In Reply to: Re: In other future news, football canceled as a collegiate sport posted by SehornBlew on January 30, 2024 at 08:50:21
Are you kidding?
Football subsidizes all because (a) athletics are NOT the purpose of universities (much as we may love them) and (b) football generates the most money of any sport.
It's a function of TV and popularity of each sport - audience size, marketing share.
Football also subsidizes all the other men's sports (only basketball in some/many schools makes more than it costs.
You want us to believe Football doesn't subsidize men's gymnastics? Track and Field? Water Polo? Volleyball? Golf?
The big problem with Title IX is that the division is based on number of individual scholarships and football requires 85 while other sports do not. That division costs us a number of small men's sports - regrettably as UCLA was superb in men's gymnastics and in Track & Field which both got lost - the former entirely, the latter for all intents and purposes - in the scholarship count to balance out. That's regrettable.
The fact that it improved participation by women in athletics and elevated women's teams is great imo. The fact that football makes money - where football makes money - is terrific.
Women are not doing this to you, man