Lacrosse

[NYC Duke Fan]

I see that only 4 schools in the ACC play lacrosse, Duke, Virginia, UNC and Maryland. Is there any reason why the others do not ?

Is there any sport that is played by other ACC schools that Duke does not participate in ?

[rtnorthrup]

Women's softball comes to mind.

[TillyGalore]

Is there any sport that is played by other ACC schools that Duke does not participate in ?

Boston College recently won the NCAA championship in hockey. The hockey team is a member of Hockey East and has been since the mid to late 80's, long before BC joined the ACC.

I think Duke has a club hockey team, not a varsity team.

[pratt '04]

I see that only 4 schools in the ACC play lacrosse, Duke, Virginia, UNC and Maryland. Is there any reason why the others do not ?


There are only 56 Division I men's lacrosse teams, so most schools in general don't have one. And the ACC is the only BCS conference to have men's lacrosse. There are a few other BCS conference schools that join other conferences for men's lax, though (for example, Ohio State is in the "Lacrosse America" conference).

[Bluedog]

The only ACC sports that Duke doesn't have are women's softball and men's volleyball (and as has been mentioned, the ACC doesn't have any hockey teams). Here's the breakdown by sport of how many schools field varsity teams:

Baseball - 12
Men's basketball - 12
Women's basketball - 12
Cross country - 12
Field hockey - 6
Football - 12
Men's golf - 11
Women's golf - 9
Men's LAX - 4
Women's LAX - 6
Rowing (women's) - 6
Men's soccer - 9
Women's soccer - 11
Softball - 8
Swimming and diving - 11
Men's tennis - 12
Women's tennis - 12
Track and field - 12
W Volleyball - 12
Wrestling - 6

I guess it has to do with cost, demand, facilities, balancing men's and women's sports, etc.

[Dukie4Life]

I believe that UNC, NCST and Maryland all have womens gymnastics programs at least.

[gvtucker]

The only ACC sports that Duke doesn't have are women's softball and men's volleyball (and as has been mentioned, the ACC doesn't have any hockey teams).

Of note, there is an ACC Hockey League. This league plays in Division II of the American Collegiate Hockey Association, so it's not even at the upper level of club hockey. Duke is pretty competitive at this level. The teams in the ACCHL are Duke, UNC, NC State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Georgetown, and George Mason.

Boston College competes at the D 1 NCAA level, a whole 'nuther world apart from ACC Hockey. The difference in ability between BC and Duke in hockey is about the same as the difference between Duke and a Division III team in basketball.

[blazindw]

And, as previously stated, BC is the only ACC school that competes in hockey, though they compete in the Eastern Collegiate Hockey Association (ECHA)

[BD80]

I see that only 4 schools in the ACC play lacrosse, Duke, Virginia, UNC and Maryland. Is there any reason why the others do not ?


Actually two other ACC schools play lacrosse, women's lacrosse.

Why only four men's lacrosse teams? Title IX.

Try to find men's volleyball, men's gymnastics, men's wrestling, even much of men's track is gone from high school and collegiate sports.

Title IX is an awful law made worse by idiot judges who have interpretted it to require absolute equality between the sexes even though there is a significantly higher percentage of men interested in team sports than women. Any fair-minded person recognizes the problem, but no politician would be caught dead appearing to curtail "women's rights" by amending the law to reasonably promote equal opportunities in sports.

Sore spot? Yep, I have watched scholarship opportunities for my teenage sons disappear in wrestling and gymnastics as schools like Michigan State have discontinued the programs. My son cannot play high school volleyball, because the school discontinued that program due to Title IX and he must now drive 45 minutes each way just to practice with a club team. It was a nasty bloodbath watching the community fight over which boys sports programs had to be cut to allow for an equal number of girls teams. The bitterness still lasts.

Even though girls have been allowed to play on boys teams, boys are not allowed to play on girls teams. Many boys volleyball players have tried this, arguing that it is the only school sponsored volleyball team and they are entitled to equal opportunity to play volleyball. I guess equal doesn't always mean the same thing.

Sorry to go so far off topic. But it relates to the question asked.

[TillyGalore]

And, as previously stated, BC is the only ACC school that competes in hockey, though they compete in the Eastern Collegiate Hockey Association (ECHA)


Don't you mean Maryland is in the ECHA? http://www.echahockey.com/teams.asp

BC is in Hockey East, http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/men/teams.php.

[LetItBD08]

Wikipedia to the rescue: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_hockey

Check out the map of D-1 teams/conferences.

[Bluedog]

I believe that UNC, NCST and Maryland all have womens gymnastics programs at least.

I have no reason to doubt this fact. I was just going off of sports officially recognized by theACC.com, and gymnastics isn't on the list.

[bludev03]

Actually two other ACC schools play lacrosse, women's lacrosse.

Why only four men's lacrosse teams? Title IX.

Try to find men's volleyball, men's gymnastics, men's wrestling, even much of men's track is gone from high school and collegiate sports.

Title IX is an awful law made worse by idiot judges who have interpretted it to require absolute equality between the sexes even though there is a significantly higher percentage of men interested in team sports than women. Any fair-minded person recognizes the problem, but no politician would be caught dead appearing to curtail "women's rights" by amending the law to reasonably promote equal opportunities in sports.

