It's rare to find an athletic director who'll speak on the record about Title IX. Here's a piece about soccer at the University of Minnesota, dated Sept 21, 1999. The quoted section makes reference to Michigan's decision to add men's soccer. http://www.mndaily.com/daily/1999/09/21/sports/mensoc/ --- "I think this was part of Michigan's approved, gender equity plan," [Minnesota men's athletic director] Mark Dienhart said. "How they were able to add a men's program and really have the same amount of women's participants that Minnesota does, I don't know. They probably have different legal advice than we do. It's legal advice I'd like to hear." Dienhart said the cost of a men's varsity soccer team at Minnesota would be around $300,000 and was convinced the funds could be raised privately. But even if the money literally walked into Dienhart's office, the men's athletic department couldn't do anything because of Title IX restrictions.
I'm not sure but I just read an article on three DII schools that were reviving their football programs. That article conveyed that since all funding was coming from outside of the athletic department that it didn't effect Title IX ratios since it wasn't university money. I don't know if this is correct but it seems like if someone wanted to foot the bill for the program other than the University you could add programs like soccer.
1. Why would you start a new thread??? Why not add this to the other TItle IX discussions??? 2. Mods, move this to college and amateur. Or else I'm doing a Blackburn-ManU pbp thread here tomorrow. Can't have anarchy.
Thanx for the post Beineke, that was an interesting read. I am glad you posted here and please continue. This is an important topic concerning the business side of sports and I would never find these items buried on the college forum. Andy
Unless there are serious objections, this thread will stay here for a while. It seems to be where most of the Title IX discussion has congregated. And the last thread was wiped out in the attack.
Here is a column from CNNSI's Mike Fish about the possible Title IX changes coming out of the political woodwork. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/inside_game/mike_fish/news/2002/12/20/fish_titleIX/ Not neccesarily anything new, just yet another perspective.
Interesting article. One suggestion about cutting coaching salaries to a max 200,000, will, IMHO, have very little impact. Take FSU for example. Bobby Bowden reportedly makes 2 million a year. But FSU only pays him around 170,000 (give or take). The rest of it comes from outside sources (namely, the Boosters) not associated with the University. Cutting Football scholarships to 60 will ONLY WORK, if you get rid of porportionaility, and go to the 50-50 rule. Why? Because a lot of schools, rather than taking those 25 football scholarships, and using the them to add soccer or wrestling, will instead, not add ANY SPORT, and use it to acheive this moving target of porportionality. The 50/50 rule is the best compromise. If you have 200 men's sports scholarships, then you must offer 200 women's sports scholarships. Equality! What a concept!