PDA

View Full Version : Women’s hockey summit seeks answers to raise CIS profile



norm1909
05-26-2012, 09:33 PM
Just passing on this article (http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sports/Women+hockey+summit+seeks+answers+raise+profile/6284193/story.html) (No. 1 concern is Canada’s...) a found interesting.

giwan
05-27-2012, 01:21 PM
Just passing on this article (http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sports/Women+hockey+summit+seeks+answers+raise+profile/6284193/story.html) (No. 1 concern is Canada’s...) a found interesting.

So there is no such thing as a Title IX in CA to try to keep things equivalent.

pgb-ohio
05-27-2012, 07:38 PM
Just passing on this article (http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sports/Women+hockey+summit+seeks+answers+raise+profile/6284193/story.html) (No. 1 concern is Canada’s...) a found interesting.Interesting topic; thanks for posting the link. There are actually multiple issues worth exploring.


So there is no such thing as a Title IX in CA to try to keep things equivalent.Gender equity is one such issue. But with all due respect, the primary battleground here is US/Canada parity, not male/female parity. The CIS Men and CIS Women actually find themselves in somewhat analogous situations. The CIS Men certainly play a good brand of hockey, but they generally don't have strong NHL candidates on their rosters. Similarly, the CIS Women play a good brand of hockey, but don't necessarily have Team Canada candidates on their rosters. Without the top end players, the CIS usually (though not always) loses head-to-head match-ups with U.S. colleges -- regardless of gender. I can certainly understand why those from North of the border would want to change that situation, and keep more blue chip Canadian players at home.

For those wanting to pursue that goal, Mel Davidson's comments in the article make a lot of sense. As one example, I was surprised to read that the assistant coaches for the CIS Women hold volunteer positions. Gotta agree with Davidson; that's a huge disadvantage and needs to change. I don't know if the CIS Men have paid assistants. If they do, then there is a gender equity issue in play. But again, the core issue is keeping up with the U.S., not with the CIS Men.

west
05-29-2012, 02:28 AM
There simply isn't money in the CIS. The men's side is essentially funded by the Canadian Hockey League through their scholarships* and why there's quality at the level in the first place. These are 21-26 year old men with ~4 years of major junior experience each. The scholarships/perks they're offered by the universities are essentially bonuses, the CHL covers the tab for uni, the program itself gives them a few thousand bucks a year. Even if the women were offered the same they'd basically be choosing between having to pay a few grand a year to split the difference between the scholarships offered to be a student athlete in Canada or get a full ride in the NCAA. Not a difficult choice for a player or parent.

McGill is a unique case for a couple key reasons: It is an elite academic school and little money is required to turn it into a full ride for a Quebec player. While I'd hate to take credit away from Peter Smith, I'd wager that if players the calibre of Ward, Bettez and Daoust were from Ontario, Alberta or anywhere else in the "ROC" and not Quebec, the CIS would not have been on their radar. There simply isn't the same kind of money available for programs in the CIS never mind money that is essentially forced upon a program through something like Title IX, as long as that gap exists the better option for a Canadian girl is going to the NCAA. Quite frankly I don't see it as such a big deal, with the way some of these programs have gone they might as well be part of the Hockey Canada development system (UMD, Cornell, Mercyhurst, soon to be Clarkson) so the idea of losing your development clout to a foreign country isn't that alarming. Especially when the post-university playing options almost exclusively exist in Canada.

I understand wanting more "homegrown" development, but the CIS isn't really the way to do it.


* For a more detailed explanation for those not in the know, here's a good article to sum it up http://www.thehockeyadvocate.com/?page_id=454

canadahockey26
05-29-2012, 12:46 PM
Also McGill gets a lot of players who are French first and English second. They may not be comfortable going somewhere where it is all English.

OnMAA
05-31-2012, 04:28 PM
Also McGill gets a lot of players who are French first and English second. They may not be comfortable going somewhere where it is all English.

McGill is an English ONLY school. A few years ago, one very high profile French Language based recruit, did not last more than a year due to the fact she could not survive in the English based education at McGill, and she transferred to U of Montreal, a French based school on the other side of the hill in Montreal.

Ottawa U and Moncton are the two other universities with a CIS women's hockey team, that offer education in French. Laurentian offers a French based education as well, but they only have a men's team.


For what it is worth, our daughters were 100% French educated, and made the switch to English when they went to college. Both struggled with the adjustment during the first few weeks, but did just fine after that. Their SAT/ACT exam training, was a key factor in the successful switch over.

whoop87
06-01-2012, 11:57 PM
McGill is an English only university with a twist...yes, the language of instruction for most courses and programs at McGill is English; however, students may submit any written work that is to be graded in English or French, except in cases where knowledge of the language is one of the objectives of the course. That was the case when I studied there for a semester on an exchange program in '85 (dark ages) and, according to McGill's own website, that is still the case today (age of enlightenment). I took a Quebecois film studies course that was taught entirely in French - my other classes were conducted in English.