They have promoted the subsidy of women's sports at the expense of profitable men's programs. They are robbing Peter to pay Paulette. When the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the Brown University sex discrimination suit Monday, it struck a blow for women's sports and struck a nerve in nearly every college football coach in the country. Football, because of its numbers, is particularly vulnerable. The University of Pacific, Bengal coach Bruce Coslet's alma mater, dropped football last year in part to conform to Title IX guidelines.
Further cuts are forthcoming.
With each Division I school permitted 85 scholarship players, and all the coaches, equipment, travel and educational expenses that entails, big-time college football is clearly bloated. Most schools could field representative teams with 60 scholarship players and walk-ons, and all of them would reduce their expenses. This enormous earnings discrepancy should count for something, but the courts and the Congress continue to see no distinction between profit and loss where college athletics are concerned. They have made and interpreted Title IX law as if sports on campus were played in a vacuum. Ultimately, their narrow view serves no one's purpose.