JOHN ADAMS

John Adams: Women's basketball should use scholarships or lose them

John Adams
USA TODAY NETWORK - Tennessee
Tennessee coach Holly Warlick crouches on the sideline during a game between Missouri and Tennessee in Thompson-Boling arena Thursday, Feb. 9, 2017. Tennessee overtook Missouri in the fourth quarter, 77-66.

The skill level will vary from one team to the next in the SEC women’s basketball tournament this week. But the 14 teams will have one thing in common: a short bench.

Just check the SEC rosters of the 14 teams competing in the tournament, which will begin Wednesday in Greenville, S.C. You are more apt to find players who dunk regularly than you are a team with its full allotment of 15-scholarship players.

Yet most league coaches will complain about a lack of depth.

There’s nothing more confounding about the sport than the unused scholarships. And that applies to women’s basketball in general, not just the SEC.

It’s as though the coaches have forgotten the intent of Title IX, which was implemented to provide women with the same opportunities as men. Those opportunities included athletic scholarships.

Before Title IX was enacted in 1972, female student-athletes had nowhere near as many chances as their male counterparts did for a college scholarship. The field has since been leveled. But most women’s basketball programs don’t take advantage of it.

I know the excuses. There isn’t enough playing time to go around for 15 scholarship players. That creates team-chemistry issues. Also, coaches want to keep scholarships open in case they have a chance for a bigger recruiting haul the following year.

None of those excuses are valid when you are depriving female student-athletes of a scholarship.

Not all players would mind sitting on the bench if it paid for their college education. Surely, sitting on the bench would be preferable to burdening yourself with a student loan or working your way through school.

Besides, women’s teams are staffed well enough to handle the extra players. As for team chemistry, coaches are paid sufficiently to deal with the potential problems that a couple of extra college scholarship players would pose.

If they insist on not using all their scholarships, why not give those scholarships to the football program?

Think college football coaches would be concerned about how a couple of extra scholarship players would affect team chemistry? Why, they almost would be willing to give up a portion of their bowl bonus for an extra scholarship. Almost.

That would never happen, of course. Taking scholarships away from women’s basketball and giving them to football would create a national uproar. Shoulder pads would be burned in effigy. Protesters would march outside football practice fields.

However, no one seems to mind that women’s basketball coaches are taking scholarships away.

Of course, giving the scholarships to football would be inappropriate. But how about giving them to another women’s sport?

Softball coaches have bigger problems than team chemistry. They have to figure out ways to distribute scholarships and partial scholarships to fill out their roster. Extra softball scholarships would be particularly well received in the SEC, which has become a powerhouse in the sport.

But this is no time to be talking softball. Women’s basketball teams are about to enter postseason play.

And if they fall short of expectations, they can blame their lack of depth.

John Adams is a senior columnist. He may be reached at 865-342-6284 or john.adams@knoxnews.com. Follow him on Twitter: @JohnAdamsKNS.

More from John Adams: