<br>
<blockquote> <p>...like NO practice - and yet the team ranks high in their competition - nationally. <<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Just think how good they could be if they could practice.</p>
<p>.............They should be able to decide what sports they want at their college since its their money.No guidelines at all. That's a great point. I agree whole heartedly.........</p>
<p>That is exactly what used to be - pretty archeic (sp) in my eyes - and it was all guys in sports - hence the NCAA has leveled the playing field :) Gals are great athletes as well - and have finally found their rightful place in college athletics - last century was a great one for the ladies of sports - they fought to participate and have won.</p>
<p>Alright mini, tell me this one....</p>
<p>I agree with hswrestler, schools should be able to spend their money the way they want to spend it...</p>
<p>What is making a female go to a particular school? If she wants to play that sport so bad, then she can go choose from 100 other schools that offer the opportunity for her.</p>
<p>And no, I'm not a crybaby and it's not a matter of I don't like girls being able to play sports. I do very much enjoy watching female sports. Not quite as much as I enjoy watching football and baseball, but I enjoy women's basketball, soccer, and volleyball. I'm just tired of every minority in this country expecting everybody else to accomodate them because they're this "poor minority." It gets old.</p>
<p>COUREUR - I completely agree LOL the would be absolutely AWESOME - (actually a bit scary in some ways LOL) - not they aren't anyways - especially when they out-rank the schools that should be kicking butt in this sport.</p>
<p>............What is making a female go to a particular school? If she wants to play that sport so bad, then she can go choose from 100 other schools that offer the opportunity for her..............</p>
<p>Not sure I get your point on this:(</p>
<p>Actually - after re-reading your post (hops-scout) - it is actually pretty insulting - the bit about minorities - there are only 2 genders involved in sports - male and female - so your minority comment is really un-called for. Women do deserve equal opportunities as the guys - on the field and financially when it comes to college sports and potentials for scholarships - if they go to the schools that offer them.</p>
<p>JeepMOM, here's my point and yes it MAY be offensive; something people have to be able to deal with.</p>
<p>Jobs, school enrollment, scholarship opportunities, military appointments, the list goes on and on and on. Minorities (women, Muslims, Africans, Mexicans, etc) think that they should be above the white male to get a job. If a white male gets hired, it's because of race or because of gender. People actually hire that way. I have to hire this African because I need the number. Who cares if the Caucasin male is a better applicant, he's in the majority and I might get in trouble if I have too many of them.</p>
<p>JeepMOM, I would like you to find a scholarship that is offered SPECIFICALLY for a WHITE MALE. I haven't seen one yet. Or is there a ORGANIZATION FOR WHITE MALE ADVANCEMENT. </p>
<p>That's my point.</p>
<p>Anyway, back to athletics....</p>
<p>Actually - there is a scholarship just for white male- from a New England school - been in all the news last year - very controversial.................but I am not gonna go there or looking for it right now..........and off topic anyways........</p>
<p>Anyways - you still don't get it - we ARE talking about athletics and college - and not the rest of the great wide political world - male vs female athletes - so your argument doesn't hold much water at all in that regard. I find it interesting and somewhat funny that you consider college females in the minority - especially since us gals take up over 50% of the college spots in this country.:D</p>
<p>I am distinctly getting the impression that you are really not pro-women - too bad..........</p>
<p>Yep MOM, you gals do seem to make up over 50% of the college spots, but you're still a minority in America as a general population.</p>
<p>Nope, I'm not "pro-women" and I'm not "pro-men" either. I'm all for equality, however I'm not for blind equality and that's what we seem to be going towards in this country.</p>
<p>So, females make up over 50% of the college population. By my opinion of equality and by Title IX (if I understand it correctly) that means over 50% of athletic opportunities should be available to females, correct?</p>
<p>At schools under NCAA rules - and Title IX law - via the manner in which those regs are applied - women should have the SAME and EQUAL athletic opportunities (to include scholarship opportunities) as men.</p>
<p>Back in the dark ages - many many schools - actually just about all of them - ONLY had mens teams - no ladies allowed - they have come a looooong way in reversing that - and the attitudes that go with it. It has taken Title IX to make that really happen.</p>
<p>Here some data based on the number of participates in high school and the number of NCAA varsity teams(D-I, D-II, D-III).</p>
