Matt Grocott

Back in Ohio, my junior high history teacher was also the wrestling coach. In seventh-grade, he questioned me relentlessly when I went out for basketball instead of wrestling. Every day after class, he’d catch me in the hall and say, “Grocott, when are you going to quit basketball and go out for wrestling?” I am thankful he did. Wrestling grew to be a passion and I have remained involved with it from those days long ago until now, both as a competitor and coach.

Around the same time Mr. Montequilla was twisting my arm to wrestle, another event was brewing in Washington, D.C. It would eventually have a major impact on my life. It started rather innocuously with legislation co-authored by Sen. Birch Bayh in the U.S. Senate and in the House by U.S. Rep. Patsy Mink. Passed in both chambers, the law was signed into law by President Nixon, June 23, 1972. While technically part of the Education Amendments of 1972, it became more commonly known as the “sports-equity law.”

Recommended for you

Recommended for you

(3) comments

John Baker

Matt, I think you’re barking up the wrong tree here. Over the years, I believe, Title IX has given our young women many more opportunities than it has taken away from men.

As you wrote, Title IX is interpreted to apply to scholarships and facilities, but most interpretations I’ve read indicate it does not directly address the overall money spent on sports programs (hence why the State of California’s highest-paid employee is UCLA’s football coach (whose salary is paid by boosters, not taxpayers). Therefore, my opinion is that the real problem is in how the NCAA allocates scholarships, setting artificially high levels for sports such as football and artificially low for sports like wrestling and volleyball (both men’s and women’s).

Schools should have more freedom to allocate a set, proportional-to-enrollment-by-gender number of scholarships within their athletic programs as they see fit. You went to Florida and eventually to Clemson, two schools where the football programs basically fund themselves -- which is the case in many top-tier programs, especially the SEC and ACC. Those schools will probably have sufficient football recruits regardless of how many scholarships they can offer. If the NCAA allowed it, they could choose to allocate some of those 85 scholarship slots to wrestling or other sports, but they have chosen football as their golden children and fund via scholarship the equivalent of almost four starting football teams.

Ideally, programs at schools that could self-fund their own teams and scholarships (such as football and probably men’s basketball) would be allowed to do so and excluded from Title IX as activities not “receiving federal assistance.” Then, scholarships for activities funded by public money could be allocated equitably across the board. In that case, even top-tier women’s programs that can support themselves (e.g. basketball at Stanford or UCONN) could potentially offer scholarships that are self-funding, allowing those schools to divert money and fund even more women’s scholarships.

My two cents...

Christopher Conway

Hey John, you still owe me an apology for calling me a white supremacist the other day. When can I expect that.

JME

Maybe you should wrestle with the problem of segregation as it exits today especially in housing. The basic white population on the Peninsula does not represent what's happening in many other parts of the country.


Living in .
\

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.

Thank you for visiting the Daily Journal.

Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading. To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.

We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.

A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!

Want to join the discussion?

Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.

Already a subscriber? Login Here