Great News!!

Will anyone every understand the NCAA logic ?

Better yet do the math for the Clearinghouse-- every prospective student athlete , male and female, who is thinking of playing DI or D II sports must register-- I leave the final $$$ amount to you

scbaseball:

You can thank Title IX, and it will only continue to get worse. Fortunately, professional sports are driven by their marketability and no artificial legislation.

I guess both proposals for an increase in baseball scholarships were voted down?

Proposals:
#1. Increase to 14
#2. Increase to 28, but it will only cover tuition, no books or lodging

Title IX is fair if you are a female crew member or badminton player with the same desires as a male baseball player that has put every ounce of effort into his game. I'm going to wimp out! I personally have given up on trying to change the NCAA or and world but will spend my efforts trying to change myself in order to adjust.
Fungo

Fungo

The NCAA will never change because of baseball people

One interesting thing to keep in mind.

There is increasing concern in academia about the drop in male college students. College eligible male students comprise about 55% of the total college eligible population in the USA - with females at 45%.

Unfortunately - last year - the composition of attendees at US universities stands at:
Male - 44% - and continuing its drop.
Female - 56%

Isnt it interesting how this situation never seems to be publicized?

Forget about sports for a moment - I think we need a Title IX type program for young males in the USA for college enrollment.

Ask yourself this - if an "equalling" of opportunities is required for NCAA sports - why isnt it required for basic academic purposes?

I don't think the vote on additional baseball scholarships came up at this meeting. I am pretty sure that vote will come at a later date - some time next year.

Guys....as the mother of a baseball player....I understand completely where you are coming from....but going back to my school days....there were no, let me repeat, no organized sports for females at my public high school.....and that was wrong....very wrong......it's like steroids in baseball...we ignore a problem and then Uncle Sam steps in to remedy the situation....and that's usually not to everyone's liking......and the NCAA.....they seem just like another government institution to me.....no dealing with them....or Uncle Sam......it's too bad.....but I can see this situation from both sides.....think things might have been different for me if I'd been able to participate in high school sports....but that's something about being denied an opportunity....you never know what might have been....

arizona red

I know you are not older than I and we had organized ladies sports back when I was in HS in the 50's

And Title IX is not the answer--the platform is tilted

TR..if you like I'll supply you the name of the high school I went to.....and you can veify that there were no female sports....they had "Girl Officers" for which we got to try out in our junior year...we practiced our freshmen, sophomore and junior years for this.....dance, club routine, and PE exercises....of the 300+ girls that usually tried out....72 were chosen...those that didn't make it got to go to PE and do exercises again their senior year..with "Girl Officers" leading the classes....that was the extent of our organized sports.....again...I'll be happy to supply you the name of the school....shall I PM you? If I didn't know better...I'd think that in your infinite wisdom....you are insinuating that I'm not telling you the truth...

I will ask again.

Why is Title IX applied to sports - but not the collegiate academic side of the equation?

What is that all about?

At just about every high school, there were no organized interscholastic sports for girls prior to Title IX. We had a very active intramural program, but we did not represent our school in playing other schools.

I, too, often wonder what I would have participated in if I had had the opportunity, but alas, no sports for me in either high school or college.

I really doesn't matter what did or did not exist back when.

What matters is that we do everything in our power to make things FAIR now.

Anything less than that means we are just picking a different group to hold down.

I have never understood how ANYONE who was once held down could justify doing the same to someone else.

itsinthegame.... Don't think I understand your questions.....unlike the days before Title IX when many schools did not include females in their sports programs.....education is available to both sexes.....was then and is now....I mean what do you want us to say? Girls are smarter than boys....

AParent...if it makes you feel any better...think that most of these laws are written by men.....just look at Congress and the Senate....majority are men....also if you "were not held down"...it's probably easy to say that it doesn't matter what did or didn't exist back then.....but to those of us who didn't get to participate...it still matters....and making it fair is important.....

I've said it before when we drag our feet on righting wrongs....the government will do it for us.....and they usually go overboard....

Arizona,

Dont know about what people may say - just asking a question.

Why is Title IX applied to sports - and not college academics?

