Girls on MDIA teams

by **LAX SAMURAI** on Thu Mar 31, 2005 7:44 pm

Quick question: what could a guy do if there were a women's varsity program at his school, but no men's lacrosse team? Would it be tolerated for the guy to join the team and play? I don't think so. The fact is, there is a double standard that really needs to be addressed. Title IX has had its time in the sun, and like sports everywhere, it needs to evolve with the times.

**Sponsor**

by **monkeylax** on Thu Mar 31, 2005 7:58 pm

Lax Samurai,
I am pretty sure that you could have a shot at playing for a woman's team if you don't have a men's team at your school, honestly. I seem to remember when a man played for a woman's NCAA Field Hockey team, I am pretty sure the guy was European and had played it in secondary school there. But seeing as most college's don't offer men's field hockey he was allowed to play on the team. I know that he was required to wear a skirt though, although he might have been used to that already. I say give it a shot, maybe it will make them add a men's team sooner, can't hurt.

by **LAX SAMURAI** on Thu Mar 31, 2005 8:56 pm

My post was only a joke. I was just trying to highlight how it would be socially unacceptable for a guy to do it, while for girls its glorified. I think it would be nasty if a girl could play at this level. I feel a little offended that their sport has grown so much quicker at the varsity level than ours. I don't blame them though, I know that guys get a damn good deal for the sports that are already in place. I play ncaa football as well, and understand the perks to varsity athletics. Its just a shame that we all can't play, especially since the interest is clearly there.

by **YESIAMAGIRL** on Thu Mar 31, 2005 10:26 pm

Title IX ROCKS!!!

Ok, just kidding. This is really hard for me (as a woman-athlete who all of my life has had to deal with discrimination and getting crap for playing with the guys) to admit that Title IX has run its course. It was a wonderful thing and I would not be the person I am today without it. But its really sad to see that its actually starting to hurt men's sports. The really sad part about it is that it pretty much just comes down to money. Programs offered to both sexes should be equal in numbers. But when a school can't afford to add another women's program they usually have to cut a men's one.

Maybe all sports should become co-ed......that would be awesome (just kidding again)

by **mizzou dad** on Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:59 am

Good one SMS Lax.

I have never seen a ladies game. Would someone drop me some info on the Mizzou lady tigers. Like to see them play

by **MountaineerLax** on Fri Apr 08, 2005 7:06 pm

YESIAMAGIRL wrote:Title IX ROCKS!!!

This is really hard for me (as a woman-athlete who all of my life has had to deal with discrimination and getting crap for playing with the guys) to admit that Title IX has run its course. It was a wonderful thing and I would not be the person I am today without it. But its really sad to see that its actually starting to hurt men's sports.

JUST NOW STARTING TO HURT MEN'S SPORTS?? Where have you been the last 30 years?? Title IX has been hurting men's sports SINCE IT'S INCEPTION! It is a terrible system, everyone knows it, but no one has come up with anything better!

FACTS:

Of the close to 200 NCAA Men's Football Teams - only 2 lose money.

Every other sport, men's and women's, loses money. But Football brings in so much that it can carry the entire athletic dept.

The most popular men's sport: Football - Roster Size of 100 - Avg. Scholarships on each team (which are also Title IX restricted) around 80.

The most popular women's sport: Crew (with Soccer a close second) both teams have roster sizes of between 25-35 and close to 15 being on scholarship.

Now compare those numbers and you tell me how we're supposed to get back into NCAA sports.

When Title IX went into effect schools were put into a position to either add more women's teams (that all lose money) or cut men's teams (which also lose money) - which one makes more since financially? Hense there are less than 40 NCAA Div. 1 Men's Lacrosse Teams left. That's just sad!

How many teams are now in the USL-MDIA?? Over 200? It's got to be close. And it's club... which is seen by everyone as BELOW NCAA - but we have more teams, and some can seriously rival some NCAA teams - again, just sad.

Title IX has set up men's sports to fail - plain and simple!

by **MountaineerLax** on Fri Apr 08, 2005 7:11 pm

Something Danny Hogan told me at the national tournament....

"In reality the only thing Men's and Women's Lacrosse has in common... we both play on the same surface, and we both use the same ball."

How true is that?

by **MountaineerLax** on Fri Apr 08, 2005 7:12 pm

2002, our first year at Western State (RMLC Div. B) we had a girl come out to play... Michelle... we weren't aware that girls could play - until late in the season when we saw Ft. Lewis' female Attack (who also got laid out by one of our nastiest dmen... he still gets crap for it) - so we told her she couldn't.

Michelle ended up being our team manager for the next 2 seasons, booking the hotels, helping with practice, and eventually generating so much drama within the team over "who's who" in the world of Michelle. It was a joke.

by **YESIAMAGIRL** on Fri Apr 08, 2005 10:15 pm

JUST NOW STARTING TO HURT MEN'S SPORTS?? Where have you been the last 30 years?? Title IX has been hurting men's sports SINCE IT'S INCEPTION! It is a terrible system, everyone knows it, but no one has come up with anything better!

Sorry I've only been around the last 18 years. And not everything about Title IX is terrible...but I won't get into that.

Question for everyone...what do you guys think athletics would be like today if there wasn't Title IX??

by **MountaineerLax** on Fri Apr 08, 2005 10:19 pm

My main point... opening up opportunities for women by closing them for men is NOT the way to go.

by **FlockOfSeagulls** on Sun Apr 10, 2005 3:38 pm

MountaineerLax wrote:
Of the close to 200 NCAA Men's Football Teams - only 2 lose money.

Go ponies!
I wonder who the other miserable losers are...

by **MinesGoallie45** on Sun Apr 10, 2005 4:25 pm

If there was no Title IX my college would still probably be Varsity.....

I am all for equality...infact I started this thread. I think if girls want to play on guys teams then let them...but Title IX just takes those teams away

by **canders23** on Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:12 pm

Title IX did not take away your varsity program. Your school did! In a world of finite funds decisions must be made. Title IX states that if your institution recieves funding from the gov't, it should be spent equally. This can be accomplished many way. It is up to the administrators at the institutions to make thoughs decisions. If you don't want them to cut your program, convince them they' re wrong.

by **YESIAMAGIRL** on Sun Apr 10, 2005 9:49 pm

I know a lot of people get pissed because programs (lacrosse included) are cut because of Title IX but everything has to be equal (and it should be). In the end its not men vs. women, whose better than who, and all that jazz, it all comes down to money. Which really sucks!!

by **MountaineerLax** on Mon Apr 11, 2005 12:18 am

canders23 wrote:Title IX states that if your institution recieves funding from the gov't, it should be spent equally.

Is that a fact? Just curious because I wasn't aware of that. If that is the case, are private schools included?

Girls on MDIA teams

Men's Lax v. Women's Lax

Who is online