Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

2016-2017 Richmond Spiders

126K views 1K replies 79 participants last post by  BigE 
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)
2016-17 Richmond Spiders

I know the minor sports get mocked on here, but thought some might be interested to know that UR has decided to eliminate its men's soccer and track and field teams in order to elevate its men's lacrosse program to varsity status. Just last year UR moved the lacrosse team from club status to varsity club status, giving it additional resources in terms of coaching, money, and more, but now they've decided to take it all the way up to varsity.

The A-10 doesn't sponsor men's lacrosse, and there is no word yet on what conference UR will be looking to join as an associate member for lacrosse. Would imagine CAA is most likely, with UMass and St. Joe's already there.

Men’s soccer and track & field cut in favor of lacrosse
 
#2 ·
re: Richmond

Lacrosse is a very fun sport to watch, and if you can get a successful program going it'll be great.

I'd recommend http://www.insidelacrosse.com/ for your website to get news from, I've found it to be pretty good. Though the people who comment there tend to hate everyone who isn't a traditional lacrosse power school. (aka a lot of them were very upset when Loyola actually pulled out the win last year)


Though it is very unfortunate that some programs had to be cut for this to happen.
 
#14 ·
re: Richmond


Rumor has it that these are flying off the shelves in Richmond:



 
#17 ·
re: Richmond

yes there is more lax enforcement of Title IX, but it's still the elephant in the room. I'm getting from good sources money was not the issue, it was numbers of participants. ie to meet Title IX, you still need to be in proportion. It's unfortunate the women don't have the level of interest the men do, so the men suffer.
 
#18 ·
re: Richmond

... to meet Title IX, you still need to be in proportion. ...
That simply is not true. There is a "three-part test" where the first of three is proportional representation and the third is meeting the needs of the underrepresented gender. An institution need only meet one of the three parts to be in compliance. I was unaware of this letter from 2010:

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-20100420.html

which does make it harder to meet the third part than it had been during the Bush administration but the ability to meet the third part is still there.
 
#19 ·
re: Richmond

Also what makes it more sad in Richmond's case is the impact in the future it will have on cross-country, which I'm surprised isn't being discussed. Note that Richmond swept the A10 in XC two years ago, winning both the men's and women's titles. However, without track, it will be much harder to recruit for XC, as better recruits will be much more inclined to go where there is both XC and track, and it could harm one of the A10s better XC programs also in addition to lowering the A10 standard in track.
 
#21 ·
re: Richmond

Institutions have very little interest in resting their hopes on Part Three compliance. It's a subjective criterion, and they don't want to risk a judgment against them.

As for XC, the impact is likely to be minimal. In fact, UR's track team is almost entirely made up of XC runners...19 of the 23 members of the men's track team at UR are distance runners. We've basically just recruited for XC and allowed them to continue running track through the rest of the year for training purposes. The plan is to even allow the XC runners to participate in some track meets after the track team is axed, although they can't participate in A-10 or NCAA track championships.
 
#23 ·
re: Richmond

Institutions have very little interest in resting their hopes on Part Three compliance. It's a subjective criterion, and they don't want to risk a judgment against them...
Ya...I've always figured it was that or a typical CYA attitude that administrators develop. I stand by the assertion, though, that this is really a money issue. They could add a women's team or two and the proportion would be the same.
 
#25 ·
re: Richmond

You are a blight on the board. Go away.
1st of all, what's a blight?

2nd of all, I have a positive green rep value of 137,816. I seem to be well liked on this board, contrary to what you are suggesting. I feel this thread should be deleted for the good of this board. At least give an OT: in the title. It helps the board run smoother...
 
#29 ·
re: Richmond

1st of all, what's a blight?

2nd of all, I have a positive green rep value of 137,816. I seem to be well liked on this board, contrary to what you are suggesting. I feel this thread should be deleted for the good of this board. At least give an OT: in the title. It helps the board run smoother...
Go away.
 
#30 ·
re: Richmond

1st of all, what's a blight?

2nd of all, I have a positive green rep value of 137,816. I seem to be well liked on this board, contrary to what you are suggesting. I feel this thread should be deleted for the good of this board. At least give an OT: in the title. It helps the board run smoother...
I think the title was sufficient for folks to know what the topic is about... Nothing to see here, please move along
 
#27 ·
re: Richmond

SFSpidur - Only having gone to big schools I had never considered the problem of a significant fraction of the students being student-athletes. Here's the percentages for UR:

male: 14.2% (194 out of 1358)
female: 10.5% (175 out of 1658)

compare that with UMass:

male: 3.1% (314 out of 10038)
female: 3.0% (291 out of 9656)


data from: http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/GetOneInstitutionData.aspx

Given that UR apparently already uses the third prong test (underrepresented gender demand is served) it would seem it really is about keeping the percent of student-athletes down.
 
#28 ·
re: Richmond

UMass87...actually, UR does not not use the third prong. The measure of proportionality is participation slots, not number of student-athletes, so an athlete who participates in XC and indoor and outdoor track counts as three participation opportunities. UR has many more women than men competing in multiple sports (and this will increase further once men's track and field is gone), so here are the numbers to look at.

Participation Opportunites: 249 female, 227 male...52.3% female
Student Body: 1659 female, 1358 male...55.0% female

We're not exactly there but the generally accepted guideline is within 3 percentage points, so we meet that. It's not a formal standard though.

rogabee...One important thing to remember is that UR cross country is non-scholarship, so we're really recruiting a special kind of student-athlete who can compete at the top of the A-10 without a scholarship. While our XC men are very solid, the year they won the A-10s was really a one-time deal. There was a group of three rising seniors the year before who decided to redshirt their fourth years (at their own expense minus financial aid of course, since we're non-scholarship) and return for a fifth year. With their extra year of training and the quality of the incoming class, they saw the opportunity to pull it all together for one good run at the conference championship, and they got it.

So I really don't think it will impact us all that much as far as XC recruiting. We've long been essentially just an XC team, and with the fantastic job our coaches do in targeting kids who will fit the UR program without money and our tradition using that model, I think they'll continue to do well.

z8-Minutemen...happy with the title now? :rolleyes: (It's not updating in forum index for some reason though...)
 
#31 ·
re: Richmond

title IX strikes again. the most sexist legislation of the modern era.

i have a friend from scotland who went to see the us women's soccer team play in the olympics. he had rave reviews and he asked me why the women were so much better than the men's national team. i answered "title IX". young people will play the sports that get them scholarships. women's soccer presents a deeper talent pool than the men.

it's time for congress to do the right thing and exempt college football from title IX requirements since at a lot of schools the football revenue funds the women's programs.
 
#32 ·
re: Richmond

title IX strikes again. the most sexist legislation of the modern era.

i have a friend from scotland who went to see the us women's soccer team play in the olympics. he had rave reviews and he asked me why the women were so much better than the men's national team. i answered "title IX". young people will play the sports that get them scholarships. women's soccer presents a deeper talent pool than the men.

it's time for congress to do the right thing and exempt college football from title IX requirements since at a lot of schools the football revenue funds the women's programs.
Also since there is NO women's sport that has nearly as many scholarships as football. Basically every other sport there's a fairly equal equivalent.
 
#33 ·
re: Richmond

Private schools need to really evaluate where the money is going. Put the money where they can be successful. For example on Hawk Hill I think they can compete at a very high level in Mens & Womens crew. They have the structure in place to do it. Now their soccer team can't recruit and has been abysmal for some time now. I don't see that changing anytime soon.
 
#34 ·
re: Richmond

Private schools need to really evaluate where the money is going.
Many state schools are even more cash strapped than privates. Given Richmond's endowment and student body, I would say it is far better funded than most state schools. Just because a school is private and doesn't get any public funds (which if you hadn't noticed is dropping very fast), doesn't make it poor. There are several private schools such as all the ivies and others such as UR that turn that notion upside down.
 
#37 ·
re: Richmond

I met Jim Miller at a basketball game three or so years ago and I commended him on the recent stadium upgrades particularly regarding how they would affect soccer. He rubbed me the wrong way by brushing it off like it was not a soccer decision and there was never going to be a soccer decision. Whereas I had been under the impression that soccer's temporary location off campus was a newer facility, he made it known to me that they were just using temporary arrangements so that they could complete the work on other priorities at Richmond which was definitely not soccer. I was baffled by his deep lack of reception as he showed little or no interest in what a soccer fan would think by his remark but now it adds up. I guess he would have catered to me more if I had a lacrosse interest. Lacrosse is hypnotizing, all right... it is the only sport that has ever literally put me to sleep. (at my first, last, and only Wings game in Philadelphia, I didn't even make it to the end!)
 
#41 ·
re: Richmond

Stop being obtuse e-parade. Ktabz said it in the context of Title IX - this is not about "other sports programs". Ktabz is saying football pays for WOMEN'S sports. It does not. It's really not that complicated.

The fact is that almost all college sports teams cost money. In a very small number of cases Football and men's basketball make money or break even. That's it. All the othe teams, be they men's or women's, cost money. The big difference is that women's coaches get paid less and they use less expensive facilities so that, in general, the cost per participant for women's sports is less than for men's so people whining about Title IX should just SFTU.
 
#42 ·
re: Richmond

Stop being obtuse e-parade. Ktabz said it in the context of Title IX - this is not about "other sports programs". Ktabz is saying football pays for WOMEN'S sports. It does not. It's really not that complicated.

The fact is that almost all college sports teams cost money. In a very small number of cases Football and men's basketball make money or break even. That's it. All the othe teams, be they men's or women's, cost money. The big difference is that women's coaches get paid less and they use less expensive facilities so that, in general, the cost per participant for women's sports is less than for men's so people whining about Title IX should just SFTU.
I'm really not being obtuse here. At those schools, you provided a percentage, football breaks at least even. The profits from that support the rest of the athletic department - without those profits, parts of the rest of the department would likely be cut due to lack of funding. When one team goes down, so does another (to keep the scholarship counts similar enough for title IX). If ANY program gets cut, ANOTHER program gets cut. The fact that ANY program can receive funding from football means that title IX NEEDS to come into play.

Do the football profits directly pay for women's sports? Maybe not. But the Athletic Department's budget includes all revenues that come from football, and without those revenues from football, not all the teams would exist due to budget constraints. That means that some women's sports (and men's because you can't cut one without the other) exist SOLELY because football makes money. Therefore they are funded because the football program allows them to be funded. You can't just take this knowledge and then turn it around to say it doesn't fund the women's programs. That would be like saying booster programs don't support women's sports because most of the money goes to football first.
 
#43 ·
University of Richmond Spiders

Great work from ESPN's Dana O'Neil on Richmond Head Coach Chris Mooney, the man.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas...ieving-student-manager-men-college-basketball

On the worst day of her life, he offered her his shoulder and his strength, guiding her home to face the grim reality that her beloved father had taken his own life.

He stayed by her through the funeral and the entirety of her senior year, opening up the home he and his wife shared to allow Robyn Jacobs Sordelett a place to live, room to grieve and above all else, a chance to recover and blossom.

And so five years later, on the best day of her life, when Robyn needed someone to walk her down the aisle at her wedding, the former basketball student manager chose the man who had given her solace, peace and support.

She chose Chris Mooney, the Richmond head coach.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top