First off I think J. Michael Neal has hit at the main issues correctly.
 
The reason Title IX came into being 25 years ago, was to give more
opportunities to more people.  There is often a notion around athletic
departments that men's sport are a given (possibly a god given right!)
whereas women have to earn that privilege.
 
Title IX tries to level the playing field.  As pointed out, that will never
really happen because of the vast cost of American football.  Remember the
American football people want three types of athletes: men, women and
American footballers!  However the real issue that most of us are concerned
about is programs like ice hockey.  It is an expensive sport, but once you
have the tradition of a men's team going, it is not as costly to add a
women's program.  Title IX, as viewed by the Office of Civil Rights, does
take into account the idea of tradition.  There is no push to kill off
men's programs.  However some athletic departments would rather do that
than take money from the big sports on campus.  Without Title IX pushing
the issue, I do not believe we would have made the progress that has been
made.
 
One of the main reasons for Title IX is to give more students the chance to
do more things.  Playing a sport and handling classes has been attributed
by many as a valuable life experience.  Women have been given the short end
of the stick.  Title IX helps to give them the same leg up men have always
gotten.
 
I see many women's college hockey programs developing, and the level of
play is improving rapidly.  It is amazing how good each new class of
first-years are.  However I also see a number of women's programs not
making progress, while their male counterparts get all kinds of perks.
That is one of the issues of Title IX.  The programs should be treated in
an equal manner.  They should both get equal "prime time" practice ice
time, travel arrangements, coaching, recruiting money (ahhhhh!!!) ...  As
it stands, when you get to see the athletic department budgets on October
1st (a new feature brought about by Title IX) I find it interesting that at
many schools, no matter how much they talk about the money they are putting
into women's programs, the ratio remains 2-1 for the men (3 or 4 to 1 for
recruitment and coach's pay).  Still, what I do see is that more schools
are giving more women the even break they deserve.
 
I have heard that both St. Cloud State and Mankato State are thinking about
varsity programs for their women's ice hockey teams.  The NC$$ is pushing
compliance with Title IX.  The Big Ten has also made an issue of it.  I do
believe we will see varsity women's ice hockey leagues for the CCHA and
WCHA soon.  The Midwest Alliance and CCWHA were the first steps this past
year.  I also think we will see a Division I scholarship league "America
East?" and a Division I mostly non-scholarship league (ECAC League) split
in the next few years.  So the national title game is not that far off.
 
The best trend I have seen is at a couple of schools who are in the process
of raising their club women's ice hockey team to full varsity status over
the next few years.  What's great is they are doing it to be in compliance
with Title IX, and they view hockey as a natural because they have a
Division I men's team.  These schools see the numbers of women on a hockey
team as a plus and continuing their school's hockey tradition!
 
 
 _____________
/
 good shooting
 hungerf
_____________/
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.