Title IX sucks

Title IX sucks. Well, at least if you are an Arizona State male athlete. It was announced Tuesday that ASU eliminated three men’s sports, wrestling, swimming and tennis. ASU plans to continue women’s swimming and tennis.

ASU now has 20 varsity sports—eight mens, 12 womens.

Yes. That’s fair.

Advertisement: Story continues below

I’m not a fan of these minor sports, but I’m not a fan of government idiocy either. If men’s swimming can’t make it as a “business”, I doubt women’s swimming can. Wait. Women. Water. Swimsuits. I need another example.

If men’s tennis can’t make it as a “business”, I doubt women’s tennis can. Wait. Women. Short skirts. Nice legs.

I’ve lost my train of thought.

Oh yes. If minor men’s sports can’t make it as a business, then it is highly doubtful women’s sports can.

Title IX has created an environment where useless sports like women’s water polo or synchronized swimming are given precedence over real sports like wrestling.

According to the Arizona Republic, wrestling programs have declined from over 400 just 15 years ago to fewer than 100 today.

This is a great example at how the government works. Instead of creating opportunity for women, Title IX has reduced opportunity for men. It isn’t fair. It isn’t right.

However, it is modern America. It is the modern world of college sports.


Add Yours
  1. 1
    Bama Hawkeye

    No, no, no, no, no.

    The government didn’t issue any mandates to cut programs. None. Don’t lay this at the feet of the government.

    If you are upset at the loss of programs, blame the ADs who have decided that building million dollar auxillary facilities is more in line with the mission of their educational institution than providing athletic opportunities for students. Blame the ADs who think nothing of annual coaching contracts that are exponentially larger than the budget for non-revenue men’s sports.

    Blaming the government is a nice feel-good way of thinking that it’s not your school’s fault. But the cuts are invariable the school’s choice.

  2. 2

    So, paying a big salary to a CEO who creates millions in revenue is bad business? Nonsense. Look at OSU’s budget since Jim Tressel arrived. Good coach=higher revenues.

    It is nonsense to ignore market forces.

    But that is what the government created with Title IX. The schools made the decision on what to cut, but the government forced the knife into their hand.

    The government mandates you provide women’s sports (ie: non-revenue producers). It sounds fair; however, the problem is the Title IX requirements have created a situation where it is more economically responsible to close men’s programs than add women’s programs.

    Plus look at Arizona State. The only programs they closed were men’s programs—Can you tell me that was anything other than the result of a government mandate? Can you tell me women’s sports paid their own way better than the men’s sports they closed?

    Of course not.

    It wasn’t a market decision. It was a decision distorted by government interference.

  3. 3

    Easy solution to this. Title 9 is fine, but make it so that sports that can fund themselves don’t count toward the pot. So for example, NCAA men’s football and basketball get donations and can often fund themselves. Some other sports can also get outside funding. Once that’s depleted, THEN split the money 50/50. Why should men’s sports get screwed when they can get funding on their own. People are much more interested in Men’s sports and that makes good sense why those sports should be disproportionate. Nothing is more annoying than having to hear about or watch something like an NCAA women’s basketball game. Who cares? Even girls I know could care less, they are watching the men!

  4. 4

    What a joke. This supporters of this law like to say that men’s sports get cut not because men are more interested in sports than women but because colleges like to allocate the majority of the men’s funds to football and basketball. However a simple google search found out that 52% of Arizona State’s are women but just 40% of their athletes are women. Seems to me that women at this institution are considerably less interested in sports and that is the reason all these men are missing out of their sports and probably their scholarships. Also, it has also been reported that this school attempted to establish a female row team in order to avoid cutting men’s sports. There is only as so much the school could do to combat an unjust law. By the way, the fact that they attempted to create a row team in the desert just proves this law is a joke.

Comments are closed.