Collegiate Sport Needs To Prioritize Women’s Leadership Advancement

The Women’s College World Series (WCWS) opening round began today with an SEC matchup between the Texas Longhorns and Florida Gators, a game featuring two men head coaches and three men assistant coaches. While those leadership numbers may seem relatively common in women’s sport, there are currently 0 women serving as head coaches for men’s college baseball teams, an arguably similar sport and one that has provided many men softball coaches the skills necessary to succeed. This common disparity represents an ongoing and troubling trend of prioritizing stereotypes associated with men’s qualifications, men who have never played collegiate softball, over women.

Outside of softball, leadership imbalances have forever plagued collegiate sport, with men dominating coaching and administrative roles across the industry. However, the industry’s rapid growth toward a distinct business model raises new concerns about how collegiate sport culture is developing given that the collegiate sport transformation is already underway. Name, image, and likeness deals have fundamentally altered the recruiting landscape, revenue sharing models are on the horizon, and the transfer portal has granted athletes historic mobility. As these changes reshape collegiate athletics, harmful leadership stereotypes and implicit associations are being solidified alongside them.

Here lies the problem at its core. The moment we officially reframe collegiate athletics away from an educational endeavor to a business enterprise, long-held stereotypes are solidified, suggesting women are inherently unfit to lead in entrepreneurial spaces. Education feels like comfortable territory for women to advance within given their association with teaching, nurturing, and largely stereotypical ‘feminine’ domains. But in sport business, the prevailing narrative insists that women lack the innate skills necessary to excel in those environments.

As a result, we now find ourselves in a particularly challenging moment. Collegiate sport has always struggled with accepting women in leadership roles, clinging to outdated notions about who belongs in athletic authority. Now, as the industry shifts toward an explicitly business-focused model, distinct from the educational mission that has long provided cover even as college sport operates within a non-profit framework, women face an even greater burden.

By The Numbers

The leadership disparities in collegiate sport are stark and have been persistent over the last two decades. Across NCAA men’s sports, 95% of head coaches are men, with zero women coaching men’s football, basketball, baseball, or soccer teams. Women’s sports fare better but still show significant gaps, with only 44% of women’s teams led by female head coaches. The variation across sports is telling. Women’s lacrosse leads with 87% female head coaches, while women’s swimming lags at just 21%.

Assistant coaching positions sustain similar patterns. Only 8% of assistant coaches on men’s teams are women, while 52% of assistant coaches on women’s teams are women. The sport-specific breakdowns mirror head coaching trends, with women’s swimming having just 42% female assistants compared to women’s lacrosse at 87%. These numbers matter because assistant coaching positions serve as the primary pipeline to head coaching roles.

At the administrative level, women only hold roughly 22% of NCAA athletic director positions, and as recently as 2014, 11.3% of athletic departments did not employ any women in either entry-level or management-level roles. Perhaps most concerning is the lack of progress women’s representation has experienced over time. Since 2003, women have consistently held between 41-45% of head coaching positions for women’s teams and just 3-5% for men’s teams, with minimal movement in either direction. The data speaks to a clear pattern where sports with fewer women head coaches also maintain fewer women in assistant coaching roles, creating a self-reinforcing cycle that limits opportunities for advancement.

Changing Collegiate Sport Culture

During the 2025 espnW NYC Summit, UCLA Head Women’s Basketball Coach Cori Close spoke to the changing tide in collegiate sport, specifically women’s sport, amidst recent NIL and transfer portal changes and alluded to the implications for the advancement of women in sport leadership. Close noted, “I truly think if you want women’s sport to grow, but also to be impactful, I’m not saying no men, I’m saying that we need more women and we need to keep our quality women in the game.”

The newly emerging sport business model introduces variables that may continue to solidify a culture favoring men’s stereotyped work-life preferences, particularly through changes made to the transfer portal. Although increased fluidity in updated transfer portal regulations has provided athletes with flexibility in their collegiate decisions, it has also generated an increasingly difficult environment for coaches. The transfer portal window timeline allows players just 30 days to make a decision and enter. The 2025 women’s basketball transfer portal window opened Tuesday, March 25 and closed Wednesday, April 23.

Close noted that the transfer portal dates generated significant distraction for coaches and programs alike. Between recruiting transfers and coach hiring decisions, the window fell directly in line with the women’s basketball NCAA tournament and championship, creating an even more hectic planning period for coaching staffs fortunate enough to remain deep into the tournament. This culture further solidifies the arms race collegiate sport has fallen victim to for decades, where coaches feel the need to maintain largely unsustainable schedules to ensure they do not fall behind the competition.

“I do think we need to move the date of the transfer window,” Close said, “and, I’ll tell you, an unintended consequence that I did not predict is that it rushed coaching changes. In the middle of the NCAA tournament, I know people were calling us. It was a distraction, and I don’t think quality decisions are being made because they’re rushing to beat the transfer portal window. So I think people rush their hires and it was a distraction in the NCAA tournament and it also penalizes the people who win.”

These industry changes continue to place emphasis on working additional hours to be successful as a leader in the industry. If coaches are not recruiting transfers as soon as the window opens, they run the risk of falling behind their counterparts. This intensification of demands continues to feed an expectation that sport leaders, especially coaches, must be available around the clock, and that hours worked will inevitably equate to success. As a result, the industry is essentially doubling down on work structures that have historically disadvantaged women, who are more likely to seek a more sustainable work-life balance and prioritize life outcomes above work related goals.

Women’s Leadership Advantage

Evidence from both sports-specific research and broader leadership studies have uncovered a critical disconnect between who is traditionally elevated to leadership positions and who actually demonstrates stronger leadership capabilities. Previous research that examined coaching effectiveness in women’s basketball found that head coach gender does not impact individual player performance, directly challenging the assumption that men are inherently better equipped for leadership roles in sports. More broadly, recent analyses of leadership competencies shows that women are rated higher than men by their subordinates across 17 of the 19 leadership traits that differentiate excellent leaders, including taking initiative, acting with resilience, driving for results, and displaying high integrity. Importantly, it was also found that during crisis situations, women leaders are rated even more positively, particularly on traits that people value most in uncertain times.

While sport continues to choose leaders based largely on stereotypical assumptions about masculine leadership traits, the data shows women excel in the areas that organizations need most. Women demonstrate superior performance in relationship building, adaptability, employee development, and honest communication. These are core competencies required of leaders in an emerging athletics environment currently navigating new NIL complexities, transfer portal pressures, and changing business models. Failure to prioritize evidence-based leadership advantages (that are more prominent among women) simply perpetuates the outdated hiring biases sport has historically fallen victim to.