|
|
Post by gaelmbagrad on Jan 13, 2011 16:27:28 GMT -5
Just posing a question since we are located in one of the nation's hotbeds for lacrosse and since many of our fellow Maac schools have established programs. Comments?
|
|
|
|
Post by chelseadal on Jan 15, 2011 13:38:41 GMT -5
Just posing a question since we are located in one of the nation's hotbeds for lacrosse and since many of our fellow Maac schools have established programs. Comments? The budget crunch makes it unlikely for now, but it is one of the fastest growing sports in the US. In the south, it is by far the fastest growing sport. Would Iona students go to the games??? |
|
|
|
Post by hawaii bill on Jan 20, 2011 19:43:11 GMT -5
Haven't become a fan of Lacrosse, personally. If I had my druthers, I'd rather we played ice hockey. But I'll stop beating that dead horse.
|
|
|
|
Post by IONA86 on Jan 24, 2011 14:49:36 GMT -5
Why would we want a lacrosse program... we are only perched in the middle of the talent hub for most of the major division one powers. Long Island, Westchester, upstate NY, NJ..... and a short distance from other traditional Lacrosse areas such as New England and Maryland. How much more expensive is Lacrosse than soccer?
Maybe Iona should just get rid of all sports except Basketball and Cross country... that should save them some money.
|
|
|
|
Post by tootie223 on Jan 24, 2011 14:57:35 GMT -5
I have a feeling the main problem Iona would have in adding Menm's Lacrosse, or another Men's sport for that matter, would be the Title IX implications. If I were to hazard a guess, Iona would have to add another Women's sport at the same time.
All in all, I agree with ctbill, would much rather see Iona play hockey. They should never have picked a I-AA football program over a Division I hockey program that had the potential to make the NCAA Tournament.
|
|
|
|
Post by IONA86 on Jan 24, 2011 15:51:32 GMT -5
I have a feeling the main problem Iona would have in adding Menm's Lacrosse, or another Men's sport for that matter, would be the Title IX implications. If I were to hazard a guess, Iona would have to add another Women's sport at the same time. All in all, I agree with ctbill, would much rather see Iona play hockey. They should never have picked a I-AA football program over a Division I hockey program that had the potential to make the NCAA Tournament. The men are already one sport less than the women. If we need to add a sport for them how about a Golf team. That cant be too expensive. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Doom on Jan 24, 2011 16:04:10 GMT -5
I think Tootie has hit the nail squarely on the head this time.
As to Iona86's comment regarding number of sports, I believe that the deciding point as to Title IX is not the number of sports available to men and women but, rather, the number of each gender participating.
|
|
|
|
Post by IONA86 on Jan 24, 2011 16:32:58 GMT -5
If the number of athletes were the case how would any school in Division 1 football meet those standards with 80+ players on that team alone?
Also how did we meet the requirements when we had hockey and football?
Right now according to Iona's website the Mens teams combined would have 10 more athletes than the ladies teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by IONA86 on Jan 24, 2011 16:34:29 GMT -5
If the number of athletes were the case how would any school in Division 1 football meet those standards with 80+ players on that team alone? Also how did we meet the requirements when we had hockey and football? Right now according to Iona's website the Mens teams combined would have 10 more athletes than the ladies teams. I would also love to see hockey back but I do not think that is going to happen. I would also love to see a woman's Golf program and a mens lacrosse. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Doom on Jan 24, 2011 17:09:25 GMT -5
Iona86, I do not pretend to be an expert on Title IX; however, I have done some research on the subject.
My understanding is that the main criteria to determine compliance is that the number of participants in athletic programs is supposed to mirror the gender breakdown of the schools overall population. If a school has a 55% - 45% (male - female) breakdown in overall population, the goal would be to have 45% of the athletes in the school be female.
I have found no criteria among the 3 main points in Title IX that refer to numbers of athletic programs sponsored by the institution.
As to the difference of 10 more male athletes at Iona than female, I suspect that this may reflect the relative breakdown in genders in the total institution.
As to your question about Iona's compliance when we had hockey and football, I suspect that we were not in compliance and that the fact that we were not may have had an effect in the decisions to drop those two programs.
Again, I am not an expert - just my opinion for what it's worth (which is probably not much).
|
|
|
|
Post by IONA86 on Jan 24, 2011 23:29:35 GMT -5
Iona86, I do not pretend to be an expert on Title IX; however, I have done some research on the subject. My understanding is that the main criteria to determine compliance is that the number of participants in athletic programs is supposed to mirror the gender breakdown of the schools overall population. If a school has a 55% - 45% (male - female) breakdown in overall population, the goal would be to have 45% of the athletes in the school be female. I have found no criteria among the 3 main points in Title IX that refer to numbers of athletic programs sponsored by the institution. As to the difference of 10 more male athletes at Iona than female, I suspect that this may reflect the relative breakdown in genders in the total institution. As to your question about Iona's compliance when we had hockey and football, I suspect that we were not in compliance and that the fact that we were not may have had an effect in the decisions to drop those two programs. Again, I am not an expert - just my opinion for what it's worth (which is probably not much). Thanks for the information.... maybe we need 30 Female curlers to offset the Hockey program. ;D Also ... what happened to the Tennis program... We had that back in the 1980's? |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Doom on Jan 25, 2011 10:21:48 GMT -5
If I recall correctly, the tennis programs were dropped around the same time as the hockey program.
While all dropped programs had elements of cost savings involved, the hockey and football also had the added element of Title IX compliance. The tennis programs were a wash regarding Title IX since both mens and womens programs were dropped.
I also believe that this happened around the same time that other programs of our size were dropping tennis. If I recall correctly, Providence (which had a very highly ranked tennis program) also dropped tennis around that time.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldtimer on Jan 25, 2011 11:11:43 GMT -5
Thoughts from a old curmudgeon who still opens doors and seats women first at the table....
Little consideration was given the fact that there are more mens sports and more men play competitive sports then women... (Ex..There are no women football or rugby teams with their considerable manpower need.)
I am not a misogynist and believe strongly that inequities should be corrected, but that common sense should prevail... 50-50 or attendance basis is not a not a well thought out resolusion and has done more harm then the intended good...
Political correctness run amok.....
Rightfully we have come a long way.......Back in my youth and the infancy of womens sports, they were acceptably referred to as "Bloomer Girls" How would that work today... ;D ;D ;D
Go Gaels!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr Doom on Jan 25, 2011 13:40:48 GMT -5
oldtimer, you are absolutely right!
This is another example of a quota system that is simply blind obedience to political correctness.
I have no problem with gender equity when based on proper parameters. This is strictly based on numbers of enrolled students by gender.
Why wasn't a "fair" study done to determine the proportion of youths of each gender that have desire to participate in sports on an inter-mural level? I suspect that a far higher percentage of males have such interests than do females.
If such a study were to determine that (for purposes of this discussion) 50% of males and 35% of females desired to make the sacrifices needed to participate in sports on the inter-mural level, wouldn't it be more valid for Title IX to base it's directives upon those findings? At that point, individuals who have the desire for such participation would be on an equal footing.
Remember, Title IX also applies at the high school level. In fact, I have heard stories where Title IX's negative and destructive effects have been felt much more severly on that level than on the inter-collegate level.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cjb on Jan 25, 2011 22:52:38 GMT -5
The spirit (gender equity) of Title IX is well intended however, I don't think the crafters of that law exercised the foresight that it would be achieved at the expense of mens sports.
|
|
