If something's gotta go, it's gonna be a men's program, in most cases.
Millersville senior Michael Parker:
We have elite caliber athletes at our university who are going to lose training partners in the men's program, and it will really be counterproductive toward elite athletes coming to our university on the women's side.
Parker also pointed out the coaching change that will hinder the women's running programs at Millersville. No, I doubt it was a slap at the new coach. Parker was just stating the facts.
Don't believe Mikey on the training issue? Just ask Kutztown University's women's swim team if they miss the men.
With the same facility and coaching, but without the men's team, they've gone from 4th in the conference and 16th at NCAA's in 2010, to 9th at conference and not scoring at NCAA's this year.
Them facts is facts: axing men hurts women.
Stick around for all nine minutes, as an interesting discussion toward the end of the video when the idea of "taking football out of the equation" came up.
The Women's Sports Foundation's Angela Ruggiero seemed open to that approach.
When it comes down to it, though, don't look for the idea to gain any traction with the Quota Crowd over at the WSF. Taking football out of the equation would mean athletic departments could - and would - immediately dismantle sports like equestrian and rowing for budgetary reasons.
As y'all know, the excuse used when sacrificing men's programs - money - cannot be used to cut women's programs.
Football will continue to "count" and proportionality will live on...until enough brave and influential women demand equal opportunities for their brothers, sons, and nephews.