16 women vs 15 men accepted into 8, 15, 3 & 5 @NCAAs.
7;56 and 13;53 required for men!
16 women vs 15 men accepted into 8, 15, 3 & 5 @NCAAs.
7;56 and 13;53 required for men!
actually 17 women in the 800.
And what makes you think that Title IX has anything to do with the decision on size of field for those races? Perhaps you should look at the time breaks between the 15th and 16th seeded men in each of those events.
the women's 800, I am pretty sure at least the last entrant only got in because she is on a DMR. The same is true for the mile. I'm sure a lot of it has to do with the fact more women are double so that opens up more spots. There is no title 9 involved, the number of total competitors is the same for both men and women.
Title IX has never screwed men. What has screwed men is the way administrators, often men, try to meet the requirements of Title IX.
title 9 has everything to do with the numbers that are allowed into nationals. there is a certin # of men to the #of women allowed in the meet, which is pre determined by the NCAA. it sucks but it is a fact of life.
Title IX screwed my university out of football.
Now for homecoming we have to go watch a goddam XC meet which is just about as entertaining as a sack of hammers.
Duffy got Humped!!!
Simply a matter of less men also being on relay teams that made Nats. Same number of competitors in meet for both genders. More women are "repeats" (being on DMR, 4x400 or running double/multiple events [including sprinters]) so they do not count again in an individual event and allow for more individual entrants. Best example is Women's mile 16th competitor who gets to run mile ahead of others with faster times that did not make the meet at all simply because she is on ASU's DMR team which qualified.... The multi-events (Hepts and Pents) also effected numbers in individual events this year but 12 additional spots per gender are suppose to be added next year. Not the best system, but the only one we got this week.
the myth wrote:
title 9 has everything to do with the numbers that are allowed into nationals. there is a certin # of men to the #of women allowed in the meet, which is pre determined by the NCAA. it sucks but it is a fact of life.
How many men and women's basketball teams get into the DI tourney? The answer shoots a hole in the Title IX theory.
the myth wrote:
title 9 has everything to do with the numbers that are allowed into nationals. there is a certin # of men to the #of women allowed in the meet, which is pre determined by the NCAA. it sucks but it is a fact of life.
Show us where the NCAA stipulates that? Where?
If football were excluded from Title IX (and thus the #'s game), then it's application would work. I don't feel like putting effort into explaining it, so I'll just let it hang out there. Argue and disgrunt away...
Read the explanation above your post. Like he said, there are the same number of men and women in the meet. They have the funding for a certain number of men and women (equal). The discrepancies appear when people double. Apparently, more women double. Duh. But if you want to cry about Title IX anyway, go ahead and be that 10-year-old.
the myth wrote:
title 9 has everything to do with the numbers that are allowed into nationals. there is a certin # of men to the #of women allowed in the meet, which is pre determined by the NCAA. it sucks but it is a fact of life.
Just following up what has already been posted. There are the EXACT same number of men and women in the NCAA meet. That is the rule. If you don't think so then count them yourself. Learn the NCAA rules.
some people just want to cry.
There is a maximum of 270 allowed for both men and women... you guys should definitely read the NCAA rules before you go and complain!!! Girls aren't getting any more advantages than guys are
Football receives something like 60-some full ride scholarships. This takes up a great number of scholarships for the mens side. There is no women's team that has this many players. Since scholarships have to be equal then men scholarships suffer do to the scholarships handed out to 3rd string football players who never see the field in a game. Where track gets 12.6 scholarships and cross country athletes who train year around dont get very much money. It's not the women's sports that are the problem but rather football.
I'm just tired of listening to the testosterone-challenged whiners on this site. Title IX has had nothing to do with men's track getting screwed - FOOTBALL has had everything to do with it. Take a look at the amount of money that has been spent on Football over the last decade. The amount of increase dwarfs everything else, and it has to come from somewhere. AD's don't give a rats ass about men's track and are willing to sacrifice. At least the NCAA takes the exact same number of athletes for cross country, indoor track, and outdoor track for both genders.
Learn the F&%$# rules before you spout off.
But how much money do football programs at most DI schools generate? Who the hell do you think is funding all the piss-poor running programs?
its football wrote:
Football receives something like 60-some full ride scholarships. This takes up a great number of scholarships for the mens side.
95 max, 85.5 min for D-1A. With the lone exception of Oregon State, men's track exists at every university that can count on a profit off of football (ACC, Big Ten except NWn, Big XII, Pac-10, SEC except Vandy, plus BYU and ND). It's at the remaining 50 to 60 D-1A univerities that it's in danger or already dead. Lower divisions generally don't put as much money into football, and men's track is doing much better there.
Just because a university has only a women's team doesn't mean they give a damn about it. As of last week, the MAC had 23 auto/provisional qualifers from its 6 men's teams as compared to 19 from its 13 women's teams.