Scenario 3 Conversation with Sports Celebrities What if your school spent most of its sports money on boys' teams? (To read the scenario in its entirety, with comments from our student panel, click on the above link. Click on participant names to read bios.) Cammi Granato Participants: Noam S., 14 (Mountain View, CA) Ben, 17 (Honolulu, HI) Bonnie St. John Deane, skier. Cammi Granato, hockey player Jonathan Ogden, football player.           Noam S.: Should the policy of discontinuing smaller college sports programs (like volleyball) in order to have equitable funds for women's teams be illegal? Bonnie St. John Deane Bonnie St. John Deane: I am not familiar with the entire situation you are describing. However, rather than fighting against a specific action it might be better to push for a better understanding of what "equitable funds for women's teams" means. If the current policy on "equitable funds for women's teams" allows practices which are damaging to women's sports overall, then the basic definitions are flawed. Cammi Granato: No, I don't believe that the policy should be illegal. In an ideal world, colleges and universities would have sufficient budgets to provide opportunities for all students (male or female) to participate in the sports of their choice. However, most universities don't have sufficient budgets to support the number of athletic programs that this would require. If we didn't have this policy in place, most women's programs would not be given an opportunity because the smaller men's programs would have an established history and tradition within the institution that would prevail over the desire to start a new program. Women need this policy in order to have an opportunity to develop the same kind of tradition and history that many men's programs already enjoy. Jonathan Ogden: Yes. The problem is that the NCAA takes football into account when they determine whether spending is equitable, and that makes the numbers skewed because it’s such a big sport and there are almost no women’s teams. You certainly want to see equity for women, but the way it ends up it’s unfair toward men as well. At UCLA, for example, men’s swimming and gymnastics, both very strong, popular programs, had to be cut in order to comply. They just should not include football.   Ben: If only the football team gets the benefits of the new facilities and equipment, aren't other boys' teams being discriminated against also? Jonathan Ogden Jonathan Ogden: Yes, but you have to understand the nature of football. You can’t go around with old equipment . . . for the safety of the players. If you use old equipment, like helmets and padding, you could get injured. Also, football is the money-maker in college athletics. It’s the unfortunate thing about America -- boosters are always going to give money to the football and basketball programs because they know that’s what people are going to spend money to watch. You have to put money into football so that it generates money to spend on other programs. Is it fair? No. Is that how it is? Yes. The purpose of this column is to identify issues. It does not purport to be exhaustive or to render legal advice. You should consult with qualified counsel or other professionals in developing responses to specific situations. Check out the legal experts' views on this scenario. >>Sports celebrities scenario 1 conversation >>Sports celebrities scenario 2 conversation >>Sports celebrities scenario 3 conversation >>Sports celebrities additional questions Student Panelists | Sports Celebrities | Legal Experts Scenario 1 | Scenario 2 | Scenario 3 *Conversations* | Convo Central (Student Comments) Links Online Conversations | Title IX