Ever since I've been familiar with sports at Virginia Tech (late 80s)-
I've always wondered why the men's LAX team is a club and not a varsity sport.
Especially now with VT being in the ACC, the premier league of the sport,
I am anxious to see Tech compete with the best. If for no other
reason its one more opportunity left unattainable to beat who?VA.
I am guessing $ is a key factor somehow, but can anyone enlighten me
and TKplayers in general on the topic?
Does Whit have any plans in this regard?
Happy Easter! (voluntary salutation- under the direction of Dabo Sweeney)
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Reading this I immediately flashed forward 20 years and saw future Hokies harping on the fact that they've "won, like, so many national championships in lacrosse" and immediately shuddered. Personally I would rather see rugby become a varsity sport or that money reinvested into Football.
I thought the same exact thing. Rugby should be varsity before lacrosse. We don't drink enough Zima to do well in lacrosse.
This is an outdated view of lacrosse. It's not for rich kids anymore. It's one of the fastest growing sports and takes some of the best athletes in high school--football players, basketball players, wrestlers. It's like hockey in the spring. Our club team is one of the best in the country and I'd love to see it as varsity sport.
for clarification mine was a sarcasitca response alluding to LOLUVA's insistence on claiming superiority for having won championships in non-football sports. I personally would still like rugby men's and women's to become varsity before lacrosse, however I have nothing really against lacrosse.
Ok, I just wanted to make that point, I saw the LOLUVA thing in multiple posts. I don't know what future rugby has as a varsity sport and what varsity rugby structure already exists. My high school (30% white by the way, lax isn't necessarily a white sport) was really good at lacrosse and it was really fun to watch. I'd like to see hockey before rugby, but rugby would definitely be cheaper.
Oh I am all for hockey! this was a question of what before lacrosse and I would like rugby over lacrosse. Primarily because it has men's and women's and because I love rugby. But if we were going with the top request, definitely Ice Hockey. Would love to win a national championship in that.
I too would be a big fan of seeing rugby become a varsity sport. As it is, we'd raise our own funds to travel, stay in 2-star hotels (and some of those I'd say had pretty generous ratings), buy our own uniforms, rent vans from VT and drive ourselves to competitions, etc. Shoot, we even had to find our own team doctor, cause all the athletics department would give us is a manager who knew how to put ice in a bag and call 911. Happily, my chiropractor, Dr. Brook of Tuck Chiropractic (seriously, if you're in Blacksburg and your back hurts, go see him. Shameless advertising. He's awesome.) volunteered to help us out. I remember some athletics dept employee getting pissed seeing us in Addidas gear (they sponsor the ACRL - the rugby equivalent of the ACC without the Florida schools, GT, or Duke and adding Navy) saying that, "we're a Nike school." My coach told him that once we got VT athletics department money to pay for it, we'd buy Nike.
"Why doesn't Virginia Tech have a Varsity Men's Lacrosse team?"
BECAUSE VIRGINA TECH "Has a great business model"
So... the Virginia Tech students on the club team suck?
Well. No. They do not suck, but you might Rocket- for putting words in anothers mouth. Not to mention the fact that we follow the rules - Titles and all.
Ah but your argument for not having varsity lacrosse said nothing about following Title IX, you merely stated that we don't have one "because Virginia Tech does not suck".
So therefore I assumed you meant that having a varsity lacrosse team would mean "Virginia Tech sucks."
I think that's a little insulting to the Virginia Tech students who love lacrosse and may play on the club team.
Yep, you're awesome - can not contain my admiration for you dude
#RocketHokieisthebestmostawesomepoliticallycorrectpersonintheworld
RocketHokie, if I ever have another son, I will name him after you. You are so almighty, I just tremble at the mere thought that you might be reading this. I am prompted to join the Peace Corps and take up the trumpet - I just can't help myself..............
let it go dude. Nobody cares and even if you two want to pull each other's hair at least come up with something clever.
I legged this just because of Mila Kunis
leg up!!
Just FYI, there is no such thing as NCAA Varsity Men's Rugby. All men's college rugby teams in the US are club sports and play in under USA Rugby, not the NCAA.
That said, like most people who did not attend an elite private prep school in Maryland, I don't really care about lacrosse.
I'm pretty sure its a Title IX issue
care to elaborate? (past violation?- catch22? too many men's sports at one school?)
In summary (very summarized), Title IX dictates that Men's/Women's scholarship athletes must be equal to that of the university. So, if the university is 60% male, at least 40% of the scholarship athletes must be female. If we add an all male team, the percentages get thrown off, and VT could get in trouble.
There is more to it, there's a spending side, and a representation side, but that is basically the issue.
Wouldn't the NCAA have to OK VT adding a varsity team?
It seems like they couldn't just add on run the the numbers later and realize they shouldnt have.
Maybe the catch is that percentages of enrollments fluctuate so they would have to keep a safe buffer.
gotcha.
So to counter the percentage shift, why not add women's lacrosse too...? They require less equipment, at least.
women's LAX is varsity
but they could add Women's Field Hockey with about the same result. There really isn't much push behind making Lax, Hockey, or Rugby a varsity sport so until that changes in terms of the Athletic department, I don't see much happening there. If Whit is as successful fundraising at Tech as he was at Cincy than possibly we could see the department add some additional sports.
Field hockey is more popular than womens lacrosse so i could see that.
The ACC dominates few sports -Men's LAX is one of them. Wouldnt it be in Techs best interest to be part of that. Winning the ACC would be just as good as an NCAA title and maybe even tougher to achieve. ... no empty trophy case yet though.
Not necessarily....its all about what may or may not make money versus cost. Hockey actually becomes a potential revenue sport but requires a large up front investment. Its one of the things we have talked about with the potential for a new arena. Penn State just built an $88 million dollar hockey complex. Eventually though, that will pay itself back because they actually have paid attendance to their games. If Tech chose to take that kind of money and build a replacement for Cassel capable of being converted for hockey and basketball it could defray that much singular investment in one sport by investing in basketball (mens and womens), wrestling, hockey (potentially mens and womens), volleyball and also the capability to utilize the facility for additional events like concerts and other shows.
Lacrosse or Rugby wouldn't draw near the crowds but doesn't necessarily require much in the way of new facilities. The other oddity with Rugby is that its not governed by the NCAA so I am not sure how that plays into the politics of the decision. Rugby could potentially be played at Lane Stadium in the springtime if some agreement could be reached with the football program. Lacrosse I would expect to double down on the soccer field in the spring if the women's lax doesn't already have a facility. The difference though is that these sports don't usually generate a huge crowd, except in the case of rugby when they are hosting a tournament, and the teams not playing are typically watching.
There is currently only one revenue sport at VT, football. There is only potential for one other, Mens's BB. All the rest of the Olympic sports are mandated money pits (either to be in revenue conferences or to satisfy Title IX). The fact that you can charge revenue does not off set operating costs. You have three ways to raise money under your control, better gate receipts, raise student fees or raise donors contributions. The football money machine is stalled. In fact we are not competing with other schools in non-coaching positions (someone to twitter prima donna recruits every time they have a BM). I hope CBW can get the BB program back up on its feet. We just invested a ton of money with him and his staff. Raising student fees for sports is going to come under major assault. Don't ask the politicians and tax payers for more money. They are catching on to the college sports shell game (see today's RTD Commentary page). Increased donations is the only way out. Twenty years ago there were two types of fans, financial and non-financial. We now have a third type. Advisors and most of them are not the big time financial advisors. They are the gurus, insiders and turkey leg collectors. If the Advisors want a new olympic sport program, the time is ripe for them to pony up and fund it. You don't have to be JP Jones or John Grisham here. Wes Worsham was a fire sprinkler contractor and Red English built roads and they got things named for them with a little up front money. Sorry everybody picked a poor boy ag/engineer school in the VA highlands that doesn't realize the value of ice hockey, LAX and rugby. Maybe we should do cricket and beat UVA and PSU to the punch?
I like hockey... and I understand people who like the other sports. And when I choose Virginia Tech I certainly didn't view it as a "poor boy ag/engineer school". The problem with those sports has been mentioned before, the upfront costs are very high, and the return on the investment would take a long time, much longer than basketball or football.
D'oh. Sure is.
That's the last time I check Wikipedia first.
I am pretty sure we are balanced as far as Title IX goes especially with the recent addition of Women's Golf to the program. I would say it is most likely a money situation for the time being.
http://www.collegesportsscholarships.com/title-ix.htm
So for example, if Virginia Tech is deemed to be 55% female, 45% male student population, than there should be 11 female varsity sports for every nine male sports. Virginia Tech is in the process of starting their Women's golf team as a Varsity sport. There are 11 Male sports counting the dual eligible sports (Track, Swimming) at Tech. There are now 11 Female Varsity sports at Tech as well.
According to the Tech website the student population is
Essentially this says that Tech could start two to three more men's sports before being outside compliance with Title IX. Reality is that it usually stays 1:1 so if they started a Men's Lacrosse team, they would need to find another Women's only sport that they don't currently have.
The last piece is where in the pecking order does Lacrosse stand in Tech Athletics. I would think that with the club teams that are well established at Tech, Lacrosse would likely be behind Ice Hockey and Rugby.
I was looking for something a little more in depth and on target about the topic...
JK this pretty much does it. Nice work!
GO HOKIES!
If VT is in compliance with Title 9,
Is the reason to not have 2-3 more men's varsity teams
a matter of budget / facilities? or something else?
Well, it's budget/facilities together (as you need a bigger budget for more facilities). If we had a bigger athletics budget, we could afford to run another non-revenue sport. Say things really took off with Whit at the helm (#Whitness!) and we see Tech operating with a $10 million per year surplus (the past couple years, it's been about $4 million), I could see us announcing that we'd be adding two new varsity sports - one male, one female.
Isn't is scholarships and not necessarily sports? So 60% of the scholarships are devoted to males and 40% to females. So a sport like football which is 85 male scholarships would decrease the number of sports because it is such a large amount of scholarships going to male athletes of just one sport.
to an extent, but most sports have so few scholarships you will still get quite a few. And its not like there arent womens sports that suck up numbers, Crew(rowing) is used at a lot of schools to balance football because you can have a ton of different people for the different events.
Besides, men's lacrosse players can't recruit football players like women's lacrosse players.
I would hope to see hockey become a varsity sport first
lacrosse just doesn't seem like a VT thing. It's a complete yankee/elitist sport. It's not polo but its pretty f***in close. #nolacrosseeverything
I thought lacrosse was from a Native American background
yeah.....it is. But the people who play it today are typically from stuffy private schools and institutions. like....ya know....UVa.
stuffy *OR* private schools....
With everyone becoming more aware of the long term effects of head injuries lacrosse is a popular alternative contact sport. Head injuries still exist but are much less than football. LAX has already become a main stream sport from toddlers thru high school. To call it elitist or northern is simply shortsighted misperception on your part.
He's generalizing but he's not incorrect. It is far more popular along the northern part of the east coast than anywhere else in the country and it is almost entirely played by white people. Elitist is not the best word to use, but when secondary sports require a lot of equipment (eg. hockey and lacrosse), they tend to be dominated (in terms of population) by white people.
To piggyback off other comments, it most certainly is a tile IX issue. I've never really read into it that much, but if there is a men's team missing at the expense of a women's, it generally is a title IX issue.
generalizing is being ignorant even if 'not incorrect'
Slanted statistics and that kind of attitude doesn't help to promote a sport that easily appeals to anyone who likes playing sports. I consider Lacrosse to be a combination of the best aspects of many sports, (Hockey, soccer, football, being the most obvious)
Sports are as expensive as you make them. If a kid is introduced to the
sport at a young age and really likes it, he(/she) will find a way to afford it.
(Formula I racing excluded from this example)
There's a pro golfer (cant remember his name ) I think he's from Cuba.
He fell in love golf as a kid and made his own clubs using sticks and rocks.
I believe he is still on the PGA tour now. It's an attitude.
