Lacrosse anyone?

[VULB#62]

I know this has come up before, but maybe it's time to rejuvenate the concept. Looking at the Enrollment thread and wondering about how to generate increased enrollment, perhaps the athletic department can help by adding mens and womens lacrosse.  Lacrosse is the fastest growing HS sport in the country. My grandkids in Montana and Boston play the sport. When my kids were kids lacrosse didn't really exist except for some prep schools.

By adding these two teams, we are talking between 44 to 80 new students.  Title IX balance is not an issue.  Startup costs would probably involve 2 coaches for each team. Mens equipment would be a bit more expensive than womens because of the added contact. Facilities already exist, Brown Field lines just need to be painted.  I'm thinking it could initially exist like football as a D-I non-scholarship endeavor.

[cornonthe]

Interesting idea, but I've heard that we are still too close on the Title IX. Not too long after we started the bowling program, it was said that we needed a large team sport to put us well over compliance. Of course, we are currently in compliance, but most schools like to have well more than they need for future changes to the system. With that said, the team sport that was talked about was bringing back field hockey. I remember that it had something to do with a coming anniversary regarding Ruth Brown. Anyway...the other thing discussed was another emerging sport for women, I would assume thats because of the great success with bowling (a former emerging women's sport).

[usc4valpo]

Hockey? Yes, that's a dream...

[VULB#62]

Hockey is way too expensive to (a) start up and (b) maintain on an annual basis.  The equipment costs are very high (decent skates run $400-$1000 alone).  Hockey teams require an indoor arena (either rented off-campus for $$ with probably next to no one attending games or built on campus for $$$$$$$ ). And typical D-I college rosters only carry 25-28 players. As a D-I school, Valpo would be required to compete at the D-I level — closest competition = B1G schools, ND, Bowling Green, Miami (OH), 3 D-II Upper Michigan colleges playing at the D-I level), a bunch of D-II colleges in Minnesota including Minnesota State also playing up a level — that would require a pretty heavy full athletic $cholarship commitment (18 allowed full rides) with fewer tuition-paying players. The typical season is 34 games with significant travel costs.  All of that is a very big money losing proposition.

The reason I brought lacrosse up again is for reasons that are just the opposite of hockey. First all, typical lacrosse teams carry between 36 and 40 players.  The NCAA only allows 12.6 athletic scholarships, so the bulk of players are paying tuition. Equipment costs are significantly less.  The playing surface already exists.  The typical lacrosse season lasts only 13 games. Closest competitors are B1G, ND, Marquette, A-Sun (Bellarmine, Detroit Mercy).  Travel expenses might be seven road trips. This can be a money maker for Valpo and help to bolster enrollment figures.

Starting up a women's hockey team to balance Title IX compliance would incur the same cost-prohibitive outlay for minimal return.

Field hockey is played by 78 D-I colleges, 14 of which are within an 8 hour bus ride, and the season is 18 games.  BUT, field hockey wouldn't work for two reasons:   The sport is played in the Fall and would be in direct competition with WSO.  AND, most college rosters are only around the 20 player mark, so that would not balance out a men's lacrosse team or a men' hockey team in terms of Title IX.

[cornonthe]

Hockey? Yes, that's a dream...
[/quote

Hockey? Yes, that's a dream...

FIELD hockey...

[cornonthe]

Hockey is way too expensive to (a) start up and (b) maintain on an annual basis.  The equipment costs are very high (decent skates run $400-$1000 alone).  Hockey teams require an indoor arena (either rented off-campus for $$ with probably next to no one attending games or built on campus for $$$$$$$ ). And typical D-I college rosters only carry 25-28 players. As a D-I school, Valpo would be required to compete at the D-I level — closest competition = B1G schools, ND, Bowling Green, Miami (OH), 3 D-II Upper Michigan colleges playing at the D-I level), a bunch of D-II colleges in Minnesota including Minnesota State also playing up a level — that would require a pretty heavy full athletic $cholarship commitment (18 allowed full rides) with fewer tuition-paying players. The typical season is 34 games with significant travel costs.  All of that is a very big money losing proposition.

