NHL to sponsor studies to explore establishing future D-I hockey programs
NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman announced on Friday that the League and the NHL Players' Association will sponsor feasibility studies to explore establishing future NCAA Division I college hockey programs on campuses across the United States.
The announcement was made during a press conference prior to the start of the 2017 NHL Draft presented by adidas at United Center.
The NHL and NHLPA have agreed in this endeavor to commit funds through the industry growth fund, which is financing the initiative.
The University of Illinois will be the first to participate in the study.
I know the VT hockey team has had a bit of success at the club level throughout the years, and given the facilities in Roanoke that we can use, as well as the rumors we could be looking to replace Cassell within the next 20 years, I wonder if this is something that Whit would look into as a potential growth opportunity for VT athletics. Considering our location, and the success the Caps, Canes, and Preds have had the last 10 years or so in the area, it seems like something we should at least look into.
Certainly would be nice to be able to have a D1 hockey team that the NHL helps to establish in Blacksburg.
Comments
It's certainly worth a look, if Whit thinks VT can be competitive there, and can afford it.
I see football, basketball, and baseball as the priorities.
My dreams are beginning to come true.
Would we have to cut another mens varsity team due to Title IX if we did? Also, I will take this question down if I am treading into dangerous territory.
We would either have to cut another D1 mens team, or add a D1 womens team somewhere.
It's my understanding that it's the scholarships that have to even out, not the number of teams. I know that a lot more women get track and field scholarships than on the men's side to help offset the football team having 85 men's scholarships without an accompanying women's sport. That said, it's a lot easier to add a team full of women on scholarship than to inflate the numbers across the board.
It would also depend on the number of scholarships offered to the men's team.
I would also be interested to see if there was enough interest for a women's hockey team.
It's actually both "number of participants" and "scholarship dollars". From ncaa.org:
It is determined based on the enrollment:
I think it really depends on the NHL's investment here. If they're willing to help schools get the funds necessary to start up the programs, then it might make sense to explore those options if we think we can turn hockey into a revenue sport for Tech (no reason to think we couldn't). At that point, we can focus the funds on spinning up another women's program to even it out.
If that's the case, wouldn't we add a Men's Lacrosse team before a hockey team? Lacrosse is already a big ACC sport and we have a top-level club program.
Just on the surface, this seems like an exciting idea. I always felt like going to the club team games was a huge hidden gem while I was in Blacksburg.
Edit: Spelling
That would be a good away to attract some Canadians to the Burg...
And if we aren't successful:
You guys are forgetting Title IX in all of this. In order to add a men's sport, you need to be spending proportionally more in Women's athletics already to get "in compliance".
* VT has 20 varsity teams already, if you consider men's and women's cross country, swimming & diving, and track & field as separate teams.
* per this article, spending must be within 1% on scholarships and the opportunities for men and women to participate must be proportionate to the % of men and women in the student body. Football, as a result, will always cause a disproportionate opportunity relative to the number of men and women in the student body:
http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2016/04/adding-mens-varsity-programs...
* adding hockey as a varsity sport may require cutting other men's sports due to both budgetary concerns and Title IX (see article above)
* you're not permitted to take scholarships from one sport (regardless of gender) and give them to another. For example, you can't transfer five football scholarships to create a women's fencing squad -- you have to create five new scholarships for women's fencing. Likewise, you can't take two of your maximum 4.5 men's golf scholarships to give them to women's golf or visa versa.
* currently, Virginia Tech has 161 scholarships in men's varsity sports but only 111 scholarships in women's sports. 42.74% of Virginia Tech's student body is women (11,024 of 25,791 undergraduates) and 40.80% of Virginia Tech's scholarships are in Women's Athletics.
What does all of this mean?
It means VT is currently out of compliance with Title IX for scholarship spending on athletics. Adding another men's sport would either require removing scholarships from other men's sports to stay in compliance -- hockey permits 18, the only men's sport higher is football so multiple men's sports would have to be cut -- or at least 18 women's scholarships would also have to be added. The only women's sports that permit 18 or more scholarships are:
* track and field (18, already have)
* ice hockey (18)
* rowing (20)
EDIT: Found out that track and cross country use the same scholarships after finding the link in the next post. Edited, which also shows that VT is out of compliance currently, not in compliance like my initial numbers showed. My original source (the four-letter network) didn't state this in their article.
For completeness sake, here's every varsity sport and how many scholarships you're permitted. Note that some sports, like football, are headcount sports -- each player is one scholarship. Others, like golf or baseball, permit partial scholarships thus why you might see "11.7" or "4.5" next to a sport.
http://www.scholarshipstats.com/ncaalimits.html
Excellent points and links.
Compliance for scholarship spending is based scholarship $ as a percentage of student athletes (e.g. if you have 200 female student athletes and 300 male student athletes, then 39-41% of your scholarship money would need to be allocated to female student athletes and 59-61% would need to be allocated to male student athletes. Scholarship spending compliance has nothing to do with % of student population (that plays a factor in participation compliance which is a separate aspect of Title IX).
Do you have a link to the VT data needed to calculate compliance (# of student athletes by sex, scholarship $ by sex)? I looked and was unable to find it, so I would be extremely wary of stating Tech is out of compliance without access to that data.
Yes, I thing "out of compliance" is probably a bit strongly worded, given that there appears to be some room for interpretation between the different types of criteria.
*Scrolls upthread 3 comments*
How in the hell did I miss that. Oops x.x Also, leg for you sir!
There is a good chance the first Title IX comments were posted while you were typing your post, thus in the timeline they look like they beat you to the punch even though they were not there when you started your comment.
This could be a great opportunity for a lot of ACC schools. If the NHL is serious about expanding their fan base in the south again, then GT, UNC, and Louisville would make great schools for them to help grow. While Pitt and Cuse seem like easy choices for programs in the north. Doesn't ND currently play in the BIG for hockey?
Notre Dame is currently in Hockey East, but yes, they will officially join the Big Ten for ice hockey on Saturday
Interestingly, VT ice hockey rejoins the ACC this upcoming season, after having earlier left for the MACH. This should help us regain competitiveness as it should significantly reduce our travel costs.
Do you think that this news would change where ND plays? Was hockey excluded from the all other sports in the ACC deal? How frequently to hockey programs switch conferences?
Outside of the ND football deal, I don't believe the ACC has any exceptions. If the ACC has a conference in a sport at a varsity level, any ACC member who participates in that sport at the varsity level is required to be a member of the conference. If the ACC had enough members playing varsity ice hockey to warrant an ACC conference at that level, BC and ND would be required to join.
Not sure how much ND would really care but boy, BC would HATE to be forced into an ACC hockey conference out of Hockey East.
The "ACC" you are referencing is not the "Atlantic Coast Conference", but rather is the "Atlantic Coast Collegiate Hockey League", which is a member of the ACHA (not NCAA) Division 2.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Coast_Collegiate_Hockey_League
I am confident in one thing: if it makes all the sense in the world for the NHL to do something and help grow the game and their popularity, rest assured they will make sure they do the opposite.