Why?

Itsinthegame,

I do not want to get into a debate about the merits of Title IX...I have seen that done here already and it ain't pretty! But I do believe that Title IX goes well beyond the scope of athletics and does include academia as well. Whether it is beneficial or not....I'm not going there!

Luv,

You are right - it wasnt pretty.

If, in fact, Title IX is somehow being applied to academia - its not working.

At this rate - in about 15 years - there wont be any males left in college.

"Houston - we have a problem."

No males left in college? I'm going out on a limb and venturing to say that the sale of Febreze will drop dramatically!

I am not sure what you mean when you say that sometimes you wonder how things might be differnt now if you would have had the opportunity to play sports when you were in high school? Not trying to be smart, just confused by what you mean.

I just wish that baseball received a little more respect from the NCAA. No disrespect for the ladies sports, just wish the NCAA would show a little love to the baseball guys.

Luv,

LOL - Find the company that sells Fabreze - and sell that company's stock short.

scbaseball.....my brother just a few years younger than me...had the opportunity to play sports in high school and was offered athletic scholarships to several schools.....I was not......I ended up going to college at 26....it wasn't until then that I could afford to go full time.....does this help explain my statements about how things might have been different? Then again....maybe not...you just don't know....

Arizona - thanks for the reply.

quote:

Originally posted by scbaseball:
I just wish that baseball received a little more respect from the NCAA. No disrespect for the ladies sports, just wish the NCAA would show a little love to the baseball guys.

I wouldnt hold my breath.

In fact - forget about baseball - or sports for that matter.

The problems are much bigger than sports at this point.

My husband and I fight over the Title IX culprits and their effects on baseball - like this thread he blames the women's sports. I blame football - which is of course blasphemous here in Wisconsin. It's disgusting that UW doesn't even have a baseball team. You could more than field a baseball team with the scholarships given to football players who never play.

Actually, Title IX has had an impact on the academic side. It just doesn't make for as interesting or controversial news. (Example: Title IX report) And, of course, it protects women since your AWG hasn't needed all that much protection.

Unless it directly affected you or yours, it's easy to forget that there were so many educational institutions who rejected single mothers, denied females admittance entirely, or actively discouraged same (particularly in postgraduate areas). Athletics is a relatively minor part of Title IX, but it's certainly the part that's gotten the press.

Considering there is, I believe, about a 52:48 split between females and males in the general population, the figures quoted for college students aren't radically far off, particularly when you factor in the pendulum swinging from the days when women were, in some cases, excluded. I do hope you were as concerned, its, when the females were at the 45% level.

arizonared makes a good point: "if you "were not held down"...it's probably easy to say that it doesn't matter what did or didn't exist back then", just as it's very easy to say that benefiting one segment of society is unfair because it deprives the segment previously favored....particularly when you yourself are in the 'previously favored' segment. The problem is that budgets, college places, scholarships, and places on athletic teams are in finite supply. Allowing a period of 'catchup' for women isn't fair to men, carefully protecting men (given history) isn't fair to women....now this is a shocker, because we've all taught our children how fair life is , and how easy it is for both sides of a controversy to recognize "fair" for the other....

Our first thought when thinking about the NCAA is baseball; well, it ain't theirs.

And I blame football, too, wis. With more than half of the programs losing money, and another chunk just breaking even, their Preferred Status is pretty much just a side effect of testosterone poisoning in the NCAA.

OK, OK, I can resist neither Title IX threads or Catcher threads. Consider yourselves warned

Gosh darn Orlando.....you got it so right! Guess having facts is a lot better than just emotions.....thanks for explaining it so well...and if we ever have a hsbaseballweb showdown....can I be on your team? Promise to get the facts straight....

Orlando,

Your use of population statistics is impressive. You should be working as a Press Secretary.

You cited the % of the GENERAL Population. That includes everyone. Personally I dont think including 60,70 and 80 year olds in this discussion is fair.

As I am sure you know there are more men than women from ages 0 - 25. The numbers you cite for the general population are almost the exact opposite of the numbers for the population that typically attend college. In fact - even if you expand the category to 0-35 - there are still more males.

