mileeeeeage wrote:
unless title 9 is repealed only guys who can run under 1530 in hs will even be able to compete in D1. D3 is doing fine, I'd like to think we'll come to our senses and eliminate scholarships from all sports, including football, but it doesn't seem likely.
Title IX, in itself, did not require all of this stuff. Rather, the athletic departments were so resistant to actually doing anything at all (many women's teams used castoff jerseys and equipment from the men's teams, traveled in relatively unsafe vans and almost never flew to competitions, had very poor facilities) that it brought forth judicial review and what amounts to forced corrective action that is now essentially enshrined in how the law handles things. If you want to blame anyone blame the male-dominated and wholly unsympathetic athletic departments (and college hirer-ups in some cases). You reap what you sow.
The notion that repealing Title IX is a policy objective anywhere of note is laughable. No one is pushing this as a solution for the problem you complain about.
Can you give a good reason why a college should spend a couple of million dollars a year to field a track and field program. Spend some time expressing why this is clearly a good thing for a college with at most modest success in T&F should do this. You and I have preferences that they do, but from a policy perspective of an average person, why should schools do this?