(07-01-2015 09:39 PM)BDKJMU Wrote:  

(07-01-2015 10:42 AM)capn kitt Wrote:  If we don't have the funds or scholarships, that's too bad for us. Lax is a growing sport and fun to watch. It is huge in Va Beach and I assume in NoVa and the capital of the Commonwealth, too, I assume. Not to mention we are geographically right in the middle of the lax Mid-Atlantic hotbed and we would be appealing to players when recruiting places like Philly and Jersey.

You mean just on the edge of/outside the geographic hotbed? I though the geographic hotbed for lax was MD and north to NY or New England?

Right, but with athletes' tendencies to go South to college (better weather) that puts us in good shape. Right in ACC lax country.

(07-02-2015 06:47 AM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  IMO it seems silly to not sponsor a team because you may fear not being Title IX compliant years from now when they finally move to FBS football. Also regarding conference affiliation they have a conference today if in the future the conference doesn't sponsor Lacrosse they could do a one off. Richmond I believe is in the Southern conference for lacrosse as an example. I view this as a quick hit that wouldn't cost a lot relatively speaking. JMU could field a team within a years time. The new convo and the prospect of FBS football and a better all sports conference in the future are all well and good but the fan base needs something to get excited about today and this would help- growing sport, exciting sport, alligns with JMU's geographic footprint, etc. When I emailed Bourne about it he never responded. If more email or speak with him about it maybe he will take note. If JMU launches a program to grow the athletic department (in line with their stated strategic plan) and then down the road goes FBS you add another women's sport to comply. In the whole scheme of things the big cost is going FBS not sponsoring a couple of relative smaller sports.

He didn't have a canned response typed up for his assistant to respond. Basically, it caught him off guard. "What am I to do, this email has nothing to do with conference affiliation, any of our coaches, not even stretch internet, how dare."

I'm not for this.
JMU should only create a LAX program after they have moved football to FBS.
There are already enough obstacles, we dont need to add more prior to moving up.
More money, more male scholarships. Those issues are already a problem.

While LAX would be cool, I don't want to see it be the reason JMU can't claim its rightful place in FBS football.

(07-02-2015 02:27 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  I'm not for this.
JMU should only create a LAX program after they have moved football to FBS.
There are already enough obstacles, we dont need to add more prior to moving up.
More money, more male scholarships. Those issues are already a problem.

While LAX would be cool, I don't want to see it be the reason JMU can't claim its rightful place in FBS football.

Do you really see JMU adding Men's lacrosse after they finally pull the trigger on FBS? It would be lost at that point. It's an opportunity for us to push for something reasonable as a peace offering to placate the fan base during the interim waiting period.

Per the Carr report with FBS football mens scholarships are 212 Women's scholarships are 226. Mens LAX would add 12 scholarships so I think they would still be ok from a Title IX perspective. The cost of college lacrosse would fall into line with most of the non football sports in the $300K-$400K range. Even if JMU wanted to go above and beyond and wanted to manage the optics of adding a men's sport without adding a womens sport they could announce plans to add a womens sport in conjunction with FBS football- again the cost would be nominal in the bigger picture.

If JMU believes that sports are part of the equation in terms of being recognized as a national university they should take note of both the popularity of college lacrosse (more popular than golf, tennis, likely as popular as college soccer) and the opportunity to compete nationally immediately (less teams at this point). There is good value in men's college lacrosse and I really don't see how it directly relates to the ultimate goal of FBS football (i.e. the numbers still work and the cost is relatively nominal).

(07-03-2015 06:27 AM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  

(07-02-2015 02:27 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  I'm not for this.
JMU should only create a LAX program after they have moved football to FBS.
There are already enough obstacles, we dont need to add more prior to moving up.
More money, more male scholarships. Those issues are already a problem.

While LAX would be cool, I don't want to see it be the reason JMU can't claim its rightful place in FBS football.

Do you really see JMU adding Men's lacrosse after they finally pull the trigger on FBS? It would be lost at that point. It's an opportunity for us to push for something reasonable as a peace offering to placate the fan base during the interim waiting period.

Per the Carr report with FBS football mens scholarships are 212 Women's scholarships are 226. Mens LAX would add 12 scholarships so I think they would still be ok from a Title IX perspective. The cost of college lacrosse would fall into line with most of the non football sports in the $300K-$400K range. Even if JMU wanted to go above and beyond and wanted to manage the optics of adding a men's sport without adding a womens sport they could announce plans to add a womens sport in conjunction with FBS football- again the cost would be nominal in the bigger picture.

If JMU believes that sports are part of the equation in terms of being recognized as a national university they should take note of both the popularity of college lacrosse (more popular than golf, tennis, likely as popular as college soccer) and the opportunity to compete nationally immediately (less teams at this point). There is good value in men's college lacrosse and I really don't see how it directly relates to the ultimate goal of FBS football (i.e. the numbers still work and the cost is relatively nominal).

We get it. You like the idea of adding men's lacrosse. Not likely to happen, however, if ever, until after the FBS FB situation is clarified. I wouldn't expect anyone to take your suggestion seriously either until such time as there is a resolution to JMU's FBS aspirations.

(07-03-2015 06:27 AM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  Per the Carr report with FBS football mens scholarships are 212 Women's scholarships are 226. Mens LAX would add 12 scholarships so I think they would still be ok from a Title IX perspective. The cost of college lacrosse would fall into line with most of the non football sports in the $300K-$400K range. Even if JMU wanted to go above and beyond and wanted to manage the optics of adding a men's sport without adding a womens sport they could announce plans to add a womens sport in conjunction with FBS football- again the cost would be nominal in the bigger picture.

Those are participation numbers, not scholarships. Adding men's lacrosse would require 12.6 scholarships, but the average NCAA roster size is around 45 per Google search results. That's more than 3x the participation numbers moving FCS -> FBS would cost per the Carr report (199 -> 212).

If JMU were to fully fund the sport (as all other sports), some additional searching suggests the yearly cost would probably be closer to $1M than $300K - $400K.

I'd rather see Lacrosse than Tennis and Golf. It would get more fans and better exposure for the school.

Prior to Title IX I remember reading that JMU had 27 D1 sports. I cannot find anything to confirm it, but I remember seeing that we were one of the most in the nation behind the Ivy's. I do think UVA was up there and maybe a couple sports ahead. My question is, were they not fully funded? Did we participate but not offer schollies? What was our athletic budget back in those days? Seems like lacrosse was one of our sports. It's pretty sad for those athletes that they cannot even go to JMUsports.com and find there name mentioned as being an athlete at JMU. I know our Archery Team was one of the best in the country, and nothing about it, at least in a quick search.

Lots of sports weren't given maximum scholarship funding back then. We offered the sports, but funding wasn't competitive.

(07-03-2015 10:41 AM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  Prior to Title IX I remember reading that JMU had 27 D1 sports. I cannot find anything to confirm it, but I remember seeing that we were one of the most in the nation behind the Ivy's. I do think UVA was up there and maybe a couple sports ahead. My question is, were they not fully funded? Did we participate but not offer schollies? What was our athletic budget back in those days? Seems like lacrosse was one of our sports. It's pretty sad for those athletes that they cannot even go to JMUsports.com and find there name mentioned as being an athlete at JMU. I know our Archery Team was one of the best in the country, and nothing about it, at least in a quick search.

Yes, the 10 or so sports which were dropped some years ago were not fully funded as in number of fully allowed scholarships and other resources. If I recall the cost savings per year really wasn't tremendous (something like $500K per year, which shows just how underfunded they were), but that was enough to provide full funding to the remaining sports. It was decided that fewer sports with the funding necessary to be competitive was better than having a broader range of sports which were more likely to struggle. Title 9 was also a stated factor, due to the participation numbers involved (not scholarships).

