next NCAA D1 ACC team?

[Waldo]

IMO nobody's going to add another non-revenue sport unless it is to comply with Title IX. Collegiate athletics are run like a business these days, and it simply doesn't make since to add a sport that will not sustain itself. Lacrosse isn't likely to sustain itself at any of the mentioned universities for a lot of reasons not least of which is the lack of television revenue. The only way it will happen is if alumni were to endow all 12.7 scholarships, build a facility, and pledge to cover all expenses.

Another thing working against lacrosse is the Director's Cup. Because only a small number of schools compete in Men's Lacrosse the points for the Director's Cup are pro-rated. Therefore it doesn't make as much sense for an athletic department to fund any part of the program because there is not as much reward.

[Sonny]

I don't think FSU is consider in compliance with Title IX at the moment. There are very few 1-A schools in compliance last I heard (Navy, Army, Air Force, Michigan, Georgia Tech all come to mind).

[grinderpete]

Even if a sport is non-revenue, if there is enough support ($) behind it, schools will add it. Schools will add everything that they can to increase applications.

[LaxC21]

Something that hasn't been mentioned are teams that do not compete in Div. 1 athletics. I think there is a greater chance for those teams to be added as a varsity sport.

I think at some point there will be one of the schools mentioned above added, but it will be under the agreement that team will be heavily supported by the alumni base as someone mentioned. I don't think alumni supporting a program is too unrealistic of an idea. I believe what the MDIA "model" does is provide a way for both struggling NCAA programs and MDIA programs to either remain varsity or make a run at attaining varsity status.

[Laxman5112]

FSU and GT will be varsity much sooner than people think.

[Sonny]

FSU and GT will be varsity much sooner than people think.

GT won't. Varsity men's and women's soccer will be added before lacrosse. And then, only after funding & facility issues are resolved.

[Sonny]

Even if a sport is non-revenue, if there is enough support ($) behind it, schools will add it. Schools will add everything that they can to increase applications.

I disagree. Some schools are cutting fully funded mens varsity sports to comply with Title IX. $ isn't the only consideration here.

[Danny Hogan]

google the history of marquette men's wrestling. fully alumni funded d1 team with no scholarships cut.

[LaxC21]

I think the scenario that grinderpete talked about is possible if the alumni say that is the only way they are going to give their money to the school. Schools most likely won't turn away money and facility improvements or rist alienating donors if they can help it.

Sonny's argument is true to a certain extent, but I believe Title IX has become an excuse to cut some programs simply because they don't generate enough money. Radford is a perfect example, but it will take to long to explain it. Also, I believe some of Title IX or at least how it is followed has to do with the amount of money that is spent on womens sports compared to mens sports. I know it is more complicated than that and there are a number of ways that it can be interpreted to ensure compliance, but if I am not mistaken, money has to do with some of it.

I think that it will be interesting to see if alumni funded varsity programs even affect Title IX, because it is money that is designated for a specific purpose by the donor(s) and not money that is designated by the university. I work in higher education and I get to use this gray area often to get around government compliance issues. As long as the donor(s) designate how the money must be spent, then the university is obligated to spend the money in that way.

[KnoxVegas]

I don't think FSU is consider in compliance with Title IX at the moment. There are very few 1-A schools in compliance last I heard (Navy, Army, Air Force, Michigan, Georgia Tech all come to mind).

Also, Waldo brings sage advice to the thread.

Thank you. While it is nice to speculate on the growth of varsity lacrosse programs, the reality is that there is more competition for the athletic dollar. The start-up costs for a division I program are pretty steep. There are many other sports (crew, soccer,etc...) which, for one, do not bring with them the insurance liability that a contact sport like lacrosse. Still, schools are in no rush to add sports, if they are already in compliance. This would be because if you add one sport for one sex, you must provide the same opportunity for the other. That being said, compliance with Title IX is something that schools struggle with. You hardly see women's programs cut in favor of men's programs, if ever.

[DanGenck]

Even if a sport is non-revenue, if there is enough support ($) behind it, schools will add it. Schools will add everything that they can to increase applications.

I disagree. Some schools are cutting fully funded mens varsity sports to comply with Title IX. $ isn't the only consideration here.

But any school can be in compliance if they spend the money, which many choose not to do. I think money is first, compliance is second. Harvard is a great example of a school willing to spend the money to keep everything going. The answer might be to endow more sports (Harvard, for example, has an endowed Head Coach position).

But I'll be honest, I'm glad it's not my job. I'd lose sleep over it...

[TexOle]

Cheerleading is a sport for scholarship purposes. Also the dance teams are usually scholarship sports. In a few rare instances you will see marching bands with athletic scholarships. These are done in order to meet Title IX requirements. Most of the time men do not receive scholarships for these activities.

[OAKS]

Even if a sport is non-revenue, if there is enough support ($) behind it, schools will add it. Schools will add everything that they can to increase applications.

I disagree. Some schools are cutting fully funded mens varsity sports to comply with Title IX. $ isn't the only consideration here.

The underlying issue of Title IX issue is $$ though. Yes, schools cut fully funded men's varsity sports, but that's because they don't have the $$ to fully fund enough women's opportunities. This is one issue where throwing enough money at the problem might actually solve it.

[Ken Lovic]

i have one question about this thread- why did it start? Why would we care or support it?

I think most of us are in a great spot. I think MDIA provides the student-athlete with a better college experience. I really preach to people down here in the South to get over that whole "Varisty is better" ideal. Is it really? In some cases maybe, but in most 180plus MDIA programs these kids are getting a better experience and still competing on a national level with great support, the ability to be young and the backbone of something special, the ability to learn, the chance to get a great education and have the oppotunity to interact with many diffenent backgrounds etc,.

I get this question a lot about Varsity and when will GT be there.... I just want to say, why does it matter? Like it's any of our decisions....

I truely believe GT and many other ACC programs are impacting more student-athletes being an MDIA program than they ever will being a NCAA program. How many ACC varsity athletes are dealing with fund raising, scheduling, campus involvement, budget issues of a program, travel, recruiting, alumni, administration issues, and much much more like that of our MDIA officers and players that deal with this on a day to day basis? All of this can prepare them better for the outside world IMO.

sorry to rant, just frustrating. I really believe all of you deserve much more recognition and a bigger STANDING OVATION for what you do. I really think that the MDIA gives you all a much better chance to succeed in life, and to be honest I care more about that than the ACC getting a AQ by adding more varsity teams.

sorry to go on and on.. not trying to sound angry, I am not. I just really love being involved with the MDIA and thinks its a great alternative to the NCAA. I understand the question, but I guess being biased I would love to see more people appluad the efforts of the MDIA folks rather than try and figure out which one will become Varsity next

[Danny Hogan]

enough said, i wouldn't change a thing if i could go back in time.