A handful of financially successful programs generate enough revenue from TV and donations to enable them to move ahead with additional sports for women.

Members of some conferences receive several million dollars a year from football television revenue, which gives them some latitude. But, they are setting a standard that universities with less successful men's revenue programs cannot emulate. Others have eliminated men's nonrevenue sports such as wrestling, swimming and soccer, and have incurred problems as well as lawsuits. The choices are becoming more difficult as fiscal circumstances force more universities to try to operate self-sustaining programs.

Most of us cannot operate like a business when we must produce two of everything in order to sell one. That is why cost-containment issues are so important at the NCAA level and why the difference between those who have and those who do not could get much worse. Imagine a professional sports franchise forced to meet gender-equity goals. Universities are not far from that position when we must operate the athletics program on its revenue. We are professional -- with amateur athletes.

The hope is that women's sports will gain in popularity to the point that they also contribute revenue. The more I watch them, the more I think that is possible. But, it hasn't happened yet and the squeeze gets worse.

V. Lane Rawlins is president of the University of Memphis.

Comment -- Providing the 'whys' of sportsmanship

BY HANK FLICK AND MIKE COUVILLION
Mississippi State University

Talking to student-athletes about the time-honored traditions of sportsmanship is simple. It's the practice that's hard. The following framework provides content for explaining "why."

Enter the athlete. Ethical conduct cannot be legislated. It rests on an athlete's perceptions and attitudes that engage fundamental human values.

Athletes don't appreciate the value of sportsmanship. Some athletes are raised with a belief in neither selflessness nor self-control. When they reach college, they struggle to survive because they have not set priorities outside themselves, learned to say no or become receptive to guidance from people around them. Personally, they lack respect for authority and the rules that define play. Professionally, they struggle to recognize the relative worth of victory in the university's scheme of things because they have failed to establish for themselves a rules-generated approach to life that holds them accountable for their actions. Sportsmanship is user-friendly because its rules provide the guidance athletes were promised when they were recruited.

Athletes believe they have a right to speak their minds and act accordingly. Not every athlete embraces sportsmanship. Some believe the practice is symptomatic of the problems of a wider sort in this country, a society in which the ideals of sportsmanship appear at odds with their individual rights to say and do as they please. Perhaps expression is of primary value. Young people believe they have the right to say what they think and do what they feel. Self-centered athletes of this type often have problems respecting, caring for and getting along with others, on and off the field.

Athletes place an overemphasis on feelings. People overvalue their feelings. They tell young people to get in touch with their inner feelings and find ways to express them, regardless of the cost. Athletes get into all sorts of situations that give rise to all sorts of feelings. For example, they may experience a range of feelings from disappointment to joy to pleasure to euphoria, all in the same game. This is quite normal for athletes, especially for freshmen. Athletes should never surrender to their emotions given them control over their actions. Sportsmanship stresses modesty in victory and self-control in defeat.

How an athlete feels is important to him or her, but how the athlete acts is of greater importance to the team. When an athlete doesn't play well, he or she has a right to feel disappointed, maybe even upset. But to the athlete's team, the only thing that matters is that he or she plays to his or her ability within a team concept, regardless of true feelings.

Athletes view sportsmanship as a sign of weakness. Sportsmanship is a code of conduct that some athletes view with suspicion. They believe that displays of civility, loyalty, mutual respect and responsible behavior are signs of weakness and therefore imply an inferior status. The whole idea of dominating an opponent and celebrating the results have become accepted action forms.

Athletes think they are entertainers. If sport is good entertainment, it is a show with a script. Too many athletes see themselves as on-stage performers who provide respite from everyday problems and who fill leisure time with defined roles that pleasure fans. They contend that fighting and taunting amuse and refresh the inner self and thus are justifiable, even admirable. Further, they believe their actions make for a more exciting game. Fortunately, there are others who argue that these same acts corrupt the game, unwittingly influence the public toward the belief that most athletes enjoy violence, and prevent the appreciation for the game as a special art form. It is hard to teach responsible behavior when athletes believe that trash-talking without a wink adds color and excitement to the game.

Athletes are vulnerable to peer influence. A student-athlete's most important teacher can be another athlete. Athletes come to college with little or no experience in living with certain rules. Suddenly, they are asked to make decisions regarding a wide range of life situations. One option is to defer to the judgment of other students with similar backgrounds. This type situation can cause problems when the peer is not committed to fundamental social concerns and values such as cooperation, fairness, honesty and teamwork.