The reason I brought lacrosse up again is for reasons that are just the opposite of hockey. First all, typical lacrosse teams carry between 36 and 40 players.  The NCAA only allows 12.6 athletic scholarships, so the bulk of players are paying tuition. Equipment costs are significantly less.  The playing surface already exists.  The typical lacrosse season lasts only 13 games. Closest competitors are B1G, ND, Marquette, A-Sun (Bellarmine, Detroit Mercy).  Travel expenses might be seven road trips. This can be a money maker for Valpo and help to bolster enrollment figures.

Starting up a women's hockey team to balance Title IX compliance would incur the same cost-prohibitive outlay for minimal return.

Field hockey is played by 78 D-I colleges, 14 of which are within an 8 hour bus ride, and the season is 18 games.  BUT, field hockey wouldn't work for two reasons:   The sport is played in the Fall and would be in direct competition with WSO.  AND, most college rosters are only around the 20 player mark, so that would not balance out a men's lacrosse team or a men' hockey team in terms of Title IX.

I wasn't talking about hockey, I was talking about field hockey or an emerging sport for women...at no point did I mention ice hockey. In fact, the point for my post was Title IX and the potential issues for adding two large team sports for men and women. Perhaps only a women's lacrosse instead?!? Regardless of the sport, schools like to be well over compliance for Title IX...that is a fact...

[usc4valpo]

Guys, I was dreaming for ice hockey, and it's not reality.

[cornonthe]

Guys, I was dreaming for ice hockey, and it's not reality.

Well, I think all of us want ice hockey, but as you said, it's too expensive!!!!

[VULB#62]

And BTW, I only reintroduced lacrosse as a way for the athletic department to aid in the pulling of an additional 70-80 new students onto campus between two new teams. Yet......... maybe a new major in AI could attract more enrollees    Just looking for answers.

I do have a question, cornonthe.  If the current Valpo Title IX compliance is currently OK, why would a simultaneous introduction of two same-sport teams on both sides of the gender ledger unbalance what is already complaint?

Anyway......... lacrosse is a great spectator sport:: fast paced, lotsa scoring, and some physical play. On the women's side it is the same except, despite 10 players running around with sticks in their hands and scoring, the physical contact is greatly reduced. My granddaughter plays lacrosse at a prep in New England and it is a pleasure to watch the speed, agility and stick handling that is so much a part of the game.  And, again, unlike soccer which I absolutely love, there is a lot of scoring. The other benefit for a school like Valpo, with iffy spring weather, is that, short of a blizzard, games don't get cancelled too often.

[cornonthe]

And BTW, I only reintroduced lacrosse as a way for the athletic department to aid in the pulling of an additional 70-80 new students onto campus between two new teams. Yet......... maybe a new major in AI could attract more enrollees    Just looking for answers.

I do have a question, cornonthe.  If the current Valpo Title IX compliance is currently OK, why would a simultaneous introduction of two same-sport teams on both sides of the gender ledger unbalance what is already complaint?

Anyway......... lacrosse is a great spectator sport:: fast paced, lotsa scoring, and some physical play. On the women's side it is the same except, despite 10 players running around with sticks in their hands and scoring, the physical contact is greatly reduced. My granddaughter plays lacrosse at a prep in New England and it is a pleasure to watch the speed, agility and stick handling that is so much a part of the game.  And, again, unlike soccer which I absolutely love, there is a lot of scoring. The other benefit for a school like Valpo, with iffy spring weather, is that, short of a blizzard, games don't get cancelled too often.

I never said it would unbalance the Title IX compliance, what I said was that it wouldn't get them closer to their goal of being "more than compliant ", for the lack of a better phrase. My point was that the old regime wanted another large women's sport roster to get them way ahead of the Title IX compliance game. However, this administration may not be concerned about it at this time...or they may be. At that time, there was talk of field hockey because of the aforementioned Ruth Brown anniversary milestone (whatever that was)!!!

[VULB#62]

Got it.  Understand.  Didn't know that about the MLB regime.