mike patten wrote:
 
> when looking at whats fair or not fair between the sports why is the
> athelete the only person whe gets looked at.  given the argument that the
> college sport is for the entire campus shouldnt we be spending the money
> based on other criteria.
 
The argument is that college athletics is *not* for the entire campus.  In
court, the NCAA argues that it is for the athlete.  This is the definition that
allows them to avoid classifying the athlete as an employee.  If the athlete
were engaged in an activity that were for purposes other than his or her own
education, this fiction would lose its legal standing.  This means that the
NCAA can not use any of these arguments in trying to get around Title IX.  What
fans want to see and which sports bring in more money are entirely irrelevant
in the Title IX debate, because that's the way the NCAA wants it.  It's not the
courts, it's not the legislatures, it's not the women; all of these complaints
keep leading back in the same direction.  Unfortunately, no one seems to want
to follow the breadcrumbs.
 
J. Michael Neal
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.