Chattanooga athletics and the absurdity of Title IX

[chattownmocs]

Chattanooga times free press article

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2012/jun/24/utc-aims-for-more-in-womens-sports/?sportscollege

As ESPN and the mainstream media continue to praise Title IX let's take a quick look at the reality of this ludicrous law.

Is it not enough that Chattanooga has one of the top mid major womens athletic programs in the country? Is it not enough that Chattanooga offers more women's sports than men? Is it not enough that Chattanooga doesn't field a baseball team because of this absurd law? Not according to this absurdt law and all of it's supporters. Because UTC's student body is 56% women and there athletic teams are made up of 40% women the Mocs will have to add 3-4 more women's sports or delete men's program.

[Redhawk2010]

I'm sorry.. I fail to see what's wrong with having a plan to expand female athletics. Have they cut any men's sports lately? I know there are a lot of things wrong with Title IX. I am a proponent of the law however I do think it needs to be re-written and changes made to it. Legislators should have celebrated the 40th making substantial changes to the law to improve it. Right now a female can claim "Title Ix violations" for just about any reason and male athletes will get punished for it.

[bobcathpdevil56]

Being a wrestling fan, Title IX has had a huge impact on that sport. 669 wrestling programs have been dropped due to the proportionality quota. Good idea, but it has hurt a lot of young men who may have received the chance for college education through sports like wrestling, by getting a scholarship.

It will take a politician with big balls to try and tackle this animal.

Here is a list of programs dropped:

http://www.nwcaonline.com/entrenchment/downloads/comprehensive_dropped.pdf

[OL FU]

I'm sorry.. I fail to see what's wrong with having a plan to expand female athletics. Have they cut any men's sports lately? I know there are a lot of things wrong with Title IX. I am a proponent of the law however I do think it needs to be re-written and changes made to it. Legislators should have celebrated the 40th making substantial changes to the law to improve it. Right now a female can claim "Title Ix violations" for just about any reason and male athletes will get punished for it.

I think it is one of those "good intentions, with bad ramifications" deals. I would imagine that Chattanooga doesn't play baseball because of title IX. We have had the conversation before, California has title 9 gone wild which is one of the reasons that California has fewer DI football teams than South Carolina, with 8 times the population. The law has good intentions but should be revisited.

[HailSzczur]

Being a wrestling fan, Title IX has had a huge impact on that sport. 669 wrestling programs have been dropped due to the proportionality quota. Good idea, but it has hurt a lot of young men who may have received the chance for college education through sports like wrestling, by getting a scholarship.

It will take a politician with big balls to try and tackle this animal.

Here is a list of programs dropped:

http://www.nwcaonline.com/entrenchment/downloads/comprehensive_dropped.pdf

Hell of a lot of PA schools on that list, I know a lot of the club wrestlers who aren't very happy that they are only a club. Likewise the male rowers hate the parity. They compete against all these scholarship athletes from other schools while they are only a club. The women's team however gets scholarships.

As a white male you tend to get used to reverse discrimination. It's never going to be completely fair, the best we can hope for is that a few changes are made to account for football scholarships. It's not fair to male athletes in other sports that there is no comparable women's team

[NoDak 4 Ever]

Hell of a lot of PA schools on that list, I know a lot of the club wrestlers who aren't very happy that they are only a club. Likewise the male rowers hate the parity. They compete against all these scholarship athletes from other schools while they are only a club. The women's team however gets scholarships.

As a white male you tend to get used to reverse discrimination. It's never going to be completely fair, the best we can hope for is that a few changes are made to account for football scholarships. It's not fair to male athletes in other sports that there is no comparable women's team

I'm pretty sure if they suddenly repealed Title IX, schools all over the country would drop the **** out of women's sports faster than you could say Birch Bayh.

[HailSzczur]

I'm pretty sure if they suddenly repealed Title IX, schools all over the country would drop the **** out of women's sports faster than you could say Birch Bayh.

Without a doubt they would. Which is why it is good to have Title IX in place. They need to find a happy medium where women's sports are safe without penalizing the male athletes at the same time

[wb247]

Exempting "any sport that calls for an excess of 60 scholarships" would be a good start for finding a medium that guarantees a full slate of womens' sports yet not punishing men simply because of their gender or ability to excel at a non-revenue sport.

