop in birth rates 16 to 18 years ago. Top name universities like Cornell, Stanford, etc. will always do well. But that is not the case for much of higher-Ed. I intentionally used low numbers so people would not think I was exaggerating.

Chip

The shooters that are serious about the sport will most probably transfer. Especially if they are on a mostly athletic scholarship.
It all depends on the shooters financials and what they are at the school for ... If they have large academic scholarships, they will be forced to seriously consider staying ... hard to pick that up at another university.
Students that do not have large academic scholarships and are walk-ons ... they are the ones who probably have the easiest opportunity to leave.
10 students are peanuts to a school of a size to host many athletic programs.

Shooting is not a PC sport and will only come under increased hassles from the schools and NCAA.
(A shame-
Think if shooting had the same percentage of permanent injuries as football --- it would be dropped in less than a heartbeat.

I'm also curious how a school can drop a co-ed sport for a pure mens sport and still be compliant with Title IX ... of is that a (small) wrist slap from NCAA if they are not compliant these days.

I dunno.
From what I hear, there are a LOT less college slots than students applying for those slots. My wife said some of the University of California campuses have a 14% acceptance rate. So 86% of the applicants don't get in.
The kids in my yearbook class are applying to MANY colleges, to increase their odds of getting accepted at one. One girl applied to 17 colleges.
So if the students leaves in protest to go to another college, there would be other student applicants waiting for that slot.

Maybe it is different at other colleges that don't get as many applicants.

I was talking to my niece the other day, who is in the process of applying to colleges. It was interesting to hear how things had changed since I was applying. Apparently one of the reasons kids are applying to more colleges is that MANY colleges have gone to a 'standard application', so if you fill it out once (online), you can send it to a bunch of schools with little extra effort (just more application fees, of course).

The elevated application rate then helps the colleges look more 'competitive' because then the acceptance rate goes down (assuming a constant incoming class size). As acceptance rate drops, the college ranking goes up because that's one factor the U.S. News and other ranking organizations use. Plus, the reduced acceptance rates reduce the opportunity to apply to a 'safe school' that you know you'll get in to...leading to fear and applying to more colleges.

I creates an arms race to get more applications, etc., etc. But the reality MAY be that there aren't really that many more applicants, just lots more applications.

marky-d

True. I assume you are talking about the Common Application. We had two of our colleges try it and the number of applicants went way up. The number of qualified applications did not go up any significant amount.

Chip

Ref Title IX compliance: School's web site shows they have more female than male sports.

So what's the future of the Harvard shooting program, now that David Hogg has been accepted as a student?

PCU wrote: ↑Fri Dec 28, 2018 9:46 pm Ref Title IX compliance: School's web site shows they have more female than male sports.

I don't believe it is measured by # of sports, but athletes .... but maybe they did have more female athletes???

I shot on that team from 2011-2015. To add insult to injury, two kids from Washington State (one from my team) were one of the six freshman that Nevada added to their ranks last year. I do not buy for a second the AD's quote that they cut the team due to the fact that rifle was not a Mountain West sport (Nevada's athletic conference). Outside support for the Nevada shooting team rose dramatically a couple of years after I started. But the team has been jerked around facility wise for years. I attached a letter I wrote to the AD and the president at the University to this post. It's long, but it will give you a good overview of what happened and some recent history of the team. If anyone would like to email them, please do. The more pressure the better (but keep it civil). Someone also posted a link to the Nevada Rifle Team facebook page; worth your time going through and looking at what has been posted, especially an email from Coach Harvey. And yes, I am also wondering how they are cutting a coed sport and replacing it with a men's sport. My understanding was that UNR's athletics have been operating with the minimum number of teams necessary to qualify as a Division 1 program.

-Zach Duncan

Zach, those that know me even a bit know I could never write such a great missive as you have.
Excellent points and explanations and have answered many questions I had about the team and it's range situations.

As a coach in the "West" (what I define as west of the Mississippi) UNR was always an option for our shooters here in New Mexico.
Now UNR makes it even more likely that our kids that want to pursue shooting as well as academic achievement will be traveling further from home.
(Our state currently has NCAA shooters coast to coast - UAF to USNA --- and many in between)

Most of the NCAA conferences do not support rifle ---- the rifle conferences are pretty much separate and are made up of fairly local ... especially the Patriot Rifle Conference ... pretty much the "Western" schools.

Again, great letter.
I truely hope that UNR will come to your side, but the cynic in me believes that this is really a political statement by the school, not an athletic decision.

Here's a thought:
The only way to combat "political correctness", is to never mention it.
Easy to get angry over perceived slights and reasons, but that anger doesn't translate into action taken, nor will it convince anyone to change their mind.
If it's really the cause, shooting sports should be able to prove that the sport meets all the objectives of the school's athletics program and does so at a a cost and investment that has similar (or lower) per athlete costs to the school than sports with similar participation.
Might find the biggest issue isn't "PCness".