Lacrosse at a "DI" UND?

[MplsBison]

I don't think the women's side will have any problem growing in the NCAA.

[star2city]

Men's Lacrosse attendance in Baltimore:

Semifinals: 52,004 (2500 over last year's record)

Finals: 48,334 (1400 over last year's record)

For a comparison, men's soccer, which has many more teams and higher national participation rates:

2005 Championship attendance: 6922 (Maryland vs New Mexico @ Cary, NC)

2006 Championship attendance: 5948 (UC-Santa Barbara vs UCLA @ St. Louis)

NBC: Lacrosse on the cusp of becoming next big NCAA sport

BALTIMORE, Md. -- Is men's lacrosse a revenue sport?

The 48,334 fans -- many of them toting their own lacrosse sticks -- who attended the Division I NCAA championship game here at an NFL stadium seem to think so. As does ESPN, which surely did not televise the game live this afternoon for altruistic reasons.

Only six larger crowds have ever attended an NCAA tournament event (bowl games are not official NCAA playoff games) and all six of those were for men's basketball. Which is to say that women's basketball, a Division I revenue sport, has never attracted more fans to a single game than today's championship, a 12-11 thriller won by Johns Hopkins, did.

[GeauxSioux]

UND needs to get on board.

[star2city]

Ned Harkness - Hall of Fame Lacrosse coach, too

Nevin D. "Ned" Harkness, one of lacrosse's most successful coaches, was inducted into the Hall of Fame as a truly great coach who has contributed noteworthy services to the game of lacrosse over the years.

Harkness is a 1939 graduate of Worcester Academy who went on to coaching stints at RPI and Cornell. Harkness started the program at RPI and from 1945-56 led the school to a record of 136-21-1, including a USILA co-national championship in 1952. He was also the coach of the North All-Star team in the 1952 North-South All-Star game. Harkness later coached at Cornell from 1966-68, compiling a record of 35-1 with Ivy League titles in 1966 and 1968.

Also a successful collegiate hockey coach, Harkness coached at both RPI (187-90-7) and Cornell (163-27-2), leading Cornell to the 1967 NCAA championship, becoming one of the few coaches to win national championships in two sports. In 1970, Harkness left Cornell to coach the Detroit Red Wings in the National Hockey League.

MSNBC: Jim Brown's Favorite Sport (wasn't football)

Jim Brown laughed that slow-but-sincere laugh, smiled that trademark little half smile, and went backward in time to the day when he dominated his favorite sport

[MplsBison]

But would UND add both men's and women's or just women's?

Like I said, with the way title IX is, I don't think the women's side will have problems growing in the NCAA. Men I don't know.

[The Sicatoka]

NBC: Lacrosse on the cusp of becoming next big NCAA sport

So is it a revenue sport? "It is today," said Blue Jay head coach Dave Pietramala afterward, as he swept his left arm to demonstrate the sea of fans who'd gladly paid $25 a head to be here. "This is a revenue sport. What we need is other colleges to pick up the sport, too. It's booming at the youth league level." ....

Here are the numbers. According to USA Lacrosse, the sport increased 11.7% in participation at the youth level nationally between 2005 and 2006. Since 2001, lacrosse has experienced a 68% growth rate in terms of participation. An annual survey by the National Federation of State High School Associations says that no sport has grown faster in the past decade.

Yet there are only 56 D-I men's lacrosse programs--less than half the number of D-I football programs. Only five programs are located in the NCAA's "West" region, and three of them are located east of St. Louis, a.k.a. "The Gateway to the West". They are Ohio State, Notre Dame and Bellarmine (Ky.). The two programs situated west of La Crosse, Wisc., are Air Force and the University of Denver. ....

That will change. Lacrosse is too athletic a team sport, and too in line with Joe Cheesesticks' lust for contact and scoring, to remain underground much longer (It's not mixed martial arts, but it ain't Bingo Night in America, either). ....

It would seem inevitable, though. Maybe it's time for football and men's and women's basketball to move over for a fourth partner. As a fan-friendly sport, lax is not lacking.

I've said it. I'll say it again: It's coming. Get out front.

[SiouxMD]

I've said it. I'll say it again: It's coming. Get out front.

I sent LTC Buning an email...pass it on.