[19Duke97]

They need to add Cheerleading as a Women's scholorship sport. JMU went through the insanity of Title 9 abt 10 years ago and dropped the sport I participated in. Title 9 is both out of date and run its course. The fact of the matter is that > 50% of today's college students are women, but far more men participate in sports from a percentage basis. This is coming from a father of a daughter too, so I have seen both sides.

[Redhawk2010]

I think it is one of those "good intentions, with bad ramifications" deals. I would imagine that Chattanooga doesn't play baseball because of title IX. We have had the conversation before, California has title 9 gone wild which is one of the reasons that California has fewer DI football teams than South Carolina, with 8 times the population. The law has good intentions but should be revisited.


Hell of a lot of PA schools on that list, I know a lot of the club wrestlers who aren't very happy that they are only a club. Likewise the male rowers hate the parity. They compete against all these scholarship athletes from other schools while they are only a club. The women's team however gets scholarships.

As a white male you tend to get used to reverse discrimination. It's never going to be completely fair, the best we can hope for is that a few changes are made to account for football scholarships. It's not fair to male athletes in other sports that there is no comparable women's team

Agree completely!

[DFW HOYA]

No one wants to say it, but it needs to be said: Title IX is poorly constructed law. Period.

Politicans don't want to say it, of course, because they would be painted as anti-women or something. But look at the law. it says nothing about athletics. It talks about discrimiantion in "education", not in football. Why isn't Title IX mandating gender proportionality in marching bands, in Greek societies, even among faculty hires?

[Redhawk2010]

No one wants to say it, but it eneds to be said: Title IX is bad law. Period.

Politicans don't want to say it, of course, because they would be painted as anti-women or something. But look at the law. it says nothing about athletics. It talks about discrimiantion in "education", not in football. Why isn't Title IX mandating gender proportionality in marching bands, in Greek societies, even among faculty hires?

Has a student sued for that gender proportionality? Like I said, I think it's a good law; it's just been poorly managed..

[TheBisonator]

More than 55 percent (and growing) of college students today are women.

There are way more men who either play collegiate sports or wish to participate in collegiate sports than women. I think I heard somewhere that the demand to play sports from male athletes is twice as much as the demand from females.

And you have legislation that states a school must distribute its scholarships/budgets/resources equally between female and male sports, or at least try to work towards that.

Simple mathematics will tell you that this will need to be reconciled, because it's not a good situation.

[Redhawk2010]

More than 55 percent (and growing) of college students today are women.

There are way more men who either play collegiate sports or wish to participate in collegiate sports than women. I think I heard somewhere that the demand to play sports from male athletes is twice as much as the demand from females.

And you have legislation that states a school must distribute its scholarships/budgets/resources equally between female and male sports, or at least try to work towards that.

Simple mathematics will tell you that this will need to be reconciled, because it's not a good situation.

So you'd rather give a scholarship to a male athlete who isn't deserving "because there's more interest?" I think there's a lot of things wrong with the law, but its idea is right. Its execution is poor. I've said that for a long time.

And also one of the prongs of compliance requires participation in athletics (in this case) be within 3% of the number of students in the school. So if 55% of college students are female then at least 52% of athletic opportunities should be for females.

[chattownmocs]

So you'd rather give a scholarship to a male athlete who isn't deserving "because there's more interest?" I think there's a lot of things wrong with the law, but its idea is right. Its execution is poor. I've said that for a long time.

And also one of the prongs of compliance requires participation in athletics (in this case) be within 3% of the number of students in the school. So if 55% of college students are female then at least 52% of athletic opportunities should be for females.


Are you serious? Women's college athletics is so watered down it isn't even funny. It is embarrassing how bad women's sports are at certain levels. Please don't tell me that they are "deserving" of an equal number, or more, scholarships. that is absolutely ridiculous. This is another victory for the over-the-top feminist movement. Women do not deserve even close to as many athletic scholarships.

[HailSzczur]

Are you serious? Women's college athletics is so watered down it isn't even funny. It is embarrassing how bad women's sports are at certain levels. Please don't tell me that they are "deserving" of an equal number, or more, scholarships. that is absolutely ridiculous. This is another victory for the over-the-top feminist movement. Women do not deserve even close to as many athletic scholarships.

And this is why nothings going to get changed. I can't say I disagree with you, but you sound like a sexist pig right now. Anything you say is a personal attack on women. While some women's sports can tend to be jokes at some schools, I wouldn't paint with such a wide brush. Our Men's bball team had a real crappy year, so we started to going to the women's games in hopes of finding some decent basketball, and guess what, we found it. It wasn't flashy, it wasn't high scoring, but it was good fundamental basketball that our grade school CYO coaches would have been proud of. That at least is the one good thing about women's sports, it tends to be very pure because its not adulterated by the media or the business aspect of sports.