<p>Boys-</p>
<p>Football- 1,071,775 athletes in high school; 625 teams in NCAA
Basketball- 546,335 athletes in HS; 1022 teams in NCAA
Track & Field- 533,985 athletes in HS; 680 teams in NCAA
Baseball- 470,671 athletes in HS; 897 teams in NCAA
Soccer- 358,935 athletes in HS; 763 teams in NCAA
Wrestling- 251,534 athletes in HS; 229 teams in NCAA</p>
<p>Girls-</p>
<p>Basketball- 452,929 participates in HS; 1050 teams in NCAA
Track and Field-439,200 athletes in HS; 734 teams in NCAA
Volleyball-390,034 athletes in HS; 1009 teams in NCAA
Softball-369,094 athletes in HS; 944 teams in NCAA
Soccer- 321,555 athletes in HS; 943 teams in NCAA
Tennis-173,753 athletes in HS; 795 teams in NCAA</p>
<p>Here are the top 6 sports for High school particapation for boys and girls and the number of teams in D-I, D-II, D-III in NCAA. </p>
<p>Wow, and you claim the number of teams aren't equal for females. Wrestling has way more HS athletes than womens tennis but tennis has 500 more NCAA teams than it. Mens track has about 100,000 more athletes than females yet there are more teams in the NCAA for females. </p>
<p>It seems like the males are being discriminated against with far less opportunities to continue their chosen sport in the next level,</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm just tired of every minority in this country expecting everybody else to accomodate them because they're this "poor minority." It gets old.
[/quote]
A guess on my part but I'd guess you are not a parent yet ... as a parent of both sports playing girls and boys I have NO problem with the intent of title IX (as with any law the rules to enforce it could always be improved)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Wow, and you claim the number of teams aren't equal for females. Wrestling has way more HS athletes than womens tennis but tennis has 500 more NCAA teams than it. Mens track has about 100,000 more athletes than females yet there are more teams in the NCAA for females.
[/quote]
Pretty simple ... if there are 1,000,000 men playing college football in the USA and about 100 women (I made that number up but I bet it is close) ... then the other sports need to provide about 1,000,000 more opportunities for women than men ... which is why there are more women's teams for virtually every other sport than football (and basketball). BTW, the DIII schools have figured out how to have football teams while also maintain virtually even number of men's and women's teams unlike the "big-time" sports schools ... it can be done ... the "big-time" sports schools have just chosen to not do it (and there are exceptions like UCLA and Stanford that have tons of teams).</p>
<p>One last comment ... the rules of enforcement for Title IX give schools multiple criteria to be in compliance (I believe at least 3) so there is not a strict proportionality test schools must meet ... they need to show they are providing opportunities in proportion of the interest and/or that they are making progress if they are not.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm just tired of every minority in this country expecting everybody else to accomodate them because they're this "poor minority."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I guess we have to point out that in colleges, women are not the minority; men are. Or have you failed to notice that the ratios at many colleges and universities tilt female (some as much as 70:30 female, and not just at formerly women's schools)? </p>
<p>So to take your scenario, it is the MEN who are now crying "poor minority" seeking to have women athletes disenfranchised.</p>
<p>Let me ask you this - assuming that all teams currently existing at a school have sufficient people coming out to field a team - which ones would you eliminate? Why should boys be able to wrestle at the expense of girls playing tennis (or whatever sport you choose)? What would your criteria be to determine priorities in funding?</p>
<p>"One last comment ... the rules of enforcement for Title IX give schools multiple criteria to be in compliance (I believe at least 3) so there is not a strict proportionality test schools must meet ... they need to show they are providing opportunities in proportion of the interest and/or that they are making progress if they are not".</p>
<p>The schools have to be in compliance with all 3 prongs of Title IX. It is pretty strict. You can't just meet two of the prongs and be in compliance with the law. You have to meet three. The same schools (D-III) have basically eliminated one of the prongs because they don't give fin. aid to athletes. So they only have to worry about having around the same male/female ratio playing sports as they do in attendence at that school and giving them equal funding. That is why it is much easier for the smaller schools to deal with Title IX.</p>
<p>And hasn't really figured out a way yet. They cut two men's sports due to the enforcement of Title IX. They cut men's swimming and gymnastics in th e90's.</p>
<p>I'd rather not act like I'm the expert on Title IX ... lots of Title IX FAQs from the NCAA ...
