Introductory press conferences are typically public forums for unbridled optimism.

Heather Lyke’s hiring as Pitt’s athletic director in March was no exception. Smiles radiated throughout the Petersen Events Center — from university leadership to, of course, Lyke herself — and well beyond it. With its hire, Pitt not only had its first female athletic director, but with Sandy Barbour at Penn State, the leaders of the two most prominent athletic departments in the state were women. The symbolism of the announcement was lost on few, least of all those who stood on the stage.

For as rosy as the situation appeared in Pennsylvania, the reality beyond its borders remained unsettling for women in the male-dominated world of athletic administration.

Despite the advances of women in athletics over the past half century, only 35 of the 351 NCAA Division I schools have a non-interim female AD, a 9.97 percent figure that’s nearly identical to what it was almost 20 years ago. In the power conferences of the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, SEC and Big East, that number dips even lower, with five of the 75 departments (6.7 percent) run by a woman — Pitt, Penn State, Washington, North Carolina State and DePaul.

Dave Molinari/Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Sandy Barbour named to U.S. Olympic Committee collegiate advisory council

Among women in the profession, there’s a strong belief and ample evidence that their standing has improved from where it once was. With those accomplishments, though, comes a fear that their progress has stagnated.

“It is kind of the last bastion of male dominance when you look at it from a leadership perspective,” said Jean Lenti Ponsetto, athletic director at DePaul. “You’ve seen women grow at much greater rates, whether it’s politics, the legal profession, the medical profession, the world of communications, computer science, science and technology. Athletics is still sort of bringing up the bottom tier.”

Title IX

In 1972, the U.S. government enacted anti-discrimination legislation that included Title IX, a far-reaching law that, among other things, mandates women and men be provided with equitable opportunities to participate in college athletics.

Forty-five years after it was passed, its influence has been palpable. During the 2015-16 academic year, according to the NCAA, there were an average of 243.2 female athletes per Division I school, up from 114.8 in 1981-82, and from 1970 to 2014, the number of women’s teams per Division I school jumped from 2.5 to 9.58, according to a 2014 study from R. Vivian Acosta and Linda Jean Carpenter of Brooklyn College.

Elsewhere in athletics, women’s gains lag behind considerably. Currently, 22.4 percent of all college athletic directors are women, a figure only 2.4 percent higher than it was in 1980, according to Acosta and Carpenter. That same study found that in 2014, 36.2 percent of athletic administration jobs were held by women, which is 1.7 percent lower than it was in 1998.

Penn State AD Sandy Barbour speaks to media at one of the Penn State Coaches Caravan stops at the Omni William Penn Hotel, Downtown.(Haley Nelson/Post-Gazette)

Bizarrely, that disparity is one of Title IX’s unintended consequences. Before the law’s passage, most schools had separate men’s and women’s athletic departments, each with its own athletic director. Of those women’s athletic departments, more than 90 percent were led by a woman in 1972, according to Acosta and Carpenter. When the law was implemented, many of those athletic departments merged and most men held their titles while most women lost theirs.

Although the law derailed the careers of some administrators, it helped lay the foundation for a future generation. Four of the five major-conference female ADs, including Lyke and Barbour, were beneficiaries of Title IX, having been college athletes themselves.

The question remains, though, why there aren’t more stories like theirs.

“Theoretically, you have a much greater pool of qualified candidates to draw from,” said Mary Jo Kane, the director of the Tucker Center for Research on Girls & Women in Sport at the University of Minnesota. “The question is why isn’t that pool being tapped?”

‘Positions of power’

For most major athletic departments, football is the sport most vital to survival. It generates the most interest, the most revenue and, for the longest time, its importance came with damaging misconceptions.

“The big one is women are not perceived as being capable or able to manage football because we didn’t play it,” Barbour said when describing the hurdles female ADs face.

That same logic once made AD positions a haven for former football coaches and standouts. It’s a mindset that has changed over the years, as only six of the 75 major conference schools have former football coaches as AD, but it’s still a perception Barbour described as “a challenge.”

In a field where they’re still very much a minority, the obstacles that still plague women in athletics go beyond the gridiron.

The people making AD hires — college chancellors and presidents — skew disproportionately male, too. There are just six female university presidents in the major conferences (8 percent) and 56 at the Division I level (16 percent), and there’s a belief by several female ADs and academics interviewed that those making hires are perhaps most comfortable choosing those who look most like them or have similar backgrounds. 

It’s not just college athletics. Women can be underrepresented in leadership positions because characteristics that make men “strong leaders” are often viewed negatively when possessed by a woman, making them liable to labels like “pushy,” “difficult” or worse. 

“There is still sexism, racism and homophobia in this male-dominated industry,” said Patti Phillips, the CEO of Women Leaders in College Sports, an organization dedicated to developing the success of women in college sports. “Some of that is unconscious bias — an intrinsic bias in business to preserve the status quo that’s been well documented.”

In interviews with female athletic directors and those who study the role of women in sports, other reasons for the dearth of women atop athletic departments varied. Some pointed to a lack of face-to-face exposure with university presidents and other leadership. Others noted that women too often don’t get the chance to gain experience in important areas such as fundraising, something that can stifle their advancement within a department.

When combined, those variables contribute to a central theme: Change typically comes slowly. Nearly 35 years after San Diego State made Mary Alice Hill the first female athletic director at a football-playing school, it’s an idea that remains relevant.

“You follow the source of power and resources and that’s where you’ll find a majority group,” Kane said. “We also know when you have a monopoly on something, especially an institution like sports that is so linked to notions of masculinity and manhood, those in positions of power are not eager to give that power up.”

Changing nature

Most any discussion of the progress of women in college athletics comes with the refrain that much work remains. Still, there’s hope that many of the barriers slowing that progress will continue to erode.

Part of that improvement can be tied to the changing nature of the profession. Many of the jobs that once went to coaches and ex-jocks are increasingly going to those with business backgrounds as athletic departments have become revenue-generating behemoths.

The misconception that women can’t oversee football is inching closer to disappearing. Three of the top 15 schools in the final Associated Press football poll last season — Washington, Penn State and Western Michigan — have female athletic directors. Increasingly, women in athletic departments such as Miami and Virginia Tech have begun working as sport administrators for football.

Some numbers also have improved, even if marginally. Two of the past 16 and three of the past 27 open major-conference athletic director positions went to women. Though it’s not at the university level, 10 of Division I’s 32 conferences have a female commissioner, a group headlined by the Big East.

First Published: October 8, 2017, 4:33 a.m.