But at the same time college sports is a business, plain and simple. If an athletic department was a large corporation, the Football and Men's Basketball would be the most productive divisions. I would go out on a limb and say probably about 90% of mens teams are more profitable (or loss less money) than their female counterparts. No corporation would reward the less productive division and cut the productive one like is the case in the NCAA. If an athletic department were a corporation it would be the women's teams getting cut for not pulling their own weight.

[TheRevSFA]

Are you serious? Women's college athletics is so watered down it isn't even funny. It is embarrassing how bad women's sports are at certain levels. Please don't tell me that they are "deserving" of an equal number, or more, scholarships. that is absolutely ridiculous. This is another victory for the over-the-top feminist movement. Women do not deserve even close to as many athletic scholarships.

Find us a woman who actually agrees with what you say, then I'll buy it

[chattownmocs]

And this is why nothings going to get changed. I can't say I disagree with you, but you sound like a sexist pig right now. Anything you say is a personal attack on women. While some women's sports can tend to be jokes at some schools, I wouldn't paint with such a wide brush. Our Men's bball team had a real crappy year, so we started to going to the women's games in hopes of finding some decent basketball, and guess what, we found it. It wasn't flashy, it wasn't high scoring, but it was good fundamental basketball that our grade school CYO coaches would have been proud of. That at least is the one good thing about women's sports, it tends to be very pure because its not adulterated by the media or the business aspect of sports.

But at the same time college sports is a business, plain and simple. If an athletic department was a large corporation, the Football and Men's Basketball would be the most productive divisions. I would go out on a limb and say probably about 90% of mens teams are more profitable (or loss less money) than their female counterparts. No corporation would reward the less productive division and cut the productive one like is the case in the NCAA. If an athletic department were a corporation it would be the women's teams getting cut for not pulling their own weight.


A personal attack on women to say that they don't deserve the same number of college scholarships as men? No that is common sense. I cannot express how asinine the idea that women deserve equality in something a) that THEY AREN'T EQUAL IN and even more importantly b) THAT THEY DON'T EVEN CARE ABOUT A FRACTION AS MUCH. You say my logic is why "things haven't changed." Well yes they have, and your logic(if you can call it that) is why things have gone so over the top that they have actually changed for the worse.

[chattownmocs]

Find us a woman who actually agrees with what you say, then I'll buy it

They agree with it by not supporting women's athletics. They don't need to agree with it when Pat Summitt brought in regular male students from the University of Tennessee so that her legendary basketball teams could actually get a test in practice that the scholarship scrubs(many of which were high school all-americans) could not give. That's how bad it actually is. Tennessee basketball is one of the few women's sports in the country that actually makes money and has a huge following.

[Apphole]

Chattown Says:
http://youoffendmeyouoffendmyfamily.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/really-fat-guy-on-computer.jpg_1295986041.jpg
NO FAT CHICKS!

[MplsBison]

Here's the thing I don't get: why don't these schools simply ask the females on campus if they're satisfied with the intercollegiate athletics participation opportunities they have via the women's sports already offered?

If they say yes: end. Title IX satisfied.

But no one does it, that I know of.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

No one wants to say it, but it needs to be said: Title IX is poorly constructed law. Period.

Politicans don't want to say it, of course, because they would be painted as anti-women or something. But look at the law. it says nothing about athletics. It talks about discrimiantion in "education", not in football. Why isn't Title IX mandating gender proportionality in marching bands, in Greek societies, even among faculty hires?

I agree, and I'd add another aspect to it as well. Maybe it's the same point you're making, but the thought of "gender proportionality" in this law has been distorted, IMO, from its original meaning.

As the unreformed law stands now, you could have spending on men's and women's sports proportional to the student body, but if the number of athletes isn't "proportional" then you have to make changes. This is what the article is talking about, but not making clear: Chatty needs to have some ratio of men to women athletes, no matter what is spent on these sports.

IMO, either you have to institute popular women's only, high-participation sports that for some reason Title IX zealots don't want implemented (i.e. cheerleading) or you have to say that proportional spending is enough. There is a happy medium to be had here, but it requires parties interested in compromise, something that is hard to find these days.

