RIT's move to Division I

[moxie]

RIT's men's team has officially announced its move to Division I. Here's what was said about the women's program in today's Rochester Democrat & Chronicle:

The RIT women's hockey program could be looking at a Division I upgrade down the road, but right now the Tigers will remain at Division III.
"The men deserve it," said Kasie Strong, a senior right winger from Groton, Mass. "Hopefully other teams like ours will soon follow."

The biggest hurdle for the women will be finding a league. Only 30 colleges have Division I women's programs, and there is currently no women's Atlantic Hockey league.

"Four of our members do (Sacred Heart, Mercyhurst, Holy Cross and RIT)," DeGregorio said, "but you need six to have a league. It's in the discussion stage." With Mercyhurst already a member, I would think RIT would have considered the CHA for its women's team and evidently rejected it. The idea of an Atlantic Hockey league would seem unlikely when Atlantic Hockey men's teams Connecticut and Mercyhurst already belong to the HE and CHA, respectively, on the women's side and Quinnipiac is joining the ECAC. Other than Holy Cross and Sacred Heart the other Atlantic Hockey schools don't have varsity women's programs.

[LoneStar]

Moxie:
What you say makes sense but, if the AHA powers are having discussions about a women's league isn't an AHA-CHA merger a perfect recipe. With RMU (Pittsburgh), WSU, Niagara and Mercyhurst and SHU, RIT and Holy Cross....an autobid league would be formed. Tell me Niagara and Mercyhurst aren't longing for that. Also, maybe this would be a way to get Ohio State to stop complaining about their travel. Location,location,location....this would make a good regional league for women's hockey.

[Hux]

As we have seen on several occasions on the men's side, there can be breakaways from existing leagues to form new ones. It is certainly plausible that there could be a women's only league formed of teams such as Mercyhurst, Holy Cross, RIT, Lindenwood etc. that aren't currently part of the same league as their men's teams. There are lots of possiblities, and it will be interesting to see how it all pans out as the women's game continues to grow.

[dakotadan]

It would definately be nice to see a few more D-I women's teams and leagues develope in the next few years.

[thebrain]

No...There aren't enough quality players yet for the teams out there...

It would definately be nice to see a few more D-I women's teams and leagues develope in the next few years.

[Hux]

No...There aren't enough quality players yet for the teams out there...


Yeah, ok, whatever. :rolleyes:

There is plenty of talent to fill ten more teams. Will they play at the level of some of the Canadian and American Olympians? No, but that doesn't mean there aren't D1 level players in the pipeline right now. If you take the Olympians out of the mix, you will find that there is a reasonable spread of talent across most teams, and there would be much greater parity.

[GWH Fan]

No...There aren't enough quality players yet for the teams out there...

"If you build it they will come..."

This becomes a chicken or the egg problem. Build more programs first or develope more talented players first. I think that more talented players are in the pipe if not at the NCAA D1 level yet, but it takes time to develope the programs. So I say, switch to D1, there is plenty of room for growth.

[stetem]

No...There aren't enough quality players yet for the teams out there...

The growth in womens hockey has leveled off or peaked
it could still grow in areas that dont have womans hockey
but i dont think you see much more in places like Ontario , central states :Wissconsin, , Minnesotta and all the east coast USA

i'm sure with the talent out there .. we could have quite a few more DI teams
thier ya go.. my 2 cents worth

[brookyone]

So primarily, it's more teams we need...I agree. It's been noted before of course, but there would seem to be some obvious (to me) candidates or possibilities here. Hint, Wolverines, Spartans, Wildcats. Perhaps some are more informed on what appear to be a unique set of obstacles at these institutions. :confused:

[ARM]

The growth in womens hockey has leveled off or peaked
it could still grow in areas that dont have womans hockey
but i dont think you see much more in places like Ontario , central states :Wissconsin, , Minnesotta and all the east coast USA

I think there is still more growing to be done in states like Wisconsin and Minnesota. The number of girls teams would need to grow by 25% to match the number for boys. In the long term, I think it will, just like all schools eventually added girls basketball, if they had boys basketball (and weren't an all-boys school). You still hear of a lot of girls who played on a boys team in high school, in places like Wisconsin and New England. If they added girls teams, there would be a lot larger pool of players.

