Expanding Football Roster Has Title IX, Logistical Issues

Moiraine said:
The true solution to your problem is to get rid of football. It eats up far more scholarships than any other sport. It’s unfair to the men who are good at other sports. /s

That’s why I don’t agree with you that it’s a problem.

Also, your math still doesn’t make sense. It literally doesn’t matter one bit if there are 15 women’s sports with 10 players each or 1 women’s sport with 150 players. The #s of players need to be equal.

Now it seems to me that the only thing you think is unfair is that the football team can only have 150 players instead of 500.

But again, that could be fixed by having more women’s sports. Your bad idea of having one huge women’s team isn’t necessary to accomplish the goal of a bigger men’s football roster. 

The way to get more men’s sports is to reduce the # of players on the football team or increase the budget so you can add more women.

The way to get more football players is to decrease the # of men’s sports or increase the budget so you can add more women. 
Click to expand...
I know your answer was TIC but it raises a question. As someone pointed out, at other schools football isn’t profitable and funding other sports so given the difficulty football presents to meet Title IX, why don’t they drop football?

By creating a women’s football team and not adding other women sports it would make the point that football has larger rosters and men are penalized for playing it.  

I don’t think it’s unfair that a football team can’t have 500. I recognize that AD’s could run amok and add many players to the football program so there needs to be hard limits that everyone abides by.   Would they do this because they hate women? They’re simply putting resources towards something with good revenue potential.

How big should football rosters be? Add women’s football and that discussion would happen quite fast and be ongoing

 
4skers89 said:
I know your answer was TIC but it raises a question. As someone pointed out, at other schools football isn’t profitable and funding other sports so given the difficulty football presents to meet Title IX, why don’t they drop football?

By creating a women’s football team and not adding other women sports it would make the point that football has larger rosters and men are penalized for playing it.  

I don’t think it’s unfair that a football team can’t have 500. I recognize that AD’s could run amok and add many players to the football program so there needs to be hard limits that everyone abides by.   Would they do this because they hate women? They’re simply putting resources towards something with good revenue potential.

How big should football rosters be? Add women’s football and that discussion would happen quite fast and be ongoing
Click to expand...






What they would do or did do in the past is have other men’s sports that were unprofitable while having next to zero opportunities for women. Without Title IX there would still be unprofitable sports. They’d just almost all be played by men.

Explain how men are penalized for playing football. 

 
4skers89 said:
Since Title IX indirectly limits how large a football roster can be (only because women don’t play football) it would need a hard limit.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. At least, not in the way you continue to claim.

Title IX is more about number of bodies than it is number of sports. We have nine male teams and 13 female teams at UNL. We have a disproportionate number precisely for the benefit of football, not to the detriment.

 
Moiraine said:
What they would do or did do in the past is have other men’s sports that were unprofitable while having next to zero opportunities for women. Without Title IX there would still be unprofitable sports. They’d just almost all be played by men.

Explain how men are penalized for playing football. 
Click to expand...
I think Title IX was a good idea and has improved opportunities for women but it’s flawed.  @Enhance pointed out there is a difference in the number of sports that men and women can participate in at UNL. Someone lost and it’s because men play football. 

 
4skers89 said:
I think Title IX was a good idea and has improved opportunities for women but it’s flawed.  @Enhance pointed out there is a difference in the number of sports that men and women can participate in at UNL. Someone lost and it’s because men play football. 
Click to expand...




More men play sports at UNL than women. It’s fairly lopsided, actually. Sports aren’t living beings. They don’t have feelings based on what gender plays them. They didn’t lose because the men have a smaller # of sports. Some men had to pick a different school to play their sport at. The same thing happens to women. There are less spots for women to play sports at UNL than there are for men. That’s fair because they aren’t generating revenue, but it’s not unfair to the men playing specific sports that wouldn’t generate revenue.

 In 2014-2015, males made up 53 percent of the undergraduate student body at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, and 61 percent of athletes, according to UNL's 2015 NCAA financial report. The 356 male athletes were divided among 10 sports, while the 228 female athletes were divided among 14.
Click to expand...


http://www.dailynebraskan.com/news/how-title-ix-requirements-affect-sports-scholarships/article_936af37e-0da9-11e6-9707-bfbebfdb4160.html

 
Last edited by a moderator:
10_point_buck said:
Some schools do have other men's sports such as hockey , soccer, and volleyball and they too must find a way to create the balance required by Title IX.  You just don't "invent" a college sport to satisfy the boundaries of Title IX, it has to make sense and have kids playing that sport to feed into it.  If you look at the total number of sanctioned NCAA sports, there are a lot we don't have here in Nebraska.  If your football coach wants 150 or more men on the football team, even if they are walk-on's, the AD has to see if they can make it work and that is either by elimination of other men's opportunities or creating new opportunities for women.  Nebraska had a men's gymnastic team at one time and I am sure there are others we used to have.  For the benefit of all athletes, I have no problem with Title IX as schools (from junior high to college) were not doing justice towards female sports on their own.  