And lest one think I'm against women's sports, my sister played basketball in college and I've followed the Lehigh women's basketball team almost as much as the men, so I certainly value women's athletics. I've got to believe there's a way to reform Title IX and not see a mass drop of women's bowling teams across the nation.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Here's the thing I don't get: why don't these schools simply ask the females on campus if they're satisfied with the intercollegiate athletics participation opportunities they have via the women's sports already offered?

If they say yes: end. Title IX satisfied.

But no one does it, that I know of.

Mpls unable to read? Evidently:


One of the steps to meeting prong three is conducting surveys to gauge the student body's interest in the sports UTC has and what sports students would be interested in UTC adding. A new survey will be done each year of the five-year plan, Herron said.

The survey conducted during the 2011-12 school year -- all undergraduates received multiple emails from chancellor Roger Brown encouraging them to participate -- yielded a small number of responses.

"We had 583 total responses, out of 10,000 students," Herron said, adding that it will take several years' worth of surveys to get an accurate picture of what students want.

[MplsBison]

Didn't read the link, it was a general comment.

Glad to see UTC is attempting to satisfy title IX via that prong. If successful, they won't have to add any new teams to the athletic department.

[FCS_pwns_FBS]

Simple Solution...exempt revenue sports. Why should scholarships for sports that generate the overwhelming majority of the revenue have be offset with women's scholarships?

[kdinva]

Are you serious? Women's college athletics is so watered down it isn't even funny. It is embarrassing how bad women's sports are at certain levels. Please don't tell me that they are "deserving" of an equal number, or more, scholarships. that is absolutely ridiculous. This is another victory for the over-the-top feminist movement. Women do not deserve even close to as many athletic scholarships.

(From the AD at school "XYZ"): sorry, guys, we have to drop men's soccer and wrestling so we can have girls bowling.........

[MplsBison]

Simple Solution...exempt revenue sports. Why should scholarships for sports that generate the overwhelming majority of the revenue have be offset with women's scholarships?

Or heck - just cut to the darn chase of it: just *mandate* the minimum number of women's athletics participants required to be in division I.

[MplsBison]

Or, how about this:

the gist of title IX was to create opportunities for females to earn scholarships to school just like males had the opportunities to do with football, etc.

So just give matching scholarships out. Give 63 (or 85 for FBS) qualifying, well deserving females scholarships to attend school. That's it. End. They just have to go to school for free and earn good grades.


What's wrong with that? You acknowledge that there's a certain physical (and behavioral) advantage that males possess that simply makes their competitions more entertaining to watch while at the same time not denying any kind of equal access to females.

[ElonFirefighter]

There’s nothing wrong with adding women’s sports. You could add Cooking or competitive dish washing or lingerie football. My vote is for the last one.

*Disclamer* The above comment in no way shape or form is a representation of how I feel or believe should happen. ;)

[MplsBison]

I guess curling could be seen as something like "teach women proper floor mopping technique" ?

http://www.erzurumindex.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/rusya_curling.jpg

That's it girls!! Spic-n-span!!

[mocman1990]

I would imagine that Chattanooga doesn't play baseball because of title IX.

Correct.

Chattanooga faced having to drop either wrestling or baseball back in the early 80's...the wrestling team was nationally ranked and the baseball team was .500 in the SoCon.

And the only reason the wrestling program is still around is because the "Takedown Club" raises enough money to pay for a large percentage of the program.

People really miss having a baseball team, but as noted in the article, the odds of it returning to Chattanooga is very slim (alums have approached before with the money to re-start the program, but they were told they would have to double the amount and sponsor an off-setting women's sport)

[GannonFan]

Simple Solution...exempt revenue sports. Why should scholarships for sports that generate the overwhelming majority of the revenue have be offset with women's scholarships?

The problem with that is that there are so few sports, men's or women's, that actually generate revenue for a school. Heck, even football at many FBS schools and the vast majority of FCS schools don't generate a profit.

[Redhawk2010]

Correct.

Chattanooga faced having to drop either wrestling or baseball back in the early 80's...the wrestling team was nationally ranked and the baseball team was .500 in the SoCon.

And the only reason the wrestling program is still around is because the "Takedown Club" raises enough money to pay for a large percentage of the program.

