Is Steve Taylor still coaching there?
Is Steve Taylor still coaching there?
Boris The Richmond Spider wrote:
Is Steve Taylor still coaching there?
Yep
URspiders wrote:
To clarify, cutting the indoor and outdoor track teams along with the soccer team will free up 64 spots for new male athletes. The lacrosse team only needs 40. So, this is not a Title IX issue.
Seriously? If it wasn't a Title IX issue, then lacrosse could just add their 40 people and you wouldn't need to cut any teams. You don't have to make room for them by cutting non-scholarship athletes...except for when Title IX is involved.
Title IX is the excuse, not the reason - the reason is they wanted to add Lax. You don't think they could've made it work if they wanted to? Did they even try?
Azaleas wrote:
Title IX is the excuse, not the reason - the reason is they wanted to add Lax. You don't think they could've made it work if they wanted to? Did they even try?
So why didn't they just add Lax and not cut anything?
It's not a Title IX issue. Title IX, as usual, is being used as a crutch. This is an issue about their athletic administration having a partiality to lacrosse, and wanting to free up money.
Title IX only comes into it if they don't want to look like theyre adding men's sports without concurrently adding womens sports. They've been under no heat for Title IX compliance, and they CLEARLY comply with prong 3. Theres no way that they've been forced to this decision for Title IX reasons
Didn't U-Maryland ax men's track and XC last year so the same reason?
The email sent out to student and faculty by AD Jim Miller. The one sent to alumni did not mention the 3 million. I know because, as a law student, I received the student and the alumni email.
I want to share with you a decision to make changes to the University's Division I athletic program in order to achieve objectives established in our April 2011 athletic strategic plan.
The athletic department is adding men's lacrosse as an NCAA Division I intercollegiate sport. The addition of men's lacrosse is part of a reconfiguration of our athletic program that was approved by the University's Board of Trustees. This reconfiguration discontinues the University's sponsorship of men's soccer and men's indoor and outdoor track and field, effective at the conclusion of the 2012-13 season. We are planning for the men's club lacrosse team to transition to a Division I team by the spring of 2014.
The athletic department will continue to sponsor the men's cross country program. Most members of the men's indoor and outdoor track teams are also members of the cross country team. They will be able to continue to participate in cross country and compete in limited track meets, although they will not be eligible for postseason competition or NCAA championships in track and field.
A successful Division I athletic department, like any successful organization, cannot remain static. It must look to the future and identify a strategy to best serve the University and its student athletes for the long term. It has been more than ten years since the University evaluated and made any changes to the intercollegiate sports it sponsors. As a result, the University's athletic strategic plan recognized the need for a thoughtful and forward-looking assessment of the University's Division I sports to ensure that we meet the future needs of the University and the next generation of student athletes.
That assessment involved more than a year of extensive study and strategic analysis that considered many factors, including competitive success, high school and college sports participation rates, and resource requirements. It focused on the most effective means for fulfilling the University's athletic strategic plan, which includes a commitment to enable our student athletes to achieve ambitious academic, athletic, and personal aspirations, and to compete successfully for conference championships and national recognition.
This reconfiguration of the athletic program and the prospect of building a nationally regarded men's lacrosse program put the University in the best position to meet those objectives and more fully leverage our athletic assets. Men's lacrosse is an excellent fit for the University and is the fastest-growing male high school sport. As the University strives to provide the best undergraduate education and ensure access and affordability, it is essential that the University consider the most effective deployment of its resources. These changes will result in a new $3 million athletic endowment funded by multiple donors and additional resources for other Olympic sports, while reducing the total number of Division I sports.
The University will make every effort to assist those students affected by this decision. For current students who choose to continue their undergraduate education at the University of Richmond, we will honor their athletic scholarships until they graduate or for a period equal to their remaining NCAA eligibility. The University will grant immediate releases to student-athletes who choose to transfer and compete for another university. Additional information is available at
http://www.richmondspiders.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=26800&ATCLID=205689650
.
While this reconfiguration serves the best interests of the majority of our current and future student-athletes, we recognize how disappointing this decision is for our men's soccer and men's track and field student-athletes, their families, coaches, and our track and soccer alumni. We are proud of the men who have competed as Spiders in soccer and track and field, and grateful for their many contributions to the University of Richmond.
Sincerely,
Jim Miller
Director of Athletics
Why aren't they cutting women's T&F also? or Why aren't they cutting women's T&F only?
So, in other words, a couple of rich alumni exercised their influence, stating something to the effect that no self-respecting private "elite" East Coast school would not have a lacrosse team, while sponsoring a foreign sport like soccer, and a boondoggle financially like track and field.
