Bigger and Better, Personalities in Sport: Stephanie Loomis

We discussed in class Holley Mangold, younger sister of professional football start Nick Mangold who also played for The Ohio State Buckeyes. Holley's bigger than life personality is so endearing when it comes to women's sport, especially the depiction of women in sport. It's not "normal" for women to be overweight and a high profile personality. But some of these athletes have proven to us with their personalities, hate it or love it- bigger is better.

                                                                Holley Mangold:

Big contracts, big fan base, and big time sports sometimes make for big egos. Some of the following personalities have been what has kept it interesting for the rest of us.

                                                                Shaquille O'Neal:

Chad Ochocinco: 

Personality, size, and the way athletes portray themselves is all a part of the athlete as a package. Do you think that personality is a dominant trait in the success or the following an athlete attains? Should success be attributed to the amount of personality an athlete brings to the game? What about as an endorser? 

Budget Allocation Assignment

After receiving $120,000 to be allocated to 15 high school athletic teams, we decided to make the following changes to the teams' budgets and needs:

First, we chose to delegate a fundraiser for the football team of $60 per person as well as men's and women's swimming, women's track and field, and men's track and field.  We also splite the $20,000 donation up into the overall budget wherever needed.

Next, we decided to get rid of men's and women's downhill skiing which would free up $15,500 in order to use that money in other areas in need.  This decision was largely based upon the fact that skiing is a 'higher-income' type sport and that it's not reasonable to be included in a public high school's budget.  Therefore, it will be made into a club sport/organization.

We also decided to allow the softball team their $10,000 trip to Florida since they're ranked number one in their respective conference.

In order to free up more money, we demoted the hockey team to the club level which freed up $19,000 (that was previously included in ice time and miscellaneous expenses.)

Lastly, men's and women's soccer will be given new jerseys because they're both ranked 3rd in their respective conferences.  That then left us with $14,050.  With the remaining money, we will buy new football helmets for $6,000 and also new mats for men's track and field for $6,000.  Also, our $1,200  will be allocated to the volleyball team for new jerseys.


Chris Cournan
Kyle McQuillen
Aaron Mehling
Derek Zyski
Derek Brewer

Budget Allocation

By: Kristi Kopaniasz
Group Members: Jackie, Jenny, Jenn

Taking the role of athletic director seemed fun until we played with the numbers. You can't please everyone and surely with the budget we were given, that was not going to happen.

First we added up all the figures that were bolded since we knew those were must haves for the sports. Our grand total with every sport was $151,350 which was well over our budget of $120,000. We took advantage of sports fundraising. To get the most "bang for our buck" we had the biggest sports fundraise. With Football (75 people), swimming (60), Men's Track (55) and Women's track (60); the total amount fundraised was $15,300. giving us $136,000 needed. We used the donation for the general athletic fund. The amount of $20,000 was divided equally among the sports. That left us with $116,050.

We decided that wasn't enough to give extra money to teams we felt deserved it. Our group decided to make Cheerleading and Field Hockey pay to play sports. By changing those two sports, it freed up $11,250. Once we totaled up everything without those two sports our total budget that we had was $104,800. That meant we had $15,200 left to give to the sports we felt appropriate.

With the extra money left we placed importance on performance. Our group created a Conference Bonus. The Conference Bonus is the left over money given to any or all teams that are 3rd or better in the conference. This year five teams qualified to split that money. Softball, Skiing, W. Track, M. & W. Soccer split that money equally and each received $3,040 to use. We deteremind that if a team is doing well they are more likely to drive in revenue from ticket sales and apparel. By helping our university we gave those teams money back to place importance on performance.

