Ron Harper, Jr. hurls a half-court buzzer-beater to take down No. 1 ranked Purdue. Jeremy Ito splits the uprights as Rutgers upsets No. 3 ranked Louisville. Bryan Fortay heaves a desperation pass to Chris Brantley in the endzone as time expires to beat Virginia Tech on Homecoming Day, 1992. They are moments burned into the memories of Rutgers’ fans.
This past season, students, fans, and alumni saw huge strides in both women’s soccer and field hockey, which captured regular season and conference tournament titles, respectively. As those teams excelled, local and national attention followed, as did increased attendance at games. Incredibly, just 50 years ago, athletes like Gianna Glatz, Katie Larmour, Frankie Tagliaferri, Amirah Ali, and Riley Tiernan would not even have the opportunity to compete, much less swell the pride of the alumni of Rutgers University.
But, while zealous sports fans may argue the value of sports programs on a college campus, no one can realistically argue that the value of athletics exceeds that of academics. Education is the instrument by which society moves forward, in a learning process that has repeated itself since early humans first rubbed two sticks together to make fire.
Undoubtedly, scholars and academics may not see the underlying value of collegiate athletics and may even decry the almost daily disturbance to their routines due to throngs of strangers streaming on campus for a myriad of sporting events causing traffic jams, road closures and parking space shortages.
Many academics or faculty members may well question the need for sporting events, especially given the fact that the majority of the student population do not participate in collegiate sports. For them, the argument that the value of improved physical fitness for student athletes is countered by the sheer costs of the programs, which is money that could “be better spent elsewhere.” After all—the reasoning goes—if students genuinely want to pursue physical fitness, a regular routine at the gym should suffice.
But this view is decidedly shortsighted.
There is evidence suggesting that when colleges have winning athletic programs, it actually increases the number and quality of students that apply to those colleges. Given that much of the general public only know universities by their reputations, a “good” football or basketball team may translate into the perception of that institution being deemed a quality academic program, as well. In the end, attracting quality students is what colleges aim to do.
When colleges have athletic programs, they do recruiting, which leads to scholarships. In the United States, $2.7 billion is given to roughly 150,000 student athletes every year between Division I and Division II schools. And those opportunities—previously disproportionally given to men—are now possible for women thanks to the Education Amendments put forth in the early 1970s.
The legislation, known as Title IX, was signed into law on June 23, 1972, as an amendment to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In brief, its intention was to further reduce discrimination based upon race, color, sex, national origin, or religion, but its impact upon women’s athletics has been profound.
Prior to Title IX, athletic scholarships for women looking to attend college were nearly non-existent. In 1972, Rutgers College welcomed female freshman to their campus, and prior to that, Douglass College (which was previously called the New Jersey College for Women) was the only entrance for women to become Scarlet Knights. It wasn’t until the 1974-75 school year that women’s athletics, in the form we know today, came into being when softball, track, swimming and diving, tennis, field hockey and basketball began in earnest. In ensuing years, gymnastics, volleyball, golf, crew, and fencing were added. One of the university’s most successful programs, women’s soccer, did not debut until 1984.
Television networks like ESPN will broadcast the drafts of numerous professional men’s and women’s sports leagues, but the fact of the matter is that less than two percent of college athletes will ever play sports at a professional level. Rutgers fans may recognize names like Carli Lloyd, Casey Murphy, Chelsea Newton, Sue Wicks and Tammy Sutton-Brown, but the reality is that for female athletes, transitioning to the professional ranks is even tougher, with less than one percent of female college players making a pro roster.
While there is a professional field hockey league (FIH), upstart professional women’s volleyball (LOVB) and softball (WPF) leagues, and both domestic and international professional women’s soccer leagues, team franchises are few and league rosters are small. In fact, the National Women’s Soccer League (NWSL) recently held their 2022 college draft on Dec. 18, with just 50 players selected, including Gabby Provenzano of Rutgers. Provanzano was taken by the Portland Thorns FC in the second round (pick number 22 overall).
Some female athletes will transition to coaching, while still others pursue careers in broadcasting. Former college athletes like Doris Burke (Providence), Jessica Mendoza (Stanford) and Rutgers’ own Kathryn Tappan (who ran track and majored in journalism) are respected sports commentators.
The overwhelming majority of student athletes—both men and women—join the workforce following graduation. But even here, young women who participated in sports during college have an additional advantage when stepping into their chosen careers.
Because of their involvement in team sports, athletes develop what are termed “soft skills,” that can lead to positive social relationships—thanks to maturing in the supportive environment that team sports engender. Recent studies show strong correlations between women who played sports and the development of improved leadership skills. Team sports aid in communication skills, build self-confidence, teaches one how to work with others, build connections, aid with time management and self-discipline, help individuals learn how to take decisive action and ultimately, build self-esteem.
