Xavier FCS Football???

[XU '11]

Volleyball is a head count sport. Those who are on scholarship are on full scholarships. Their Title IX rights would not be violated by a non-scholarship sport. What’s funny about this example is that the main reason a lot of schools would add a sport like beach volleyball is so they can sort of bend the rules of Title IX. You can count all your volleyball players twice by saying they’re on both teams. So, such a lawsuit would likely not succeed. For me personally, I think a more plausible Title IX lawsuit (which I think we may actually see some day) will be along the lines of “Why do we have to go through the motions of competing in a second sport just so we can be counted twice? That’s not fair and equal!”

Look, you're listing club sports as if they somehow apply to Title IX within athletics. I really don't think you know what you're talking about, I don't think you understand anything about the intricacies of Title IX and how it would apply to adding non scholarship football, and that you're COMPLETELY wrong about how "most schools are not in Title IX compliance." Does this mean that most schools are lying on their annual EADA reports??

EDIT: Just to be clear, when talking about sports that are created for pretty much the sole purpose of creating double counters some day being a potential Title IX lawsuit, I don't mean at Xavier. I just meant some place in general.

I know club sports don't matter to Title IX.

But if Xavier's legal argument is that they are fulfilling the Title IX requirements not by proportional participation numbers, but by "Fully and effectively accommodating the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex", the abundance of women's club sports that Xavier chooses not to offer as a varsity sport would be a tough sell.

[XU '11]

If the first is a quote from the NCAA rules, then they do mention scholarships.

If you played non-scholarship football, couldn't you offer non-scholarship opportunities in other sports to the women?

Yes.

[XU '11]

Does this mean that most schools are lying on their annual EADA reports??

No. Just that most female athletes don't have any incentive to sue their school.

[xubrew]

I know club sports don't matter to Title IX.

But if Xavier's legal argument is that they are fulfilling the Title IX requirements not by proportional participation numbers, but by "Fully and effectively accommodating the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex", the abundance of women's club sports that Xavier chooses not to offer as a varsity sport would be a tough sell.

That's a student activities issue, not an intercollegiate athletics issue. The question in that case would be are there equal opportunities and resources within student activities? This is a COMPLETE non-issue! You're just imagining things.

But, to your point, if there was a clear inequality in intercollegiate athletics, and Xavier's response to that was to point to club sports, then yes that would be a very serious problem with that explanation.

If you're asking questions so you yourself can better understand it, that's one thing. But if you're actually trying to definitively say that these are actual issues, you are 1000% percent wrong.

[xubrew]

No. Just that most female athletes don't have any incentive to sue their school.

So when these reports are submitted to the federal government, you don't think they'd bother to alert the school to the fact that they are not within compliance??

[XUGRAD80]

The following is the actual title IX legislation as written and signed into law by President Nixon in 1972…..

“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

It was meant to update the 1964 a Civil Rights Act that dealt with many forms of discrimination in business, but did not mention anything about discrimination in education.

The key word in it for the discussion here is….activity. That’s how and why it came to be such a point of contention when dealing with college sports. If colleges did not receive any Federal financial assistance, they wouldn’t have to worry about it. ( In fact, Hillsdale College in Michigan makes it a point to not accept any federal financial assistance and therefore has no title IX stipulations that it has to uphold. ) But since virtually every college in the land does receives some form of federal assistance, this legislation has been used to deal with discrimination based on sex in ALL facets of college life….academic and athletic.

[xubrew]

The following is the actual title IX legislation as written and signed into law by President Nixon in 1972…..

“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

It was meant to update the 1964 a Civil Rights Act that dealt with many forms of discrimination in business, but did not mention anything about discrimination in education.

The key word in it for the discussion here is….activity. That’s how and why it came to be such a point of contention when dealing with college sports. If colleges did not receive any Federal financial assistance, they wouldn’t have to worry about it. ( In fact, Hillsdale College in Michigan makes it a point to not accept any federal financial assistance and therefore has no title IX stipulations that it has to uphold. ) But since virtually every college in the land does receives some form of federal assistance, this legislation has been used to deal with discrimination based on sex in ALL facets of college life….academic and athletic.

I really don't know how it works outside of athletics. Does student activities have to submit a report every year? Does Housing? Does Enrollment Services? I don't know. I really don't. If they do, then I have no idea what those reports look like.

I just know that athletics does have to submit the EADA reports every year. And it absolutely does not include things like club sports, or student activities, or housing, or academic programs, or anything like that. I don't know Xavier's specific situation, but I can say with relative confidence that generally speaking, adding non-scholarship football would not throw Title IX out of whack. It's NON SCHOLARSHIP, so the part about athletic aid wouldn't even be impacted at all.

[XUGRAD80]

I really don't know how it works outside of athletics. Does student activities have to submit a report every year? Does Housing? Does Enrollment Services? I don't know. I really don't. If they do, then I have no idea what those reports look like.

I just know that athletics does have to submit the EADA reports every year. And it absolutely does not include things like club sports, or student activities, or housing, or academic programs, or anything like that. I don't know Xavier's specific situation, but I can say with relative confidence that generally speaking, adding non-scholarship football would not throw Title IX out of whack. It's NON SCHOLARSHIP, so the part about athletic aid wouldn't even be impacted at all.

I don’t know if there are any reports like you mention done. I kind of doubt that there are. But I know that there have been lawsuits brought against schools for sex discrimination as described in the legislation that have had nothing to do with anything happening in an athletic department.

I do know that numbers of participants is not the be all and end all for determining discrimination and that it is up to the one being the suit to prove discrimination, it’s not up to the one being sued to prove that there isn’t any. Someone can claim discrimination all they want. Proving it is something else. Showing that there is no discrimination within the housing, employment, etc. is not something that the legislation says must happen. However, there many be additional rules and regulations imposed by agencies that make reporting such things a requirement. I just don’t know, and I’m not afraid to admit that.

[xubrew]

Getting back to why Xavier didn't decide to do this a long time ago, I think it's because people just didn't understand how it would/could work, so they just decided that it wouldn't. The new president seems to think differently. She came from a private school that had football, so she knows how it can work, and that a lot of the reasons people come up with as to how it won't work just aren't valid reasons. That's my guess as to why it's happening now.



My answer is that I have no clue. Maybe they feel it isn't part of their culture. Maybe they don't fully understand how it can be beneficial. Maybe the benefits it can provide don't match the immediate needs or wishes of the school.

Now I have some questions...

-Why do all of the small private schools who do have football continue to have it?? If it's not ultimately a financial benefit for the school, then why would so many of them continue to do it?

-Why have so many schools decided to add it??

-Why have so many schools that have added it decided to not immediately cut it if it turned out to not work out for them?

-To better state the question above, why haven't there been any noticeable outcries from schools that recently added football about how doing so depleted resources for the rest of the athletics department and campus that are no longer available because of football??

So while discussing this offline last night, it was pointed out to me that La Salle cut football back in 2007. The person who pointed this out did so rather emphatically and really enjoyed himself as he did so. I can't say I blame him. When you think a team has existed for fifteen years that actually hasn't existed at all, you deserve to get your balls busted.

Well....I guess I missed that memo.

[GoMuskies]

I think the 50 year non-losing streak will be too much pressure to put on the kids who would come to Xavier to play football.