College Athletic Scholarship Limits
Click to expand...


Stanford  and Ohio St comes to mind as far as fielding a lot of sports. Both men's and women's. How do they do it?

Economics comes into play as well.  At Nebraska and many other universities football is the cash cow that funds the women's sports.  I know it won't happen but maybe some allowance for this should be made?

 
Honestly, I would be interested in seeing Nebraska add field hockey. BTN shows quite of few of those games in the fall.

 
huKSer said:
Stanford  and Ohio St comes to mind as far as fielding a lot of sports. Both men's and women's. How do they do it?

Economics comes into play as well.  At Nebraska and many other universities football is the cash cow that funds the women's sports.  I know it won't happen but maybe some allowance for this should be made?
Click to expand...
Football is the cash cow that not only supports women's sports, but men's sports as well.  Outside of football, men's basketball, and women's volleyball every other sport at UNL is supported from the funds brought into the athletic department from football.  Sure, UNL could have more sports of many kinds, but don't see a reason to do it.

 
10_point_buck said:
Some schools do have other men's sports such as hockey , soccer, and volleyball and they too must find a way to create the balance required by Title IX.  You just don't "invent" a college sport to satisfy the boundaries of Title IX, it has to make sense and have kids playing that sport to feed into it.  If you look at the total number of sanctioned NCAA sports, there are a lot we don't have here in Nebraska.  If your football coach wants 150 or more men on the football team, even if they are walk-on's, the AD has to see if they can make it work and that is either by elimination of other men's opportunities or creating new opportunities for women.  Nebraska had a men's gymnastic team at one time and I am sure there are others we used to have.  For the benefit of all athletes, I have no problem with Title IX as schools (from junior high to college) were not doing justice towards female sports on their own.  

College Athletic Scholarship Limits
Click to expand...






Nebraska still has a men's gymnastics team.

 
"Expanding Football Roster Has Title IX, Logistical Issues"

So did getting the 3rd Army to Bastogne in 5 days, Patton did it anyway.  

Excuses be damned!

 
Now as Frost starts practice this Friday for his second season at Nebraska, he’ll do so with a roster of over 150 — some two dozen players more than on the team he inherited.

And he can thank the women’s swimming and cross country teams for that.

To bring in the new football players while still seeking to stay within the bounds of the Title IX gender equity law, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln is adding roughly an equal number of female athletes in those sports.

In college athletics, it’s called “roster management’’ — juggling head counts across all sports with a goal of attaining overall gender balance. 

But women’s sports advocates say the practice also can be abused, with team sizes becoming unusually large and lesser female athletes recruited to simply pad rosters. It then becomes a means to avoid adding a new women's sport, denying women a truly meaningful college athletic opportunity.

Figures show that with the recent adjustments at Nebraska, the rosters of both the women’s cross country and swimming teams are now substantially above the NCAA average.

And an examination of last year's swim roster expansion shows the school added nine walk-on swimmers whose skills were well below those of its scholarship athletes. The walk-ons also practiced separately from the rest of the team and swam a much-abbreviated season.
Click to expand...


OWH

 
And an examination of last year's swim roster expansion shows the school added nine walk-on swimmers whose skills were well below those of its scholarship athletes. The walk-ons also practiced separately from the rest of the team and swam a much-abbreviated season.
Click to expand...


I'm failing to see how it matters that the new female athletes are walk ons. The added men are also walk ons. And most of the walk on football players don't get to play at all.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why not add about 25 more female players to the football team as walk ons ?    I am sure that would grab the headlines across the country and certainly shift the 'balance' of Title IX numbers dramatically.   

Who knows?   Maybe we find a few that can actually contribute and no doubt it will make recruiting the males a lot easier too.   LOL  And these days, with the lunacy of the transgender rules, it may be that there really isn't any male or female athletes or sports for that matter - or in other words, not sure if Title IX is even applicable anymore since there really isn't a male or female - just whatever you feel like you want to be that day.

 
84HuskerLaw said:
Why not add about 25 more female players to the football team as walk ons ?    I am sure that would grab the headlines across the country and certainly shift the 'balance' of Title IX numbers dramatically.   

Who knows?   Maybe we find a few that can actually contribute and no doubt it will make recruiting the males a lot easier too.   LOL  And these days, with the lunacy of the transgender rules, it may be that there really isn't any male or female athletes or sports for that matter - or in other words, not sure if Title IX is even applicable anymore since there really isn't a male or female - just whatever you feel like you want to be that day.
Click to expand...


Or have half of the football players "identify as female".  Problem solved

EDIT: Just in case anyone needed this:  :sarcasm

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top