<p>
</p>
<p>More at: </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/02/sports/ncaabasketball/02women.html?_r=1&ref=sports&oref=slogin[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/02/sports/ncaabasketball/02women.html?_r=1&ref=sports&oref=slogin</a></p>
<p>The only experience I have personally is that my son’s high school age premier soccer team used to practice occasionally with a college women’s team. This was stopped after two girls were seriously injured (joint injuries) during a scrimmage game.</p>
<p>Pat Summitt of Tennessee finds this NCAA move to be ridiculous. She claims the use of men in practice is invaluable. And I’d defer to her on any women’s sports issue.</p>
<p>My neighbor was a local basketball star, but not good enough (or tall enough) for Div1. He was approached by the Providence women’s coach while playing in a pick-up game and asked to practice with the women. He loves it. I’m not sure if he’s part of a full scout team or not.</p>
<p>What an interesting question. It seems pretty clear from the opening post that some such practices would be enormously advantageous to the femal athletes, and that other such practices might be much less so. </p>
<p>I’m almost never a “states’ rights” advocate, but I can’t imagine an NCAA rule that would trump the good sense of individual coaches (or maybe better, athletic directors) who are on the ground in particular sports and particular situations.</p>
<p>I read an article last year about the guys (students) that were practicing with the Rutgers women’s b-ball team. They had to commit to show up for every practice. The coach really appreciated how much they helped her team and regretted that she could offer them nothing in return - no pay, no financial aid, no uniforms… nuthin. However, I don’t think the issue of the 2nd and 3rd team sitting and watching was raised in the article. Why don’t they just scrimmage on another court? </p>
<p>I wonder if the ruling would apply to cross country, or swimming?</p>
<p>I believe the concern is in the contact type sports - not the individual sports - track/field and swimming as examples.</p>
<p>Tho there is one gal who is/was on a college football team 
for real as one of the listed players</p>
<p>I’m smiling because in the main sport my D does at college (varsity, Division I, but an individual type sport), her girls Varsity team practices with and attends races with the men’s team but the men’s team is only a Club Sport. In fact, my D leaves tomorrow for three weeks of training camp with both the men and women’s teams. However, the women are MUCH better than the men in this case. It makes sense as they compete on a varsity squad, one of the best in their division and the guys are a club team. But all their practices are together. And their races are together (but not AGAINST each other!!) and so they spend every weekend living together.</p>
<p>It sort of depends how these co-ed practices are conducted. If in fact it’s men playing with women to help them excell that’s one thing. But if this practice devolves, like the article suggests, into men playing while the women stand on the sidelines (or even play, but marginally) then it certainly seems against the spirit (if not letter of the law) of Title IX.</p>
<p>Soozievt, my D also plays an individual sport (squash) on a women’s team and they also practice and travel with the male squash players. The whole group has become very close and it’s benefitted the women greatly - unlike in your D’s case, here the women’s program is new, and the girls aren’t nearly as good as the guys.</p>
<p>I wonder what the men get out of it?</p>
<p>My neighbor gets to play against fantastic girls. He likes the structure, the camaraderie, the premiere court time, & takes pride in the team’s success. He is hugely social & I bet he’s networked quite a bit with these friendships. I don’t want to pry more than that!</p>
<p>I agree with Marathon, that the good sense of individual coaches should be honored. The second string is often not challenging enough to play against and simulate game situations. For some girls as talented as the starters on the Lady Vols, this is the only way to practice against the kind of competition they’ll face against a UConn level team. These top ten Div1 athletes are almost a different species, and the second stringers are mere mortals.</p>
<p>For lesser programs, I imagine introducing male practice partners would raise the level of play quickly.</p>
<p>exactly what i was going to say stickershock. tennesee and uconn women basketball are in a league of their own. most of the time, they cant practice against women, because where are they going to find a bunch of strong athletic women over 6 feet tall who arent already on the team???
i have a male friend who was a practice player for uconn, big strong guy, and even he had trouble keeping up!</p>
<p>without male practice players, the chances of injury go up. basketball teams typically dont have enough players to have a full scrimmage, as most teams have about 10 healthy players at once. if they practice against weaker opponents, not only do the non-basketball players risk injury, but out of frustration, they may accidently injure a team player.</p>
<p>This issue came up five or six years ago when I was doing a Title IX athletics investigation of an ACC school. It involved men practicing with the women’s basketball team. At the time I had never heard of this. As far as we could tell it represented no Title IX issue and we ignored it.</p>
<p>Oh for heavens sake! I actually complained to the administration when I was in college (1972) so I could practice with the men. (There was a diving coach for the men, none for the women; after some serious hazing, I was allowed to share the coach–who went on to coach numerous women to all-American (not me).) Surely this issue was resolved when Title IX when through?</p>
<p>Title IX has never been resolved. It is being abused by advocacy groups & its original purpose seems to have been lost. I’m not at all surprised that this new wrinkle has developed. </p>
<p>This NCAA committee fails to consider that the men scout team idea has been used successfully for decades and is endorsed by the coaches & the players. Definitely falls into the “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” category.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Huh? </p>
<p>The only abusive advocacy groups that I’m aware of are those that represent college wrestlers. And, btw, Title IX’s original purpose has not yet been achieved. I say this as a person who has done approximately 25 Title IX athletics investigations at the college and high school level. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, I think the comments from the NCAA committee on using male practice players are absurd. They in no way limit female participation or violate the spirit of Title IX.</p>
<p>“They in no way limit female participation or violate the spirit of Title IX.”</p>
<p>I’d have no way of knowing. If there is a starting 5 and then benchwarmers, and the benchwarmers don’t get the opportunity to practice, with the benefit of top-level coaching, because that opportunity is given to men, doesn’t it “limit female participation”?</p>
<p>I didn’t mean that rhetorically; I’d like to know more before coming to any conclusion.</p>
<p>this is definitely a hot topic of discussion at the blogs and message boards. you can read more at:</p>
<p>Women’s Hoops Blog</p>
<p>RebKell’s Junkie Boards</p>
<p>likely more discussion also found at other women’s college basketball boards and blogs, i.e., The Boneyard Women’s Hoop Board, HoopScoop Forums, etc.</p>
<p>Division I women’s basketball teams are permitted up to 15 basketball scholarships. Most Division 1 schools have three to four coaches. UNC has four coaches for 13 players; Duke has four for 11 players; UCONN has four for 12 players. These numbers don’t include administrative support staff. I fail to see how having two or three guys working out with the team could in anyway dimish the opportunities for the women.</p>
<p>Couple opinion articles from ESPN.com:</p>
<p><a href=“Mitchell Marsh to captain T20Is against West Indies with Warner named - ESPN”>http://sports.espn.go.com/ncw/columns/story?columnist=lieberman_nancy&id=2701428</a></p>