Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
B
BDad11 Offline OP
goal
OP Offline
goal
B
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
I understand some preliminary work is being done to possibly bring about the return of Men's soccer to The Citadel...As far as I know nothing has been decided but I know that a meeting was held with prospective players to gauge interest..If it happens it will most likely be as a Division III program to start. Again, only in the talking stages..Nothing concrete being decided yet...With so many schools dropping soccer,I thought this was good news,in that at least somebody wants to bring soccer back to a school that was forced to drop it due to Title IX/financial reasons.

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
world cup
Offline
world cup
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
A Division III school in South Carolina?!?!? I thought I would never see the day. How about their womens program, can we get them to go D3 as well?

Erskine?
Coker?
Limestone?
Anderson?
Southern Wesleyan?

Last edited by Hurst66; 12/12/06 04:29 PM.

Kids play sports because they find it fun. Eliminate the fun and soon you eliminate the kid.
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170
S
coach
Offline
coach
S
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170
>>[BDad11] ...bring soccer back to a school that was forced to drop it due to Title IX/financial reasons.<<

If only the Citadel would go back to a mens-only school, all of this Title IX stuff there would be solved!

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
world cup
Offline
world cup
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
BDad11,

I probably should have worded that one a little better, by no means am I slamming The Citadel or any of the other D2 and NAIA teams I listed.

I'm going to limit the scope of my discussion to the womens side. I have long been an advocate of NCAA Division III soccer and found it very interesting when I moved to South Carolina eight years ago that no D3 programs existed in the state. If just one school would step up (or down) and go D3, I strongly feel that the program would be nationally competitive. Right now, no NAIA or D2 schools in the state are NATIONALLY competitive. Some may be regionally competitive, and hopefully challenge for a SAC, Peach Belt or CVAC conference championship, but none make a mark on the national level. I believe NCAA D2 bids are expanding next year, but right now only four teams in the region get a bid to the national tournament. When was the last time a South Carolina D2 team got a bid? I don't know. My guess is that it was PC some time ago....but I don't know.

As for D1, we are all more familiar with these schools. Clemson went to the Final 8 and year in and year out, they are nationally competitive. But what about everybody else? USC, Furman and College of Charleston are great programs but I don't believe any of them earned a bid this year despite having pretty good seasons. Winthrop had their best year in their history, and Coastal Carolina is always strong in the Big South. Unless they win their conference, they stay home. If they are fortunate enough to advance it's generally one and done.

If we had a D3 school in South Carolina I firmly believe that they could harness some very good talent within the state and challenge the Messiah's and College of New Jersey's out there that field very competitive teams year in and year out. Again, on the women's side, I have found that many very good club and high school players decide not to continue playing at the college level. I'm sure there are many reasons but a common one is that the player has made a year-round commitment to soccer since they were 9-years old, and now they are looking ahead to the "college experience" without the commitment that a competitive D1 or D2 team requires. Many of these girls stay in-state, where it is affordable, and go to schools such as Clemson, USC and CofC. Some might play club soccer at the university.

I've always thought that if a competitive player, who doesn't want to make the year-round commitment, or, who perhaps is just a small notch below what a coach of one of our competitive D2 programs is looking for, had other options....these girls could be recruited to form a nice, competitive team.

Here are the selling points:

1) Palmetto and Life scholarships (you don't need athletic scholarships to attract in-state players when they can qualify for this type of aid)

2) Close to home (an opportunity to play regionally/nationally competitive college soccer without leaving "home")

3) The D3 commitment (bust your butt from August - November and then be a regular student for the remainder of the year, with a modified spring season)

4) Talent pool (we have a lot of good players right here in SC, coach should focus on them and let the D1's and D2's mine Florida, Georgia, Texas and North Carolina)

5) The weather (coach will attract prospects from northern states simply because this is a great place to attend college and play college soccer)

Again, I'm not being negative toward The Citadel or toward any of the other programs mentioned. I'm just saying it could be real interesting if some school went this direction.


Kids play sports because they find it fun. Eliminate the fun and soon you eliminate the kid.
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 212
C
corner kick
Offline
corner kick
C
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 212
Good post Hurst. I would also love to see more college soccer in our state especially when it excels to the national level.

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
B
BDad11 Offline OP
goal
OP Offline
goal
B
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
Unfortunately, I'm not sure that the NCAA , Justice Dept. and others who oversee gender equity compliance would allow these schools to have a womens sport at the DIII level and mens sports at "scholarship levels"....Its all about the money.

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
world cup
Offline
world cup
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
BDad11,

I believe you are right. I don't think the NCAA would allow The Citadel to "jump start" their men's program at the D3 level either.


