Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Hoo's That, post: 3053027, member: 3609"]
You can be in compliance by having direct proportionality between the percentages of each sex and the number of athletic opportunities for each sex (BTW, the male players most big-time WBball teams practice against count as females for Title IX purposes), you can offer as full a slate of sports as your students show interest in (not having a field hockey team won't hurt your Title IX compliance numbers if you can show no one wants to play even though you tried to start a team), and, I imagine, if like Stanford and ND you offer basically every sport at the fully funded level there's nothing more you can do despite your majority female situation because you've maxed out.  I've never claimed omniscience on every aspect of Title IX, but I do know, for example, that schools with just a WLax team are unlikely to start a MLax team without dropping another sport (like Richmond did) because they're using WLax to get closer to Title IX proportionality.

I said he must not be a fan of Title IX because just about every women's sport is non-revenue for just about every school and he said he hates non-revs.

24 rowers and 3 cox are in 3 8-seat races .
8 rowers are in the 2 4-seat races.
Plus novice races, usually at least 1 8-seat plus cox.
That's 35 (not counting novices) on the water each regatta.

Stanford, 46 on the non-lightweight rowing roster.  UWashington (this year's champion), 64 on the rowing roster.  UTexas (this year's runner-up), 64 on the rowing roster.  Maybe other schools should re-evaluate their roster size in order to be more competitive because theirs seems to be too small?

I know you enjoy looking down your nose at others a lot.  Be careful in your choice of direction.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?