4_edited_22(1).jpg)
Jarrod King, Edinboro University
Sometimes, decisions made far away from any wrestling mat can have a profound effect, whether it’s concerning one individual collegiate matman… or all college wrestlers.
Another year for King. The NCAA has ruled that 2009 NCAA Division I 165-pound champ Jarrod King of Edinboro University will have one more year of wrestling eligibility for the 2009-2010 season.
The decision, made on the basis of “medical hardship,” was made on an individual basis, based on King’s situation. He had battled injuries for three seasons at the University of Oklahoma before transferring to Edinboro prior to his junior year.
With this additional year of eligibility – his sixth -- King gains the chance to defend his NCAA title, and possibly become the first two-time national collegiate champ for the Fighting Scots.
Last month, the NCAA granted a sixth year of eligibility to teammate Phil Moricone, a former national qualifier at 174 pounds.
"I guess I always think we're going to be better than other people think we are," Edinboro head coach Tim Flynn told sportswriter John Dudley of the Erie (Pennsylvania) Times News. "I thought we would be OK even before we found out Jarrod would be back, but whenever you get a national champion back that's a real good thing. It's fantastic news."
Court ruling could impact Title IX proportionality interpretation. In late June, a California court issued a ruling related to Title IX that could have lasting implications for universities around the country.
First, a word about Title IX. The landmark June 1972 federal legislation governing educational opportunities, states, "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." Although the most prominent "public face" of Title IX is its impact on high school and collegiate athletics – including men’s collegiate wrestling -- the original statute made no reference to athletics.
Before this California ruling, judges have ruled that a school is compliant with Title IX –intended to provide equal opportunities for women and men -- if the proportion of female participation comes within five percent of the representative population of the school. So, in the past, if a school's population were 50 percent female and 50 percent male, the university would be seen as compliant if just 45 percent of its athletes were female.
However, in the decision affecting the University of California-Davis and three female student-athletes, the university is required to come within 1.5 percent of proportionality. UC Davis has 10 years to meet these new requirements.
If this ruling stands, the change could have a lasting impact on universities around the country. In the past, some colleges have eliminated various men’s intercollegiate sports – including wrestling – to comply with the proportionality aspects of Title IX.
Resources
NCAA article on California Title IX ruling... and Wikipedia listing for Title IX
Comments