PDA

View Full Version : LFN: New York Times, Relying On Deception, Undermine FCS Football


Lehigh Football Nation
April 26th, 2011, 05:23 PM
http://lehighfootballnation.blogspot.com/2011/04/new-york-times-relying-on-deception.html

I'm guessing by now you figured out I have some strong opinions about Title IX. This week, with the NYT weighing in on teams out of compliance, I let them have it on polls, and hinting that schools should drop or de-emphasize football programs.
401ks
April 26th, 2011, 08:38 PM
xthumbsupx
Lehigh Football Nation
April 27th, 2011, 10:42 AM
Some of the comments on the NYT's Title IX articles are very interesting. Of note to the FCS community is the idea of simply exempting football from Title IX.

I don't think that would ever happen for FBS schools, especially at the BCS level.

But could there be a case, though, of making an exemption for FCS football in terms of Title IX?

FCS is, after all, cost-containment football. Accepting that fact and acknowledging that, for FCS schools, compliance is onerous at best and catastrophic for many programs (including HBCU's) at worst might pave the way for an exemption.
Hammerhead
April 27th, 2011, 11:55 AM
Why not get rid of all college sports that can't pay their own freight? What's the difference between women's soccer and wrestling? Most people wouldn't miss them if they were dropped.
NHwildEcat
April 27th, 2011, 11:58 AM
Why not get rid of all college sports that can't pay their own freight? What's the difference between women's soccer and wrestling? Most people wouldn't miss them if they were dropped.

I agree with you to an extent. For me personally, the only college sports that matter and/make money are Football & Hockey...everything else is pointless to me!
Lehigh Football Nation
April 27th, 2011, 11:59 AM
Why not get rid of all college sports that can't pay their own freight? What's the difference between women's soccer and wrestling? Most people wouldn't miss them if they were dropped.

The answer to that is that there would be about twenty teams left in all of collegiate sports. Not sports. Teams.
DFW HOYA
April 27th, 2011, 12:02 PM
FWIW, the words "athletics" or "sports" appears nowhere in Title IX.
Hammerhead
April 27th, 2011, 01:54 PM
Title IX covers "education programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance." This would include school-sponsored athletic teams.


FWIW, the words "athletics" or "sports" appears nowhere in Title IX.
bkrownd
April 27th, 2011, 02:53 PM
Some of the comments on the NYT's Title IX articles are very interesting. Of note to the FCS community is the idea of simply exempting football from Title IX.

To most people it would be obvious that there is really no women's equivalent to football, for solid historical and cultural reasons.

When you get down to it football has far too many scholarships - the sizes of teams could be greatly trimmed. Many athletic programs have a similar number of players on the field with far fewer bodies on the bench. The facilities and aspirations are much too large at many schools. Too much money is involved. (these days that's true of pretty much everything at college$ and universitie$) The current "semi-pro" model of college football designed to chase the all-corrupting television dollars is an abomination. Unfortunately some schools jealously guard their cash cow. It's all about the $$$.