Great Attitude-Gene Csakany

This past week in class we discussed the loveable and charismatic power lifter that is Holly Mangold.  Many people know her brother, former Ohio State Buckeye and current New York Jet center, Nick Mangold.  When many people think of Holly, most of the time they just think of a big girl that is only famous because of her size and her choice in athletic participation, but there is so much more to this girl then meets the eye.  Most girls her age are concerned with their looks and how to be thinner, not many girls enjoy being the biggest person (male or female) in the room.  Holly however, takes that statement in stride.  From a young age she never really was concerned with the norm of what girls “should” be doing, she took after her brother and wanted to play football.  Although she was not very good, she compensated with her size, for her lack of skill.  Although many videos show her throwing people around, this does not necessarily mean she was talented, she was just that much bigger than all the boys participating on the field.  With that being said, it is still remarkable that she went through all the practices, and worked out in the weight room with the team to try to better her skill. This is right around the time she got recognized as being someone who could participate in power-lifting.  She took a back-handed complement she received from one of her coaches in stride, and just put her mind, her body, and her over sized personality to the task of becoming a power lifter.  Yet another great accomplishment was the fact that she made the US women’s Olympic team for weight lifting, which is a great feat in itself for the fact that she has been doing it for such a short amount of time.  Although she did not medal, she kept a positive mind throughout the whole process.  She was not expected to be able to make the Olympics until the 2016 games, and she made it for the 2012 summer Olympics.  So maybe by the time the 2016 Olympics come around she will be an elite weight lifter and be able to add an Olympic medal to her already large personality.   

Embrace It

This week in class we talked about a lot of things.  The thing that struck me the most was when we talked about Holley Mangold.  Mangold had a very interesting story and her story made me realize a lot.  Mangold doesn't let her weight define who she is, she embraces it.  This shows me and a lot of people that you should make the best out of what you have.

It may be hard to see now but when I was growing up I was kind of a chubby kid.  I didn't realize this until 7th grade when I went to the doctor for a physical to play football.  The doctor told me that I was overweight and I was shocked.  However, I looked at it in a positive way.  In my head I just said that this will make me a better football player. It helped in some areas and hurt I n others.  The weight made it harder for other players to tackle me in the pocket( I played quarterback) but it made it harder for me to run away from them too.  I used the weight to my advantage tho.

By 9th grade I had gotten taller, I also started weightlifting and sort of transformed my body. To watch my body transform was amazing and I believe it's one of the reasons why I like to workout.  To see your hardwork bring results right before your eyes is exciting.  By this time I really began to appreciate my body, flaws and all.  I learned to appreciate what you were given, kind of just like Holley Mangold.

In all one should always appreciate and embrace themselves physically and mentally.  You are who you are and one should embrace it.  Be proud of who you are and don't pay attention to what other people think.  If people are saying something bad about you then your doing something right.

-Tim Love

Department Budget

In Tuesday’s class we had to construct a budget for an Athletic Department.  We were advised to try and not cut any sports, though we could make them a club sport.  We started out with $120,000, which we had to divide up amongst the sports.  Then we received a 20,000 donation from an alumnus.  The last way we could have received money was by fundraising but only with four sports.  This would give us $50 for each athlete they had in their program.  We were also given minimal amounts for each program stating the least amount we could give to each sport.

The first thing we did was find out which sports had the highest amount of participants to fundraise for the whole athletic department.  The four sports programs we picked were the football, swimming, women’s track and field, and men’s track and field.  The fundraising from these four teams gave the athletic department an extra $12,750 dollars.  Bringing the total we have to spend to $152,750.  Then we figured out all the minimal amounts we had to spend, this total was $151,350. We thought about making some sports club but felt we wanted to keep all the teams around if it was in our budget, which it turned out to be.  We fulfilled all the required amounts for each sport and had $1,400 dollars left over.  We decided to give this money to the softball and skiing teams because they both finished first in the conference last year.

The project was a good learning experience for my group and taught us more about what an athletic director has to work with.

Josiah Blevins, Kevin Meyers, Marlin Pickens, Ollie Goss, Mason V.M.

Money and Sports

In last Tuesdays class we did a project that involved acting like an Athletic Director for a school and giving money to the different sports. Each sport had a minimal limit on how much money we could give out. We received a $20,000 donation, had fundraising, and charged $50 for pay to play for the teams that were not highly ranked.