People really miss having a baseball team, but as noted in the article, the odds of it returning to Chattanooga is very slim (alums have approached before with the money to re-start the program, but they were told they would have to double the amount and sponsor an off-setting women's sport)

See and I think that's one problem with the Title IX. There was a case in the early 2000's I think down in Florida that really ticked me off. The baseball boosters and parents went out and raised a bunch of money. Then they volunteered their time to renovate the baseball field with scoreboard, bleachers, etc. Two softball parents sued the school because they didn't get the facilities. Heaven forbid the softball parents get up off their butts and do some work! Unfortunately the softball parents won and the baseball team was not allowed to use their new improvements until the softball team had similar improvements.


The problem with that is that there are so few sports, men's or women's, that actually generate revenue for a school. Heck, even football at many FBS schools and the vast majority of FCS schools don't generate a profit.

Well the problem is that sometimes these numbers are fudged against the football teams. I know that was the case at SEMO all the time...

[CID1990]

With all the girls they had on their football team last year I don't see how Title IX is a problem at Chatty.

[NoDak 4 Ever]

With all the girls they had on their football team last year I don't see how Title IX is a problem at Chatty.

You cannot give Reputation to the same post twice.

[FormerPokeCenter]

With all the girls they had on their football team last year I don't see how Title IX is a problem at Chatty.

You must spread some reputation points around before giving to this poster again...

[TheBisonator]

So you'd rather give a scholarship to a male athlete who isn't deserving "because there's more interest?" I think there's a lot of things wrong with the law, but its idea is right. Its execution is poor. I've said that for a long time.

And also one of the prongs of compliance requires participation in athletics (in this case) be within 3% of the number of students in the school. So if 55% of college students are female then at least 52% of athletic opportunities should be for females.

Say hypothetically that there are no scholly limits. If you have 200 males wanting to play sports for a scholarship at your university and 100 women wanting to play for a scholarship at your university, and you give scholarships and roster spots to ALL of them, you're blatantly breaking Title IX rules.

Title IX says you need to give an equal opportunity for scholarships/roster positions for women as men. You could definitely give athletic schollies to all the women who demanded it, but if twice as many men want one, now you have to start denying opportunities to a whole bunch of men, and is that really fair?? Does Title IX deal specifically with (in its wording) controlling discrimination against women, or does it word itself as trying to establish equality for both genders?? Honestly, I do not know.

Simple math and simple recent trends say that this law will need to be revised somehow in a way that works with today's reality.

[GannonFan]

Well the problem is that sometimes these numbers are fudged against the football teams. I know that was the case at SEMO all the time...

I sincerely doubt that SEMO ever brought in enough revenue to sustain itself and the rest of the athletic program. There are maybe 10 FCS schools that make a profit on football, and over half of the FBS schools do. Other than that, people like to think it's a loss leader in that you lose money on it but maybe it gets people in the door and they give more later.

[CID1990]

Didn't read the link, it was a general comment.

Glad to see UTC is attempting to satisfy title IX via that prong. If successful, they won't have to add any new teams to the athletic department.

Any thread about women's athletics that involves such a liberal use of the word "prong" is teh awesome in my book.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I sincerely doubt that SEMO ever brought in enough revenue to sustain itself and the rest of the athletic program. There are maybe 10 FCS schools that make a profit on football, and over half of the FBS schools do. Other than that, people like to think it's a loss leader in that you lose money on it but maybe it gets people in the door and they give more later.

Not even.

[MplsBison]

Say hypothetically that there are no scholly limits. If you have 200 males wanting to play sports for a scholarship at your university and 100 women wanting to play for a scholarship at your university, and you give scholarships and roster spots to ALL of them, you're blatantly breaking Title IX rules.

Title IX says you need to give an equal opportunity for scholarships/roster positions for women as men. You could definitely give athletic schollies to all the women who demanded it, but if twice as many men want one, now you have to start denying opportunities to a whole bunch of men, and is that really fair?? Does Title IX deal specifically with (in its wording) controlling discrimination against women, or does it word itself as trying to establish equality for both genders?? Honestly, I do not know.

Simple math and simple recent trends say that this law will need to be revised somehow in a way that works with today's reality.

Factually wrong.

In fact, one of the ways to satisfy title IX - the most obvious way in my opinion - is to simply prove that you're satisfying the interests and abilities of the female student population on your campus via the current athletic offering.

[MplsBison]

Not even.

Depends what you define as "football costs". If you said only scholarships for the 85 players who get them and the coaching staff's salary - with the rest of costs being put under the athletic department budget - I bet at least half of the FBS schools take in enough revenue to be in the green.