Shelli Koszdin:
Up until about 1992, the NCAA sponsorship of both men’s and women’s teams was declining at almost identical rate …
Around 1992, something happened to cause the fortunes of men’s and women’s teams to diverge. The decline of the women’s was slowed (but not halted) and that of the men accelerated. What happened? …
Stick it Media – Another Look at the Decline in NCAA Sponsorship of Men’s and Women’s Gymnastics
Gymnastics Coaching.com 
Ms. Koszdin and I share an enthusiasm for NCAA men’s gymnastics; we disagree about many aspects of circumstances pertaining to the decline of programs.
I take strong issue with her suggestion that the circumstances of the Gwinnett lawsuit were proximate causes for college athletic directors dropping men’s programs….
I also wish to point out to your readers that the the graph shown above is inaccurate…..there were approximately 150 mens programs in the early 1970s and far less than 100 in the early 80s….today there are 70+ women’s programs not 40……thirdly, (and Ms. Koszdin may correct me here), I do not recall the Texas Longhorns ever having a varsity women’s program and if they did, I’d sure like to see documentation….if anybody can provide same, I’ll certainly apologize on this site to Shelli
LikeLike
The graph isn’t the easiest to read because it has more than one y-axis. Jim you are correct but, the graph is actually agreeing with you. It seems deceiving. The orange line must be read looking toward the left, while the blue line must be read looking toward the right. The way it’s drawn makes it look like the numbers are comparable.. I’m curious about texas though
LikeLike
I think I’ll take that post down. For now. THANKS.
LikeLike
Time for a public apology . The Longhorns did have a women’s varsity team. It was not around very long, which is probably why people don’t recall it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1997/07/06/playing-field-levels-at-texas/f571d66e-e905-4034-8751-722c7aa6c76d/?utm_term=.65385e01ea2c
“Texas had no history of expansion of women’s sports. The only change in the university’s varsity sports menu since 1980-81 had been the women’s gymnastics team’s elimination.”
International Gymnast also notes that Texas had a team in the past – http://intlgymnast.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4439:why-doesnt-texas-have-division-i-gymnastics&catid=2:news&Itemid=53
The infographic is confusing, but not inaccurate. The point was to compare the relative rate of change of NCAA sponsorship, NOT compare the populations. I can find somebody better at math to redo this so it is clearer.
That the were 100 + men’s programs in the 1970s is not relevant to this particular graphic, as only covers time past 1981.
So take a stab at these questions, people – the NCAA sponsorship of women’s gymnastics was declining at the same RATE as men’s until about 1992.
Between 1984 and 1988 intercollegiate athletics was not covered by Title lX (see Grove City College v Bell), 17 men’s gymnastics teams were cut. Title lX can’t be implicated there, either.
Remember when people were claiming the California men couldn’t be reinstated in 2011 because of Title lX? We all know what happened there.
LikeLike