[dmksioux]

Perhaps the NCAA would look at UND more positively if we were to add a sport with Native American origins...

Lacrosse

[star2city]

Perhaps the NCAA would look at UND more positively if we were to add a sport with Native American origins...

Lacrosse

By playing and promoting lacrosse, UND could actually be instrumental in helping the Sioux reclaim part of their heritage.

The Iroquois nation is actually recognized as a separate country in the Box and Field World Lacrosse Championships.

The Iroquois Nationals are unique in that they are the only American Indian team sanctioned for international competition in any sport. Team members travel under Haudenosaunee Confederacy passports and play under the purple-and-white flag of the Iroquois, which features a motif of the Hiawatha wampum belt, representing the Six Nations (Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca and Tuscarora) of the Confederacy. The team received sanction from the International Lacrosse Federation in 1990; this marked the Iroquois' fourth trip to the world championships. They are the only team to use the traditional wooden sticks.

[star2city]

With today's announcement, Syracuse seems to be heading toward a football-basketball-lacrosse +hockey model, the same model (on a lesser scale for football/basketball) that would IMHO most benefit UND:

While it always painful when sports are dropped, Syracuse faced huge costs if they ever hoped to get swimming competitive nationally. While there's still no word on men's hockey, Syracuse's AD has been open to it. SU would be the only DI school with a women's but not a men's hockey program.

SU to cut swimming, start up hockey

Syracuse University will drop its men's and women's swimming programs after the 2007-08 academic year, two sources told The Post-Standard on Wednesday.

The decision to end the university's participation in swimming will coincide with the start of a women's ice hockey team, the sources said.

The elimination of the swimming programs marks the first time in 10 years that Syracuse University will cease participation in a sport. In 1997, Syracuse dropped wrestling and men's gymnastics as scholarship sports.

One source said athletic director Daryl Gross wants to place more emphasis on sports that can compete for NCAA championships.

"Daryl wants to be extraordinary," the source said.

The second source mentioned the financial aspects of the decision.

Currently, Syracuse swimmers train and compete in an antiquated pool inside Archbold Gym. The pool has six lanes and is just 25 meters long. An Olympic pool normally has at least eight lanes and is 50 meters long.

The source said a new natatorium would cost $35 million to $50 million to build.

Meanwhile, the first source indicated that Gross has been influenced by research numbers indicating the large numbers of elite-level women's ice hockey players from the area.

[The Sicatoka]

If Syracuse feels like it can't compete in M/W swimming .... (gulp) ....

[jimdahl]

Your aggressive posting style's pre-denigration of anyone who dares disagree with you notwithstanding, I'll take a stab at defending the premise of this discussion.

1. Screw you if you think of all sports as avenues to pay for your precious hockey. REVENUE is the dumbest reason I've ever heard of to scrap a college athletic program.

I'm not sure to which post this comment is directed, but I don't think any of us who are fans of adding lacrosse see it as a revenue stream for hockey. Quite to the contrary, hockey is a high-profile, self-funding sport that doesn't need revenue help from others; we mention it in this thread because it puts UND on the national stage because we're competitive with big-name schools. I view lacrosse as a similar opportunity to add another high-growth sport that could quickly draw local fan interest with UND playing big-name schools and national interest if UND could succeed.

2. Screw you if you want equestrian or skating just "so we can fulfill title IX." Do it for a real reason--because some student out there wants to continue a sport they know in college.

I'm with you, but I don't remember ANY UND fan being a proponent of this. Reality is what it is, but I certainly don't *want* to see us following the 'SUs in adding "fake" sports to meet Title IX.

3. COLLEGE ATHLETICS ARE FOR THE STUDENTS. They are a reason to get good students, or allow students who couldn't afford to come normally. They should always be for the students--if you have possible incoming students who consistently want to play baseball, let them play baseball. If they want to run track, let them run track. This is not about YOU and your dreams for $$$ to go back into other sports--this is about making the students happy and giving them the chance to compete should they so choose. And if a student wants to go to a game, they shouldn't have to PAY for it--it's THEIR TEAM.

Reality is that North Dakotans expect their freakin' events centers to run in the black; as silly as I think it is, they're surely going to expect their collegiate athletic departments to run in the black. The move to D-I means the big profile sports, football & bball, are going to suck up more money. The default way to pay for that is cut some non-revenue sports and possibly add some b.s. low-cost sports.