Other athletes are poor role models. Athletes have a choice. They can either live up to or down to the example they are provided. Those who close their ears to the advice from their parents often open their eyes to the actions of their sports heroes. This can be a poor choice when you consider that many professional athletes are poor role models. Problems arise when athletes find satisfaction in imitating their ways.

Certain athletes are considered beyond help. Some athletes come from backgrounds where there is an absence of authority. This does not mean they are bad people. No belief is more destructive than the one that claims that certain athletes cannot be helped. Even more disturbing is the claim that athletes from urban centers are not caring and honest people committed to high standards. Whatever the background, young adults can benefit from a code of values that declares antisocial behavior wrong and holds them ultimately responsible for their actions. They need to find a program where their own values will not be lost.

Athletes adopt a win-at-all-cost attitude. Athletes, especially those participating in big-time programs, feel the pressure to win. The time has passed when athletics was played only for enjoyment. The games children played on the front lawn for fun have become social rituals because of the emphasis on winning and the consequences associated with losing. Every team is made up of individuals who hate to lose. Some will break the rules, cheat and do anything to win. These actions undermine respect for authority and make sportsmanship an even more difficult end to achieve, even in ideal circumstances.

The celebrity athlete is a hard role to play. The media make instant celebrities out of some players. The most successful players tend to be role models for other players. But not every player can handle his or her celebrity status. The rewards of being famous can corrupt young adults to the point that they struggle with reality. Players often ignore their studies. After that happens, it is difficult to re-establish an athlete's focus on the importance of the development of character through competition.

Athletes see unsportsmanlike spectator conduct condoned. Spectators represent their school as much as the athlete. Many fans are poor role models. All too often, spectators find it necessary to throw objects at players and team benches. Others seem to enjoy directing threats, obscenities and insults at opposing players. Some players feel they are being leashed while the fans are relatively free to say and do as they please. Often, little is said about this form of unsportsmanlike spectator conduct.

Athletes are expected to learn early. The general public appears perplexed about the development of student-athletes to the point they place too much pressure too early on them. They believe, for example, that the intricacies of discipline and self-control can be learned without trial and error. The truth is that sportsmanship is a never-ending class that athletes register for every semester. Sportsmanship is part of every level of education. The grades for the course vary from semester to semester. It is wise to remember that sportsmanship is a repeated lesson imperfectly learned. Its application is rarely easy.

Enter the coach. Coaching is a self-portrait of the doer. Whether team sports promote competition with integrity and help young people grow in significant ways is always a question of coaching leadership.

Coaches don't always put sportsmanship first. Great coaches are teachers who know the difference between right and wrong and live the difference in front of their players. Unfortunately, some coaches are concerned more with producing great athletes than helping raise good people. It is difficult to develop a great tight end, but it is more difficult to develop a mature young man who practices self-control. One reason is the absence of reinforcement. Why should players struggle with controlling their emotions if little is said and no support is offered? There is little incentive for "sweat equity." A choice of words is a choice of worlds. Any coach who does not quickly condemn unsportsmanlike conduct on the part of his or her players negatively reinforces its practice.

Coaches want to be liked and loved. Coaches are no different than anybody else. They want to be liked and loved by people around them. Concerns about being accepted by their players often distract coaches from their work and prevent them from disciplining their players.

Coaches are concerned more with rankings than integrity. Too many coaches run up the score on less competitive teams to improve their rankings in the polls. Respected coaches avoid tendencies that demean or embarrass their opponents. The ideals of sportsmanship are never advanced by the destruction of an opposing team's self-respect. The real losers are the principles of restraint, decency and the good name of the school.

Enter the athletics department. To promote character development, more athletics departments need to recognize themselves as part of an educational community where high standards are affirmed and extended.

Intercollegiate athletics departments fail to see themselves as teaching departments. Not enough athletics departments see themselves as comprehensive and pre-eminent teaching departments with a subject matter all their own. They can train student-athletes in legitimate methods of good sportsmanship that include self-respect, leadership, discipline, perseverance, respect for authority, dedication, hard work, acceptance of outcomes and the importance of rules. Programs can stress the social ills associated with sexism, racism, sports violence, steroid use, alcoholism and other drug use. It is unfortunate that more departments do not work harder promoting life-long guidance in those areas helping athletes make more responsible decisions.

