A conflict between Georgetown's athletic department and some students, faculty and administration members has surfaced over the issue of a women's varsity track and field team.

Opinions expressed in interviews and in the college newspaper. The Hoya, appear divided over whether a track team is being forced on the women as an economizing measure and whether athletics already are receiving too much money.

The differences come at a difficult time for GU, which, like other colleges, is trying to upgrade its women's sports program to conform with new federal standards while maintaining men's athletics at their current level - and doing both on the same budget.

There are other problems in that Georgetown is also trying to raise $7 million for a new sports complex that could significantly alter the future of varsity sports on the 4,600-student campus.

In an effort to equalize opportunities for men and women, the university's athletic advisory board has recommended that women have their own track and field team next year, complete with five tuition-only financial grants.

In addition, the board is recommending five women's tuition grants in basketball, one in tennis and five in volleyball. Women are limited by the Association for Intercollege Athletics for Women to tuition-only grants.

This year, GU gave two women's grants in volleyball, two in tennis and one in field hockey. The men are budgeted for 15 grants in basketball and 14 in track and field.

Athletic director Frank Rienzo and assistant athletic director Nathalie Paramskas said that elevating womem's track to a major varsity sport would help the department economize, since the men's, and women's teams would have common coaching and training staff and facilities.

There is some sentiment on campus that the economizing on the sport was engineered to save money that will be used to bail out the costly football program, which Rienzo says is the most popular spectator sport at Georgetown.

Still others contend that women are being forced to accept track as a major sport because Rienzo was once Hoya track coach. The women should have been polled on whether they would prefer grants in track or another sport, detractors say.

The proposed fiscal year 1978 budget of $770,000 has not yet been adopted, but some academics are arguing that sports should not get an increase before faculty salaries are raised.

All sides are buttressing their arguments with surveys that purport to show track is or is not of interest to students.

The student government, newspaper and some administrators have presented a 1974 study showing little interest in track. Rienzo and the athletic advisory board have 1976 studies by the university's economics department and a national high school federation showing a great deal of interest in track by both men and women.

The GU study showed 11 per cent of the women on campus had participated in track during the past three years - ranking it third behind basketball and volleyball, in which no more than 17 per cent of the women participated, Rienzo said.

The difference in the surveys may partially be attributed to whether the questions dealt with watching or playing sports.