Sore spot? Yep, I have watched scholarship opportunities for my teenage sons disappear in wrestling and gymnastics as schools like Michigan State have discontinued the programs. My son cannot play high school volleyball, because the school discontinued that program due to Title IX and he must now drive 45 minutes each way just to practice with a club team. It was a nasty bloodbath watching the community fight over which boys sports programs had to be cut to allow for an equal number of girls teams. The bitterness still lasts.

Even though girls have been allowed to play on boys teams, boys are not allowed to play on girls teams. Many boys volleyball players have tried this, arguing that it is the only school sponsored volleyball team and they are entitled to equal opportunity to play volleyball. I guess equal doesn't always mean the same thing.

Sorry to go so far off topic. But it relates to the question asked.

I am totally floatin in ur boat! If girls can be on the boys' wrestling and football teams , then boys should be allowed to play on the girls' field hockey, gymnastics, and volleyball teams.

What position does ur son play in vb?

[bludev03]

On a seperate note, why does Duke have a "rowing" team?? Why is the girls sport called "rowing", but the guys sport is called "crew" ? I hope the new AD gets rid of this team, and add other sports (ie softball, etc)

[gvtucker]

Actually two other ACC schools play lacrosse, women's lacrosse.

Why only four men's lacrosse teams? Title IX.

Try to find men's volleyball, men's gymnastics, men's wrestling, even much of men's track is gone from high school and collegiate sports.

Title IX is an awful law made worse by idiot judges who have interpretted it to require absolute equality between the sexes even though there is a significantly higher percentage of men interested in team sports than women. Any fair-minded person recognizes the problem, but no politician would be caught dead appearing to curtail "women's rights" by amending the law to reasonably promote equal opportunities in sports.


I consider myself "fair-minded", and I disagree with your contention that Title IX is an awful law. I think it is perfectly reasonable to argue that the sole reason that a higher percentage of men have played team sports in the past is because of the greater availability of team sports for men in years past. And I think that it is perfectly reasonable to demand that men and women be granted an equal chance to play team sports.

I fully realize that this makes things much more difficult for your sons, and I can understand your anger. Hopefully, though, you can also at least see that things were grossly unfair to women prior to 1972.

[blazindw]

Don't you mean Maryland is in the ECHA? http://www.echahockey.com/teams.asp

BC is in Hockey East, http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/men/teams.php.

Yes, I meant Hockey East

[Duvall]

On a seperate note, why does Duke have a "rowing" team?? Why is the girls sport called "rowing", but the guys sport is called "crew" ? I hope the new AD gets rid of this team, and add other sports (ie softball, etc)

That's certainly a thoughtful and well-reasoned argument for eliminating an entire team sport. You do realize that there are slight differences in the cost of running different sports, do you not?

[prefan21]

On a seperate note, why does Duke have a "rowing" team?? Why is the girls sport called "rowing", but the guys sport is called "crew" ? I hope the new AD gets rid of this team, and add other sports (ie softball, etc)As a former member of Duke men's crew/rowing (same difference), I strongly disagree. The women qualify for nationals virtually every year, and have done exquisitely well. It's a sport popular at many of the prep schools and colleges with which Duke wants to be competitive academically (particularly the Ivy League), so like lacrosse, it's a nice sport to offer. And though the men's team isn't varsity, the women have shared their boathouse on Lake Michie with us, among other perks.

[Johnboy]

As a former member of Duke men's crew/rowing (same difference), I strongly disagree. The women qualify for nationals virtually every year, and have done exquisitely well. It's a sport popular at many of the prep schools and colleges with which Duke wants to be competitive academically (particularly the Ivy League), so like lacrosse, it's a nice sport to offer. And though the men's team isn't varsity, the women have shared their boathouse on Lake Michie with us, among other perks.

nudge, nudge, wink wink, say no more, Sire!

[BD80]

I am totally floatin in ur boat! If girls can be on the boys' wrestling and football teams , then boys should be allowed to play on the girls' field hockey, gymnastics, and volleyball teams.

What position does ur son play in vb?

My son is a libero, you don't see many ex-gymnasts as outsider hitters :(


I consider myself "fair-minded", and I disagree with your contention that Title IX is an awful law. I think it is perfectly reasonable to argue that the sole reason that a higher percentage of men have played team sports in the past is because of the greater availability of team sports for men in years past. And I think that it is perfectly reasonable to demand that men and women be granted an equal chance to play team sports.

I fully realize that this makes things much more difficult for your sons, and I can understand your anger. Hopefully, though, you can also at least see that things were grossly unfair to women prior to 1972.


Herein lies the problem. The evidence indicates that a higher percentage of males are more interested in participating in sports than females, and generally that the interest level is higher (there is a quantitative and qualitative higher interest level). There is much anecdotal evidence and I have seen references to at least several studies. This evidence is not generally challenged.

Supporters of Title IX as currently interpreted argue, like you, that things would be different, that the same percentage of females would want to participate if opportunities were equal over some period of time. In other words, the legislation is supposed to CHANGE the current preferences. The legislation is to socially engineer our children to create an equal preference toward sports. You argue that it is OK that some males will now be discouraged from sports due to the lack of opportunity because some unnumbered females felt discouraged sometime in the past.

