... and people wonder why Susan mentioned UConn Lacrosse out of blue? | Page 3 | The Boneyard

... and people wonder why Susan mentioned UConn Lacrosse out of blue?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Doesn't count. Federal court ruled on that last year or so. Sorry no link.

That's stupid. The Feds announced during the Bush administration that the intepretations of Title IX by all these schools is wrong. It does not require equivalent numbers of scholarships at all. The plain language of the law clearly does not mandate this. These schools are doing it from their own twisted sense of political correctness.
 
That's stupid. The Feds announced during the Bush administration that the intepretations of Title IX by all these schools is wrong. It does not require equivalent numbers of scholarships at all. The plain language of the law clearly does not mandate this. These schools are doing it from their own twisted sense of political correctness.
I didn't realize this. Do you have a link?
 
It does not require equivalent numbers of scholarships at all.

Since when?

I distinctly recall the 90s ruling that said the number of players had to match the school's M/F percentage. (US vs Brown University)
 
I didn't realize this. Do you have a link?

It's all a question of administrative enforcement and interpretation. The law never mandated equal numbers of scholarships.

Obama apparently reversed the Bush administration interpretation allowing use of surveys in 2010.
 
.-.
Since when?

I distinctly recall the 90s ruling that said the number of players had to match the school's M/F percentage. (US vs Brown University)

It was Cohen vs. Brown. Not explicitly on the point of having level scholarships or scholarships proportionate to the M/F ratio. It was 1st Circuit. The Supreme Court has never ruled on this. What had developed over the years, was university counsel and compliance advisors pushing bright line rule to ensure compliance. The Bush administration came out and said there were several different ways to gauge compliance.
 
Not that anyone cares, but the ACC is one short on having an AQ for Lacrosse (once Maryland leaves, ND should join). Except those schools are not hurt by it. Only 9 schools have ever won a national title in men's lacrosse and all four current ACC schools - UNC, Duke, UVA, and Maryland, along with incoming Syracuse are among those 9 (Johns Hopkins, Princeton, Cornell and last year's winenr - Loyola are the other 4).
 
I was going to say this, but I thought it would sound snobby. But you said it right.

Lax is a growth sport. Baseball is sputtering away, nobody gives a flying you know what about that sport anymore, less kids play it every year.

If I can go off on a slight tangent. Having a varsity lacrosse team would market the University to another segment of potential student. We know that lacrosse is huge in Connecticut at the youth level & exploding at the high school level (as more high schools are adding it across the state yearly). It's possible that UConn would be attractive to kids that play lacrosse if they have aspirations of playing the sport in college.
Let me give you two examples:
Coach Jon Wholley's younger brother played both football & lacrosse at Southington High. He was given a scholarship to attend Maryland to play lacrosse. With his family's past sponsorship of UConn Athletics (Better Bedding) & his brother being employed by the University, don't you think that he would have given UConn a sniff if varsity lacrosse was part of the athletic department?
In my own family: My nephew played both football & lacrosse at the high school level in state. As you know, many members of my family have attended UConn. Nephew was a tremendous lacrosse player. He played varsity lacrosse at another institution. UConn was never on the radar because of lack of a team at the varsity level.
My point is that with the popularity of the sport in state, UConn is better served offering the sport at the varsity level to attract more students, than disengaging this population by omission.
 
As much as I enjoy UConn baseball, when you get beyond the 45+ age group baseball is in decline. As far as LaCrosse goes, if the B1G wants us we could have a program up in less time than it would take to build an ice rink or upgrade the Rent.
 
Here is a list of the things the Big 10 cares about:

1. Cable subscribers willing to pay a premium for their network.

2. How consistently good is your football team.

End of list.
 
Here is a list of the things the Big 10 cares about:

1. Cable subscribers willing to pay a premium for their network.

2. How consistently good is your football team.

End of list.

Why did you add a second care?

They just added Maryland and Rutgers.
 
.-.
It's all a question of administrative enforcement and interpretation. The law never mandated equal numbers of scholarships.

Obama apparently reversed the Bush administration interpretation allowing use of surveys in 2010.
Thanks for the link. I am reading this just the opposite. The Bush policy of surveying female athletes to find out what they need is being dropped and the new interpretation iencourages the elimination of men's participation in some sports. That negatively impacts the top female athletes, however who often train with men. (I undertand this. My son is a good, but not execeptional runner. He often trains with a female runner who is nationally ranked (and pretty highly) but is slower than him. So if you eliminate the men's team, she doesn't get to challenge herself and it impacts her performance.)

Seems like the current administration eliminated a more product approach that had been successful, and by their own admission "did so without a whole lot of thought".

That's just off a quick scan though.
 
Thanks for the link. I am reading this just the opposite. The Bush policy of surveying female athletes to find out what they need is being dropped and the new interpretation iencourages the elimination of men's participation in some sports. That negatively impacts the top female athletes, however who often train with men. (I undertand this. My son is a good, but not execeptional runner. He often trains with a female runner who is nationally ranked (and pretty highly) but is slower than him. So if you eliminate the men's team, she doesn't get to challenge herself and it impacts her performance.)

Seems like the current administration eliminated a more product approach that had been successful, and by their own admission "did so without a whole lot of thought".

That's just off a quick scan though.

Yes exactly. I didn't realize that Obama's administration had reveresed the policy directive. The law by the way, still says what it says. It's all about administrative enforcement. Schools want to avoid being sued in the first place even more than they want to win if they are.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,322
Messages
4,563,851
Members
10,458
Latest member
Liam Rainst


Top Bottom