(04-14-2020 05:07 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(04-14-2020 04:47 PM)ccd494 Wrote:  

(04-14-2020 03:53 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(04-14-2020 02:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If the NCAA waives minimum teams requirements, expect men's sports to be on the chop-block because (a) Title IX still protects women's sports, and (b) football is the Sacred Cow that the other sports will be sacrificed to.

Title IX protects gender equity; it won't provide protection for a school that goes to two men's sports and nine women's sports. Title IX has the "women's sports law" connotation because schools were out of compliance because of disproportionate men's sports, but make no mistake: if there's deep cuts to be had in athletic departments, while women's sports won't be the first to go, they won't be immune.

It could if the two men's sports receive resources and scholarships equivalent to the nine women's sports. Raw number of sports does not matter.

No, but unless the women's sports are mostly non-scholarship, or that nine of every 11 students are female, the discrepancy would still exist. I'm just pushing back on the notion that Title IX is exclusively a women's sports rule; it's a gender equity rule that is mostly called on for athletic departments that do not have a balance that meets the standard that it sets.

You can have 9 women's sports with 10 scholarships each (on average), and then football and men's basketball fully funded, and you would still owe the women some slots. Football swallows men's athletic opportunities whole.