I do not oppose Title IX to the extent it is interpreted to provide equal opportunity to sports. I vigorously object that it has been interpreted to so disproportionately disadvantage a discreet group: male athletes. There are simply WAY less opportunities for male athletes who wish to compete compared to female athletes who wish to compete.

I do believe you said it best:
I think that it is perfectly reasonable to demand that men and women be granted an equal chance to play team sports. I agree. This should mean that males be granted the same relative opportunity as women, not that the exact same number of spots be created. Do you know that in Michigan, many high schools have canceled men's lacrosse because they cannot find enough girls to field a women's lacrosse team to "balance" the programs for Title IX. That is OK? For there to be a 20 person men's lacrosse team, there must be a 20 person women's team, even if there are 50 boys but only 5 girls that are interested in playing lacrosse?

The source of the problem is having separate men's and women's programs. If we were to pretend that men and women are truly equal, there would be single coed teams in each sport. But women generally wouldn't be competitive, and there would be far less women in sports. So, we need to admit that men and women are not the same. Can we admit that perhaps more men are interested in sports and stop trying to engineer society to the detriment of MANY young men?

It is not just scholarship opportunities, entire men's teams are being defunded. There is no more men's gymnastics program at all at MSU, many schools have cut wrestling. Men's programs are being CUT to "equalize" the opportunities! Title IX was not intended to reduce opportunites for men.

Retribution for perceived past inequality is not just, it is mean.

[greybeard]

Actually two other ACC schools play lacrosse, women's lacrosse.

Why only four men's lacrosse teams? Title IX.

Try to find men's volleyball, men's gymnastics, men's wrestling, even much of men's track is gone from high school and collegiate sports.

Title IX is an awful law made worse by idiot judges who have interpretted it to require absolute equality between the sexes even though there is a significantly higher percentage of men interested in team sports than women. Any fair-minded person recognizes the problem, but no politician would be caught dead appearing to curtail "women's rights" by amending the law to reasonably promote equal opportunities in sports.

Sore spot? Yep, I have watched scholarship opportunities for my teenage sons disappear in wrestling and gymnastics as schools like Michigan State have discontinued the programs. My son cannot play high school volleyball, because the school discontinued that program due to Title IX and he must now drive 45 minutes each way just to practice with a club team. It was a nasty bloodbath watching the community fight over which boys sports programs had to be cut to allow for an equal number of girls teams. The bitterness still lasts.

Even though girls have been allowed to play on boys teams, boys are not allowed to play on girls teams. Many boys volleyball players have tried this, arguing that it is the only school sponsored volleyball team and they are entitled to equal opportunity to play volleyball. I guess equal doesn't always mean the same thing.

Sorry to go so far off topic. But it relates to the question asked.

The man has a point. An excellent one, imo. This is plain wrong.

[NYC Duke Fan]

There are only 56 Division I men's lacrosse teams, so most schools in general don't have one. And the ACC is the only BCS conference to have men's lacrosse. There are a few other BCS conference schools that join other conferences for men's lax, though (for example, Ohio State is in the "Lacrosse America" conference).

Doesn't the IVY League have men's lacrosse ? I think that only Columbia does not field a lacrosse team...maybe Penn doesn't either but I'm not sure on it.

[Lavabe]

Actually two other ACC schools play lacrosse, women's lacrosse.

Why only four men's lacrosse teams? Title IX.

...

Sorry to go so far off topic. But it relates to the question asked.

You've avoided discussion of ... lacrosse.

Rather than berate Title IX in discussing the main topic of this thread, a more relevant fact that should be acknowledged is that lacrosse, although the fastest growing sport (especially among women), has historically in pre-college levels, been well-developed on the east coast (mostly northeast). Georgia only recently made it a statewide varsity sport for both boys and girls. When growing up in Jersey, lacrosse was not recognized as a varsity sport, but over the border in NY State it was. Only relatively recently has the sport reached similar New York state levels in places, such as Georgia.

More relevant is the fact that historically, lacrosse folks developed their own conferences, some of which provided more strength of schedule than the traditional "BCS" kinds of conferences.

One such conference is the one that MOST "ACC" schools are part of, the Southeastern Lacrosse Conference (http://www.selc.org/index.php?section=teams), which includes: Miami, FSU, VaTech, GaTech, Wake, NCSU, and Clemson.

On the women's side, the nationally dominant Northwestern team is part of the American Lacrosse Conference, not the Big Ten (Eleven).

Staying on topic, FWIW, I am very thankful that lacrosse is available for girls. My daughter had tried a bunch of sports (gymnastics, swimming, soccer, volleyball, among others), didn't like most of them due to injuries, taunting, inexperienced/improper coaches, cost, lack of friends, schedules, a variety of factors. She also tries to balance academics, music, and other activities (sort of like her dad;) ). General interest in sports wasn't one of them. She just didn't find the one that she could enjoy that much, until lacrosse. I am glad the lacrosse organizations have put together these opportunities.

Cheers,
Lavabe

[blueprofessor]

Doesn't the IVY League have men's lacrosse ? I think that only Columbia does not field a lacrosse team...maybe Penn doesn't either but I'm not sure on it.

...seems to be listed and ranked at the Laxpower website.Further,the various conferences appear with their component teams.In another ranking service,the Duke men's team is ranked #2 behind leader Syracuse.Link for Laxpower:
http://www.laxpower.com/index.php


Best regards.:D

[devil84]

More relevant is the fact that historically, lacrosse folks developed their own conferences, some of which provided more strength of schedule than the traditional "BCS" kinds of conferences.

One such conference is the one that MOST "ACC" schools are part of, the Southeastern Lacrosse Conference (http://www.selc.org/index.php?section=teams), which includes: Miami, FSU, VaTech, GaTech, Wake, NCSU, and Clemson.

It's my understanding that at NCSU, their team is a club team rather than a varsity sport. While I'm fairly new to this whole lacrosse thing, I'm learning quickly as my son is on his high school JV lacrosse team. Being one of the closest high schools to NCSU, our JV coaches at the beginning of the year were NCSU students who explained the NCSU program to the kids.

I noticed that a few other schools in the Southeastern Lacrosse Conference have a President listed; a varsity sport would not. I'm going to guess that this conference is a collection of club teams. I would expect the funding to be dramatically different between club and varsity teams, necessitating different conferences. Duke, Maryland, UVA, and UNC are all varsity teams, and are competing at a dramatically different level than what appear to be club teams at the rest of the ACC schools.


Staying on topic, FWIW, I am very thankful that lacrosse is available for girls. My daughter had tried a bunch of sports (gymnastics, swimming, soccer, volleyball, among others), didn't like most of them due to injuries, taunting, inexperienced/improper coaches, cost, lack of friends, schedules, a variety of factors. She also tries to balance academics, music, and other activities (sort of like her dad;) ). General interest in sports wasn't one of them. She just didn't find the one that she could enjoy that much, until lacrosse. I am glad the lacrosse organizations have put together these opportunities.

I know a number of girls on the girls lacrosse team at the high school, and they love it. I'm so glad we've come so far since I was a girl. I don't know that lacrosse, or even soccer, was available when I was a girl growing up in Chicago. Instead, I was the only girl on my ice hockey team -- and Dad had to pitch a fit to get me to play. Had there been a lacrosse team, I'd have probably played.

My son loves lacrosse, too. He comes home with a new bruise or injury almost daily (this is FUN?!), and really enjoys the sport. He hopes to continue playing at the college level.

[gvtucker]

FWIW, the Southestern Lacrosse Conference is part of the Men's Collegiate Lacrosse Association, which is for non-NCAA club lacrosse teams. That's a level below NCAA, which has three levels, D I (the top division, the one that Duke is in), D II, and D III.

[Lavabe]

It's my understanding that at NCSU, their team is a club team rather than a varsity sport. While I'm fairly new to this whole lacrosse thing, I'm learning quickly as my son is on his high school JV lacrosse team. Being one of the closest high schools to NCSU, our JV coaches at the beginning of the year were NCSU students who explained the NCSU program to the kids.

I noticed that a few other schools in the Southeastern Lacrosse Conference have a President listed; a varsity sport would not. I'm going to guess that this conference is a collection of club teams. I would expect the funding to be dramatically different between club and varsity teams, necessitating different conferences. Duke, Maryland, UVA, and UNC are all varsity teams, and are competing at a dramatically different level than what appear to be club teams at the rest of the ACC schools.

Your understanding of the other ACC teams is correct. The SELC is part of the MCLA, all non-varsity. Having said that, the few GT folks I know would take offense if you said they weren't a varsity athlete. Then again, I've been in Division III schools for so long that I often cannot tell the difference between club and other sports.;)

I believe the formation of these lacrosse conferences vary in their participation at NCAA levels. For example, the American Lacrosse Conference (w/Northwestern's women's team) IS an NCAA sponsor, even though their funding may differ somewhat from the Big Ten teams at the school.

Cheers,
Lavabe

[devil84]

Your understanding of the other ACC teams is correct. The SELC is part of the MCLA, all non-varsity. Having said that, the few GT folks I know would take offense if you said they weren't a varsity athlete. Then again, I've been in Division III schools for so long that I often cannot tell the difference between club and other sports.;)

I don't mean to imply that any club team, GT or otherwise, isn't a great team with very talented players! But I'm guessing that club teams don't have facilities like Koskinen Stadium, huge crowds, televised games, team posters, academic advising, recruiting budgets, or other perks for the varsity teams. The clubs have a lot more work to do, such as their own fund raisers, arranging their own transportation, and even negotiating practice facilities with the school, though I imagine some schools have more support for club teams than others. There are probably some excellent club teams out there that can definitely compete with Div I schools. But generally speaking, it doesn't seem fair to ask club teams to compete against varsity teams given the probable huge discrepancies in resources. So the SELC sounds like a terrific solution to keep the playing field level.

[Lavabe]

...seems to be listed and ranked at the Laxpower website.Further,the various conferences appear with their component teams.In another ranking service,the Duke men's team is ranked #2 behind leader Syracuse.Link for Laxpower:
http://www.laxpower.com/index.php


Best regards.:D

At laxpower, the Duke women are ranked #7, but have the #1 strength of schedule.:)

[pratt '04]

Duke Men's Lax defeated UNC 17-6 in the first game of the ACC tournament this evening. Duke was up 5-3 at the half before really turning it on. Duke will play the winner of UVA/Maryland in the championship game on Sunday at 3:30. I think the game will be televised on Fox Sports Net.

[burnspbesq]

You've avoided discussion of ... lacrosse.