[stetem]

I think there is still more growing to be done in states like Wisconsin and Minnesota. The number of girls teams would need to grow by 25% to match the number for boys. In the long term, I think it will, just like all schools eventually added girls basketball, if they had boys basketball (and weren't an all-boys school). You still hear of a lot of girls who played on a boys team in high school, in places like Wisconsin and New England. If they added girls teams, there would be a lot larger pool of players.

AGREED ARM
but i would think those same women are already playing girls hockey other then high school.. so the amount of girls that might play high school hockey would increase...but the overall percentage of girls would stay relatively the same

[uvmcats]

The growth in womens hockey has leveled off or peaked
it could still grow in areas that dont have womans hockey
but i dont think you see much more in places like Ontario , central states :Wissconsin, , Minnesotta and all the east coast USA

i'm sure with the talent out there .. we could have quite a few more DI teams
thier ya go.. my 2 cents worth

Although it worries me when I have to disagree a bit with my learned friend STETEM, I do not feel the growth in women's hockey has peaked at the college level and it may not have peaked in the youth levels.

To use the Vermont experience, we have added teams to our U12, U14 levels so that now we have 20 to 25 teams operating at those levels up from 10 to 15 four or five years ago. This doesn't count 20 or so high school teams that have formed in the past 4 years. I also understand there are the beginnings of some U10 teams and it doesn't count the girls that are still playing on boys teams.

So my point is that the real growth in the sport in Vermont will not hit the college age level for another 2 to 3 years. (not to say all coming up through would be skilled for the college game but if you build the base, the top will have more quality and quantity) I can't believe this isn't the pattern in other states.

[stetem]

Although it worries me when I have to disagree a bit with my learned friend STETEM, I do not feel the growth in women's hockey has peaked at the college level and it may not have peaked in the youth levels.

To use the Vermont experience, we have added teams to our U12, U14 levels so that now we have 20 to 25 teams operating at those levels up from 10 to 15 four or five years ago. This doesn't count 20 or so high school teams that have formed in the past 4 years. I also understand there are the beginnings of some U10 teams and it doesn't count the girls that are still playing on boys teams.

So my point is that the real growth in the sport in Vermont will not hit the college age level for another 2 to 3 years. (not to say all coming up through would be skilled for the college game but if you build the base, the top will have more quality and quantity) I can't believe this isn't the pattern in other states.
Good morning Necad...and you can disagree with me anytime
i guess the point i'm trying to make is overall number of girls playing hockey
10 or so years ago we had a very large growth in female hockey in Ontario
hopefully the next Olympics will incourage new players to take up the sport at a young age
but our growth spurt included woman who where past the college age that just wanted the recreation

in 1999 we did not have girls hockey where i live... but now we have approx 250 players
it seems to be a large spurt but most of the girls already played on boys teams or other centres that had established girls hockey

[ARM]

stetem, In most communities, the high school team is the highest level of hockey played. This is where young kids watch friends, older cousins, etc. and think "I want to play hockey, too." Having a varsity team spurs interest and participation at other levels. It also helps validate the sport. So I think that at least in the long term, more high school teams will translate into more players available for college teams.

[stetem]

stetem, In most communities, the high school team is the highest level of hockey played. This is where young kids watch friends, older cousins, etc. and think "I want to play hockey, too." Having a varsity team spurs interest and participation at other levels. It also helps validate the sport. So I think that at least in the long term, more high school teams will translate into more players available for college teams.

I do agree
i was in minn visting Shattuck with my daughter some years back and at the same time we hooked up with a team playing in a tournament in Blaine (i think)
all the girls parents i talked to said they all played high school hockey first then joined local teams when the season ended
not quite the same here...although i wished it was
most of the girls play in local leagues first..then high school if offered where they live
so... i'm thinking you are right ,,high school hockey could use the growth.. especially here in Ontario

[uvmcats]

stetem, In most communities, the high school team is the highest level of hockey played. This is where young kids watch friends, older cousins, etc. and think "I want to play hockey, too." Having a varsity team spurs interest and participation at other levels. It also helps validate the sport. So I think that at least in the long term, more high school teams will translate into more players available for college teams.