We started by adding all the bold expenses (which was expenses we had to pay) and came up with $151,350. Then we added up the fundraising for the four biggest teams which were football, women and men's track, and women and men's swimming. Then we ended up charging $50 for pay to play for the rest of the teams and added up the $20,000 from a donation. We added up the total of $165,500 from the fundraising, pay to play, and the donation. After adding up the total, we subtracted the $165,500 from the $151,350 and then we got $14,150. From that total we took $1,000 from men and women's shot put and discuss in track, $1,200 from volleyball jerseys, $2,000 from hockey jerseys, $1,200 for men and women's soccer jerseys, and lastly $6,000 for men's football helmets. There were 8 remaining sports that did not receive any extra funding, so we divided our left over $1,550 by 8 and gave the rest to those sports for them to spend the money however they would like. 

This project was helpful in making me realize how money is distributed between sport teams in every school. Distributing money takes time, patience, teamwork, and a lot of thought. Even though it is important to distribute money evenly through the different sports, some times more money has to go to the higher ranked sports. This might seem unfair at times, but in the end the higher ranked team will earn more money from winning games and attracting fans, so giving them more money will bring in more profit for the school.

Kody Burlingame, Nicholas Vanderpool, RJ Hefflinger, Jacob Beverly

Group Blog

At the end of class last thursday, we were presented with three questions by Carpenter about the DGWS philosophy. To answer the first question Carpenter asked, if schools were in compliance with the DGWS philosophy, then men's minor sports wouldn't be sacrificed to the "premier" sports on campus. Being in compliance with the DGWS philosophy would mean that all the sports on campus are equal and favoritism would not be a factor (Carpenter, 2005). At BGSU, this would change the marketing done for each individual sport. Its fair to say that the men's football team is marketed more heavily than the men's golf team. For our university to be in compliance with Carpenter's DGWS philosophy, the marketing for every sports team would have to change to be equal. Instead of having a commercial with solely the football team, create one with a member from each sport to emphasize the BGSU athletic program as a whole.

Even if the DGWS philosophy was followed, we believe there would still be NCAA infractions in regards to financial aid. Since the financial aid would be even throughout a university's athletic program, athletes would have less financial aid and be more willing to accept benefits that would go against the NCAA code.

Every high school player that could have a potential professional career makes the decision to go to college or not and we believe that even more talented basketball and football players would forego college. We believe if this DGWS policy was standard, more athletes would take the path that Milwaukee Bucks point guard Brandon Jennings took to the NBA. Brandon Jennings was a McDonalds All-American and has scholarship offers from all of the top basketball programs. Instead of going to college, Jennings went to Europe and played professionally for a year and then entered the NBA draft. This path would be replicated by a lot more of high school prospects and would limit the talent level that the NCAA basketball program would have.

By: Ollie Goss, Kevin Meyers, Josiah Blevins, Mason, Marlin Pickens

Going Pro

By: Kristi Kopaniasz
Group Members: Jenny, Jenn, Jackie

Every one seems to have differing opinions on athletes going pro without finishing college. My group all had the same view. Today's society is all about being ht best. Whether it means playing in the best leagues or making the most money. If an athlete is good enough to be able to go pro, I see no problem with them doing so. They are making the best decision for themselves.

These huge pro contracts are one of the reasons players will go to the NFL or NBA without graduating. Instead of paying for college and getting a degree that you probably won't use, go pro and have someone pay you for your skills.

There is always the chance of injury, that is a risk those athletes have to take. On injury could be the difference between huge first round contracts and second round rookie minimums. For example, Eric Page from University of Toledo. He felt pressure to leave as a junior to avoid injury in his senior season. Ironically once he was in the NFL he got injured and was cut. For him, that route backfired. Personally, I think he should have stayed and after not being drafted and going free-agent proved my thinking.