After that - the men start dying off much sooner - and women begin to outnumber men.


However, lets assume - for discussion purposes - that the numbers for college eligible students are split 50-50 for male/female. If the student population now stands at 56% female - and 44% male - is that fair? That would imply an imbalance of a couple million young men. And the trend shows no hint of slowing down.

Again - I ask. Why are we hearing so much about Title IX in sports - but virtually nothing about the academics side.

I am not implying anything about Title IX - I am not saying that equal opportunity is a bad thing.

I am asking the question - why dont we hear anything about this - and is it fair?

Its....just a suggestion....but how about parents putting more emphasis on education and less on sports....do you think that might help even the numbers out....you know..... like a Dad saying to his son...."I know you are the star quarterback, but you can't play football this season because you did not meet my academic requirements". Or a Mom refusing to let her son play baseball because he didn't prep for his SAT's as she requested....I don't know with 100% certainty the answer to your question....but have a few ideas......

Watched "Coach Carter" yesterday......it was a good film.....

Edit: Don't mean to say sports is total problem....what I want to say is that we, as parents, need to put the emphasis on edcuation......period.

Arizona,

I have no answers - just observations and questions. LOL

Its....and I think you like to stir the pot too.....

Arizona,

Who - Me? LOL

Actually - I think all of these issues are important. And I like to ask questions about these issues.

I think without asking questions - and without using some critical thinking - there is no progress.

Plus - it would be boring too. LOL

Three kinds of lies: lies, ****ed lies, & statistics. Having said that....

According to the US Census Bureau (2000 numbers; last available), there are, indeed, 52% male and 48% female in the 18-24 age bracket.

There are also, by the government's numbers, 51% female and 49% male who were enrolled in school for that age group. (What was the source for your percentages?) That 3% difference is a little over 363,000 young men. Even if you took a few percentage points of the entire expected-college-age group you wouldn't hit "millions" of young men impacted. (3% of the demo's entire population would be just over 800,000).

Their Educational Attainment figures for the 18-24 demo are interesting; from 'some college, no degree', through AA, Bachelor's and on to Grad or Professional Degree....the gap widens. It would appear that the female students stay in college longer and attain more.

Hmmmmm....might they have earned these numbers, inluding the majority of those undergrad places? Now that the door is open to young women with Moms who remember when it wasn't?

What is it you're looking for from Title IX on the academic side?

Pot....stirring....college....yes, there is a relationship here.....

arizonared

Why the defensive posture ?-- I am not insinuating anything and I have far from infinite wisdom as you suggest.

I am just stating what we had when I was a kid

Orlando,

Your numbers are all wrong.

Here are just a few of the sources that would validate the 56 to 44 ratio I cited.

American Enterprise Institute - Christina Hoff Sommers is particularly literate on the issue (and quite brave as well - LOL) - She has also written a very interesting book about the subject. I admire her willingness and fortitude in addressing this issue so forcefully, publically and literately.

Business Roundtable
Harvard University
Univ. Of Michigan

As well as many many others. Hopefully - they will start addressing this issue as well as Christina has.

In fact - even the Government (Dept. of Education) statistics showed that in 2002 - the ratio was 56 to 44 - for bachelors degrees.

The trend is hard to ignore - and I think we all ignore it at our own peril. And it is accelerating. And the disparity has reached well over the million mark (actually closer to 2 million)

That is - IMO - alot of young dudes. LOL

Actually, they weren't "my" numbers. They were the US government's. Granted, for 2000, but the latest available from the census bureau.

The same comment could be made about the numbers you quoted (hence my previous intro with the Disraeli quote ) A book or "study" which quoted numbers from where: all US colleges? Private only? Public only? A sample? Who chose the sample? (And what was their agenda? Ms. Sommers is hardly a neutral academic!)

How far were those numbers broken down? Although I suspect you won't like the source, (but in the name of Balance you took one from the Right, so I'll take one from the Left ) this article's "numbers" (with as much validity as any other's) suggests the sector responsible for the biggest gap in college attendance by gender is households with income under $30,000....where males have higher-paid factory or skill jobs available to them after hs, but females would be in lower-paid sales or service jobs without college. There is more gender-parity at the $70,000 income and above level. This seems a reasonable analysis to me.