Kids play sports because they find it fun. Eliminate the fun and soon you eliminate the kid.
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
B
BDad11 Offline OP
goal
OP Offline
goal
B
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
Actually Hurst I believe they might allow the Men to do so because no scholarship money is used,however I don't believe they would allow the womens team to move down for competitive reasons due to scholarship balance( i'e. football). Davidson is allowed to field a DIII football program while having the rest of their sports D I.

I was told by a board member the other day that The Citadel specifically asked the NCAA if they be allowed to field fewer womens sports in the hope of making their womens program more competitive...The NCAA gave a resounding no as their answer and consequently you see The Citadel struggling mightily on the Womens side. Not to pick on anybody ,but finding female athletes at The Citadel is a tough task...We had one woman golfer who shot 161 in a tournament round.....All to equalize some arbitrary numbers.

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
world cup
Offline
world cup
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
That's not an 80 on Friday, followed by an 81 on Saturday? You're talking 161 for one round??? Yikes!


Kids play sports because they find it fun. Eliminate the fun and soon you eliminate the kid.
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
B
BDad11 Offline OP
goal
OP Offline
goal
B
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
161....One Round.....Unfortunately yes.

Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170
S
coach
Offline
coach
S
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170
Okay...more seriously.

It's my understanding that Title IX enforces the concept of proportionality, i.e., that the proportion of the funding of the athletic department must reflect the proportion of genders at a university. The folks that want to reform Title IX want a different interpretation, to wit that proportionality may refer to the proportional interest in athletics by the genders that constitute the study body rather than the actual numbers.

In any case, I would think that the Citadel is vastly a male-oriented institution. Given the Title IX proportionality test, why would the Citadel need to be spending much on women's sports as per Title IX?

Or does this really have anything to do with Title IX but instead has to do with decisions that the Citadel administration has made for reasons that lie outside of Title IX?

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
B
BDad11 Offline OP
goal
OP Offline
goal
B
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
My understanding of Title IX is proportionality in the student body in general....Out of a student body of around 2000, perhaps 100 or so are women...Ironically, most of the 100 are athletes...No womens sports would mean very few women students,and most those left would be on full military scholarships.

Beyond those figures I realy don't understand the nuts and bolts of The Citadel's gender equity situation...Only that men's soccer and golf were eliminated and other than track The Citadel's women teams are horrendous...

Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,198
C
Brace
Offline
Brace
C
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,198
It is not based on enrollment, it is based on the number of male scholarships vs female scholarships. Football has a large number and most schools never get enought girls sports to equal the boys but they have to prove to the NCAA that they are doing there best. There are many other small public schools that have has this happen to them. My school had soccer for 20 plus years and then when the coach retired the droped it and wrestiling at the same time. Now they have womens soccer but still no men. Title IX has caused many mens programs to suffer of make canges.

If the rules would not include football in the equation then schools could meet the requirements, however until that happens this will still be a hot topic.

Last edited by Coach J; 12/13/06 03:54 PM.
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
world cup
Offline
world cup
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
Surely The Citadel has to be looked at as an exception. Football at The Citadel has what, 75 scholarships? What's the max womens soccer can have...11?


Kids play sports because they find it fun. Eliminate the fun and soon you eliminate the kid.
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,457
F
Hat-Trick
Offline
Hat-Trick
F
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,457
Or Coach J.... Don't give out 75 scholarships for football... Give say 30 with another 15 that are shared as in soccer. That should be more than enough, but every time I bring it up I am almost always in the minority.

No other sport would have a scholarship for what essentially is a 3rd stringer.

Some are created more equal than others

Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,768
World Cup
Offline
World Cup
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,768
Football fuels much of the athletic budget. Cutting it and its ability to be competitive would be shooting yourself in the foot.

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
world cup
Offline
world cup
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
I'd never advocate cutting The Citadel's football program. Just curious if there are even enough females on campus to field the amount of womens sports teams necessary to level the playing field, as per Title IX?


Kids play sports because they find it fun. Eliminate the fun and soon you eliminate the kid.
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,457
F
Hat-Trick
Offline
Hat-Trick
F
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,457
W&E not negating the fact, but another fact is not all 75 players play. So it would make sense to give scholarships to the ones that do play and partials to the 3rd stringers, etc..

And not to throw gasoline in the fire, I seem to recall a little study done by Chico which showed the majority of football programs operate in the red...i.e they generate less than they spend.
The ones in the black are most likely the ones you actually watch on TV. Therefore a Coastal or Citadel would most likely operate in the red (entirely speculation in my part, no hard data), so how can you argue for 75 scholarships???

Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,198
C
Brace
Offline
Brace
C
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,198
Remeber we live in a football country. You are not going to get them to drop scholarships! Before the NCAA stepped in years ago schools gave out 100 or more scholarships. Football pays the bills and if you have a scholarship you will be playing some where during the game. What other sport draws this size crowd. In the EPL crowds do not match up to the NFL. 40,000 is huge for the bigger EPL games and that is not even close to the NFL. We live in the south and football is king. so get used to it.

Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170
S
coach
Offline
coach
S
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170
>>[Coach J] It is not based on enrollment, it is based on the number of male scholarships vs female scholarships.<<

Actually, Title IX is based upon the following three tenants:

1) Participation. Proportionality is the simplest, most straightforward method of assuring compliance. If you have 5% females in the student body, you have 5% female athletes in your athletic program. There are ways to bypass proportionality (history and continuing practice of program expansion or full and complete accomodation of female's interest); but proportionality stands up to review the best.

2) Benefits and Services: Schools don't have to spend the same proportional amount on male and female sports, but they need to show that benefits and services are propotional.

3) Scholarships: The percentages of total athletic scholarship dollars awarded to male and female athletes must be within 1% of their participation rates.

So if 5% of the undergraduate student body is female at the Citadel, this means that 5% of the scholarship dollars needs to be awarded to females.

Bottom line: this sounds less like a Title IX issue than it does an administration budgeting issue.

Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,198
C
Brace
Offline
Brace
C
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,198
Here is a little history about Title IX for those of you who still do not undrestand how the law has helped women in thier effort to participate in sports.

Happy reading.

A r c h i v e d I n f o r m a t i o n
Title IX: 25 Years of Progress -- June 1997
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Achieving Success Under Title IX
(continued)

Increasing participation in athletics
Title IX has helped girls and women participate in interscholastic and intercollegiate athletics in far greater numbers than they had in the past. When Title IX became law, dramatic change was needed to level the playing fields of this nation's schools and to change the perception of the place of girls and women on them. Just one year before the enactment of Title IX, in 1971, a Connecticut judge was allowed by law to disallow girls from competing on a boys' high school cross country team even though there was no girls' team at the school. And that same year, fewer than 300,000 high school girls played interscholastic sports. Today, that number is 2.4 million.

The rise of women's basketball is illustrative of the dramatic changes that have taken place since the enactment of Title IX. In 1972, 132,299 young girls played high school basketball. In 1994-95 the number had increased to 412,576, an increase of over 300 percent. In the last two years, women's basketball has come of age with the gold-medal victory of the American women's basketball team at the 1996 Olympics, the increased media attention to the NCAA women's basketball tournament, and the development of two professional women's basketball leagues.


"Without Title IX, I'd be nowhere."--Cheryl Miller, Olympic athlete
Outstanding member of 1984 gold medal women's basketball team

Girls and women also are increasingly participants in sports that have traditionally been seen as out of bounds for women, including lacrosse, wrestling, soccer, rugby and ice hockey. In one sport that is more and more a favorite for young girls-- soccer--the results have led to a World Cup championship. In 1996, the U.S. national soccer team captured the first-ever women's Olympic medal in this sport before a crowd of 76,481, and in doing so established its position as the world's premier women's soccer program.

In many ways, the very image of American women in the sports arena is being redefined by the many accomplishments of women in athletics. Women are now seen as sports stars in their own right, from Mia Hamm in soccer to Sheryl Swoopes in basketball. The inspiring story of Dr. Dot Richardson, the captain of the American Olympic softball team, who immediately left her triumph in Atlanta to begin her medical residency, exemplifies just what has been accomplished on the field and off as a result of Title IX.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Richardson - Olympian

Dot Richardson was 10 years old, playing catch in an Orlando, Florida, park when a man noticed her exceptional arm and asked if she wanted to play on his Little League team. Richardson was thrilled. "We'll just cut your hair short," said the coach, "and call you Bob." Richardson never believed that ball playing was reserved for boys. She went on to become a four-time All-American in college and was named NCAA player of the decade for the 1980s. She graduated as a physician from the University of Louisville Medical School, often ending 20-hour hospital shifts with workouts and practice so that she could compete in 1996 in the first women's softball appearance in the modern Olympic Games. She hit the first home run in Olympic softball history, helping the U.S. team win the gold medal. Richardson is now a resident in orthopedic surgery at the University of Southern California.


