>>football is at times a "loss leader" and as such there are intangibles
associated with it- BU lost at least 1 million dollars from the Greb
Foundation<<
 
$1 million is hardly an intangible.  But you're looking at only one side of
the balance sheet.  What was the cost of operating the football team?  If it
cost more than $1 million to operate the football team, then financially at
least, dropping football was a good decision.
 
[. . . ]
 
>>as far as I am concerned the less government control and micromangement of
our society the better<<
 
Larry, you can't have it both ways.  Not long ago, you were in favor of
restricting the number of foreign hockey players on U.S. hockey teams.
There's  really no way of accomplishing this without bureaucratic
intervention and micromanagement of hockey rosters.
 
>>- American women certainly know how to get a university to address their
concerns- go to schools that offer the sports they want and the marketplace
witll dictate more sports- assuming there is a real marketplace for more
womens sports<<
 
Just as the displaced baseball players from Providence can now go to other
schools that offer the sport.  If Providence starts to lose students due to
the fact that they don't have mens baseball, then they can re-institute a
baseball team.
 
>>even the women concede that Title IX has resulted in the elimination of
mens' non-revenue teams- Providence baseball; Notre Dame wrestling; etc<<
 
Once again, you're looking at only one side of the balance sheet.  Some
colleges' attempts to comply with Title IX have resulted in the elimination
of some men's non-revenue teams.  But colleges' attempts to comply with
Title IX have also resulted in the CREATION of hundreds, perhaps thousands
of women's teams.  The net effect, in terms of number of teams, is
overwhelmingly positive.  Will you concede that?
 
>> [. . .] you can't dictate quotas anymore than you can say MIT should
admit enough women engineers to equal the males- does not work<<
 
When I went to MIT, the male/female ratio was 97:3; today, it's my
understanding that it's about 60:40.  That's not equal, but it's a far cry
from 97:3.  Some of that remarkable change is due to changes in society and
technology.  But some of it is also due to programs, government and
otherwise, that have encouraged women to go into technical fields and
programs on the part of MIT to find and recruit females.  Now you can argue
that those programs might have happened in the absence of the threat of
governmental actions, but in my mind, there's no doubt that legislation,
litigation, and the threat of it accelerated the process.
 
I'm not saying that Title IX is perfect.  But in viewing its overall effect,
if you're going to bring up the negative anecdotes, you've gotta consider
the positive ones as well.
 
Clay
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.