Of course, I liked the article because it poses the same thought I addressed to you earlier in the thread:

"I do hope you were as concerned, its, when the females were at the 45% level."

The implication in the article is that some colleges are now and more will in future adjust their entrance requirements to attract more males. But Title IX is So Wrong to have done that in favor of women.....oh, I do get so confused....



Too Many Women In College?


Ah, a lot of young dudes....but not "All The Young Dudes" Whatever happened to Mott the Hoople?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Orlando:

"I do hope you were as concerned, its, when the females were at the 45% level."

The implication in the article is that some colleges are now and more will in future adjust their entrance requirements to attract more males. But Title IX is So Wrong to have done that in favor of women.....oh, I do get so confused....

Orlando,

I am concerned about equity in all situations.
And remedies that are fair and just. I am not a fan of left or right - I am a fan of the facts and of not shying away from problems. I am not a fan of politically expedient solutions that solve one problem on one side and create more problems on the other.
That isnt a solution - it is a shell game.

As for colleges addressing the issue - they better hurry up IMO. The numbers I cited are for all Universities in the USA. And the numbers are undeniable.

Finally - I would strongly recommend Christina's book. Of anything I read on the subject - I thought hers was the most honest - and most compelling.

See, that's why I say I get so confused. "They" have to address the issue, but no "shell games". Apparently Title IX was a 'shell game"; but the converse won't be???? Any suggestions?

Again, given that the numbers you referenced actually are for ALL US colleges, you (and perhaps Ms Sommers) haven't mentioned the gender differences based on an economic breakdown as only one example of contributing factors. Perhaps you/she don't regard that as relevant...? And you don't see her as having an agenda, eh?

And there's no factor there for women having earned the right to those places? Because all men...and women...are created equal?

We all advertise our politics by what we choose to read. Saying you're not a fan of the right or left and then quoting only Sommers would be a bit like saying, "I don't support the right or left, I just happen to think Anne Coulter/Michael Moore is correct!"

Orlando,

Just ridiculous assumptions concerning what I read and why. I wont touch that one.

As for Coulter and Moore - I think both are media buffoons.

More importantly,
I also think it is safe to assume that given the current climate in this country - we can expect less and less young men going to college in the near and far distant future - with results noone will like.

What started out as an attempt to create fairness and equality - has in fact created more unfairness and inequality. Just for another group of young people. As I said - that is not what I would call a "good" solution. Just a shell game.

Very unfortunate for our society - all of us IMO.

P.S. I do enjoy debating this with you.

TR......can't imagine why I would feel defensive to your posts?

I do apologize if I mistook....

Its and Orlando.....isn't there a saying about stats...and how easily they can be manipulated?

A couple of things, not necessarily related:

Our very large high school in the 70s had full and equivalent boys and girls varsity sports and, in fact, the track teams were close to each other, even though one team's spring coach preferred otherwise.

Something that is happening one of my sons and I have read it happening in other places as well: Corporations are changing their recruiting approaches somewhat, going more and more to even the high school level, identifying those they wish to pursue, then train them the way they want. Education (read: college) is part of this, but not necessarily in the so-called traditional four-year manner. It's more of a 10-year plan.

It is hard to give up on a college sports dream, but these corporate recruiting pitches are something to be heard.

Add this to what many male athletes (in sports not named football or basketball) see as an openly hostile attitude at the college level, I don't see it as surprising that we have shrinking male bachelor's degree candidate levels.

Old VA,
How fortunate you were to go to such a progressive HS in the 70s. Unfortunately, those talented girls on the track team (or ANY girls team, for that matter) had no opportunity to compete on a national collegiate level - no women allowed in NCAA! Thank goodness my daughters now have opportunities more like my sons do - academically and athletically. Don't quite know what you mean by openly hostile attitude toward males at college level. Seems to me if you have the grades, there are are many good opportunities for both. Fear of cracking the books, maybe?