“I'd say the student athletes' confidence is about the same as that of their classmates, and their ability to work in groups is a bit better,” notes Dr. Lori Herz of Lehigh University. Herz, who is the Professor of Practice and Associate Chair of the Bioengineering Department, did her graduate work at Rutgers University and has taught female athletes from cross-country, track and field, basketball, volleyball, swimming, soccer, rowing, and field hockey during her time at Lehigh. “What impresses me most about student athletes is their ability to manage time. I find it impressive that they can balance the rigors of D-1 athletics and an engineering curriculum.”
One study from 2015 noted that more than half of the C-level (CFOs, COOs, CEOs) female executives surveyed had participated in collegiate sports, and fully 80 percent of female Fortune 500 executives had played competitively at some level in the past. But the impact does not just apply to business. Before Title IX, less than 10 percent of law and medical degrees were taken by women; today it is nearly 50 percent. While changing social mores and shifting demographics figure into this phenomenon, it is also true that going into those professions with the types of skills learned as a result of being on a college team gives former female athletes a big advantage.
Through team sports young women develop positive role models such as coaches, and learn the value of mentorship as older players impart knowledge to younger, inexperienced teammates. This can be especially useful for women who choose to go into education, as they will then serve as positive role models for the next generation of students. Research shows that women who were former college athletes are more likely to be employed full-time over those individuals who did not participate in team sports.
College football and men’s basketball are the two main revenue streams for most universities’ athletic departments in the United States. While it is true that many schools’ athletic programs lose money during the year, these two sports do help subsidize all other sports—men’s and women’s—that a given university has to offer. Much of the revenue comes from gigantic media contracts, promotional agreements, ticket sales and concessions, and in 2018 Power Five schools averaged $125 million apiece.
When Covid-19 forced the cancellation of the NCAA basketball tournament, the loss of revenue was staggering. It is estimated that between television, marketing rights and direct ticket sales, over $900 million was lost. That translates into less money that gets distributed to colleges to fund other non-revenue-producing sports. Further fiscal hardship came from many Power Five conferences shortening their football seasons due to the pandemic in 2020, and those games that made the schedule were played in front of empty stadiums.
As a result of the devastating loss of income, many colleges cut the number of scholarships they offered to potential college athletes, further reducing opportunities for many high school hopefuls to attend the institutions they coveted. Some schools took more drastic measures, and cut out several sports entirely.
Power Five schools also benefit from their conferences having their own networks. Revenues from the ACC, Big Ten and SEC networks are key to lining the pockets of member schools and that money ripples through to the other sports—including those tied to Title IX (as well as providing additional funding to money-draining men’s sports such as baseball and soccer). One Big Ten school, Ohio State, reported some $233 million in 2020 on their Financial Reporting Services (FRS) report. That translates into monetary assistance for a lot of Buckeye sports.
But as the wording in the legislation reads, included in the groups that Title IX was designed to protect are any individuals regardless of national origin. Consider then women’s sports that have large numbers of athletes whose country of origin is outside the United States. Two prominent examples of teams with foreign-born athletes are Rutgers’ volleyball and swimming/diving teams.
Of the 21 athletes on the current 2021-2022 swimming and diving roster, 12 of them are from foreign countries, including Italy, Slovenia, Russia, South Africa, New Zealand, England and Brazil. Similarly, the Scarlet Knights’ volleyball team also has more than 50 percent of the roster comprised of foreign nationals from Serbia, Russia, Greece, Canada, Turkey and Australia.
The implications of this cannot be understated. Whether any of these young women ever play professionally after their college careers conclude is inconsequential. The skills that these athletes learn and cultivate will translate into valuable assets in the business world. Many of these players will undoubtedly choose to return to their homelands following graduation, and this translates into American legislation benefitting the workforce of companies in nations across the globe. For a university like Rutgers whose motto is “Jersey Roots, Global Reach”, the example could not ring more true.
Television ratings for women’s sports are on the rise, and this exposure will cause today’s players to be role models for the next generation of girls who want to follow in the footsteps of college players they admire. With today’s social media, players can gain followings, and like their male counterparts, it will allow female college athletes to partake in lucrative NIL (name, image, and likeness) deals. As evidence for this, one needs look no further than the landmark signing by the Nike corporation. The first NIL deal that Nike signed was not with a prominent men’s basketball or football star, it was with sophomore forward Reilyn Turner on UCLA’s women’s soccer team.
Football and men’s basketball will likely always be the king and prince of the collegiate fiefdom. But the potential for women’s sports to begin generating more income and become self-sustaining may be on the horizon. Unlike sports such as men’s basketball (where star players will often declare for the NBA draft after one season), many players on women’s teams will play for a full four years of eligibility. That allows fans, alumni, and students to connect with the players, further fostering a potentially larger fan base. More fans equate to more attention, and the chance for larger promotional and media contracts—all of which benefits the post-college futures of young women and further reinforces the underlying intention of the original Title IX legislation.
--------------------------------------------------------------
• Subscribe to our YouTube Channel
•Talk about it inside The Round Table Message Board
•Talk about it inside the FREE Rutgers Olympics Sports Forum