I'm backing an alternative -- a growing sport that I think could be revenue positive and in which UND could possibly even grow into a national niche like we enjoy with hockey. The part that seems to bother you is that few of us think it would be enough to prevent cutting some non-revenue sports.

[SiouxMD]

This thread is going too fast for me to keep up right now, but I wanted to say some things before I got too pissed off:

1. Screw you if you think of all sports as avenues to pay for your precious hockey. REVENUE is the dumbest reason I've ever heard of to scrap a college athletic program.

2. Screw you if you want equestrian or skating just "so we can fulfill title IX." Do it for a real reason--because some student out there wants to continue a sport they know in college.

3. COLLEGE ATHLETICS ARE FOR THE STUDENTS. They are a reason to get good students, or allow students who couldn't afford to come normally. They should always be for the students--if you have possible incoming students who consistently want to play baseball, let them play baseball. If they want to run track, let them run track. This is not about YOU and your dreams for $$$ to go back into other sports--this is about making the students happy and giving them the chance to compete should they so choose. And if a student wants to go to a game, they shouldn't have to PAY for it--it's THEIR TEAM.

Look, we all know that Grand Forks is in the middle of nowhere, but if you start scrapping programs, so will the nearby schools. If you want to be a leader in the athletic world, keep as many sports as you can. Heck, add new ones. Scrapping the ones you already have is an idiotic move.

UND is a state school. It has a low tuition, which allows for people to afford it who could not otherwise. Why take the possibility of playing a sport they love away from them just because they aren't quite good enough for a scholarship somewhere else?

Posts like this often remind me of this *.gif animation:

Have a nice weekend.

[The Sicatoka]

This thread is going too fast for me to keep up ...

Might I recommend you go back to about post 115 and start in there. Doing so you'll see that folks are not talking about these things off the cuff but do understand the impacts and ramifications (on people, on programs, on budgets).

Yes, in a perfect world every school could offer every sport to every body. But it's not a perfect world, and it's very dynamic. As the dynamics change so too must people, programs, and budgets. No, it's not perfect, but it is reality and we all must live in that.

Why? We don't have infinite resources. We must maximize what we do have.

[star2city]

If Syracuse feels like it can't compete in M/W swimming .... (gulp) ....

Swimming world shocked - decision defies logic

"I pledge to be on the front line of trying to get this decision reconsidered, and ultimately, reversed," Neuberger stated. "This is too good of a program, in so many ways that matter, to allow it to die without the swimming community rallying behind the effort. That effort begins today for me."

"This is a decision that defies logic," said Phil Whitten, Executive Director of the College Swimming Coaches Association of America. "To cut two teams in which there is a great deal of student interest and replace it with one team in which, even in the Northeast, there is minimal student interest makes no sense. While it is admirable that the athletic director (Daryl Gross) is interested in improving the school's performance in the NACDA Cup, what should be primary in his calculations are the student-athletes

[PCM]

Posts like this often remind me of this *.gif animation:

Have a nice weekend.

Is this the GIF you intended to post?

[SiouxMD]

Is this the GIF you intended to post?

I see both...and they appear to be the same. So yeah...I guess it was the GIF I intended. Thanks for the clarification.

[siouxjoy]

I see both...and they appear to be the same. So yeah...I guess it was the GIF I intended. Thanks for the clarification.

The image on your post shows up as a red X...at least on my computer anyway

[jimdahl]

The image on your post shows up as a red X...at least on my computer anyway

Add me to the list of being able to see both

[PCM]

Add me to the list of being able to see both

I only see the red X in the original post.

EDIT: Now, for some reason, I can see both animations.

[SiouxMD]

Add me to the list of being able to see both

Thanks jimdahl.

[Hammersmith]

I'm with you, but I don't remember ANY UND fan being a proponent of this. Reality is what it is, but I certainly don't *want* to see us following the 'SUs in adding "fake" sports to meet Title IX.

I have to ask, exactly what "fake" sport has NDSU added to meet Title IX?

