With no idea how permanent it will be, what kind of legal fight will be engaged, or any more detailed idea of what effect it will have, Title IX is history, per one of Trump's inauguration day executive orders, no longer exists. All of that it is political discussion which is not what I am looking for,
What interests me is what kind of actions and rules the NCAA should take to make things "fair" for female athletes, which was the intent of Title IX. Let's NOT get into the politics of the order as I am sure we could begin and quickly widen the discussion into non useful rants and discussions which would leave thoughts about Title IX in the dust. Let's be theoretical problem solvers rather than political partisans.
For my part, I think NIL mixed with title IX and revenue sharing, would be perhaps a Gordian knot very soon. Those producing well over 90% of the revenue would be asked to share too much of the fruit of their labor with both men's and women's other programs. I can see enough of that revenue being applied to maintain and even increase the scholarships and costs of maintaining those low or non revenue sports but equity would be damaging to college athletics, as well as unfair. It would not be beyond reasonable speculation that a school could eradicate both men's and women's sports beyond what would create a number of women's scholarships equal to equal Men's basketball, football along with whatever pet sports they excelled in. Of course, at least some if not all, conferences have have some requirements concerning how many sports a school must have to remain members.
I'm probably ignorant of at least one important detail of Title IX, but let's assume it gone, never to return so the details are not important.
The NCAA needs to define the monetary benefits of college athletics and which income should be shared. They can identify what it takes to properly fund each program. They also need to consider if it is necessary to have equal numbers of scholarship. I kind of think there should be in order to avoid litigation to reestablish the practice. Beyond what is needed to support all of the programs revenue should be shared by revenue producing programs by whatever method a school chooses. Their choice might have a lot to do with the viability of other sports and the beauty of major programs to portal athletes and high school recruits.
NIL is a mess in itself, better discussed separately.
What interests me is what kind of actions and rules the NCAA should take to make things "fair" for female athletes, which was the intent of Title IX. Let's NOT get into the politics of the order as I am sure we could begin and quickly widen the discussion into non useful rants and discussions which would leave thoughts about Title IX in the dust. Let's be theoretical problem solvers rather than political partisans.
For my part, I think NIL mixed with title IX and revenue sharing, would be perhaps a Gordian knot very soon. Those producing well over 90% of the revenue would be asked to share too much of the fruit of their labor with both men's and women's other programs. I can see enough of that revenue being applied to maintain and even increase the scholarships and costs of maintaining those low or non revenue sports but equity would be damaging to college athletics, as well as unfair. It would not be beyond reasonable speculation that a school could eradicate both men's and women's sports beyond what would create a number of women's scholarships equal to equal Men's basketball, football along with whatever pet sports they excelled in. Of course, at least some if not all, conferences have have some requirements concerning how many sports a school must have to remain members.
I'm probably ignorant of at least one important detail of Title IX, but let's assume it gone, never to return so the details are not important.
The NCAA needs to define the monetary benefits of college athletics and which income should be shared. They can identify what it takes to properly fund each program. They also need to consider if it is necessary to have equal numbers of scholarship. I kind of think there should be in order to avoid litigation to reestablish the practice. Beyond what is needed to support all of the programs revenue should be shared by revenue producing programs by whatever method a school chooses. Their choice might have a lot to do with the viability of other sports and the beauty of major programs to portal athletes and high school recruits.
NIL is a mess in itself, better discussed separately.
Last edited:
