Tougher to get $ for some programs like CU.
by RagingBull (2019-03-13 20:53:04)
Edited on 2019-03-13 20:54:12

In reply to: Growing the sport in NCAA D1  posted by jrdjr84


I think you will see less of the Utah model and more of the Marquette/High Point/Cleveland State model. Teams without big-time D1 football programs will look to lacrosse as a way to get on the map of high school kids.

If you are CU, how do you chase a quality football coach while trying to fund a lacrosse program that would no doubt succeed very quickly but on which you will lose $.

I think USC and Stanford are possible. Texas, and Florida State are realistic options because of the strength of their athletic budgets.


Florida State doesn't have the Title IX room.
by hoomanbeing  (2019-03-14 21:57:23)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

They're supposed to have a Sugar Daddy who has already put up the money to fund both lacrosse teams if they can get their Title IX numbers to work.


Georgia Tech surprises me
by tf86  (2019-03-26 15:40:02)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Due to 65% male enrollment, they appear to have the Title IX room to add men's lacrosse. Lacrosse is growing in popularity in that area, and they'd have instant access to the most prestigious college lacrosse conference. At most, it would take only minimal adjustment from a Title IX standpoint, for example, add a women's team in any other sport they currently do not sponsor.

And while Atlanta is not worlds apart from Tallahassee in terms of geography, it is enough of a difference to give Georgia Tech a considerably larger number of potential bus travel opponents than Florida State, so it also would be a cheaper add for Georgia Tech than for Florida State, although money isn't the big issue.