For the good of the game
I was watching a college basketball game the other day when they ran a halftime feature about the NCAA investigating whether women's college teams practicing against men was a Title IX violation.
It brought some great points that I hadn't thought about.
Pretty much all of the top women's programs in the country practice against male players. Practicing against men, who are bigger, quicker and more athletic, obviously helps the women become better prepared for game competition.
That's a no-brainer and it's why women's basketball is getting better and better.
The feature pointed however, that Division I programs are using fewer and fewer of their scholarships. The reason is, they don't need to recruit as many players since men are being used in practice.
Years ago, college coaches recruited, not only the blue chip athletes, but also the smart, hard-working kids who would primarily be practice players. Now, there's no longer a need for these over-achieving student-athletes.
Part of the reason for Title IX was to give more opportunities for women in athletics.
What should the NCAA do?
Practicing against men, in my opinion, makes the women's game better. But, by giving out fewer scholarships, will it eventually backfire and hurt the game? Fewer scholarships mean fewer opportunities in basketball, which could also lead young girls to other sports.
I suppose the NCAA could allow the use of male practice players and simply force the colleges to use their full allotment of scholarships. But, if the players at the end of the bench aren't going to get on the floor even in practice, what good does that do?
It's definitely a difficult call, kind of a catch-22, either way.
In my opinion, it should still be about opportunities. The more scholarships handed out to high school students, the better. I would limit the number of hours colleges could use male practice players. If you could only scrimmage against the men once or twice a week, at least that would give some opportunity to the border-line Division I player to get on the court and get better.
It's not the best idea in the world but something will have to be done.
It brought some great points that I hadn't thought about.
Pretty much all of the top women's programs in the country practice against male players. Practicing against men, who are bigger, quicker and more athletic, obviously helps the women become better prepared for game competition.
That's a no-brainer and it's why women's basketball is getting better and better.
The feature pointed however, that Division I programs are using fewer and fewer of their scholarships. The reason is, they don't need to recruit as many players since men are being used in practice.
Years ago, college coaches recruited, not only the blue chip athletes, but also the smart, hard-working kids who would primarily be practice players. Now, there's no longer a need for these over-achieving student-athletes.
Part of the reason for Title IX was to give more opportunities for women in athletics.
What should the NCAA do?
Practicing against men, in my opinion, makes the women's game better. But, by giving out fewer scholarships, will it eventually backfire and hurt the game? Fewer scholarships mean fewer opportunities in basketball, which could also lead young girls to other sports.
I suppose the NCAA could allow the use of male practice players and simply force the colleges to use their full allotment of scholarships. But, if the players at the end of the bench aren't going to get on the floor even in practice, what good does that do?
It's definitely a difficult call, kind of a catch-22, either way.
In my opinion, it should still be about opportunities. The more scholarships handed out to high school students, the better. I would limit the number of hours colleges could use male practice players. If you could only scrimmage against the men once or twice a week, at least that would give some opportunity to the border-line Division I player to get on the court and get better.
It's not the best idea in the world but something will have to be done.
posted by Tony at
12:11 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home