Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

http://www.yappi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132017

This Title IX is interesting. Maybe it should be changed. That could be why we dont' see interesting March NCAA Tourney cuz no mid-major has a chance against the elite cuz every ladies team gets 3 extra schollies, allowing Duke , MD, OSU, and whoever to swallow up all of the great D1 talent in the countr. I'd definitly be in favor of either getting rid of Title IX or reforming it and cutting down the extra schollies to 1. Thats whats happened in football, with out the 85 schollie limit we probably don't beat Purdue in '03 and don't come close to beating OSU that same year either.

We need some actuall "March Madness" for the ladies as well. It would boost programs like us and others who hope to actually do something in the NCAA Tourney instead of getting beat in game 1 every year.

Title IX is very important. All it needs are some tweaks and it'll be perfect. If you have no Title IX you might as well say bye to all women's sports that aren't revenue.

BGDrew wrote:Title IX is very important. All it needs are some tweaks and it'll be perfect. If you have no Title IX you might as well say bye to all women's sports that aren't revenue.

Then what exactly was Title IX for anyway. I understand that it was supposed to help women's programs grow but how exactly I'm not really clear on.

Ttile IX was an amendment to an education bill back inthe 1970's. The original intnet was to ban the practice of discriminating based on sex, race etc... at institutions recieving federal aid. I don't think the initial language even mentioned athletics, but over the years the scope and enforcement of the amendment has widened. Like a lot of Federal statues, the importance of Tile IX varies with each administration's justice department.
They go after whaty they want to go after...if title IX isn't important, enforcement can get a tad lax.

For example...the current interpretation states that equal opportunity will exist within an institution...there was some noise that the justice department under (I think) Clinton was going to broaden the scope to say that the opportunities should be apportioned based on the individual schools demographic. In other words...say BGSU is 60% female...then 60% of the scholarships should go to women.

The important thing to remember is that title IX is federal law. Challenging it involves a battle not with the NCAA, but with the justice department on it's turf...the federal courts.

I haven't checked that Yappi thread, but we should not confuse Title IX, a federal law, with the NCAA womenh's basketball scholarships limit, which is probably a policy set to help schools better comply with Title IX.

A preferrable policy, to me, would be to reduce the football limit from 85.

Right...I meant to point that out and forgot.

85 schollies for football seems really high to me also.