I love the "next generation of student athletes" line, what's next Crossfit?
And good luck with a bunch of private school lax players, I am sure they won't embarass the school academically, or end up on the local police blotter. Hey, does George Huguely V have any little brothers, UVA probably won't recruit them after his murder conviction.
egw wrote:
Can't believe they're doing this and bumping f*cking lacrosse up to the varsity level. A track program that didn't have a penny of scholarship funding. That lax program won't bring in any significant amount of revenue either
Don't know why you are surprised? Lacrosse is a sport on the rise in popularity. Kids love it. So all the screaming over Title IX was wrong - the are just replacing sports.
Track has always been, and continues to be, the sport with one of the highest high school participation numbers.
Combined numbers for 2010-2011:
Football: 1.1 million
Track and Field: 1 million
Soccer: 759000
Swimming: 294000
Lacrosse: 170,000
It isn't about "the sport of the future", it's about ADs who think Lacrosse is an easy sport in which to gain national prominence (see participation numbers) and cheap compared to football.
I agree, his statements abouts participation (track and soccer huge, lax limited), academics (distance runners, golf, tennis typically highest academically, and someone above said there have been academic all-americans in track), and personal aspirations (what does that mean when comparing soccer, track to lax?), he makes no sense by adding lacrosse.
Maybe by personal aspirations, he meant the alumni donors, not the athletes.
I can't help but think that a big part of this is bringing in lacrosse players whose parents will make donations and not ask for any financial aid. I think the school will make money off of this, but probably not through ticket sales to lacrosse games.
Lacrosse is a sport played primarily by kids of the wealthy. Many rich kids play lacrosse. Look at high schools in the state of VA. It is not a varsity sport in the public schools in the state. However, almost every private high school in VA has lacrosse.
I agree with previous posters that feel lacrosse will attract a certain type of student from very wealthy backgrounds, which translates to rich parents (potential donors). Plus ideally, a few years down the road, lacrosse alums will also be rich, either by family money or family connections combined with a degree from a very good school, and be generous donors back to U of R.
I would be interested to know what kind of alumni giving men's track & field and soccer had at Richmond.
Either way, as a track and field fan, this is very disappointing to see another school drop the sport. The A.D. says lacrosse is the fastest growing sport in terms of high school participation, but as a previous poster showed, track and field is still #2 behind football in total high school participation numbers.
Very unfortunate decision.
I hope most readers realize that to sponsor a Division 1 Track team, you need to compete in 6 meets per season
(indoor or outdoor) and have 14 competitors in each meet,
I think you would be very hard pressed to find 3 meets in the last 5 years; where Richmond had 14 competitors in a meet.( BY the way,there are very many distance oriented Division 1 teams that do NOT meet this requirement.)
I am sure that the Richmond administration was aware that they were not meeting the NCAA requirements to remain in compliance to the rules.
why are you surprised wrote:
Don't know why you are surprised? Lacrosse is a sport on the rise in popularity. Kids love it. So all the screaming over Title IX was wrong - the are just replacing sports.
People still can't see that Title IX plays a role?
A) U Richmond wanted to make Lacrosse a D1 sport instead of a club sport
B) Title IX has limits on the ratio of male/female athletes
C) U Richmond got rid of track and soccer to be able to add lacrosse and be Title IX compliant
C doesn't happen without the stipulations of A and B. So....yeah....Title IX had a pretty integral part.
people still aren't getting it wrote:
People still can't see that Title IX plays a role?
A) U Richmond wanted to make Lacrosse a D1 sport instead of a club sport
B) Title IX has limits on the ratio of male/female athletes
C) U Richmond got rid of track and soccer to be able to add lacrosse and be Title IX compliant
C doesn't happen without the stipulations of A and B. So....yeah....Title IX had a pretty integral part.
It never ceases to amaze me how uneducated the average person is about title 9.
There are 3 prongs to title 9 ; a university only needs to meet one of them. There are tons of schools out there that don't meet the proportionality clause, but meet one or both of the others. Richmond definitely falls into this category. They clearly accomodate the interest of female athletes. They would be in no trouble whatsoever with title 9
So why didn't they just add lacrosse without cutting any sports? They aren't saving any significant money by cutting a non-scholarship sport.
Lax is a popular HS sport in FL. I hear it's popular all over with HS kids. They're probably trying to read the wind and get ahead of the game. Not that that's cool, but it's definitely not a IX issue. Rich bros get what rich bros pay for. Sad face.