Demographics aside, from a standpoint strictly about Tech Athletics-
it seems like something is missing being in the ACC which is, by far
the best league for the sport of Lacrosse and to not have a Varsity team.
For me its more about Tech competing with the best in any sport,
and the ACC is the best place to play Lacrosse.
Say what you want, but facts are facts. It is effin' expensive to play lacrosse in America. The club lacrosse team requires its members to pay around $2000 in dues each year. By comparison, the ruby team dues are $250 per year. Besides, get your hands on a ball and just about anyone can play rugby.
not comparing it to rugby Id love to see both as varsity teams.
I imagine Tech's LAX club is expensive because they are established
as a club and play good teams (travel alot)
The ACC rules the sport and I would love to see Tech in that arena.
That's the point I am (trying) to make
Your second point is completely invalid, as tech's rugby team travels all over the place, renting vans to do so. Not to mention we pay our own way to get to the Collegiate Rugby Championship in Philly - we have about a $6,000 ticket commitment (if memory serves) before we even get into any other expenses.
The reason Tech's LAX club is expensive is cause the equipment is expensive. I simply brought up rugby because, as it's been very successful and it's relatively low-cost, I could see that sport being elevated before LAX.
Not arguing anything about cost.
The ONLY point I'm making, and so far no one has refuted, is that:
The ACC rules the sport of Lacrosse
Being a top athletics program, it makes alot of sense to have a team competing in a league that dominates the sport, especially already being in the league for all other varsity sports.
It only makes sense if you feel you are going to consistently compete in the league and be ranked like the rest of the ACC. If you are going to spend the first ten years as a conference door mat than this probably doesn't make sense from both an athletic department standpoint or a fan base. Hard to break in quickly against the blue bloods but the recruiting grounds for some of the country's best lax talent are right here in the Mid Atlantic and growing. So is ice hockey though. I know Loudoun County schools now play both. Lax will grow faster for the lack of ice arena's in the area though.
You're not entirely wrong. The equipment is pretty expensive. However, much of our dues goes towards league fees and officials fees. Also, we had a trip to California this year that easily cost $500 a person, and we had to buy plane tickets in case we make nationals, which are also in California, so there was another $500/person. Not to argue with you about how expensive equipment is (ours probably cost a good $400-500), but it's really only a fraction of our dues.
alright alright alrihght. A couple things....I thought about it.
1. that my view is a shortsighted misperception - is it? I went to a private school for my bachelors and I've seen the lacrosse kids - they are by no means bad people, they just come from let's say....very sophisticated backgrounds.. I see who is playing for 'national titles' every year in the sport (bceause lax gets a couple hours per year on ESPN) Johns Hopkins, UNC, UVa, Syracuse, Notre Dame, Maryland, Lehigh, Yale in 2013?
2. That because I generalized this, I am accused of ignorance - cmon man.....generalizing a race of people, or a country.....I get it. But, in the context of my argument - I feel like I can pretty safely generalize that
a. lax is a sport played in the north
b. either northern schools or schools with 'elite' status are the ones who play the game well. (Okay, they're not all elitits....)
I don't think lacrosse makes sense to the region or to the type of students that typically attend....but honestly, any chance to beat UVa at something they're so good at (no matter how few people are watching), could be an interesting proposition. I bet LAX coaches are relatively cheap (head women's coach at loyola is bangin out 150K per year....so men's coach for double that salary?) and since it seems we play in the best overall lax league (?), we could probably steal some solid kids out of Maryland....(shudders)......(vomits).....and now I've come back full circle with my original point....lacrosse is for a different kind of school. I've been all over the northeast.....the people are generally nice.....(generalization alert)
but....does lacrosse fit the culture of Virginia Tech? I'd say no.
1. Break the mold. Golf is considered elitest/blue-blood etc. Golf is a much tougher sell to a newcomer than a more physical, spectator friendly, team sport like lacrosse but it is being done. Ask Tiger. Spread the word. Don't let your past experience cloud your view. Same thing goes for teams that have won... if you told me in 1990 that Virginia Tech would one day be playing football teams like OSU, Alabama, Tenn, Penn State, Mich, ND, etc. .... especially during the regular season? ... there would have been a long pause, followed by laughter, and then I would realize you weren't kidding. Believe it.
2. Break the mold. LAX is conducive to many climates. Geography is in the mind. Take down your rebel flag, the war has been over for quite some time now.
I won't touch your assumption that a men's lax coach would be paid twice as much as a women's coach... but ill point it out for you anyway. As for LAX making sense for Tech and its culture? It already does. The LAX team is maybe the most established club sport at Tech. Its been around for at least 25 years, so I'd say it makes sense to at least some people in Blacksburg.
LAX wasn't popular in my area when I was growing up. I know people who play and I wish I was exposed to it. If you don't like the sport that's one thing. Don't assume everyone else wont.
GO HOKIES!!!!!
Maybe we need to get rid of the tennis team then?
Interesting side story... I knew a guy who graduated from Cornell (mid 90s) he was telling me that alumni would 'tailgate' for football games, using fine china and silverware table settings to eat cooked pheasant. My point is that because its a certain way at some schools, it doesn't mean its going to be that way everywhere. Universal generalizations about a sport and its culture on the whole are plain silly. I mean look at Zima-ville.
No. Perception. It's primarily a sport of the coastal mid atlantic to northeast and that plays into your perception.
I graduated from a public middle class HS and played lacrosse.
I was small and short so, no basketball, no football for me.
I wanted contact sports so I played lacrosse.
Rugby after I got to college.
the kids I played lacrosse with were definitely not rich or stuck up brats.
By your reasoning, the VT Golf and Tennis teams should be disbanded.
It's interesting that this is brought up as the ACC is looking for a new lacrosse team with the departure of Maryland in order to keep their AQ (need 6 teams). There's been a major push for Louisville (who I think doesn't even have a club team, or if they do, don't play a very competitive schedule) to step up to NCAA level. Whoever does step up though will definitely have a hard time, seeing as all the ACC teams are ranked in the top 10, and are there year in and year out. Also, if it makes people happy (which I'm sure it will), UVA didn't make the ACC tournament this year, finishing dead last in conference play.
As for us, I think it's a little more than a title IX issue. If you look into our club's history though, we actually competed as a DII affiliate (non-scholarship) school, which basically meant we were a club competing against NCAA schools. Our coach who recently retired kept trying to push the athletic department to make MLAX a D1 sport, but to no avail. In 1995, the NCAA put forth a rule that would basically punish teams for playing club schools. This led to us being dropped by our conference, and forcing us to become a club sport. Now that Whit is the AD though, maybe there's a shot for men's lacrosse to go D1. It depends on what Whit wants to do.
I do expect us to add a new sport soon, as there seems to be the capacity to do so. It all comes down to the money, as some others have brought up here.
This is simply an idea/question.
Would it be a violation to donate money to the school asking them that the $ be used strictly to study/research the possibility of Tech LAX becoming a D1 sport? Its one thing to ask them to look into it. Its another thing to say here's the money you need to investigate - go to it.
There are already donations exactly like this being made to Tech regarding Ice Hockey so no it is not a violation. It likely would take an extraordinary number of contributors doing the same or a single significant donation to even get them to start a project of this nature as I don't think the hockey donations have gotten traction at this point.
Also, how does sponsorship work in the NCAA?
The NLA (pro LAX) basically evolved from sponsored leagues, if I'm remembering correctly. Before the NLA, there were corporate sponsored leagues/teams(I think Coors Light had a team for instance). I know there are regulations, but could equipment be donated by sponsors in return for product placement somehow to help defray the overhead costs?
EDIT: not beer companies, of course - thinking LAX / sports equip sponsors.
I'm not 100% sure how it works, but there are sponsorships where companies will give teams free stuff in hopes that they will be used in games. I have a friend that played for CNU, and they are sponsored by Maverik. Every year they get like sticks from them for free. I don't think they're bound to a company like the Major League Lacrosse does with their teams. I'm not sure how the rest of the equipment works though, but I think they might get some other stuff free. It's all about promoting their brand.