Consider that the decline in male percentage attending college has more to do with career alternatives and economics than any 'hostile' atmosphere or Title IX (or Girl-Crisis, Ms. Sommers ) Conspiracy. Careers like computer techs, specialized maintainance, have joined plumbing, electricians, etc. as better-paying jobs that both don't require degrees and are much more often pursued by men.

Pretty much everybody here knows just how expensive college can be. The gap in male-female ratios is much more prevelant in the lower income families where boys have options like those cited above and girls look to teaching or healthcare/paralegal careers that require an AA.

Please remember that a decline in percentage does not necessarily mean a decline in degrees for males; the article I linked earlier said there haven't been fewer degrees awarded to men; the women's numbers have simply increased. But don't worry, boys, the government's cut in federal aid for next school year will help cull some of those pesky females trying to better their lot in life; as the college-attending gap is widest in the under $30,000 annual income households (roughly 2/3 of those students are women for the reasons noted above), that cut in funding will hit those women students (and potential students) the hardest.

When I wrote openly hostile, I mean the attitude of support staff and, to a certain extent, faculty against male athletes (almost all, in this specific instance, women).

I have seen this in some dealings at my son's school (when paying bills, running paperwork). The attitude these people bring is that the young men are there to play and only to play, and that they otherwise don't belong.

My son won't be mistaken for an honor student any time soon, but he has a decent GPA and is on pace for graduation in five years with a psychology degree. In fact, he plans to use his experience to help prepare a term paper in one of his classes this spring.

Certainly this is not by far the case at all schools, and it was not at the junior college my son attended before his transfer to a four-year school. But if I could feel it, and I'm there (other than to watch a game) for about a handful of days a year (dropoff-pickup and paying more bills), it is a factor that must be considered nationally.

Also, while the NCAA was just starting to become women-inclusive in my competing days, there was a national championship vehicle in numerous sports (AIAW, I believe). If memory serves, there was considerable debate among women's groups that they wanted no part of inclusion in the NCAA. I specifically remember this because my high school guidance counselor was a big shot in U.S. women's track and field at the time and it came up in discussion.

If you want to know why the NCAA ever does anything. Realize they work for the University President's (technically known as member institutions).

Changes happen when pressure is applied. Obviously the S****R Moms have more influence than the baseball Moms.

We need the ladies to unite, give their respective University there collective thoughts and be "persistent." We all know the immense power of persistence especially in numbers.

This may be an unpopular idea that might not survive "editing" but men are no match for the ladies when it comes to persistence.

When men are persistent it rarely has positive results but when women are persistent it rarely does not - men may have "institutional" power but women have proven quite succesful at motivating men.

Ladies, be forewarned Just purchased some ceramic body armor...plus i won't defend myself soooo.....

This is the first time I have looked at this thread.....and though I am not going to do any of the research, I'm sure there are several reasons that women now outnumber men on our college campuses.....and none of those reasons have anything to do with lack of opportunities for men.

I will guess at some things.....sorry again I do not have any research to back these guesses......but I would guess that the retention rate for women is higher than it is for men, that in general college aged women are better at setting and achieving goals then college aged men, that more college aged women have appropriate levels of commitment and self-motivation than college aged men, and that a significant number of women attending college in the USA today are non-traditional aged college women who may have sacrificed their education due to family obligations (or many other possible reasons) when they were younger. The non-traditional student population has exploded in the past decade or so; I am willing to bet that a great majority of those students are women.

If the NCAA has added two scholarships to the D-I limit for women's s****r, then that is great.....they did not take away any men's baseball scholarships to do that. I just don't see a problem with that.....and if I did I just might try to influence people who are in positions to make decisions. I am willing to bet most of us here do not make those decisions.

grateful, good call(s). The numbers for women over the age of 26 (how's that for "old" ) starting or returning to college are, indeed, significantly higher than for men.

And anyone with a footie-playing daughter was probably celebrating the news. Might even have a few members here in that group.

arizonared

quote:

also if you "were not held down" ... it's probably easy to say that it doesn't matter what did or didn't exist back then... but to those of us who didn't get to participate...it still matters... and making it fair is important

You have really confused me with this one.