Rather than berate Title IX in discussing the main topic of this thread, a more relevant fact that should be acknowledged is that lacrosse, although the fastest growing sport (especially among women), has historically in pre-college levels, been well-developed on the east coast (mostly northeast). Georgia only recently made it a statewide varsity sport for both boys and girls. When growing up in Jersey, lacrosse was not recognized as a varsity sport, but over the border in NY State it was. Only relatively recently has the sport reached similar New York state levels in places, such as Georgia.

More relevant is the fact that historically, lacrosse folks developed their own conferences, some of which provided more strength of schedule than the traditional "BCS" kinds of conferences.

One such conference is the one that MOST "ACC" schools are part of, the Southeastern Lacrosse Conference (http://www.selc.org/index.php?section=teams), which includes: Miami, FSU, VaTech, GaTech, Wake, NCSU, and Clemson.

On the women's side, the nationally dominant Northwestern team is part of the American Lacrosse Conference, not the Big Ten (Eleven).

Staying on topic, FWIW, I am very thankful that lacrosse is available for girls. My daughter had tried a bunch of sports (gymnastics, swimming, soccer, volleyball, among others), didn't like most of them due to injuries, taunting, inexperienced/improper coaches, cost, lack of friends, schedules, a variety of factors. She also tries to balance academics, music, and other activities (sort of like her dad;) ). General interest in sports wasn't one of them. She just didn't find the one that she could enjoy that much, until lacrosse. I am glad the lacrosse organizations have put together these opportunities.

Cheers,
Lavabe

Lax is big in NJ high schools nowadays. Big rivalry game tomorrow, Ridgewood (my alma mater) at Mountain Lakes.

[burnspbesq]

Duke Men's Lax defeated UNC 17-6 in the first game of the ACC tournament this evening. Duke was up 5-3 at the half before really turning it on. Duke will play the winner of UVA/Maryland in the championship game on Sunday at 3:30. I think the game will be televised on Fox Sports Net.

That makes up for the women kicking away a five-goal halftime lead to lose to UVa.

[Lavabe]

Lax is big in NJ high schools nowadays. Big rivalry game tomorrow, Ridgewood (my alma mater) at Mountain Lakes.

Thanks for the good news. I was at nearby Pascack Vallley. Lacrosse was picking up steam, but still had a long way to go.
Cheers,
Lavabe

[burnspbesq]

Thanks for the good news. I was at nearby Pascack Vallley. Lacrosse was picking up steam, but still had a long way to go.
Cheers,
Lavabe

I was one of the founding members of the lax club at RHS, way back in the early 70s, 15 years before they made lax a varsity sport. We practiced four days a week at 7:00 a.m. for the whole school year, and the only competition we got was in the Fair Lawn summer league.

[burnspbesq]

Thanks for the good news. I was at nearby Pascack Vallley. Lacrosse was picking up steam, but still had a long way to go.
Cheers,
Lavabe

This seems to be Rivalry Weekend in boy's HS lax all across America. Georgetown Prep and Landon went four overtimes in the DC area today, and the biggest crosstown rivalry in SoCal, St. Margaret's vs. Serra down in San Juan Capistrano, was also today.

Uva took care of Murlund, 11-8 in the second ACC semi. But the Patriot League semis shredded all of the bracketology, as Colgate beat Navy and Bucknell beat Army. An Ivy League team -- most likely the loser of tomorrow's Brown-Princeton game -- probably just got knocked out of the NCAAs.

[DevilAlumna]

Sore spot? Yep, I have watched scholarship opportunities for my teenage sons disappear in wrestling and gymnastics as schools like Michigan State have discontinued the programs. My son cannot play high school volleyball, because the school discontinued that program due to Title IX and he must now drive 45 minutes each way just to practice with a club team. It was a nasty bloodbath watching the community fight over which boys sports programs had to be cut to allow for an equal number of girls teams. The bitterness still lasts.

Even though girls have been allowed to play on boys teams, boys are not allowed to play on girls teams. Many boys volleyball players have tried this, arguing that it is the only school sponsored volleyball team and they are entitled to equal opportunity to play volleyball. I guess equal doesn't always mean the same thing.


Why don't the schools give up some football scholarships so they can host a volleyball team? I mean, a football team only needs 11 guys on the field at once, right?

Oh, wait, that's just silly talk -- Of COURSE it's the women who are taking away all the opportunities for men in non-revenue sports.... :rolleyes:

[DevilAlumna]

On a seperate note, why does Duke have a "rowing" team?? Why is the girls sport called "rowing", but the guys sport is called "crew" ? I hope the new AD gets rid of this team, and add other sports (ie softball, etc)

It's not a gender thing. A group of rowers or a rowing team is the "Crew," what they do is row, therefore it is the sport of rowing. ("Everything else is just a game.")

As another poster pointed out, Duke is an East Coast school that should and does do very well in the sport. High school crew is uber-competitive, particularly in the mid-atlantic/philly/delaware corridor, as well as in Florida -- all areas that send lots of students to Duke.

My high school sends its top rowers to the varsity crews at Princeton, Brown, Yale, Harvard, Michigan -- all top national crews on the East Coast -- and since it turned varsity, several have gone to Duke. There's a good fit between the sort of student-athletes that row and want to go to Duke, and the sort of student-athletes that Duke wants in its classrooms and boats.

I don't mean to imply anything less of softball players, but I fail to see why crew is not deserving of varsity status and softball is?

[hughgs]

On a seperate note, why does Duke have a "rowing" team?? Why is the girls sport called "rowing", but the guys sport is called "crew" ? I hope the new AD gets rid of this team, and add other sports (ie softball, etc)

Why are other sports more important than crew? Where would you house them? How strong is the interest at the club level? How about some making an argument rather than blathering some random statement?

[BD80]

Why don't the schools give up some football scholarships so they can host a volleyball team? I mean, a football team only needs 11 guys on the field at once, right?

Oh, wait, that's just silly talk -- Of COURSE it's the women who are taking away all the opportunities for men in non-revenue sports.... :rolleyes:

Football is the REVENUE sport. To cut football is to cut the budget for the entire athletic department. Your solution is to cut the budget for everybody? Damn reality, so annoying at times.

Taking football as a given, please, how to proceed? This is where the judicial interpretation of Title IX has gone so far astray. The law itself does NOT require equal numbers of "spots", just equal opportunity to participate. This isn't "women vs men", this is women's advocates vs reason. Unfortunately, it has been argued that equal opportunity means equal NUMBERS of opportunities regardless of actual interest in participation.

In practice, athletic departments have been forced to cut men's teams to equalize the number of opportunities available. It is directly caused by Title IX.

Is it the women "taking away all the opportunities for men in non-revenue sports?" Not necessarily. It is the stubborn adherence to the concept that equal must be the same. If males and females are the same, let them compete on the same teams.

Frankly, women ARE taking away opportunities for men, by not demonstrating enough interest in sports! There simply are not enough women interested in sports to generate the creation of enough spots for women at the high school and college levels to balance the interest level of the men. Interpretation of Title IX is denying men opportunities in hope or expectation that the level of interest will become equal. Alice, meet Wonderland.

Since men and women are different, why not acknowledge that there is a different interest level in sports and provide relative equality in opportunities?

One simple, partial solution would be to exclude football from the equation, but then we have the appearance of inequality. Unfortunately, too many would rather actively deprive young men of opportunities than admit the truth. Let's talk silly, shall we?

I am NOT saying we should cut women's programs in any way, I am saying we should allow for greater numbers of men's programs where interest justifies.

[hughgs]

Frankly, women ARE ... not demonstrating enough interest in sports! There simply are not enough women interested in sports to generate the creation of enough spots for women at the high school and college levels to balance the interest level of the men.

I eagerly await your data to back up this point of your argument since everything hinges on it.

[dyedwab]

I was one of the founding members of the lax club at RHS, way back in the early 70s, 15 years before they made lax a varsity sport. We practiced four days a week at 7:00 a.m. for the whole school year, and the only competition we got was in the Fair Lawn summer league.

As a Fair Lawn native, I remember that LAX was our big spring sport, over baseball. We were ok, but as you recall, few teams locally really played the sport...Ridgewood and Fair Lawn were two of the few that had established programs...

I love watching lacrosse and am glad to see its expansion and development and gratified to see Duke's success on the field

[BD80]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BD80
Frankly, women ARE ... not demonstrating enough interest in sports! There simply are not enough women interested in sports to generate the creation of enough spots for women at the high school and college levels to balance the interest level of the men.

I eagerly await your data to back up this point of your argument since everything hinges on it.

You doubt this?!? Have you ever been involved in high school or college athletics? Ever have kids in sports? Ask any AD in college or high school. Better yet, get involved. Personally, I have been involved at the high school level in trying to create women's sports teams to achieve the necessary "balance" to add a men's sport. We were initially successful in creating a women's lacrosse team, but the team is currently suffering from lack of interest. We also drew vociferous complaints from coaches that we were cannibalizing the other women's teams of the relatively few women interested in sports, and thus jeopardizing the viability of those teams. Go look at intramural programs on college campuses, take a look at sports fields or basketball court as you drive around each day. In real life this isn't a close call; there are overwhelmingly more men interested in participating in sports than women.

Yes, this is a central point of my argument. As I originally stated, I recall there being studies which showed this, but I rely more on anecdotal evidence. Franky, I haven't the patience to belabor the point with people like you.

If you honestly see as much interest in participating in sports from women as men, I guess I will concede my argument. No honest person has ever said there is the same level of interest.

More likely, you are refusing to admit what is plainly true. Demanding "proof" is the essence of the problem. The only truly quantifiable "equality" is to create equal numbers of opportunities, and this simply ignores reality. Any attempt to quantify the disparity in interest levels is susceptible to challenge as to the exact number (ie it should be higher or lower), so it is easier to just allow boys to be screwed over. After all, haven't men had all the advantages for so long? It is time they were disadvantaged, isn't it?

Do you also need proof that women are different from men? How is the difference to be quantified?

Tell me if you honestly think there are as many women interested in participating in sports as men.

Tell me if you honestly think it is fair that men's teams are being cut despite more than sufficient interest in the teams.

[prefan21]

I'm for amending Title IX, if there's a way to do it that doesn't unduly jeopardize the opportunities for women. As it stands, it's a bit like a school that gets 2:1 male:female applicants sticking hard and fast to a 50% men, 50% women admissions policy.

