From the Joplin Globe on Monday
Superintendent Ron Lankford said the R-7 Board of Education voted June 10 not to add girls soccer and golf programs this fall based on his recommendation. Lankford said rising fuel costs make this a bad time to add programs that involve traveling to competitions.
Someone remind me again how many boys a high school football program will take to a road game weekly? I remember covering a Glendale Falcons game (my sister’s stepson was playing) and Joplin had 40+ JV players and an equal number of varsity players on the sideline.
4 Comments
I would imagine very few patrons of, at least the R-12 district and I would suggest many other public schools, realize how little effect soccer programs have on a district’s budget compared to FB or BB. The amount of money raised by booster clubs to obtain everything from practice balls to uniforms to field maintenance allows the district to expend very few dollars on the program. For the most part, soccer programs are NOT supported financially by the district outside of travel costs. It all comes down to where the district wants to place its athletic emphasis. Its a situation that we have dealt with for many years and its unlikely to change any time soon. They have great athletes in Webb City and its their loss, or more directly, its the soccer players’ loss.
This is another example of how fuel costs affect everything. I don’t think it’s fair to single out the football team though - there are several other girls and boys sports that require bus travel. Also, there aren’t near as many football road games as there are other sports such as soccer, basketball, or baseball/softball.
There are 100+ young men who have the opportunity to play football for their high school at any school the size of Webb City Dan. With three games a week (freshman, JV, Varsity), the cost of outfitting, maintaining, providing coaching and travel is significant. Especially when compared to the cost of two coaches and 40 girls in simple uniforms by adding soccer.
Don’t drink the kool-aid and accept the excuses Lankford offers. Instead get out in front of this and support young women having the same opportunities that representing their school offers the boys.
Easy now; I’m not making excuses for girls not having the same opportunities as boys to play (they should), but I don’t think it’s fair to single out one sport. There are lots of other factors contributing to a sports budget, especially with a poor economy/inflation; but you’re right, a Class 5 school shouldn’t have any problem fielding a girls soccer team.
Supporting youth sports isn’t just about one sport or one gender, it’s about supporting all of them and finding a way to make it work for all of them, equally. Believe it or not, it is possible to “get in front” and support football and soccer at the same time! In fact, I also support kids playing baseball, basketball, and softball, etc. Also, the article wasn’t addressing equipment, but travel (which I was commenting on). I have no idea what is going on in Webb City with the administration or school board, I was commenting on how other sports do in fact travel just as much if not more than football. As far as JV and freshman, I know a lot of schools have started playing them on the same night to save time and expenses. If fuel is in fact the concern, I bet you’d find enough parents willing to pull transportation duty to get the girls there and back. (But there may be some liability issues there being a school sponsored activity?)
Post a Comment