Athletics departments believe they are in the entertainment business. Athletics departments are not commercial entertainment centers. Their mission should not be to make money to further their own ends. Still, they devote their time to peddling their names, logos, space on uniforms and television rights to the highest bidder. This practice undermines institutional integrity. Integrity has no price tag and, as such, should be valued above all prizes.

Historically, departments have had to increase ticket prices, raise more money from their booster groups and embrace the corporate marketplace to generate revenue to cover increased costs. Some of those measures would not be necessary if America's colleges and universities would budget more money to athletics. In truth, athletics departments alone have not created their problems. They have been required, however, to find their own solutions.

Sportsmanship draws a line in the dirt and asks athletes to perform with their Sunday clothes on. Its spirit places the responsibility for play and ethical conduct squarely on the shoulders of athletes, coaches and athletics departments. It makes character development the first priority of intercollegiate athletics.

Hank Flick and Mike Couvillion are faculty members in the department of communications at Mississippi State University.

Opinions -- Title IX still producting passion, 25 years after birth

Comments made around the time of the 25th anniversary of Title IX:

Deborah Brake, senior counsel
National Women's Law Center
Scripps-Howard News Service

"There are a lot of people fanning the flames of fear by saying (Title IX) will hurt football and other men's sports. It's a tactical choice by opponents of Title IX. They are trying to use the word 'quota' as many times as possible knowing that the public hates quotas."

Kathy Kemper, tennis professional
Albany Times-Union

"As coach of the Georgetown University women's tennis team for eight years, I saw repeatedly how the rigors of athletics competition teach young women the value of perseverance, self-reliance and the competitive spirit. It is therefore a great irony for me to note that today's conventional wisdom increasingly looks askance at competition in education.

"Well-meaning enthusiasts of the so-called self-esteem movement have argued for all manner of new programs to boost girls' self-esteem as a shortcut to helping them get ahead in the work force. Some suggest segregating girls from boys in math and science courses, relying on dubious research on child development. Others challenge the place of competition in our schools more generally. Across the country, amazingly, high schools are abandoning the selection of senior class valedictorians so as not to undermine students' self-esteem.

"This strange trend flies in the face of everything we have learned from our long experience with Title IX. Our daughters -- no less than our sons -- need more competition, not less. We owe them raised expectations, not diminished standards.

"We should begin by refocusing attention and resources on girls' athletics. Community organizations and corporations can play a pivotal role by sponsoring the kinds of athletics scholarships, prizes and competitions that have always flowed to male athletes. The same corporations that now sponsor Bring Your Daughters to Work Days could sponsor girls' sports teams and leagues.

"The time has come for daughters to take the field and learn the rules of the game."

Ara Hairabedian, former men's water polo,
swimming and gymnastics coach
California State University, Fresno
The Fresno Bee

"I suppose what made Fresno State softball No. 1 was the fact that they had their own secretary in a separate office. Or perhaps it was because the men's water polo team was dropped, or perhaps because the men's swimming team was dropped to get greater equity?

"Let us not forget that these men's teams no longer exist at Fresno State. We never seem to mention who gets trampled on to achieve this so-called equity. Numerical percentages do not make things equal.

"We continue to tear down men's programs for numerical equity. Recently at California State University, Northridge, more men's programs were dropped.

"Water polo and swimming are practiced in most high schools throughout the Valley, but the young men who participate in these sports cannot continue athletics competition at Fresno State. Where's the equity?

"The victims of Title IX are the Olympic sports for men who never did anything against women's sports. The national problem has been college presidents, athletics directors and some women who interpret that equity is best achieved by eliminating certain men's sports.

"Whose civil rights are being violated now?"

Jack Rose, baseball coach
University of Denver
The Denver Post

Reacting to the announcement that the University of Denver is discontinuing its baseball program:

"Title IX has been the death of college baseball in Colorado. It does nothing to help gender equity when you eliminate men's sports. It just makes people angry....

"It just doesn't make any sense to me why they can't just gradually work toward equity rather than make it have such a negative impact on so many people. I'm all for the women. I hope they get every opportunity they can, but not when it takes away from us."