I believe in fair and equal treatment of individuals, regardless of their gender. As a coach of a female team at an NCAA institution, I am a strong supporter of Title IX when it is applied correctly. I also coach a nonrevenue men's sport, so the correct application of Title IX is very important to me. I believe my position also gives me a unique perspective to share in a Title IX discussion. I believe that Title IX is too often disputed from the extreme positions and not viewed from the middle ground.

One of the most common misconceptions concerning Title IX is the quest for equality in the coaching ranks -- sometimes to the degree of hiring lesser-qualified candidates to ensure that balance. This happens all the time. Thus, I was disappointed when I read in the May 24 NCAA News coverage of the Title IX Seminar about a study concerning the number of female coaches.

The study indicated that while the number of female student-athletes and number of women's teams offered per school are at their highest or near-highest levels, "there are still areas where improvements can be made."

Improvements the News story referred to include "the number of women coaches for both women's and men's teams, the number of female sports information directors and the number of women in administrative positions in athletics departments."

What bothers me most about that statement is that administrators will read it and say to themselves, "we need to hire more female coaches," instead of what they need to be telling themselves: "We need to hire the most qualified coach for our female student-athletes."

While the number of female coaches may be an affirmative-action concern, Title IX does not address the gender of the coach. In fact, it is a violation of Title IX to hire a less-experienced and often less-qualified female coach over a more experienced male coach. Hiring a coach based on coaching experience and potential to improve the student-athletes' experience is the right thing to do under Title IX.

As a male coach of a female team, I know my opportunities are limited by that erroneous interpretation of Title IX. I have been a collegiate head coach for 10 years. My teams have won more than 20 games seven times and have appeared in the NCAA tournament six times; however, there are many positions for which I would not be considered as a candidate because I am male.

Title IX ensures that all student-athletes are given fair and equal opportunities to participate in athletics, and that all coaching candidates receive fair and equal opportunities as well. The gender of the coach should not be an issue under Title IX.

Wick Colchagoff
Men's and Women's Volleyball Coach
University of Findlay

Intervention looms unless changes made

The upcoming House Judiciary Subcommittee hearings to investigate actions of the NCAA, specifically its enforcement and infractions process, is a great step in reforming college athletics. As a former intercollegiate athletics coach and athletics administrator, I endorse such an external review. This is an area where government intervention will happen unless immediate changes are made.

There have been significant and positive changes regarding NCAA enforcement since Congress last reviewed it in the 1980s. Some of the notable changes include the creation of the Infractions Appeals Committee, tape-recorded interviews, and placing people outside the NCAA on the Committee on Infractions and the Infractions Appeals Committee.

Even with these needed developments, however, more is needed to insure fundamental fairness for all involved.

Granted, the enforcement and infractions process is grounded in administrative law, not Constitutional law. However, when dealing with institutions, reputations and careers, Constitutional due process and protections must apply. It is an issue of fundamental fairness that is guaranteed for all American citizens.

I have been approached to testify at the upcoming hearings to give my views on this process. As a person who has personally been involved in two major infractions investigations and as a scholar of intercollegiate athletics, I believe that I can convey workable solutions to Congress. There are several modest and simple proposals that can upgrade the enforcement process:

Create an independent, full-time Committee on Infractions and Appeals Committee with administrative staff to eliminate perceived conflicts of interest. With all that is at stake, investigating yourself does not pass Constitutional muster.

Create an independent oversight/ethics board to review process and assess grievances put forth by anyone involved in an investigation.

Ban the use of secret witnesses. Everyone must have a right to face their accuser and talk to all witnesses.

Explore ways to give the NCAA enforcement staff subpoena power and ability to depose individuals under oath.

Adopt NCAA Constitutional rules of evidence and procedures, including disclosing all information, witnesses, and other evidence in the true spirit of cooperation.

Make all hearings public and open to the media to include public disclosure of hearing transcripts.

These are very simple proposals that immediately lend needed credibility to a process that is continually criticized for its alleged unfairness.

The NCAA already has progressed through academic reform; enforcement is another area that needs attention. If the NCAA does not address it, the government may have to.

B. David Ridpath
Assistant Professor of Sports Management
Mississippi State University