Wide Rights on a strange reaction to the question of women coaching men's teams

Pete Olsen runs the Wide Rights blog, and is a law student. He recently posted on a "debate" on contractual measures to increase the presence of minorities in coaching staffs... here, women in men's collegiate sport. Here's an extract:

We moved on to discussing the Rooney-Rule of the NFL. If you’re not familiar with it, basically, any NFL team that is hiring a new head coach must have three “finalists” and one of those three finalists must be a “minority candidate.” We discussed the merits of it, whether it has been successful or not, whether it is still needed, etc.

And then the professor posed the question: Should a rule like the Rooney-Rule be imposed for women coaches in NCAA men’s sports, because, for example, there are no women head or assistant coaches in men’s Division I basketball ? (The professor was not, nor am I, familiar with any women coaches at that level).

The response simultaneously astounded and bothered me.

And it came from both men and women.

Ignoring the merits of a rule like the Rooney-Rule and whether there would even be women interested in coaching men as general matters (which both were discussed), those that spoke suggested that a woman would not even have the capacity to do so.

The rest is quite amazing... keep reading HERE.