Major upstate NY SUNY school will be going D1

[bleedblue94]

That is true, inasmuch as the vast majority of college sports programs are non-profitable. Division I Hockey is a revenue sport, but it isn't a revenue sport at every school where it's played, just as Division I men's basketball isn't profitable at every school where it's played, either. Schools are willing to break even/lose money on athletics to build good PR and bring in the alumni donations.

And I'll stop shitting on garbage hockey when its promoters stop demanding to be taken seriously. Club hockey is a participation trophy sport, just like Midget B. Have fun with it, sure, but don't go telling people you "played college hockey" because you played club hockey. Those who know the difference will laugh at you.

I think most people know and respect the difference but I don't think anyone is expecting the club players to fill out a D1 program. That is just silly. Most people aren't that naive, and most of the current club players wont be around anymore by the time this program actually starts.

Also, to your first point I've always seen hockey as a college sport at any level to be a spring board to help justify increases to female sports that a school supports because of Title IX requirements. Having those increased opportunities for students just enhances the school's standing. It is a game at times with the financials of these institutions and as you alluded to it isn't always about sport X being profitable so much as the entire portfolio of the enterprise.

 

[CrazyEddie20]

I think most people know and respect the difference but I don't think anyone is expecting the club players to fill out a D1 program. That is just silly. Most people aren't that naive, and most of the current club players wont be around anymore by the time this program actually starts.

Also, to your first point I've always seen hockey as a college sport at any level to be a spring board to help justify increases to female sports that a school supports because of Title IX requirements. Having those increased opportunities for students just enhances the school's standing. It is a game at times with the financials of these institutions and as you alluded to it isn't always about sport X being profitable so much as the entire portfolio of the enterprise.

You'd be surprised at the naivete of hockey parents, players, and so on.

In re: Title IX, generally, most collegiate athletic programs would fail the three-pronged test for Title IX compliance when it comes to equity in athletics, however, they are rarely if ever sued by students over it or challenged by the Department of Education. You're right that adding women's hockey can help schools move toward better compliance, however, most schools instead choose to add women's sports with significantly lower cost barriers to entry, such as golf, tennis, crew, etc. Lindenwood and Syracuse, to my knowledge, are the only schools that started women's hockey without a men's program as such a measure, and now Lindenwood is further out of compliance once again because they found their rubber stamp. They'd better hope that none of their female athletes are paying attention.

 

[bleedblue94]

You'd be surprised at the naivete of hockey parents, players, and so on.

In re: Title IX, generally, most collegiate athletic programs would fail the three-pronged test for Title IX compliance when it comes to equity in athletics, however, they are rarely if ever sued by students over it or challenged by the Department of Education. You're right that adding women's hockey can help schools move toward better compliance, however, most schools instead choose to add women's sports with significantly lower cost barriers to entry, such as golf, tennis, crew, etc. Lindenwood and Syracuse, to my knowledge, are the only schools that started women's hockey without a men's program as such a measure, and now Lindenwood is further out of compliance once again because they found their rubber stamp. They'd better hope that none of their female athletes are paying attention.

I wasn't suggesting adding women's hockey. I was suggesting adding a single male sport like hockey bc of its costs can lead to other sports for women. You are absolutely correct about the compliance issues with title IX, however I believe its mere existence causes a lot of organizations to be more aware of having some sort of balance, even if there is not actually a complete balance. I think actual public title IX audits of most school athletic programs would be interesting. to say the least.

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

As I said before, you did not get it right...

You never said anything after I said SUNY Binghamton, reread through the thread.

 

[CrazyEddie20]

I wasn't suggesting adding women's hockey. I was suggesting adding a single male sport like hockey bc of its costs can lead to other sports for women.

Could that happen? Sure. Does it? Rarely, if ever.

 

[SemireliableSource]

You can read however you chose into things, but I have been vetted for having information pertaining to several professional leagues including the NHL. If you chose to not believe my information I don't much care. And if I wanted to keep something truly hidden and be "sly" I wouldn't post it at all. Just having to fun is all.

Do you know what it means to be sly? Not saying anything wouldn't be sly at all because there would be no insinuation.

 

[bleedblue94]

Could that happen? Sure. Does it? Rarely, if ever.

In this case it will be happening, only one minor sport add though but they are connected to each other. I would like to see more than one added but maybe that happens down the line.

Do you know what it means to be sly? Not saying anything wouldn't be sly at all because there would be no insinuation.

I was referring to the follow ups.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

We need a link or for you to be vetted. We're not here to play twenty guesses.