It really doesn't matter what did or didn't exist back then - Title IX does not recreate your childhood and give you back your lost opportunity.

What matters is that we make things FAIR now, now titled in a new direction.

And I really don't know why saying this should be so much easier for me than it is for you.

AParent.....you're kidding right? If you're not.....then I've nothing more to post to you....just refer back to my postings on this thread.....they still reflect my position on this subject.....

Actually I'm not kidding.

You can not alter the past.

You cannot make past mistakes right by making new mistakes today.

I dislike Title IX for that very reason. It tries to rectify past mistakes by making new ones.

I didn't get to participate with the boys either, but I don't hold them responsible and certainly not the sons of today.

That said, I too will bow out.

Actually neither am I.....

You can not alter the past, but you can learn from it.....

You cannot continue past mistakes in favor of the good old and comfortable ways........

You cannot dislike a law that attempts to right years of injustice.....

You cannot hold the youth of today responsible for the sins of yesterday....but you can say....move over....make room......and that's what it's all about....

That said....and in retrospect....I'll never bow out on this subject....but sorry...so to speak...that we will not be hearing from you anymore AParent.....your final bow.........so sad...

sc

What we need is for hockey to go on strike again so ESPN and its multitude of channels can televise college baseball like it did last season.

The more exposure the better it will be

AZ,
I'm with you. It's not about "recreating" anything. It's about making sure it doesn't happen to our daughters. AParent obviously has no daughter, so what's to lose...

If that is the case - then apply it to academics as well.

Title IX was about academics as well as sports.

So far - it is failing miserably on the academics side. That is a fact.

No one ever answered my question - why is it ok to level the playing field in sports - but not academics?

And please - no breakdowns on income and the rest of the politically expedient excuses. If it is a quota system - then lets get it done.

Wouldnt you agree?

If you want to make it equal - make it equal.

its, you have an amusing (but not endearing ) idea of what 'facts' are. Something along the line of "because I said so"

Orlando - LOL

Not endearing? Thank God. Much kinder than most.

My proposal as it relates to COLLEGE TODAY (- and not anything else - including Wounded Knee - the Revolutionary War - The Potato Famine - the treatment of Italians and Irish in the 20th century - or any other historical domestic injustice) is as follows:

If the NCAA mouthpieces and intellectuals are committed to making it equal - then make it equal.

No excuses - just equal it out according to population - sports or otherwise.

If not - then the useless elitists that occupy academia should at least have the guts to come out and say - it is not about equality - it is about revenge.

Either way - just give us truth - so we can react accordingly.

Isn't title IX about....opportunity....in sports and academics???.....I never ran into one male student who felt that he was not being provided the opportunity to learn....and go to college.....usually the opposite.....they felt they were being asked to learn too much! Females too....

It's..... our legislation is based on domestic history....I think it comes into play in many laws.....I mean a lawmaker just didn't wake up one morning and say...."Gee I don't have anything else to do today....I'll make a law requiring equal employment opportunities for all people!"

First you take facts/numbers and use them as you wish to make your point...but now...you try and tell us what facts we can and can not use to make our points.....

Okay....my turn to ask a question...

I've worked in public education (High School) for many years....I never met a male student who worked hard at his studies and wanted to go to college...that didnt get to college. Have you?

"It's" - - forget it, no one is listening

there is some serious baggage here - and it isn't about title IX

take my advice & walk away!




ps - I say "walk" because there is "NO little animated guy RUNNING fast enough"!!

Bee,

You are right IMO.

I'm done.

I wish the best for Title IX and lets hope the % of young males continues its precipitous decline. Maybe in another 10-15 years we can eliminate young males from college altogether.

That should be wonderful for the country. LOL

I agree too....I mean.....eliminating males from college...in 10 to 15 years......that is serious baggage to contend with.......even scary!

Still no answer to my original question.

Bee>

quote:

I say "walk" because there is "NO little animated guy RUNNING fast enough"!!

Will this work?

Post script: This is not a reflection of my personl opinions on this matter ... merely an attempt at humor