Beyond that, I think what we're seeing here is a difference in collegiate athletic models. Mburtonk seems to favor a DIII-style "participation" model where the athletic department is almost an arm of student services. In this model, the focus is normally on the student-athlete. On the other hand, in DI, you usually find a "business" model where the athletic department fuctions as a public relations/fundraising arm of the university and its administration. Here, the focus is on the university as a whole rather than the individual student. DII sees both models or, more often, a hybrid of the two.

Both models have pros and cons, and most are rather obvious. In the DI model, some students get to participate is something larger than themselves. They're part of a history, a tradition of excellence. Of course, that means many students are excluded from participating. The DIII model allows general participation, but misses out on the remarkable potential the athletic department has to improve the university's status on many levels. The wonderful thing is that there is ample room for both models in the overall university system. Other than the general philisophical debate of sports in college, the only time this becomes a major issue is when a school begins to transition from one model to another. I would argue that UND has been using a largely DI model for quite some time ,and will soon be making a transition to a fully DI model. This will invariably cause some hard feelings for students, alumni, and supporters who favor a more DIII-style model.

Just my opinion.

[GeauxSioux]

I have to ask, exactly what "fake" sport has NDSU added to meet Title IX?

Beyond that, I think what we're seeing here is a difference in collegiate athletic models. Mburtonk seems to favor a DIII-style "participation" model where the athletic department is almost an arm of student services. In this model, the focus is normally on the student-athlete. On the other hand, in DI, you usually find a "business" model where the athletic department fuctions as a public relations/fundraising arm of the university and its administration. Here, the focus is on the university as a whole rather than the individual student. DII sees both models or, more often, a hybrid of the two.

Both models have pros and cons, and most are rather obvious. In the DI model, some students get to participate is something larger than themselves. They're part of a history, a tradition of excellence. Of course, that means many students are excluded from participating. The DIII model allows general participation, but misses out on the remarkable potential the athletic department has to improve the university's status on many levels. The wonderful thing is that there is ample room for both models in the overall university system. Other than the general philisophical debate of sports in college, the only time this becomes a major issue is when a school begins to transition from one model to another. I would argue that UND has been using a largely DI model for quite some time ,and will soon be making a transition to a fully DI model. This will invariably cause some hard feelings for students, alumni, and supporters who favor a more DIII-style model.

Just my opinion.

I believe that Jim was referring to the equestrian comment made by mburtonk in post 287. SDSU has added the "sport" and from what I recall NDSU has talked about adding it.

[star2city]

I have to ask, exactly what "fake" sport has NDSU added to meet Title IX?

First, good post. NDSU, unlike SDSU, hasn't added equestrian (yet), but that might be considered a "fake" sport in many eyes. Other examples would be bowling, rifle, archery, badminton that are more skills than athletic endeavors and are mostly mostly emerging sports to meet Title IX requirements. If NDSU does add equestrian, it would make business sense by best utilizing its existing resources and creating a niche for students predisposed to equine science.

... in DI, you usually find a "business" model where the athletic department fuctions as a public relations/fundraising arm of the university and its administration. Here, the focus is on the university as a whole rather than the individual student.

Totally agreed. DI is about high performance, winning, and generating income, not participation. A DI school that values participation must offer extensive intramural and club programs.

[Hammersmith]

I believe that Jim was referring to the equestrian comment made by mburtonk in post 287. SDSU has added the "sport" and from what I recall NDSU has talked about adding it.

I understand that he was talking about equestrian, I was just pointing out that he was being imprecise in a matter-of-fact. Yes, SDSU has added W equstrian, but NDSU has not. Jim's comment flat-out said that both SU's had added "fake" sports. If you've read any of my earlier posts, you've seen that I'm a bit of a stickler for correct facts. I give far more leeway to opinions, but I call people out if facts are wrong, even if it's me(remember the athletic fee thread). All that being said, I was mainly yanking Jim's chain a bit because he's normally more accurate and I hold him to higher standard.

In the interests of full disclosure: I actually support NDSU adding equestrian. I think it would complement our equine studies program while allowing us to move our non-revenue men's sports closer to fully funded without sacrificing Title IX compliance. There's also a chance it might improve relations between NDSU and the western part of the state. A small chance, true, but better than none. It also wouldn't cost us much in additional facilities. Adding tennis, S&D, hockey, or any of the other "real" women's sports would all require a major investment in facilities. With the BSA renovation hanging over our heads and the FD Arena in question, now is not the time for another major athletic construction project.