Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

wtf? why couldnt we get rid of some other sport

Pope4Heisman wrote:wtf? why couldnt we get rid of some other sport

We only have so many sports here. They're not going to get rid of the bigger name sports.

Pope4Heisman wrote:wtf? why couldnt we get rid of some other sport

Non-revenue producing sports get the ax first.

Thanks for bringing this up. Now I won't be able to sleep tonight.

Losing men's track is one of the biggest travesties ever inflicted upon us. (the other is losing lacrosse).

what exactly is Title IX ?? I'm young and stupid and dont know stuff like this

Pope4Heisman wrote:what exactly is Title IX ?? I'm young and stupid and dont know stuff like this

Here is my take on Title IX. Anyone can please correct my mistakes. It is about giving equal opportunities to both males and females. I don't think it pertains simply to college athletics, but it is where the biggest impact is seen. Schools must give out a similar number of athletic scholarships to males and females. It doesn't matter if the sport makes money for the university or not. It is trying to level the field and gives females equal oppotunities. So for example, if BG gives out 125 athletic scholarships to males, it must give a similar amount out to females. This is not a problems when you look at sports where both men and women compete (basketball, baseball/softball, track, golf, etc.) The problem is that there is no comparable women's sport to football and hockey. I don't know the correct number, but lets say there are 70 football scholarships and 25 hockey. That means there needs to be 95 scholarships offered to women, and they would have to be sports that there is not a comparable mens sport. Volleyball and gymanstics are two that come to mind. and that would only account for about 20-25 so there is stil a large discrepancy. This is made up by eliminating some men's sprots, i.e. golf, track, cross country, etc. but keeping those sporst open for women. Hope that helps.

That isn't fair when it comes down to it, the NCAA needs to take into consideration that football and hockey do have alot of scholarships. They should make it more of a comparison between sports, for instance the same amount of baseball scholarships as softball or something. Eliminating sports such as golf and track is definately not a good idea.

I think I heard Michael Wilbon suggest once that football should be made exempt from Title IX. That's pretty simple, and it would clear up a lot of problems. That wouldn't solve the problems caused by hockey, but it would be a start.

(And BGSU does have a women's club hockey team...maybe they could just start offering schollies for that?)

4th Row wrote:I think I heard Michael Wilbon suggest once that football should be made exempt from Title IX. That's pretty simple, and it would clear up a lot of problems. That wouldn't solve the problems caused by hockey, but it would be a start.

Football just has way too many players to be fair to count againt it. Maybe the could count football players as half, or a third of a scholorship as a comprimise. It is a shame that we get punished by offering both football and hockey especially since they are both so deep in traditions.

Pope4Heisman wrote:That isn't fair when it comes down to it, the NCAA needs to take into consideration that football and hockey do have alot of scholarships.

The NCAA is not responsible for Title IX. It is a federal law established in 1972.


The following looks back at Title IX after 25 years and how it affects education -

On the 25th anniversary of Title IX it seems fitting to suggest that America is a more equal, more educated and more prosperous nation because of the far-reaching effects of this legislation.

Much has been accomplished in the classroom and on the playing field and we have many reasons to celebrate the success of Title IX in expanding our nation's definition of equality. With Title IX, we affirm what can be accomplished when we allow all Americans--men and women--an equal opportunity to be their best.

What strikes me the most about the progress that has been achieved since Title IX was passed in 1972 is that there has been a sea change in our expectations of what women can achieve. More important, women have shown skeptics again and again that females are fully capable of being involved as successful and active participants in every realm of American life. Women astronauts from Sally Ride to Shannon Lucid have made their mark in space even as Mia Hamm and Michelle Akers have led the women's national soccer team to Olympic glory and the World Championship. Women have entered the medical and legal professions in record numbers and we have seen a fourfold increase in women's participation in intercollegiate athletics.

The great untold story of success that resulted from the passage of Title IX is surely the progress that has been achieved in education. In 1971, only 18 percent of all women, compared to 26 percent of all men, had completed four or more years of college. This education gap no longer exists. Women now make up the majority of students in America's colleges and universities in addition to making up the majority of recipients of master's degrees. Indeed, the United States has become a world leader in giving women the opportunity to receive a higher education.

Accompanying this untold story of success is the too frequently told story of the barriers that women continue to encounter--despite their history of accomplishments and despite the history of the legislation that protects them from such barriers. Too many women still confront the problem of sexual harassment, women still lag behind men in gaining a decent wage, and only one-third of all intercollegiate athletic scholarships are granted to women. Clearly, much more remains to be done to ensure that every American is given an equal opportunity to achieve success without encountering the obstacle of gender bias.

But of this I am sure: somewhere in America today there are young women who are studying hard and achieving success on the athletic field who even now may be thinking hard about their careers as scientists, business owners, basketball players, or even the possibility of becoming president of the United States. They may not know of the existence of Title IX, but Title IX will be there for them should any of them encounter a skeptic who does not believe that they can succeed and be part of the American Dream.

Richard W. Riley
U.S. Secretary of Education

http://www.ed.gov/pubs/TitleIX/part1.html


It should be noted the current Bush Administration looked at ways of possibly repealing Title IX. One of the biggest proponents of Title IX is US Women's Soccer Team Captain Julie Foudy.

Warthog wrote:

Pope4Heisman wrote:what exactly is Title IX ?? I'm young and stupid and dont know stuff like this

Here is my take on Title IX. Anyone can please correct my mistakes. It is about giving equal opportunities to both males and females. I don't think it pertains simply to college athletics, but it is where the biggest impact is seen. Schools must give out a similar number of athletic scholarships to males and females. It doesn't matter if the sport makes money for the university or not. It is trying to level the field and gives females equal oppotunities. So for example, if BG gives out 125 athletic scholarships to males, it must give a similar amount out to females. This is not a problems when you look at sports where both men and women compete (basketball, baseball/softball, track, golf, etc.) The problem is that there is no comparable women's sport to football and hockey. I don't know the correct number, but lets say there are 70 football scholarships and 25 hockey. That means there needs to be 95 scholarships offered to women, and they would have to be sports that there is not a comparable mens sport. Volleyball and gymanstics are two that come to mind. and that would only account for about 20-25 so there is stil a large discrepancy. This is made up by eliminating some men's sprots, i.e. golf, track, cross country, etc. but keeping those sporst open for women. Hope that helps.

That's roughly it. But it would be more accurate to say that the scholarships should reflect the proportion of men and women in the student body.

(This raises the bar somewhat for Bowling Green, where women have outnumbered men pretty much since day one.)

Rather than exempting football -- which isn't going to pass muster against Title IX anyway -- the approach I would prefer is for the NCAA to reduce the number of maximum football scholarships permitted across the board.

I think scholarships are part of it, but the other part is opportunity. If you run athletic programs, you have to have equal access for men and women, so essentially men are penalized because they walk-on, while women don't.

For example, if we started a non-scholarship wrestling team, there probably would be enough walk-ons to fill it, but a women's field hockey team would require scholarships.

Which sport gets cut to satisfy Title IX is probably all wrapped up in administrative/athletic politics.