[hughgs]

You doubt this?!? Have you ever been involved in high school or college athletics? Ever have kids in sports? Ask any AD in college or high school. Better yet, get involved. Personally, I have been involved at the high school level in trying to create women's sports teams to achieve the necessary "balance" to add a men's sport. We were initially successful in creating a women's lacrosse team, but the team is currently suffering from lack of interest. We also drew vociferous complaints from coaches that we were cannibalizing the other women's teams of the relatively few women interested in sports, and thus jeopardizing the viability of those teams. Go look at intramural programs on college campuses, take a look at sports fields or basketball court as you drive around each day. In real life this isn't a close call; there are overwhelmingly more men interested in participating in sports than women.

Yes, this is a central point of my argument. As I originally stated, I recall there being studies which showed this, but I rely more on anecdotal evidence. Franky, I haven't the patience to belabor the point with people like you.

If you honestly see as much interest in participating in sports from women as men, I guess I will concede my argument. No honest person has ever said there is the same level of interest.

More likely, you are refusing to admit what is plainly true. Demanding "proof" is the essence of the problem. The only truly quantifiable "equality" is to create equal numbers of opportunities, and this simply ignores reality. Any attempt to quantify the disparity in interest levels is susceptible to challenge as to the exact number (ie it should be higher or lower), so it is easier to just allow boys to be screwed over. After all, haven't men had all the advantages for so long? It is time they were disadvantaged, isn't it?

Do you also need proof that women are different from men? How is the difference to be quantified?

Tell me if you honestly think there are as many women interested in participating in sports as men.

Tell me if you honestly think it is fair that men's teams are being cut despite more than sufficient interest in the teams.

Since you're done with your diatribe, I eagerly await your answer to my question. I see just as many woman who are interested in sports as men. I'm not claiming that what I see is true for the entire sports community, you are the one making that claim. So, I ask again where is your data?

[BD80]

Since you're done with your diatribe, I eagerly await your answer to my question. I see just as many woman who are interested in sports as men. I'm not claiming that what I see is true for the entire sports community, you are the one making that claim. So, I ask again where is your data?

Sorry, thought I had answered your question. I've seen data referred to but don't have it to cite to you. I do have the anecdotal evidence that I referred to. Strong, convincing evidence of having TRIED to find girls willing to participate in sports (ANY sports that we could create a team for) and talking to the girls' coaches and several ADs who lament that there are not nearly as many girls interested in participating in sports. This was a huge issue throughout the area as we tried to develop a boy's lacrosse program in Southwest Michigan and found Title IX a solid obstacle.

Now will kindly answer my questions?

Do you honestly think there are as many women interested in participating in competitive team sports as men?

Do you honestly think it is fair that men's teams are being cut despite more than sufficient interest in the teams?

Here's another question, what exactly is your sampling in which you find "just as many women interested in sports as men." I truly do disbelieve your assertion. Fitness sessions or classes don't count. We are talking about competitive sports teams. (Include competitive cheering - that is certainly a team sport).

[hughgs]

Sorry, thought I had answered your question. I've seen data referred to but don't have it to cite to you. I do have the anecdotal evidence that I referred to. Strong, convincing evidence of having TRIED to find girls willing to participate in sports (ANY sports that we could create a team for) and talking to the girls' coaches and several ADs who lament that there are not nearly as many girls interested in participating in sports. This was a huge issue throughout the area as we tried to develop a boy's lacrosse program in Southwest Michigan and found Title IX a solid obstacle.

I truly do disbelieve your assertion.

Since you "truly disbelieve my assertion" then I don't see why I should believe your assertion. So I repeat my question what data do you have that supports your contention?

[BD80]

Since you "truly disbelieve my assertion" then I don't see why I should believe your assertion.

Ah, this is the well-reasoned type of intercourse one can expect from Title IX proponents. "Don't ask me for facts or reasons, this is just the way I feel it should be. I don't care who it hurts, it is not hurting me!" Thanks for being so honest.

Well, I am sorry I pointed out to you that Title IX has been turned into a poorly reasoned social engineering project which causes more harm than good. We now return you to your regularly scheduled program of denial.

If you do ever wish to honestly explain what sampling of people would lead you to believe that women are as interested in participating in team sorts as men, I for one am willing listen. I think it is important to understand how there can be such a huge disconnect between the the judicial interpretation of Title IX and the real world.

[burnspbesq]

Ah, this is the well-reasoned type of intercourse one can expect from Title IX proponents. "Don't ask me for facts or reasons, this is just the way I feel it should be. I don't care who it hurts, it is not hurting me!" Thanks for being so honest.

Well, I am sorry I pointed out to you that Title IX has been turned into a poorly reasoned social engineering project which causes more harm than good. We now return you to your regularly scheduled program of denial.

If you do ever wish to honestly explain what sampling of people would lead you to believe that women are as interested in participating in team sorts as men, I for one am willing listen. I think it is important to understand how there can be such a huge disconnect between the the judicial interpretation of Title IX and the real world.

Y'all should really take this little spitting contest either private or to the public policy board. It seems to be locked into a non-productive cycle of "you first." I'm also seeing a fair amount of one side projecting the deficiencies in its own case onto the other. Just sayin.'

FWIW, where I live (Orange County, California) there is ample anecdotal evidence of equal participation and equal interest by boys and girls, at every level from age 5 through high school varsity competition. Just drive around to the schools and parks whose facilities are used by youth leagues on a Saturday, and notice the gender of the players. Then log onto the website of either the Los Angeles Times or the Orange County Register and review their high school sports coverage.

