Thoughts on the NBA Draft

I missed the first few picks (I blame The Target Corporation and their lack of efficiency and organization), So I can't really comment on what happened, I am happy that Mr. Andrew Bogut (left) was the first pick. Otherwise, I have a few other thoughts about tonights happenings.

-I'm SOOOOO happy that the Jazz did not draft Chris Paul. I could have no longer associated with them and it would have been tough to let go of the last 13 years.

-After listening to the Gerald Green/Martell Webster interview on the Draft preview on Monday night, I wouldn't have drafted Green too early either. The young man cannot complete a sentence or use proper grammar. How can he master a complex NBA offense?

-Too much UNC

-All the Seniors were great. Some of my favorites are: Channing Frye, Danny Granger, Julius Hodge, David Lee, Salim Stoudamire, Ronny Turiaf, and Travis Diener. I realize that this is almost all the Seniors, but that's ok. I can't imagine a greater asset than a successful college senior on your team.

-On that note, I don't understand why "upside" prospects that might possibly turn out SOMEDAY are drafted so high that they get guaranteed contracts while sure thing college seniors are taken in the second round even though they can help immediately. That seems backwards to me. For once I think the Spurs have it right. When they had a lottery pick, they took a sure thing. When they have a late first round pick they take projects that they can develop and as much as I hate to say it, it works for them.

For the most part I thought this was a good draft. Too many high schoolers got bad advice and are stuck trying to earn their way in from the 2nd round. I think this validates the new age limit. If these kids aren't good enough to go in the first round, they should go to college. That's it. Too many high schoolers aren't coming through for as many teams to take a shot. The Era of the high school phenom has mercifully ended. Next up...The Era of the prep school phenom. It's not quite a sequel, but the plot will be similar.

Title IX

Taking a break from my recent NBA Draft theme I have decided to take a shot at Title IX. For a general overview of what Title IX is, I'm probably the wrong person to ask. But I'll give it a shot. Title IX legislature, as it applies to amateur athletics, saysthat women can not be discrimated against. Academic institutions have to show that the numbers of participation are proportionate with the gender breakdown of that school. The only way around this is to show that their is lack of interest in the under represented sex, and therefore no need to provide opportunities.

My main question when it comes to Title IX is, Does it really provide more opportunities for women's sports, or does it take them away from men? I repeatedly see schools dropping men's sports in favor of women's sports. Some of the more popularly eradicated men's programs are volleyball, wrestling, and gymnastics. Some of the more popularly added women's programs are soccer and crew, sports that provide large rosters, to help even out the male to female ratio. I recently read an article about the Northwestern University Women's Lacrosse team and their national championship win after only four seasons of existence. I later learned that two of their players, a set of twins named Ashley and Courtney Koester, had never picked up a lacrosse stick until the day they began playing for the NU varsity program. How is it truly fair to arbitrarily add women's sports that recruit girls on campus who have no experience, when their are a number of men who are turned away from schools after their lifelong dream of playing collegiate sports is denied when their sport is cut from the programs so the school can meet federal regulations.

Is the point of college sports to randomly decide that women deserve to play for no other reason than that they are women? I was under the assumption that the point of college sports was to award those who had worked hard with the opportunity to continue their careers while attending college.

I understand that my view isn't politically correct. But anyone who knows me, knows that I have an appreciation for some of the less popular sports in America and I don't understand why the men who play these sports are left out in the cold, while the women who never played their sports before are given scholarship opportunities in their place. Title IX is not a pro-women's measure, even though its taken on that quality over time. It's supposed to be an equality measure. That should mean that people are treated fairly, not that women get all the opportunities.