LFN: The Patriot League's Title IX "Problem"

[Lehigh Football Nation]

http://lehighfootballnation.blogspot.com/2011/05/patriot-leagues-title-ix-problem.html

It's long - but a worthwhile read about how Title IX is affecting the Patriot League and, specifically, the football scholarship discussion.

[citdog]

http://img.youtube.com/vi/CUUaHpMM9XQ/0.jpg

[Go...gate]

As ever, nice work, LFN.

[DFW HOYA]

It's been said no private school ever moved up to the big leagues. This one did, albeit before the I-A/I-AA split.

http://tampasportshistory.blogspot.com/2010/03/sos-for-spartans-football-22775.html

[Go...gate]

I remember Tampa's brief time in Division I very well. They were respectable and got some nice wins. When Rutgers was going "bigger time" in the early 1970's, new athletic director (at that time) Fred Gruninger hailed games with Tampa, Air Force and Hawaii on the Rutgers schedule as steps to major college competition. Rutgers lost at Tampa in 1973 (34-6, AIR) and the return game was never played due to the program's demise.

[citdog]

http://lehighfootballnation.blogspot.com/2011/05/patriot-leagues-title-ix-problem.html

It's long

TWSS

[Lehigh Football Nation]

In many ways, I think the PL would be the perfect test bed for challenging the proportionality test. There aren't any illusions that they will ever become FBS programs. Their record in Title IX compliance and opportunities for women is stellar. Football scholarships for the PL aren't about building the next Auburn, it's about attracting the best student athletes, putting them on a level recruiting field with H-Y-P and becoming more competitive in FCS.

It could pave the way for, perhaps, another way to measure Title IX compliance - one that's more favorable for FCS football schools, and maybe non-revenue men's programs like rugby or wrestling.

[RichH2]

Unfortunately LFN your position is much to reasonable to even be considered by NCAA. From what I've read proportionality has not done well either in the ncaa or the Courts. The TitleIX fanatics have fought it tooth and nail. Their objections as to FBS giants may have some validity. Look their are schools with female equestrian teams of 100 girls, clearly a debasement of the very valid purpose of Title IX. For PL, those dangers are not even remotely possible.

[citdog]

http://motivateurself.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/women2.jpg

[citdog]

http://www.budgethomecleaning.com/images/woman-vacuuming.jpg

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Unfortunately LFN your position is much to reasonable to even be considered by NCAA. From what I've read proportionality has not done well either in the ncaa or the Courts. The TitleIX fanatics have fought it tooth and nail. Their objections as to FBS giants may have some validity. Look their are schools with female equestrian teams of 100 girls, clearly a debasement of the very valid purpose of Title IX. For PL, those dangers are not even remotely possible.

Agreed that their complaints against the FBS giants might have validity. But meanwhile, the Patriot League can't expand scholarship opportunites for men, many men's wrestling teams and rugby teams have closed up shop, and recently, Delaware announced they were dropping their 100 year old men's track and field program.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/02/sports/02gender.html?src=mv


When the University of Delaware announced this year that it was demoting its men’s track and cross-country teams to club status, the news was sad but not surprising to many who follow college sports.

Delaware is one of dozens of universities that have eliminated low-profile men’s teams like wrestling, gymnastics and swimming in an effort, the universities say, to comply with Title IX, the federal law that bans sex discrimination in education.

But in cutting the men’s varsity track team, Delaware took the practice a step further. The university did not make the argument that it needed to cut the team to immediately comply with the law — after all, it plans to add a women’s golf team in the fall. Instead, officials say they are ending the track program, which has its 100th anniversary this year, out of concern that they could not remain compliant in the future.

Now, members of the men’s track team have taken an unusual step of their own: they have filed a complaint with the federal Office for Civil Rights, which oversees Title IX, alleging that Delaware is discriminating against its male athletes. The office decided to look into the complaint, and last week, the university agreed to enter into mediation with the track team to try to resolve the issue.

Perhaps this complaint against the proportionality test will get somewhere, I'm not sure. Maybe someone with a better legal background than myself might comment on it.

Something similar, though, could be argued, I think, about Patriot League scholarships. Because of the proportionality test - the only "safe harbor" for compliance - Patriot League schools cannot offer football scholarships. As a result, men have fewer opportunities than they otherwise would have, and are present for all other women's sports competing in the Patriot League.