What do you guesstimate the amount to be?
Like I said, I have no idea how much free stuff they actually get other than the 2 free sticks, so I have no clue exactly how much per player.
Question for amount to do research (above)
If you want to spend money on Lax you can donate it to the club. Check their web site for details.
We used to play UVa in lax. It was more like a scrimmage for them.
Honestly, I'd love to see VT hockey become varsity before men's lacrosse.
us 2
Classic movie, +1 for Slapshot
I too have long hoped for a Varsity Hockey team. My fraternal Big Bro was part of the club team, and he hailed from the Chicago suburbs. This year's Frozen Four games and Championship were great sources of entertainment, and congrats to Union. Few things compare to going to a hockey rink, when it comes to sheer energy.
That's where LAX might be an easier sell.
The fields are there. It merely becomes an issue of scheduling.
The facilities impact would be minimal.
GO HOKIES!
Count me on team LAX.
I had never seen it, cared about it, thought about it until my oldest son made the switch from FB to LAX in high school and it is fun, rough, and fast paced.
It's gaining steam in the South, and it's not at all blue-blood Caucasians on the rosters.
Where do you think these moves came from?:
We'll let UVA have lacrosse. They need to feel like they're good at SOMETHING.
Wait. No. They don't. We must fix this
It's a very low return on investment for the athletic department. This would not be a great time to add a cost center such as men's Lax when we can't even sell out our football games (#1 revenue stream) and our basketball program has been abysmal the past 3 years.
Whit is doing the right thing investing in football and Basketball - let's talk about adding another varsity sport after we win a football or basketball national championship and get our endowment where it needs to be to continue to compete at a high level in the major revenue generating sports - when they win all programs win.
As a former VT Lax team member I am very familiar with this discussion. LAX has been a club at Tech since the 1940's. The issue of varsity status has been around almost as long. There are many reasons why it has not happened. Money is one and Title IX is another. The reasons have changed over time. It is expensive with all the travel involved. Scholarships aren't cheap either. Title IX is not just about numbers of students it is also about per captia spending. Spending ratio of male and female students is the measure. There are many schools that dropped varsity lacrosse in order to comply with Title IX.
Lax has grown in popularity in recent years and the number of college clubs has grown as well. So much so there is now a National Championship for club lacrosse and All-American teams. Read about the MCLA http://mcla.us/ Unlike varsity lacrosse, club lacrosse championships have been dominated by west coast teams. Probably due to the fact there are no, or very few, varsity teams in the west.
VT Lax is currently a member of the SELC (SouthEastern Lacrosse Conference). If you like lacrosse support the team by attending games and even giving money. These are true student-athletes who pay their own way to play the sport they love.
Read more about the team: http://www.lacrosse.org.vt.edu/
VT is playing in the SELC tournament this week. They have been to every SELC tournament, played in many championships and won twice. They have also been to the National Championship tournament several times. The SELC consists of many SEC schools and ACC schools without varsity Lax. IT is nice to see them dominate over the SEC in this sport.
Your description of how established the club league is definitely changes my perception of VT's club status. I pictured it more as an underground / pick up game mentality just calling around to other schools to see if they want to play.
Especially with your description of the west coast teams, some of the best talent at the college level is playing on clubs rather than on varsity. In that sense, I'm starting to think that being varsity as not necessarily being better, talent wise. I think the varsity status would be better still, so that 100% of the cost isn't on the players.
The school gives the club some money and provides facilities but the rest is on the students and whatever doantions come in.
After many years trying, the recently retired head coach, a VT professor, also came around to the idea that varsity wasn't necessary because of changed landscape. Club level lacrosse is very competitive and gives an opportunity for many to play at the collegiate level that would not be available if varsity was the only option. Still would be nice to have varsity, but it isn't necessary.
It is the same thing with the Crew team. For years we tried to convince the school to at least add a Varsity women's team that the men's team could piggyback off of (quite common in other places, like UVa). I would say the majority of teams that were seen in competition all over were club teams, similar in nature to how the Lacrosse team is.