Varsity sports too big for size of undergraduate population
by NDoggie78 (2018-05-29 13:19:03)
Edited on 2018-05-29 13:19:21

In reply to: I was responding to the post above that purported to lay  posted by HoundDog1973

Post Reply Return to Lefty's Rink

That is your opinion - not a fact.

As I posted above, Stanford (Jenkin's aspirational peer) has 36 varsity sports to our 26. They have a smaller undergraduate population. They not only have an abundance of varsity sports, they play most of them very well.

As someone who played a club sport before it became varsity, they are not equal. I'm sure the women who play club hockey and those who would be recruited to play varsity hockey would agree



Yes, it is my opinion.
by HoundDog1973  (2018-05-29 13:40:11)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I certainly agree that a club sport is not equal to a varsity sport. Each has advantages over the other. I just don't see a reason why ND should recruit women and pay them (scholarships) to play hockey. There are plenty of women already at ND who play hockey for the school's club team.

I believe it was Monk who used the term aspirational peer to describe Stanford and other schools. I have not heard Fr. Jenkins use that term although he may have too.
You're right - Monk not Jenkins
by NDoggie78  (2018-05-29 14:44:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

They both have pissed me off (spoiled by Hesburgh & Joyce)

My opinion on ND sports is swayed by seeing many sports emerge from club status to varsity during my time at ND (most notably women's basketball, soccer and lacrosse). And formed by sports lost primarily by Title IX - wrestling (brother was on wrestling team). Not arguing against Title IX, just advocating for couple more sports. Some school's sports programs are constrained by budget - ours aren't.