Title IX Group review, Turea, Stephanie, Tim, Sparkle

Last week, we dove into discussion on Title XI and the current university standards practiced under it. (Carpenter, 2005) provided us with fuel for the fire by listing the following from the Division for Girls and Women's Sports (DGWS), as their philosophy:

1.  Enrichment of participants should focus on athletics.
2. Priority of funding should be "for a comprehensive athletic program" instead of financial aid for a few (Carpenter, 2005, p. 106).
3. Focus should be on "educated" citizens instead of scholarship to compete in athletics- emphasis on student in 'student-athlete'
4. Emphasis should not be on recruiting but on "comprehensive program" (p. 106)
5. Curriculum and program should be basis of choosing institution 
6. Favoritism should not be shown to certain sports (football) over others (gymnastics or soccer)
7. Participation should be encouraged for reasons other than financial aid. 

When my group reviewed the discussion question we were on the fence about some ideals. But first when we considered the concept of cutting minor men's sports as a sacrifice to 'premier' sports on campus, if the DGWS Philosophy was followed we determined that one sport would not be superior to another. It seems to be an easy concept, that no one sport will be favored over another based on campus popularity. Furthermore, we discussed if we thought that there would continue to be many headlines about "abuse and deceit regarding financial aid" and we believe that there would be less new coverage, possibly even no need to publicize financial aid decisions because as set forth by the DGWS Philosophy, number two reveals there would be more of a priority to choose an institution for academics and athletics as a partnership, not athletics over everything. Followed by number seven which gives the idea that there would be an increased promotion for walk-on athletes and less focus on unfair financial aid disbursement.
 Finally, we were asked if elite athletes would be "enticed to forego an education in order to pursue the unrealistic dream of hug pro contracts" (p. 106) This was the most difficult question to provide a clear-cut answer. We concluded that it depends on the person and the times in which collegiate sport is governed. When this article was first released it was prior to the redefining of when athletes can join a professional organization. With athletes such as LeBron James foregoing his collegiate opportunities to become an  NBA all-star, worked out in his favor. However, in recent years it has proven to be very beneficial to future contracts for athletes who went to university, and furthered their skills to gain a higher monetary value. So this question, in today's times seems dependent on the person.

National Pride

By: Ryan Hetrick

In last Tuesday's class, the Olympics was heavily discussed and the impacts of the Women's World Cup in 1999. These topics brought many different opinions and views on the events on a social level.

First, in 1999, the United States hosted the Women's World Cup. Now since I was only seven when this took place, I cannot properly speculate as to how America viewed women's soccer. I know that watching the small video clip in last gave a brief picture, but it is still difficult for me to believe that those working around the World Cup were actually concerned that they wouldn't sell how the venues that they selected. I know that it was one of the first breakout women events in U.S. history, but I feel that people would have rallied around the event specifically because it was a large event taking place in the U.S. I know that watching and having the United States win was a big moment for America, but I feel as though it would have been just as big of a moment had it been men playing. The national pride of the United States trumps the gender disparity in my eyes.

Although I feel that national pride raised curiosity for the World Cup, it did pave the way and inspire many young female athletes. It showed them that they could achieve some of the same exposure and glorification as men in sports if they stuck to it and dedicated themselves to it. This trend has truly shown in the Olympics with girls like Gabby Douglas, Missy Franklin, and continues in soccer with Alex Morgan and Hope Solo. This drive started by the 1999 World Cup inspired women and I think led to the 58 medals in the 2012 Olympic Games in London.

The final thing I wanted to hit on in this entry was the difference of medals for U.S. women and U.S. men. The women finished the 2012 games with 58 total medals with half of them being gold while the men finished with 45 total medals and 17 gold. Why the difference if men are supposedly the dominate gender in sports? There are several reasons for this but I think the main reason is the lack of women's sports being developed in other nations. This used to be the case even for men, the best example being the 1992 dream team. While a great team, the rest of the world had not developed their county's basketball program which led to big, big wins by the U.S. This is now happening in women's sports. The U.S. women have been allowed more freedoms and opportunities to compete in sports while other county's had women enter the Olympics in certain events for the first time. It will be interesting to see how other country's move forward in developing women's sport program in the Olympics in the coming years.

Progress of Women's Sport a Facade? - Week 4

By: Nate Dudzik

Last week's class continued over the subject of Title IX and the differences between male and female athletics. One of the areas we looked at was the progress women's sports has made since Title IX, especially since the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta. Just recently at the 2012 London Olympics, the women out-tallied the men in overall medals including gold. By the numbers, many outside observers would say that women have become more successful during the olympic games, or that the progress of women's sports has now outdone the men's side. However, is that true? My solid belief is still no.

Even though the progress of women's sports in the U.S. has achieved some of its highest points, that doesn't say the same for everyone else. While Title IX has given equality and balance to both male and female sports in the U.S., many other countries most likely don't have the same equal opportunity laws that the U.S. does. This is clearly evident by the level of competition displayed from the women's and men's side. U.S. male athletes faced stiffer competition all-around than their female counterparts. Now I'm not taking anything away from what the women were able to accomplish, but to use an example, our women's olympic basketball team looked like a high school varsity squad playing the freshmen team. That goes all the way back to how countries view women's sports in their countries. Do they have the same funding and facilities for women as we do in the U.S.? I highly doubt it. But do they have the same funding and facilities for men? Now that I could believe. 

Another point mentioned in class is why women's soccer doesn't have a league of their own, as opposed to the men which have MLS. For awhile now, the women's Olympic/FIFA team has received greater attention than the men's team. Our expectations as fans has raised for the women's team over the mens' team. If our men's team got to the finals, it would be the most amazing accomplishment. If our women's team got to the finals, we'd expect them to win it. So in all this popularity and success, why do the men have a league of their own and not the women? My opinion is that fans in the U.S. just want to see the Olympic/FIFA women's team play. Together, players like Abby Wambach, Alex Morgan and Hope Solo have this popularity that makes people want to see them. However, alone, I don't think they would create enough buzz that would make people want to go out and spend money to see them. There isn't enough marketability to have, "Watch Abby Wambach and her team take on Hope Solo and her team." The other players aren't important to the media and wouldn't create enough attention to get people interested. Granted the men's side isn't pulling away in popularity either, but that can stem back to the idea that men's sports is just more interesting and fun to watch. I know they were trying to get a new women's league started, and who knows, maybe it will be a success. 

13 Appliances with Title IX- Gene Csakany

In last Thursday's class we discussed many areas of Title IX.  I thought this was very interesting in regards to BGSU Athletics.  We went around the room and athletes of various sports were asked about the thirteen different areas addressed in Title IX and if they all apply properly to our University.  I found it very interesting that there were significant differences in number7.  Provision of locker rooms, 9.  Housing and dining facilities, 10.  Publicity.  There were many differences in what the football team gets, as opposed to the soccer, volleyball, or swim team.  It goes to show that the most important thing at our university is which sport brings in the most money.  This is something that is shocking, yet understood and realistic.  Title IX is a very important amendment in the United States, and it is surprising that money is still what fuels the decision of whether these thirteen appliances will be met.   I do not think it would be to bold of a statement to assume that many other universities at the Division 1 level have the same inequality in those three above numbers that I have already mentioned.  It is all about which sport the university cares about the most and which sport excels or gets the most media attention.  For BGSU our biggest sports are men’s football and hockey and women’s basketball.  In those three sports it is safe to assume that all the thirteen appliances are met regardless of the fact that two are men’s sports and one is a women’s sport.  But how about a university where the popularity of a sport completely overshadows the other sports at that university?  This is something the NCAA should be responsible for and not just let these things go unnoticed, simply because of the money brought in by different sports.   Regardless of male or female basis, these are Division 1 athletes and need to be treated accordingly.       

Fueling the Fire!

Over the course of history, one of the main topics of debate seem to always rotate around gender stereotypes. This is something that happens on a day to day level, but also has a huge impact on the Sporting Industry. This can go from topics on Title IX, but also leads to discussion all the way to extremes like women playing with men. Although I believe women deserve the right to be taken seriously in the world of sports and appreciate some of their leagues, I believe some of these discussions are simply too extreme!

