MAG Cal athletics

[profmom]

As I have said, I don't think every football program is a problem, but the big ones have gotten to the point of wagging the dog, and they are not serving their students well. And when a university mortgages its entire future, including the academic side, for the sake of a stadium that benefits only one sport, that's a problem. Despite the existence of terrible people like me, the amount of money being invested in football programs has been growing and growing. I'd be fine with returning football to the standing -- and roster sizes -- it had back in the 1970s. Big time college football is unsustainable and broken. I am not advocating for the elimination of football. I am advocating for its return to its honest roots and for the prioritizing of the student over the athlete. (And some serious research into how to change the rules to reduce the incidence of head injuries.) I really wish Northwestern University's team had won their bid to unionize. That would have been a big step in forcing people to start rethinking what is going on with these students and what they are being asked to do for damn little compensation.

What is the justification for saying that Title IX equality should prevail for every sport but football? Looked at in another way, if we say that football is a special class, we basically say "OK, we are going to set aside 120 athletic opportunities that are only for men and then all the rest can be equal."

 

[Madden3]

What is the justification for saying that Title IX equality should prevail for every sport but football? Looked at in another way, if we say that football is a special class, we basically say "OK, we are going to set aside 120 athletic opportunities that are only for men and then all the rest can be equal."

What is the justification for insisting that colleges provide sports opportunities/spending for women's athletics when there are less women than men interested in participating in collegiate athletics- (yes it is true) yet no such proportionality rule exists for the many extracurricular activities that are women dominated? Even 50/50 is not enough, because to be in compliance the athletics have to be "proportionate" and since more women are at colleges than men now, that means colleges must provide more for women than men. Even though actual interest in competitive team sports participation is the inverse.

To add a wrinkle, what about egaming? http://www.espn.com/college-sports/...-compliance-priority-varsity-esports-programs Well, as you can see, collegiate esports are here. There are vastly more men interested in participating in competitive egaming than women and that seems unlikely to change dramatically as that gender gap in interest has existed since the first Asteroids game was installed at my local bowling alley 40 years ago. Are we going to insist on equal quotas for egaming when the best minds in the industry have tried and failed for decades to get women interested in gaming at more than a fraction of male interest? Or are we going to admit that equality of opportunity does not require precise quotas because interest is simply not equitable? When does ensuring that women are not left out or left behind become social engineering aimed at changing women and men into something they are not and can never be - the same in all ways?

Look we (profmom and I) have been over this all before and I am happy to drop it on this thread and respectfully disagree on this issue. Yes I would like to see a return to what was supposedly the original intent of Title IX (non discrimination but not quotas in many areas, not just sports) and you would like to see changes in football you outlined above. IMO neither change is at all likely to happen fast enough to save USA MAG and other ideas for that must be tried.

Despite the existence of terrible people like me, the amount of money being invested in football programs has been growing and growing.

I have never said or thought that you or anyone else on this forum is a terrible person.