Increasing athletic scholarships
Before the passage of Title IX, athletic scholarships for college women were rare, no matter how great their talent. After winning two gold medals in the 1964 Olympics, swimmer Donna de Varona could not obtain a college swimming scholarship: for women, they did not exist. It took time and effort to improve the opportunities for young women: two years after Title IX was voted into law, an estimated 50,000 men were attending U.S. colleges and universities on athletic scholarships--and fewer than 50 women. In 1973, the University of Miami (Florida) awarded the first athletic scholarships to women--a total of 15 in golf, swimming, diving, and tennis. Today, college women receive about one-third of all athletic scholarship dollars.


Athletic Facilities at Fresno State University, California

Fresno State University had spent more than $15 million on state-of-the-art facilities for men while it had spent about $300,000 on the women's athletic facilities, which were considered substandard. Despite this, Fresno State captured 9 of the last 12 softball conference championships, and 5 current or former members of the Fresno State softball team were on the U.S. Olympic softball team. To meet the requirements of Title IX, Fresno State completed an ambitious plan costing more than $8 million to provide equity in athletic facilities for women. A new building for women athletes houses four new team rooms. In addition, the women's Fresno State Bulldog Softball team has a new stadium, which seats more than 2,500 fans. When the team last played its traditional rival, bleachers were added for the more than 5,000 people who filled the stadium. Coach Margie Wright, who was also a coach on the gold medal Olympic softball team, tells her Fresno State athletes that they got the stadium because of their hard work.

Achieving equal opportunity for women in intercollegiate sports has not been an easy task. Some colleges have faced budgetary restraints and others simply have been reluctant to change the status quo. Given the fact that no federal Courts of Appeals have ruled against Title IX's athletic provisions, however, it is clear that the immediate challenge for our nation's higher education community is to find positive ways to comply with the law.

Here it is important to recognize that there is no mandate under Title IX that requires a college to eliminate men's teams to achieve compliance. The thought that "if women are to gain opportunities, then men must lose opportunities," presents a false dichotomy. As with other educational aspects of Title IX, and according to the expressed will of Congress, the regulation is intended to expand opportunities for both men and women.


Title IX: Student Participation in Athletics

In the assessment of the "interests and abilities" portion of the Title IX regulations, a three part test governs. As the name suggests, this test consists of three separate and distinct parts. All that is required under Title IX is that an institution be in compliance with one part of that test. No one part of the test is the predominant or "true" measure of compliance. The three parts of the test are:

Part One: Substantial Proportionality. This part of the test is satisfied when participation opportunities for men and women are "substantially proportionate" to their respective undergraduate enrollments.
Part Two: History and Continuing Practice. This part of the test is satisfied when an institution has a history and continuing practice of program expansion that is responsive to the developing interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex (typically female).
Part Three: Effectively Accommodating Interests and Abilities. This part of the test is satisfied when an institution is meeting the interests and abilities of its female students even where there are disproportionately fewer females than males participating in sports.



Opening up avenues of achievement through athletics
The critical values learned from sports participation--including teamwork, standards, leadership, discipline, self-sacrifice and pride in accomplishment--are being brought to the workplace as women enter employment in greater numbers, and at higher levels than ever before. For example, 80 percent of female managers of Fortune 500 companies have a sports background. Also, high school girls who participate in team sports are less likely to drop out of school, smoke, drink or become pregnant. It is no surprise, then, that 87 percent of parents now accept the idea that sports are equally important for boys and girls.


"I Should Watch...They Should Compete"

"As a child, I loved athletics and physical activities. I was talented, but my talent was not appreciated or approved of by most. I watched my brothers compete on school teams. It didn't matter that in the neighborhood pick-up games, I was selected before my brothers. Society dictated that I should watch, and that they should compete. So at home in the backyard, I would catch as my brother worked on his curve ball, I would shag flies as he developed his batting prowess and, as I recall, I frequently served as his tackling dummy. The brother I caught and shagged for, and for whom I served as a tackling dummy, went on to Georgetown University on a full athletic grant. He later became vice president of a large banking firm. So, while I rode in the back seat on the bus of opportunity during my lifetime, I want my daughter's daughter and her peers to be able to select a seat based on their abilities and their willingness to work. Don't deny them the things that I dreamed of."-- Excerpts of a letter sent to OCR in spring 1995 by Joan Martin, Senior Associate Director of Athletics, Monmouth University, New Jersey


-###-


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ Achieving Success Under Title IX ] [ The Next 25 Years ]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last Updated -- July 10, 1997, (pjk)

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 249
D
corner kick
Offline
corner kick
D
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 249
In reference to futbol(soccer)'s post.

Division 1AA (which Coastal Carolina and The Citadel are members of), has a limit of 63 scholarships, not 75.