The point about high school play is important. Up until a few years ago in New England area, prep schools were the only real opportunity for girls to play hockey. Prep schools do not get the publicity that local high school sports get in the local media. They don't get the same fan following or interest. If you play in high school, the local paper and local TV has reports on the games. There is almost no greater incentive for kids than to see their efforts recognized in the newspaper. So the introduction of the sport in the public schools gives the sport a lot more local exposure and generates the interest at the youth level to begin to take up the sport.

It used to be for winter sports around here that basketball was the only game in town for girls. The youth basketball program probably had 250 girls in it through junior high school. With the high school team only taking 12 girls and the JV team taking 12 girls, there are 200 girls without a sport to play in the winter. Girls hockey is giving some of those athletes an opportunity to play a varsity high school sport that did not exist previously. As the sport has become established at the high school, there has been an increase in participation in the youth level in our community.

[Ironman33]

Just an update for all of the "more women's teams" interested parties...Ron Mason spoke at a USA Hockey Coaching Clinic in East Lansing last weekend. During his Q and A someone asked him having a women's team at Michigan State. His answer "well...we do have a team here, we have a club team, actually we have an excellent club team, but as far as varsity goes, well we have 25 varsity program we are trying to pay for, as soon as we get that figured out, then I'd like to add another Varsity team, but that is a ways off, especially with the facility issue" So sports fans..take that as you will... but it is directly from the horse's mouth and in front of 300+coaches.

[brookyone]

Ron Mason spoke at a USA Hockey Coaching Clinic in East Lansing last weekend. During his Q and A someone asked him having a women's team at Michigan State. His answer "well...we do have a team here, we have a club team, actually we have an excellent club team, but as far as varsity goes, well we have 25 varsity program we are trying to pay for, as soon as we get that figured out, then I'd like to add another Varsity team, but that is a ways off, especially with the facility issue."
Interesting, if not disappointing. A quick check of the University of Minnesota Gophersports website reveals approx. 23 varsity sports. I know that of these, only three, football, men's basketball & men's hockey make money, the others all lose money. I could be wrong but I have to believe Spartan football & men's basketball compare favorably to Minnesota's in terms of revenue...men's hockey I'd assume would also be at least fairly comparable at both institutions. Anyone can correct me if I'm wrong about any of that. I just don't know if I buy the money...or no money angle. For whatever reason(s), women's hockey probably just isn't up there on Mr. Mason's priority list. Of course some institutions athletic depts. and or regents are likely more willing to support programs at a loss than others. Pretty much same goes for the Wolverines. Just get the feeling it's more political than anything else at these institutions.

[dave1381]

My understanding is that in terms of cost/athlete, women's hockey is pretty high up there. So it's not the best sport for athletic departments looking to keep costs low and increase the number of female athletes. It's not as if Michigan decided to add women's water polo over women's hockey because its prospective students were more interested in water polo.

[Hux]

The growth in womens hockey has leveled off or peaked
it could still grow in areas that dont have womans hockey
but i dont think you see much more in places like Ontario , central states :Wissconsin, , Minnesotta and all the east coast USA

i'm sure with the talent out there .. we could have quite a few more DI teams
thier ya go.. my 2 cents worth

Actually there has been considerable growth along the eastern seaboard over the past two years, and USA Hockey expects that to continue.

Last year I had five girls in clinic/initiation, this year there are 11. We will be fielding a U10 team next year, and are seeing a number of older girls 9-14 take up hockey.

There was an interesting piece on the USA Hockey web site about the Girl Scouts having three day hockey camps in various parts of the country. The result was a 50% plus rate of participants taking up the sport. We plan on doing the same with the Girl Scouts here in town hoping for like results.

(I am also planning to spread nasty rumors about the kinky sex, drug induced, communist sympathising, alien abducted backgrounds of the National Championship cheerleading coaches here in town. With any luck we can pick up some of the 125 cheerleaders that should be playing hockey rather than shaking pom poms on their way to Disney ;) )