xpress23
All-District
ALL ABOARD
Posts: 101
|
Post by xpress23 on Dec 30, 2004 18:07:33 GMT -6
What is everyone's feelings about title IX.
I am for a change. I think it was a good law back in the 70's when women had a hard time getting into sports, but now that there is a high demand for it the law should be changed or removed all together. i want to make it clear i'm not a sexist who wants women's sports removed, i just think that mens sports should be allowed to expand. Men's soccer and wrestling are getting hurt by title IX. it should be tweeked a little bit to allow schools to carry more male sports and it and should not limit the amount of sports carried for female and male sports except for finacial reasons.
by the sec mandating that its member schools require them to have 2 more female sports than male sports, isn't that discrimnation against men.
|
|
|
Post by coachray40 on Dec 30, 2004 18:33:39 GMT -6
Its not about numbers of sports--its about guaranteeing a proportionately equal number of opportunities for women as men in athletics. The big number skewer for this in the NCAA is football(all D1 programs carry 120 scholarships), as there is no female equivalent. As most athletics are non revenue producing, especially womens athletics (not a sexist statement, but a fact) many schools choose to reduce mens athletics rather than increase womens due to simple dollars and cents--why have an even bigger loss of money(money coming from schools academic funding) by providing scholarships, facilities and support for more womens sports, when they can just reduce their overhead by eliminating mens. Its just business.
|
|
|
Post by rocksccrstar on Dec 30, 2004 18:39:54 GMT -6
xpress,
the problem with Title IX is that the law has been abused. It was implemented in the 70s but was not truly enforced until the early 90s, and by that time universities were sent scrambling to comply with the law due to pressure through lawsuits, the NCAA, and the respective conferences. However instead of shifting funds around to support women's programs they chose to cut men's programs which was not what the law was intended for.
Title IX is not strictly about sporting programs but rather about any programs sponsored by an educational institution that receives federal or state money (alot of people think it is just about women's sports). It has just been applied to sports because this is where the biggest cases of discrimination have occured.
However the law would work and there would be a more equal playing field if the powers that be (ADs and college administrators) had taken the time to investigate how to better manage their athletic departments. All they had to do was cut funds insteand of cutting programs. Make a man's sport bleed a little but don't kill it alltogether.
did you know that only like less than 10% of Division I college football teams make money for their universities and that football is allowed 85 full scholarships. Now there was a study done several years ago that showed that a college football team only plays about 30 players in a game. The study showed that if a Division I football programs would cut out 10 scholarships they could fund a small men's or women's sports program.
However no one in an athletic department wants to cut funds out of football, and I am not saying that football is the enemy but it just seems that sometimes they spend money (uneccessarily) that could go to funding other sports.
So therefore the law was manipulated to make schools compliant without affecting the mighty gods of football. The SEC took it to an extreme when they decided on a blanket policy of just having two more women's sports instead of using the percentage method set forth in the law. This does nothing but hurt those universities, like LSU, who have a demand to start a man's sport, like soccer, but can't because of an SEC rule and not a federal law.
I think overall when used like it was intended the law is good, it levels the playing field, I hate to say it but most of the northern schools got it right, but the southern schools were behind, as always.
However I hope you boys know that the law works both ways and there is an overwhelming interest to start a sport and the ratios fall correctly then you can use the law to get what you want (ie soccer at LSU)!
Sorry for the rant I wrote most of my master's papers on title IX.
|
|
xpress23
All-District
ALL ABOARD
Posts: 101
|
Post by xpress23 on Dec 30, 2004 20:44:42 GMT -6
i agree with you both, but coach ray and wlfrocksccrstar don't get me started with football and the number of scholarships they give out, it is rediculous, why is it that football has enough money to form several teams with full scholarships and other sports with maybe the exception of basketball don't have enough to form one team. and coach ray as far as trouble with money and not having enough funding for other programs, why is that when the soccer team travels they have to stay in the crappiest motels and barely get enough perdium, while football gets to be lavished in the finest hotels with gourmet meals, you want to save money cut back on spending for football. i know that the law doesn't have to do with the number of sports a school has for each gender but with proportions to the number of each gender in the school, and also other qualifications that can become confusing, i think it needs to be changed to become simpler and more equal
whats wrong with me suing the SEC for discrimination against men. don't you think females would have a problem and there would be lawsuits if the men had two more sports than women. (I need to talk to a lawyer, maybe this is my way to get rich, jk)
i think this needs to be talked about more, maybe it will get more attention and the problem can be addressed
|
|