Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But it's not funding. They could add more women's sports, or more women in the sports they have, or (as has been suggested about football) cut some players in men's sports. It's really too bad for guys that equality means having to share the resources equally.
I think all such scholarships are equally silly minded. I think they should be given to bright or dedicated students who lack money not to athletes.
Do you also believe you should eliminate scholarships for music, acting, or fine arts also?
Scholarships at non revenue producing sports and at smaller schools don't necessarily go to complete morons that would never get into those schools. Many of those students are actually very smart, very skilled at their sport, and those schools use the bait of an athletic scholarship to get them to enroll. The vast majority of those scholarships are only partial ones, even sports like baseball. One of the reasons why the schools like to give those out, is the athletes surprisingly succeed in life, have strong school spirit, and become lifetime donors (much higher than the average student population). There is some sort of study that showed if you strip out men's basketball and football that athletes have higher GPAs than the average students at the schools that they attend.
My friend turned down both the U. of Illinois and Notre Dame to attend Temple because of a partial scholarship and the chance to play college volleyball. Was she nuts? Or did she have a once in a lifetime chance to play competitive sports beyond high school and still get a good education.
Men's basketball and football are different because they are tremendous revenue generators. You can also maybe make the argument for women's basketball and baseball at some schools where they are high profile sports. It's just not the same for say cross county at liberal arts college.
But it's not funding. They could add more women's sports, or more women in the sports they have, or (as has been suggested about football) cut some players in men's sports. It's really too bad for guys that equality means having to share the resources equally.
Funding is tied to spending because most sports programs at larger colleges is self funded, or at least 90% self funded. So football and men's basketball funds the entire sports program, which then must be split evenly between women and mens sports. The catch 22 is that football has extremely high overhead costs, but you can't cut it or you'll destroy the funding for all other sports.
The only alternative to offset the high costs of football is to cut non revenue producting men's sports, particularly those with high facility, travel, or equipment costs.
So yes, a university could spend more money to grow women's sports and not cut men's sports, but it would then cost more money from the university's academic funds which most colleges are unwilling to do for sports like men's golf, baseball, swimming, gymnastics, or wrestling that don't have a big following.
So I think there is some merit in exempting part of the revenue producing sports in the Title IX analysis, but then again is some of those sports getting kicked down to club level really going to kill anyone.
Do you also believe you should eliminate scholarships for music, acting, or fine arts also?
Scholarships at non revenue producing sports and at smaller schools don't necessarily go to complete morons that would never get into those schools. Many of those students are actually very smart, very skilled at their sport, and those schools use the bait of an athletic scholarship to get them to enroll. The vast majority of those scholarships are only partial ones, even sports like baseball. One of the reasons why the schools like to give those out, is the athletes surprisingly succeed in life, have strong school spirit, and become lifetime donors (much higher than the average student population). There is some sort of study that showed if you strip out men's basketball and football that athletes have higher GPAs than the average students at the schools that they attend.
My friend turned down both the U. of Illinois and Notre Dame to attend Temple because of a partial scholarship and the chance to play college volleyball. Was she nuts? Or did she have a once in a lifetime chance to play competitive sports beyond high school and still get a good education.
Men's basketball and football are different because they are tremendous revenue generators. You can also maybe make the argument for women's basketball and baseball at some schools where they are high profile sports. It's just not the same for say cross county at liberal arts college.
Film, dance, theater and arts are all rich in educational and even academic value. Football, basketball, baseball, volleyball, etc. do not.
Not that I necessarily completely agree with either gentleman here, but this debate is relevant, well-spoken and from university members themselves (UT Austin faculty)
Do you also believe you should eliminate scholarships for music, acting, or fine arts also?
Not for music and arts as those are intellectual pursuits and proper fields of scholarship. Actually I'd as soon see colleges teach arts and music as "business" and accounting which are vocational courses and make college the white collar version of a welding or diesel mechanic school.
Actually, I was a competitive swimmer in school. Very pompous and petty of you to assume I have never competed. Now, whose fault is it that your wife did nothing but drugs in college rather than learn the skills, art and aesthetics of music? Sports are great activities, but they are not of academic value. I love hiking, fishing and climbing but the enjoyment of those activities does not make them part of serious higher learning. Again, the man who cannot spell "competitive" somehow cannot discern the difference between academic and other subjects. Who would have known?!
Hey, that's fine .... no need to be jealous/hate on those who still enjoy recreation and games of skill
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