While many football programs operate in the red, colleges and universities see them as a marketing arm of the university. Calculating simple income and expenses is probably not how the presidents of these institutions place value on their football programs. For instance how many people would give to the "Gamecock Club" or "IPTAY" if it weren't for the popularity of football? It is probably true on a lower scale at the smaller colleges and universities around the country. How important is it to a president to have 15-25,000 of his/her most loyal alumni and friends together on campus for 5-7 Saturdays in the fall?

The way I see it, with no facts, figures or pie charts to back this up; football and basketball are viewed as marketing engines for colleges and universities. The other sports are enrollment boosters.

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
world cup
Offline
world cup
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
Part One: Substantial Proportionality. This part of the test is satisfied when participation opportunities for men and women are "substantially proportionate" to their respective undergraduate enrollments.

Is this the true litmus test? What's The Citadel's total enrollment and what is the gender ratio?

Last edited by Hurst66; 12/14/06 04:51 PM.

Kids play sports because they find it fun. Eliminate the fun and soon you eliminate the kid.
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,457
F
Hat-Trick
Offline
Hat-Trick
F
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,457
Deahler ...was referencing the Citadel number put out by Hurst.. no factual data in my part.

I do not disagree with you comments, but I have resigned myself to live in disagreement how "some are better than others".

My thinking still stands, there are 11 starters in Offense and 11 on defense, a kicker, a punter. That sums up 24, we need subs so selct 16 additional players for a total of 40. The remaining 23 players (your number above)maybe receive 1/2 scholarship (or have a pool of money to share like soccer does) this in theory frees up 11 scholarships to be used elsewhere and you still have not impacted the performance which keeps the marketing arm running.

Now that is D1AA, what about D1 schools that did away with soccer...East Carolina, Vanderbilt, etc. I think they carry more scholarships.

And finally, the idea of going to school is to get an education that will last forever.

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
world cup
Offline
world cup
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
Deahler & futbol....I just threw that number out there figuring it was close. Sorry.

Also, as the father of four girls, I'm all for Title IX and the opportunities that it has created for young women. If a few sacrafices had to be made by the male species as a result of this legislation, it is certainly trumped by the huge benefit it has provided for women. I'd venture to say that the two marquee cash cows, Men's Basketball and Football, are actually in much better shape now (both financially and in terms of their popularity) than they were before Title IX was enacted.


Kids play sports because they find it fun. Eliminate the fun and soon you eliminate the kid.
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170
S
coach
Offline
coach
S
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,170
The reason that I've raised the points I have is that I think that many colleges are using Title IX as a scapegoat for balancing their budgets by cutting programs. Yes, according to Title IX, it's probably more difficult to cut expenses by eliminating a women's program when you don't have proportional representation in your athletic department -- but the point is that it's the overall financial situation causing the elimination of the programs -- not Title IX.

The latest numbers I've seen say that 81% of college football programs lose money and 1/3 of Division I-A programs lose money. Does this mean that these schools should cut their football programs? Let's say no -- that there are other considerations at play. Okay...that's fair...but it's fundamentally unfair to blame Title IX (i.e., the proportional clause) for other men's programs being cut when in fact it's the fault of the overall athletic department financial management.

My personal "hot button" are large organizations that want to avoid criticism by pointing their finger elsewhere. I see a lot of that in the Title IX debates that seem to continue to rage.

Finally, please understand that these financial shenanigans are hurting women's sports as well. Women's soccer was recently was denied a lifting of the number of available scholarships at an NCAA meeting -- it was the Division II schools that predominantly voted against it.

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
B
BDad11 Offline OP
goal
OP Offline
goal
B
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
Interesting article on Academics vs Athletics at Birmingham Southern...Maybe the Ivy Leaguers have it right..All Scholarships based on need.


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/frank_deford/01/10/birmingham.southern/index.html



Last edited by BDad11; 01/11/07 02:33 PM.
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
world cup
Offline
world cup
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,659
BDad,

Great article....interesting philosophy. I am a little disappointed to see that my alma mater is joining a new conference, but they are doing so for a similar reason. Interesting to see the emphasis being place on weekend games in order to minimize time away from the classroom.

http://www.susquehanna.edu/Sports/releases/Spring06/landmark.htm


Kids play sports because they find it fun. Eliminate the fun and soon you eliminate the kid.
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
B
BDad11 Offline OP
goal
OP Offline
goal
B
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 441
When college football coaches make 10 times more than the college President, then something is askew. I long for the old days of true student athletes.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 5.4.45 Page Time: 0.095s Queries: 72 (0.020s) Memory: 3.4125 MB (Peak: 3.7719 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-04-29 13:36:26 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS