NCAA Asks Schools Not to Blame Title IX

Reader Comments
Back to blog

"If women can't beat men at sports, let's take their teams away" couldn't possible be an ideology of many feminists because the number of women who actually try or want to compete against men is miniscule. Why would they want to? If they did, Title IX would be focused on giving women equal access to the realm of human athletic competition, which it is not. That realm is dominated by men for many reasons. The prevalence or likelihood of a male to be more interested or involved in athletics than a female is exactly like the prevalence or likelihood of a male to be bigger or stronger than a female. It is an innate gender bias that has more to do with biology than opportunity. Since something like 75% of all collegiate males enjoy/engage in some form of athletic competition, whereas less than 20% of collegiate women do, the insanity of feminist ideology is that women-versus-women athletic programs should receive the same amount of money as men-versus-men athletic programs. Our allowing feminists to mandate this insanity via Title IX is as asinine and shamful as Brand's boneheaded and disingenuous attempt to obfuscate the true influence of this irrationality on the further cutting of men's athletic programs.
A far more equal approach to the funding of men's and women's collegiate athletic programs would be to base funding on the proportions of each gender's interest and involvement in collegiate athletics, which could be objectively measured.

Pat of CA 4:16AM March 24, 2009

This is a pretty amazing statement: the NCAA pres is actually asking schools to rewrite the truth so that the message fits his agenda. If a school is influenced by Title IX enforcement policies in the selection of men’s teams for the chopping block, it is advised not to admit it and to put all the blame on budget cuts. There is no doubt that budgets have a place to play in the decision to reduce athletics participation, but somehow men’s teams are cut in much greater numbers and percentages than women’s, despite that men are more able to put together funding plans (endowments) to take budget out of consideration (just like Princeton wrestling 15 years ago – will lessons not be learned?)

Clay McEldowney of NJ 6:44PM December 27, 2008

Essentially, the economic crisis will necessitate cutting collegiate athletics, but because of Title IX, women's teams are immune. As usual, I blame feminism. I really think their ideology goes something like this: "If woman can't beat men at sports, lets take their teams away"

anthony of NY 4:13PM December 16, 2008

Miles Brand is either naive, ignorent or dishonest, since it is invomprehensible that the President of the NCAA could be so wrong when he suggests that Title IX has nothing to do with the downward spiral of men's college sports. It's not funny - it's tragic.

Clay McEldowney of NJ 10:00PM December 10, 2008

Typical PC argument. Men's sports mostly generate money for schools far more than Women's sports. An honest cut in sports would be to cut those sports with the most negative impact on the sports budget - Women's sports. However, PC arguments always ask the public to ignore logic and common sense and instead artifically create conditions. Typical crap from the left wing. Ignoring reality is always the request of the left wing ideologies when it is not convenient.

Gene of MD 3:05PM December 10, 2008

It is always awful when programs are cut just to achieve equality in opportunity for men and women. Pity NCAA schools didn't think of that before refusing equal opportunity for female students in all those years.
Why not have professional teams support farm teams as suitable at various schools and pay players accordingly. Educational facilities should provide education, not training for professional sports. The money they will lose from sports-besotted alums will offset the money they spend on such sports. Live and die on academia and that money. Let athletes be paid and receive medical insurance, etc. commensurate with the money they "earn" for the various schools.
Unhappy alums will have to live out their Walter Mitty-ism another way.

Edgar of VA 1:46PM December 10, 2008

Brand's request only makes sense if an equal number of women's teams get cut. The sport teams that get affected the most are the lesser known male sports such as Fencing. Even when outside private funding is offered to bring back the men's fencing team (Title IX cut them out but kept the women's team)at a well known university, they don't dare to accept it. The sport is becomming more and more popular but their male college teams are getting more cuts.

of WA 12:39PM December 10, 2008

IF they would make it a Club Sport the college would be out of the Title IX. Plus the NCAA would be out alot of money. Each Club Sport would be it's own business. The Club would have to paid for travel, referees, but the Club would be able to ask for donations from alumni. I would take a Club Basketball team from Kentucky any day of the week.

SIG4969IF of OH 9:37AM December 10, 2008

Title IX is worthless, I don't even know that why Brand is asking nly to have cut in man's team. Downtown can me recorverd by other things like lovering the salary of coach, extra facilities etc.

Frait of NJ 9:17AM December 10, 2008

College athletics does not have anything to do with students graduating from high school and college.
I work in college athletics and I think it's funny to blame the economy when Title IX has been a reason for so long to cutting programs. I think now with APR issues, it's better to blame something/someone to drop a program that is not meeting the threshold (men's track is typically one of the sports that is on the lower end of the APR). We all know that they will not cut the MFB or MBB because of that reason so they have to look at the non revenue sports.

Mary Smith of KS 8:25AM December 10, 2008