Within the world of sports, there are many sports that men and women play together. This allows team bonding and building of great relationships on a social level, but this is something that should not carry over to a professional level. I will be the first to admit, it is neat seeing women referees in leagues today, but on a playing aspect that is a little extreme. For the simple fact, women can not compete with and/or against men. This might work when you are 8-9 years old on a youth soccer team, but once men mature  it simply becomes an unfair advantage. I know Dr. Spencer hates this terminology, but that is just the way it is. There will have to be extreme advancements in training technology for this to be fair by any means.

Also, if it becomes acceptable for women to compete in men's sports, does that mean that men can play women's sports? If this were to happen records would be shattered and disregarded that have been around for centuries. I mean have you seen the men's fast pitch championships on TV! Talk about an exciting softball game!

I know I may be biased, but this is the only way it can be! Men and women should never compete on the same level!

If you can see there is a little bit of a difference!

Nathan Riley

Gender Equality - Fact or Fiction?

By: Ryan Hetrick

Some say that females should not be able to participate in male sports and vice versa for reasons of: physicality, athleticism, and pure skill. The social norm allows us to follow a set schedule of men competing sports segregated from women. This social norm has been challenge and more and more data is coming out about how this divide between sexes in sports could or should been seen.

In class on last Thursday we watched a short video comparing both a male and female athlete in not just a sport, but a combat sport, meant to show the true aggressiveness and combative nature also dwell within females.

The study was conducted to compare the power or force per square inch of a punch from each athlete. In the first test the male was to punch a live human in the stomach, then would be repeated by a female in the same manner. After both athletes were allowed their turn, the human subject, a training partner for fighters around the country, couldn't distinguish a difference between punches. 

The following test used a more scientific approach and both athletes were to punch a dummy that would measure the force of their punch. Again, the male led and the female followed in the punch. The scientific data had concluded that the female punch with over 200 pounds of force more than the male's punch. To the naked eye, this test would undoubtedly prove that females have just as much, even more of a punch than a male would.

Now on to my analysis of this test/data. I do believe that females are just as aggressive as males when it comes down to competition but I believe that this test of raw power was not strict enough on exact guidelines when both athletes took their punching turn. The female punched the actual human after he had already been punched 3 times (the female mistook the test the first time). Also, the actual motivation for the test comes into play. The male from a body language standpoint, look as if he was simply going through the motions and completing the test, while it was very apparent that the female athlete was excited and motivated for this test of power.

In the final test, the male again punched with a very blaze' attitude and went through the motions of a straight punch. On the females turn she switched stances and delivered a left hook that would send just about anyone to the floor for a knockout. While impressive, the test was instantly skewed. To compare two different styles of punches and stances is very irresponsible and will absolutely lead to inconclusive results, which I believe took place in this experiment.

So back to my first paragraph... Do I believe males and females could compete together? Some day, depending on the sport, absolutely. But, that can only happen in a very specific and calculated manner. The media will most likely ruin this idea and have too high of expectations should the barrier be cross in say the NFL or NBA. Could Brittany Griner compete with some men in the NBA? Probably. Could she dominate like she does in the women's games? No, and the media would make that the expectation, and kill the idea of men and women competing. I have a lot more on my mind about the topic but I think I've rambled on enough about it for today.

"Who Plays Soccer?"

By: Chris Cournan

In regards to last week's PowerPoint slides giving opinions from students on whether it's more acceptable for girls or for guys to play soccer, Blake's opinions seemed very unreasonable.  He stated that, "I think it's a girls' sport...because I think it's really stupid and girls play stupid sports."  As a soccer player, I take offense to this because soccer is hands down one of the hardest sports to play.  Unlike big name sports like football or baseball, soccer requires an incredible amount of endurance.  It requires 45 minutes of straight running (in one half.)  Also, most professionals remain in games for 75-90 minutes of most games in their season.  Although the game of football is 60 minutes long, it's broken up into quarters instead of halves and the average play is only four seconds long.  In between each play then, players can receive up to a forty-second rest period.  Therefore, to say that only girls should play soccer because it's "stupid" is ridiculous.  Although it may not require as much weight training as a sport as "manly" as football, it requires much more endurance and therefore it's just as difficult.