[citdog]

http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/bociek666/bociek6660904/bociek666090400032/4632146-woman-cleaning-house-in-gloves.jpg

[Go...gate]

Things are returning to normal on AGS. : )

[citdog]

Things are returning to normal on AGS. : )xoutofrepx


http://cuadie.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/make-me-a-sandwich.jpg

[citdog]

http://cdn.tauntr.com/sites/default/files/UCONNWomen.jpg

[ngineer]

Damn, why don't we get The Citadel into the PL..Higgins would love to renew acquaintances.(;-)

[Pard4Life]

I can only see men being denied an opportunity in one sport: football. But if you start adding scholarship money for men, then one could make the claim that there are no athletic scholarship opportunities for women. That is how I would answer one of your questions LFN. If it were a sport specific balance this wouldn't be an issue. It SHOULD be a sport specific balance, but in theory, one could pour all athletic scholarship money into football and ignore other sports, which gets back to my original point and the whole reason for Title IX.

If there are equal opportunities in other sports, what's the problem, as you allde to. But at Lafayette, even though we are in compliance, women's sports receive significantly less funding than men's sports. Maybe they cost less to run? I did some calcs based on the rudimentary numbers available over the winter and I think Lafayette would need $1.3 million this year for football schollies and Title IX compliance.

And ps I'd rather see my girlfriend/wife working a six figure job, hire a cleaning service, and I'll make my own sandwich.

[citdog]

And ps I'd rather see my girlfriend/wife working a six figure job, hire a cleaning service, and I'll make my own sandwich.

She's got you driving one of these doesn't she?

http://hotflashesofinspiration.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/2008-chrysler-minivan.jpg


She's got you on a schedule too doesn't she?
http://www.bigpapablog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/angry_wife-300x220.jpg

Perhaps you can acquire some more since she seems to have yours in her purse. Turn carefully though...you've already had one set crushed.
http://files.sharenator.com/1886turn_carefully_or_itll_crush_your_balls_Overal l_Funny_Almost_Awesome_Pics-s437x700-33688-580.jpg

[carney2]

I think Lafayette would need $1.3 million this year for football schollies and Title IX compliance.

And every year.

This is about money. (Gee, do ya think?) An annual "money game" would only put a dent in this. It wouldn't solve the problem.

[citdog]

http://www.funz.eu/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Are-The-Women-Meant-To-Cook.jpg

[DFW HOYA]

Something similar, though, could be argued, I think, about Patriot League scholarships. Because of the proportionality test - the only "safe harbor" for compliance - Patriot League schools cannot offer football scholarships. As a result, men have fewer opportunities than they otherwise would have, and are present for all other women's sports competing in the Patriot League.

1. Of course it can--Fordham did. It just needs to offer comparable scholarship support across other women's sports.

2. Proportionality is not the only safe harbor. Factor #2 (ongoing expansion of women's programs) has passed compliance muster as well. Number 3 (the school has run out of interest by women in further sports) has not.

Example: For Lehigh (60% male), you could fully fund football, wrestling and basketball, but nothing else, if it would fully fund women's basketball, lacrosse, softball, soccer, and track. The cost is a bigger issue than Title IX, as you're looking at approx. 175 full rides a year to cover.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

1. Of course it can--Fordham did. It just needs to offer comparable scholarship support across other women's sports.

By saying "comparable scholarship support" you're implicitly talking about the proportionality test. And just peeking at Fordham's EADA reports.... I wonder if they are actually meeting the proportionality test. Their spending is 58/42 in favor of men in athletic-related student aid, and there are all sorts of caveats and hoops that they seem to go through in order to make it seem like they sort-of meet this test as well.

I'm not saying this is wrong that Fordham is doing this, nor that it's a bad thing. But if you're judging their compliance based on their implementation of the proportionality test, Fordham isn't going to win any awards. And they're the school that claims that football scholarships are going to be no problem for the rest of the league. It's fair to assume that there would be schools with bigger proportionality test challenges than Rose Hill.


2. Proportionality is not the only safe harbor. Factor #2 (ongoing expansion of women's programs) has passed compliance muster as well. Number 3 (the school has run out of interest by women in further sports) has not.

Example: For Lehigh (60% male), you could fully fund football, wrestling and basketball, but nothing else, if it would fully fund women's basketball, lacrosse, softball, soccer, and track. The cost is a bigger issue than Title IX, as you're looking at approx. 175 full rides a year to cover.

By definition, Factor #2 (ongoing expansion of women's programs) will run out eventually - what I call the "we haven't met the percentage yet, but we're really trying!" prong. And in your example - unless I'm not following - you're still talking about the proportionality test, not Factor #2.

Title IX states: "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." Are not potential Patriot League football-playing men being "denied the benefits" of an activity - a scholarship - thanks to the proportionality test, since with it many PL schools (if not all PL schools) are unable to implement FB scholarships?

You could go a step further. You could say that PL football players are even discriminated against - they're subject to discrimination on their ability to pay. No women's team in the PL is required to go through this needs test.

The proportionality test itself is causing the PL to be incompliant with Title IX.