SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums College, Pro & International Soccer Possible Return of Soccer at The Citadel

Okay...more seriously.

It's my understanding that Title IX enforces the concept of proportionality, i.e., that the proportion of the funding of the athletic department must reflect the proportion of genders at a university. The folks that want to reform Title IX want a different interpretation, to wit that proportionality may refer to the proportional interest in athletics by the genders that constitute the study body rather than the actual numbers.

In any case, I would think that the Citadel is vastly a male-oriented institution. Given the Title IX proportionality test, why would the Citadel need to be spending much on women's sports as per Title IX?

Or does this really have anything to do with Title IX but instead has to do with decisions that the Citadel administration has made for reasons that lie outside of Title IX?

My understanding of Title IX is proportionality in the student body in general....Out of a student body of around 2000, perhaps 100 or so are women...Ironically, most of the 100 are athletes...No womens sports would mean very few women students,and most those left would be on full military scholarships.

Beyond those figures I realy don't understand the nuts and bolts of The Citadel's gender equity situation...Only that men's soccer and golf were eliminated and other than track The Citadel's women teams are horrendous...

It is not based on enrollment, it is based on the number of male scholarships vs female scholarships. Football has a large number and most schools never get enought girls sports to equal the boys but they have to prove to the NCAA that they are doing there best. There are many other small public schools that have has this happen to them. My school had soccer for 20 plus years and then when the coach retired the droped it and wrestiling at the same time. Now they have womens soccer but still no men. Title IX has caused many mens programs to suffer of make canges.

If the rules would not include football in the equation then schools could meet the requirements, however until that happens this will still be a hot topic.

Surely The Citadel has to be looked at as an exception. Football at The Citadel has what, 75 scholarships? What's the max womens soccer can have...11?

Or Coach J.... Don't give out 75 scholarships for football... Give say 30 with another 15 that are shared as in soccer. That should be more than enough, but every time I bring it up I am almost always in the minority.

No other sport would have a scholarship for what essentially is a 3rd stringer.

Some are created more equal than others

Football fuels much of the athletic budget. Cutting it and its ability to be competitive would be shooting yourself in the foot.

I'd never advocate cutting The Citadel's football program. Just curious if there are even enough females on campus to field the amount of womens sports teams necessary to level the playing field, as per Title IX?

W&E not negating the fact, but another fact is not all 75 players play. So it would make sense to give scholarships to the ones that do play and partials to the 3rd stringers, etc..

And not to throw gasoline in the fire, I seem to recall a little study done by Chico which showed the majority of football programs operate in the red...i.e they generate less than they spend.
The ones in the black are most likely the ones you actually watch on TV. Therefore a Coastal or Citadel would most likely operate in the red (entirely speculation in my part, no hard data), so how can you argue for 75 scholarships???

Remeber we live in a football country. You are not going to get them to drop scholarships! Before the NCAA stepped in years ago schools gave out 100 or more scholarships. Football pays the bills and if you have a scholarship you will be playing some where during the game. What other sport draws this size crowd. In the EPL crowds do not match up to the NFL. 40,000 is huge for the bigger EPL games and that is not even close to the NFL. We live in the south and football is king. so get used to it.

>>[Coach J] It is not based on enrollment, it is based on the number of male scholarships vs female scholarships.<<

Actually, Title IX is based upon the following three tenants:

1) Participation. Proportionality is the simplest, most straightforward method of assuring compliance. If you have 5% females in the student body, you have 5% female athletes in your athletic program. There are ways to bypass proportionality (history and continuing practice of program expansion or full and complete accomodation of female's interest); but proportionality stands up to review the best.

2) Benefits and Services: Schools don't have to spend the same proportional amount on male and female sports, but they need to show that benefits and services are propotional.

3) Scholarships: The percentages of total athletic scholarship dollars awarded to male and female athletes must be within 1% of their participation rates.

So if 5% of the undergraduate student body is female at the Citadel, this means that 5% of the scholarship dollars needs to be awarded to females.

Bottom line: this sounds less like a Title IX issue than it does an administration budgeting issue.