[DevilAlumna]

To get this on-topic, (and because if this was posted in another thread, I missed it):

Duke Men's LAX crushed UNC (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=1447934) Friday evening, 17-6! They face UVA in the ACC Championship today, 3:30PM EDT.

[Indoor66]

To get this on-topic, (and because if this was posted in another thread, I missed it):

Duke Men's LAX crushed UNC (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=1447934) Friday evening, 17-6! They face UVA in the ACC Championship today, 3:30PM EDT.

and it is being televised on FCSA! (Channel 723 in Fort Lauderdale, FL Comcast area.)

[SMO]

To get this on-topic, (and because if this was posted in another thread, I missed it):

Duke Men's LAX crushed UNC (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=1447934) Friday evening, 17-6! They face UVA in the ACC Championship today, 3:30PM EDT.

9F9F9F9F9F9F

Anyone know if today's contest on the tube in the Northeast? NJ specifically?

[Lavabe]

Y'all should really take this little spitting contest either private or to the public policy board. It seems to be locked into a non-productive cycle of "you first." I'm also seeing a fair amount of one side projecting the deficiencies in its own case onto the other. Just sayin.'

FWIW, where I live (Orange County, California) there is ample anecdotal evidence of equal participation and equal interest by boys and girls, at every level from age 5 through high school varsity competition. Just drive around to the schools and parks whose facilities are used by youth leagues on a Saturday, and notice the gender of the players. Then log onto the website of either the Los Angeles Times or the Orange County Register and review their high school sports coverage.

Agreed completely (FWIW, similar conditions here in suburban Atlanta).

If you do set up a discussion at PPB, you might want to skim through the Chronicle of Higher Education over the last year, as there have been several conflicting issues going on, and you'd be discussing more than anecdotal evidence. Also, a number of books that are useful points of discussion have come out in the last year, including one co-authored by Duke former swimmer (now lawyer) Nancy Hogshead-Makar.

Cheers,
Lavabe

[Indoor66]

The game is on FSCA!

[jjasper0729]

Does anyone know when the ncaa tournament is and wwhen the first game will be (if duke hosts any)?

[Ignatius07]

It's my impression that the seeds have yet to be announced, but at the least Duke still has one regular season game against St. John's (today at 1pm) left before the NCAA tournament.

[DukieInKansas]

Does anyone know when the ncaa tournament is and wwhen the first game will be (if duke hosts any)?

Seeds will be announced tonight and the tournament starts next weekend. Men & Women.

[merry]

Duke just beat St John's. They announced afterwards that if Duke is selected to host there will be a game here next Saturday 5/10.

We arrived at the game after it was in progress and my 13 year old exclaimed there's NO ONE here! There was actually a pretty nice crowd but he is used to seeing the stands packed for lacrosse! How cool.

Also worth noting, during the game Greer broke the NCAA scoring record.

[Ima Facultiwyfe]

Duke just beat St John's. They announced afterwards that if Duke is selected to host there will be a game here next Saturday 5/10.

We arrived at the game after it was in progress and my 13 year old exclaimed there's NO ONE here! There was actually a pretty nice crowd but he is used to seeing the stands packed for lacrosse! How cool.

Also worth noting, during the game Greer broke the NCAA scoring record.

Also worth noting was that absolutely SICK between-the-legs goal by Danowski! :eek: That alone was worth the price of admission.....had there even been a price of admission! Honestly.....you folks who don't come out and enjoy this really don't know what you're missing.

It's also really heartwarming to hang around a bit after the game and watch our guys take time to grin, shake the hands and visit a bit with the starry eyed kids hanging on the fence. Gosh! They make you proud, bless their hearts.
Love, Ima

[hughgs]

Ah, this is the well-reasoned type of intercourse one can expect from Title IX proponents. "Don't ask me for facts or reasons, this is just the way I feel it should be. I don't care who it hurts, it is not hurting me!" Thanks for being so honest.

Well, I am sorry I pointed out to you that Title IX has been turned into a poorly reasoned social engineering project which causes more harm than good. We now return you to your regularly scheduled program of denial.

If you do ever wish to honestly explain what sampling of people would lead you to believe that women are as interested in participating in team sorts as men, I for one am willing listen. I think it is important to understand how there can be such a huge disconnect between the the judicial interpretation of Title IX and the real world.

I have never said that I support or reject Title IX. You made a statement about the basic premise of Title IX. I simply asked to give us some data to support your contention. At the same time I gave you anecdotal evidence that refutes your contention. Then you responded that you didn't believe me.

And now we've come to the crux of the problem. You're correct to question my anecdotal evidence. I agree that anecdotal evidence means nothing when arguing whether the basic premises of Title IX are true or false. Maybe what I see is an anomaly. But, by the same token why should I believe your anecdotal evidence. How do I know that your situation is the norm? And that's why we look for facts, not anecdotes to prove our points.

And so, once again, since you issued the original statement, I ask where's your data? You've made some wild accusations about Title IX and haven't backed any of it up with any real data. It would be like saying that you're the world's expert in nuclear physics (man, I hope you're an English major). Without any credentials or any evidence there is no reason to attach any significance to your pronouncements.