Chatham?

[vcxc3200]

I want some different takes on this one because well, I don't have many facts to go on.

As of next year, Chatham is fielding men's varsity teams. (If you didn't hear, they are now co-ed.) At the moment, they sponsor women's hockey in the ECACW.... Does anyone think they will possibly start fielding a men's squad in the next few years, and could be the ECACW's elusive seventh team? I know Title IX considerations could make that difficult, but still, give some thought to that one.

How much longer does the ECACW wait?

[joecct]

Re: Chatham?

Wouldn't Title IX favor the men in this case?

[LakerEagleLover]

Re: Chatham?

Wouldn't Title IX favor the men in this case?

Yes, I believe it would....

[spwood]

Re: Chatham?

Hopefully the administration would give both teams more support than the ladies have gotten to date. Otherwise, the men would be looking at getting Lebanon Valley/Scranton to the extreme. It wouldn't be good for hockey as a whole. It's been good to see the 15-0 scores out of the game.

[joecct]

Re: Chatham?

Lebanon Valley could have worked, SHOULD have worked if they changed their recruiting model when they joined the West. They didn't and the slaughter began.

[norm1909]

Re: Chatham?

They are "co-ed", but 91% female to 9% male, they have an endowment of $63,349,605 and their 2014-2015 Tuition & Fees are $33,429.

They have away to go before adding a men's hockey program - but - I do believe it is in the scope of the future.

[vcxc3200]

Re: Chatham?

They are "co-ed", but 91% female to 9% male, they have an endowment of $63,349,605 and their 2014-2015 Tuition & Fees are $33,429.

They have away to go before adding a men's hockey program - but - I do believe it is in the scope of the future.

Keep in mind too... the male enrollment will grow due to A. Father Time, and B. Athletics. They've admitted one cohort of male undergrads. Give that a few years. Athletics should speed up the process too.

[norm1909]

Re: Chatham?

Keep in mind too... the male enrollment will grow due to A. Father Time, and B. Athletics. They've admitted one cohort of male undergrads. Give that a few years. Athletics should speed up the process too.

Very true - and the ratio isn't a bad recruiting tool either. I do believe that male sports will happen in due course (also Title IX) and adding men's hockey would be highly synergistic with a women's team already in place.

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Chatham?

Keep in mind too... the male enrollment will grow due to A. Father Time, and B. Athletics. They've admitted one cohort of male undergrads. Give that a few years. Athletics should speed up the process too.

Which was exactly the plan Nazareth College used when they went co-ed -- grow the athletics program to help recruit male students (not necessarily athletes) to the school. It seemed to have worked.

[norm1909]

Re: Chatham?

Which was exactly the plan Nazareth College used when they went co-ed -- grow the athletics program to help recruit male students (not necessarily athletes) to the school. It seemed to have worked.

+1

Formerly all female, Seton Hill University became co-ed in 2002 and has also done very well with its co-ed athletics (NCAA DII), and I do expect Chatham to be successfully as well.

[Scott_TG]

Re: Chatham?

+1

Formerly all female, Seton Hill University became co-ed in 2002 and has also done very well with its co-ed athletics (NCAA DII), and I do expect Chatham to be successfully as well.

Chatham Women's Hockey is pretty much a joke, 4-46 their last three seasons and some of the worst goals I've ever seen given up. For Plattsburgh the long trip there and back is probably tougher than playing the Cougars on the ice when its their turn to be the road team.

But I guess for both the teams and the fans of the ECAC West schools it would be manna from heaven if the team that gives them the autobid is also a perennial cupcake like Chatham Men's Hockey is bound to be.

[Hammer]

Re: Chatham?

Chatham's women have been pretty rough to watch the past couple years, but Buffalo State hasn't exactly wowed me in women's hockey, either.

And neither one of them had a 72-game losing streak like Finlandia did, which they snapped last season. There's plenty of cupcakes in D-3 women's hockey.

[spwood]

Re: Chatham?

Chatham's women have been pretty rough to watch the past couple years, but Buffalo State hasn't exactly wowed me in women's hockey, either.

And neither one of them had a 72-game losing streak like Finlandia did, which they snapped last season. There's plenty of cupcakes in D-3 women's hockey.

The problem with Chatham, and what I bring up every time they are discussed is that they've yet to be able to field a full roster. They are way behind before they even hit the ice. With half the roster of their opponents, they work their asses off on the ice. I actually pull for them (except when they play Plattsburgh). Those girls deserve better than the school has been able to do for them so far.

[norm1909]

Re: Chatham?

The problem with Chatham, and what I bring up every time they are discussed is that they've yet to be able to field a full roster. They are way behind before they even hit the ice. With half the roster of their opponents, they work their asses off on the ice. I actually pull for them (except when they play Plattsburgh). Those girls deserve better than the school has been able to do for them so far.

You are correct and the sad thing is, the cost of doing a great job and a poor job differ by maybe 10-15%