(12-23-2016 12:50 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Title IX means virtually all schools need to add an equivalent number of women's sports scholarships

One of the biggest misconceptions in all of college athletics.

Title IX has only to do with participation, not scholarships.

I'll believe it when I see it. Colorado has been historically tight budget-wise for its athletics, and the amount of investment required to go D1 in hockey is higher than most other sports. It's kind of en vogue for big name schools with ACHA programs to talk about going varsity due to Arizona State starting hockey at the moment. Rutgers and Alabama have been making noise about this recently as well, and Rutgers even talked with their administration about it only to get a "no."

As a Coloradoan with a lot of ties to the world of ice hockey, I don't see this happening anytime soon at CU.

CU is still trying to get it's athletic finances sorted out, and if it were ever to happen, they would proabably need a Terry Pegula-like donor with a very big checkbook, similar to what Pegula did at Penn State.

Ice Hockey is a very heavy lift for any college athletic department, and there needs to be quite a groundswell of financial commitment to make it work as a revenue sport.

(12-23-2016 05:56 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(12-23-2016 12:50 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Title IX means virtually all schools need to add an equivalent number of women's sports scholarships

One of the biggest misconceptions in all of college athletics.

Title IX has only to do with participation, not scholarships.

"participation and opportunities", not "just" participation ... it does not automatically require an equal total number of scholarships, but at the margin it typically means you have to add similar numbers.

And while schools that are out of compliance have opportunities to present a plan to come into compliance, that leeway does not automatically extend to a school that deliberately takes itself out of compliance as a result of adding a sport.

(12-27-2016 06:36 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(12-23-2016 05:56 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(12-23-2016 12:50 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Title IX means virtually all schools need to add an equivalent number of women's sports scholarships

One of the biggest misconceptions in all of college athletics.

Title IX has only to do with participation, not scholarships.

"participation and opportunities", not "just" participation ... it does not automatically require an equal total number of scholarships, but at the margin it typically means you have to add similar numbers.

And while schools that are out of compliance have opportunities to present a plan to come into compliance, that leeway does not automatically extend to a school that deliberately takes itself out of compliance as a result of adding a sport.

No idea where Colorado stands on Title IX, but they added women's lax recently, so there could be an "opening" for hockey.

(12-22-2016 12:18 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  PAC-12 Needs to form a conference

Alaska
Alaska-Anchorage
Denver
Colorado College
Air Force
Colorado
Arizona State

Then add as PAC-12 teams start up. Washington, Oregon, Stanford, Utah, etc.

You need at least 5 PAC-12 schools right?

I'm guessing you can get Simon Fraser

(12-29-2016 07:46 PM)superdeluxe Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 12:18 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  PAC-12 Needs to form a conference

Alaska
Alaska-Anchorage
Denver
Colorado College
Air Force
Colorado
Arizona State

Then add as PAC-12 teams start up. Washington, Oregon, Stanford, Utah, etc.

You need at least 5 PAC-12 schools right?

I'm guessing you can get Simon Fraser

Simon Fraser will be joining the Alaska schools someday. Denver and CC don't want to play Alaska schools - that would be like the SEC joining forces with Southern Conference teams. AFA won't be big time either, as they can't attract NHL prospects.

Denver needs UND and Omaha in their hockey conference. If a PAC12 school puts enough emphasis on hockey, they would get an NCHC offer. Ariz St doesn't have a decent rink yet, otherwise they would be in.

(12-27-2016 06:36 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  "participation and opportunities", not "just" participation

What is an "opportunity" within the context of varsity collegiate athletics? A roster spot.

And how do you count the number of participants for a team? The number of filled roster spots.

Alas, they are one in the same.

(12-27-2016 06:36 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  that leeway does not automatically extend to a school that deliberately takes itself out of compliance as a result of adding a sport.

By the letter of the law, all a school needs to prove (in court, if a lawsuit is brought and a settlement not reached) is that the interests and abilities of female students on campus to participate in varsity athletics have been satisfied.

(12-29-2016 07:55 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Denver needs UND and Omaha in their hockey conference.

Colorado College too, but I get that this was in response to a proposed "Mountain Hockey Conf". Luckily for Denver, it has/will have strong ties to both Omaha and UND via the Summit League.

That is, unless the Big Ten were to offer affiliate hockey membership to UND and/or UNO.