Blake's second answer of, "well, that's cause like...Brazil and Europe...all those countries that are really stupid, they don't know anything about basketball," in response to Dr. Spencer's statement that soccer is the most popular sport in the world, is obviously a crazy one.  There are youth soccer leagues in nearly every nation around the world mainly because of the inexpensiveness of the sport and of how easy it is to learn.  These leagues cause soccer to be the most popular sport in the world.  Also, when David Beckham, a soccer player, was in his prime playing for Manchester United and Team England, he was considered the most popular athlete in the world.  Although he may not be the most popular athlete anymore, men and women looked up to him all around the world and viewed him as an outstanding athlete, no matter the sport.  

        

Sporty Barbie?

By: Kristi Kopaniasz

Type in "Sporty Barbie" into a Google image search. Below are some of the images that come up.

If I'm not mistaken, I have never seen a tennis player in bikini bottoms, with sun glasses, hair down and make up done. It was hard to find sport barbie dolls. Most of them are in pink dresses and high heels. If a tennis player came out in that outfit, people would laugh. I feel that young girls are turned away from sports because of their up bringing. Not only do these Barbies show over feminized sport going females but they are unrealistic. Being involved with BGSU's Women Club Volleyball team I know that our team may focus too much on the importance of looks. We talked about new jerseys, warm ups and shoes before the teams were even picked. Women are much more worries about their looks while they play then men are, I feel.

- At what age do you feel girls are turned away from sports and what is the reason behind that?

We talked about men and women being equal in sports but physically that just isn't realistic. I am currently taking a PEG volleyball class for fun. I am better then most of the men in the class because of my skill and technique level. However I have played volleyball since I was 10, they have not. If we both had the same amount of training the men would be better then me because physically they are stronger and bigger. It goes the other way too. Men can be better then women in a sport because of training. I don't feel that just because someone is male or female means they have a pre-set stereotype placed on them.

- For the women in the class, have you ever been viewed as not as good in a co-ed sport or while playing with other males and had to work harder to prove them wrong?

Gene Csakany-Sports Science

In Thursday’s class, we had a great discussion after the watching of the video about whether or not a girl can punch as hard as a man.  This was such an interesting discussion, but also led to much debate.  Personally, I don’t believe the video did the actual debate any justice.  Looking at the video realistically, it should have been obvious that, yes, a women can punch as hard as a man, Sports Science doing that video did nothing more then add fuel to the already large fire in the debate of male and female equality in sports. 

The video had circumstances that successfully sparked a discussion on a woman fighting a man, when in reality; the video was only about whether or not woman could punch as hard as a man.  They used uneven circumstances in the video, the women fighter is a world champion female fighter, whereas the male, was a little known boxer of the UBF (Underground Boxing Federation), who barely cracks the top ten in that league (Officialubf.com).  So, by using one of the best females against an unknown male, it immediately started the debate on an uneven playing field.  Simply asking the question, “Can a female punch as hard as a male” should obviously be followed by a yes, not because I am trying to be fair, but because that is just an ignorant question, of course some females can punch as hard as or harder than some males.   Using the circumstances they tried to portray, which was two world class boxers of the same weight class but different sexes, there should have been a male world class boxer used as well.  If they really wanted to spark a controversy they would have used a Floyd Mayweather, or Manny Pacquiao.  Now I know this is unrealistic, but simply put, why?  If this is a fair debate, it should be the Female best versus the Male best, considering the whole point of this Sports Science episode was to be able to say a female could beat a male.  All things considered, Lucia Rijker would beat me and most likely anyone in the class easily, but if she was put up against a male counterpart of the same class of boxer, she would not stand a chance, much like Candance Parker against Lebron James.