<a href="http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/ed_outreach/gender_equity/faq.html%5B/url%5D">http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/ed_outreach/gender_equity/faq.html</a></p>
<p>and a bunch more on video ... <a href="http://www.ncaa.org/gender_equity/video/%5B/url%5D">http://www.ncaa.org/gender_equity/video/</a></p>
<p>3togo, at what point will people realize that football should not count because it IS available to both men and women. It's just that not many women try. The OPPORTUNITY is there and that's what needs to be provided.</p>
<p>Chedva, if you'd read the WHOLE thread and not just what you want to read, you'll find that I have already agreed that women tend to populate college campuses more than men.</p>
<p>My criteria for funding?</p>
<h1>1 thing would be Grades. They are here for an education.</h1>
<h1>2 thing would probably have to be money. How much are they contributing? Are they operating in the black or in the red?</h1>
<h1>3 thing would have to be success. At this level, it is now about winning. The character development and the skill development is great, but winning has to be a priority to the team.</h1>
<p>".............If a school has a Division 1 or 2 team they usually prohibit club sports...........</p>
<p>I would question and disagree with this statement - all D`1 schools we have looked at have many club sports. Can you specify these D1-2 schools that prohibit club sports MerryMom"</p>
<p>Jeepmom, this is how is was explained to me and my child several years ago. I did verify what he said at the time. Perhaps it is different now.</p>
<p>1.A Division 1 school must have a certain amount of members attend their games. If not enough attend, they loose their Division 1 Title.</p>
<p>2.So a Div1 school may prohibit a club football, to keep attendance high at the Varsity Football Team.</p>
<p>3.I would imagine the size of the school will effect this process.</p>
<p>4.The schools may not say directly, "We don't have a club sport in football." But, they won't finance a coach, provide practice space, or uniforms. Same way of saying, "No club sport to compete with varsity.</p>
<p>5.There also has to be other schools with club sports to play and someone to pay for the scheduling and transportation and organization.</p>
<p>6.I would imagine this is less of an issue at a really huge school with lots of alumni and money.</p>
<p>I am only referring to the limitation on club sports if there is a Varsity one at the Division One School. </p>
<p>I have had schools not be upfront about this policy.</p>
<p>Would someone be so kind to explain how to copy another posters' comment and display it in grey, instead of only with quotations? Thanks!</p>
<p>"Continuation of Post 76..............If a school has a Division 1 or 2 team they usually prohibit club sports...........
I would question and disagree with this statement - all D`1 schools we have looked at have many club sports. Can you specify these D1-2 schools that prohibit club sports MerryMom</p>
<p>1.There are also intramural sports, if not a club sport. </p>
<p>2.These are usually between other dorms or entities on campus. They require less funding and organization. </p>
<p>3.Sometimes the ability of the players are less. Usually anyone may play. These are sometimes more like neighborhood "pick-up" games. They don't have the time committment and practice that a club or varsity sport may have.</p>
<p>However, I do know of some intramural sports that are taken very seriously, and are played by very highly skilled players.</p>
<p>hops_scout, I did read the entire thread. My comments stand (particularly in light of your "minority" comment quoted above).</p>
<p>And if you do want to use grades for funding, many, many Div 1 football and basketball teams would have to be cut. Add graduation rates in there and even more would be cut.</p>
<p>Hops_scout</p>
<p>"Yep MOM, you gals do seem to make up over 50% of the college spots, but you're still a minority in America as a general population."</p>
<p>Actually, no. There are more women in the US, and the world, than men. Because male babies have a higher mortality rate than female ones.</p>
<p>So, again, your argument falls flat.</p>
<p>And your attitude toward athletics is upsetting. </p>
<p>Grade: Yes, they should be good. But you know what? I bet you more of those DI football players, who are coddled by schools and given special majors to prevent them from being ineligible, are failing than the girls rowing crew.</p>
<p>Money: Contributing? Since when did sports become about money? A college has a budget, and yes it's nice to have a football team that is successful and brings in money from the alumni. But that's EXTRA money. The college doesn't need it to operate.</p>
<p>Winning: Are you really suggesting that the value of a sports team is in whether or not they win more than they lose? Are you insane? One of the big pluses of sports for young people has always been the character development. Winning is nice, but it sure isn't everything.</p>