Changing Sides: The Failure of the Wrestling Community’s Challenges to Title IX and New Strategies for Saving NCAA Sport Teams

Abstract

The relationship of intercollegiate athletics and the federal Title IX statute has been the subject of significant concern and academic inquiry. This article explores the legal and legislative history of Title IX and the statute's impact on intercollegiate athletic programs and practical solutions for compliance. The article is broken into three distinct parts. Part I details a brief history of Title IX congressional, judicial, and regulatory involvement/enforcement over the past 36 years. Part II examines Title IX's application in practice with regard to public institutions and athletics. In Part III, the researchers present recommendations to wrestling programs and other men's teams concerning the economic realities of intercollegiate athletics. Specifically the researchers examine the wrestling community's legal and legislative challenges and explain how colleges' economic decisions and zeal for competitive teams at the "revenue sports" level are at the core of wrestling's dilemma rather than the law itself. The researchers also suggest more constructive solutions for preserving and expanding athletic opportunities for all without cutting men's sports programs. In particular, they argue that instead of attacking Title IX and women's sports, the wrestling community should form alliances with women's teams and their advocates to reverse the reallocation of resources in the college athletics arms race. The perception that Title IX and gender equity requirements are responsible for the loss of hundreds of intercollegiate wrestling programs is widely accepted by many who are affiliated with the sport (Benson, 2007; Hughes, 1999; Ridpath, 2007a, b). On the surface, the evidence appears to support that contention, as some athletic directors and university presidents over the past two decades, in an effort Ridpath, Yiamouyiannis, and Lawrence are with

Gender Policy Feedback: Perceptions of Sex Equity, Title IX, and Political Mobilization among College Athletes

“…Track and field and cross-country stand out as high-participant, low-cost sports, and thus, those participants may have distinct perceptions of resource distribution. 14 Wrestling has been central to equity policy discussions due to claims that colleges defunded and disbanded a number of men's wrestling teams in pursuit of Title IX compliance (e.g., Ridpath et al 2009). We also include variables to identify respondents attending the University of Iowa and the University of Minnesota because, during the time of our data collection, both schools were in the midst of public Title IX controversies.…”

The Impact of Title IX on Career Opportunities in Intercollegiate Athletic Administration

“…According to the literature, the discriminatory responses may be the perception that Title IX and gender equity requirements are responsible for the loss of many intercollegiate athletic men's teams (Bensen, 2007;Ridpath, Yiamouyiannis, Lawrence, & Galles, 2008;Ridpath, 2007a;2007b) which has led to allegations of reverse sex discrimination. A man said, People think that everything has to be the same proven by numbers.…”

An Examination of Administrators’ Nonrevenue, Olympic Program Values within NCAA Athletic Departments

“…Despite this claim, Marburger and Hogshead-Makar (2003) have instead argued that the trend to eliminate programs is driven primarily by profit-motivated athletic programs and not by tight budgets. Further as explained by Ridpath, Yiamouyiannis, Lawrence, and Galles (2008), the loss of nonrevenue teams can "arguably can be found in out-of-control and unfair economics in bigtime college athletic programs" and the "reallocation of money from some men's sports (such as wrestling) to other men's sports (such as football, basketball, and even baseball)" (p. 278). While men's Olympic sport programs have suffered most severely in program discontinuations (National Collegiate Athletic Association, 2008) recent trends support the notion that even women's programs are not safe in today's increasingly competitive intercollegiate athletic environment.…”