In the case of Archery, I thought that was akin to a club level sport, or competed in some other organization outside the NCAA. I don't think the Athletics department ever provided funds.

(07-03-2015 09:55 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(07-03-2015 06:27 AM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  

(07-02-2015 02:27 PM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  I'm not for this.
JMU should only create a LAX program after they have moved football to FBS.
There are already enough obstacles, we dont need to add more prior to moving up.
More money, more male scholarships. Those issues are already a problem.

While LAX would be cool, I don't want to see it be the reason JMU can't claim its rightful place in FBS football.

Do you really see JMU adding Men's lacrosse after they finally pull the trigger on FBS? It would be lost at that point. It's an opportunity for us to push for something reasonable as a peace offering to placate the fan base during the interim waiting period.

Per the Carr report with FBS football mens scholarships are 212 Women's scholarships are 226. Mens LAX would add 12 scholarships so I think they would still be ok from a Title IX perspective. The cost of college lacrosse would fall into line with most of the non football sports in the $300K-$400K range. Even if JMU wanted to go above and beyond and wanted to manage the optics of adding a men's sport without adding a womens sport they could announce plans to add a womens sport in conjunction with FBS football- again the cost would be nominal in the bigger picture.

If JMU believes that sports are part of the equation in terms of being recognized as a national university they should take note of both the popularity of college lacrosse (more popular than golf, tennis, likely as popular as college soccer) and the opportunity to compete nationally immediately (less teams at this point). There is good value in men's college lacrosse and I really don't see how it directly relates to the ultimate goal of FBS football (i.e. the numbers still work and the cost is relatively nominal).

We get it. You like the idea of adding men's lacrosse. Not likely to happen, however, if ever, until after the FBS FB situation is clarified. I wouldn't expect anyone to take your suggestion seriously either until such time as there is a resolution to JMU's FBS aspirations.

Agree. There is way too much noise in the system regarding FBS, and this would likely only appease a few while raising greater concern and backlash from those that are such ardent FBS supporters, as they would view it as another hurdle (excuse) for making the jump.

(07-03-2015 11:25 AM)DooX Wrote:  

(07-03-2015 10:41 AM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  Prior to Title IX I remember reading that JMU had 27 D1 sports. I cannot find anything to confirm it, but I remember seeing that we were one of the most in the nation behind the Ivy's. I do think UVA was up there and maybe a couple sports ahead. My question is, were they not fully funded? Did we participate but not offer schollies? What was our athletic budget back in those days? Seems like lacrosse was one of our sports. It's pretty sad for those athletes that they cannot even go to JMUsports.com and find there name mentioned as being an athlete at JMU. I know our Archery Team was one of the best in the country, and nothing about it, at least in a quick search.

Yes, the 10 or so sports which were dropped some years ago were not fully funded as in number of fully allowed scholarships and other resources. If I recall the cost savings per year really wasn't tremendous (something like $500K per year, which shows just how underfunded they were), but that was enough to provide full funding to the remaining sports. It was decided that fewer sports with the funding necessary to be competitive was better than having a broader range of sports which were more likely to struggle. Title 9 was also a stated factor, due to the participation numbers involved (not scholarships).

In the case of Archery, I thought that was akin to a club level sport, or competed in some other organization outside the NCAA. I don't think the Athletics department ever provided funds.

You must be correct I just went to NCAA.com and archery is not listed, so, unless the NCAA dropped it as a sport, then your explanation is on target.

(07-03-2015 10:12 AM)DooX Wrote:  

(07-03-2015 06:27 AM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  Per the Carr report with FBS football mens scholarships are 212 Women's scholarships are 226[/B]. Mens LAX would add 12 scholarships so I think they would still be ok from a Title IX perspective. The cost of college lacrosse would fall into line with most of the non football sports in the $300K-$400K range. Even if JMU wanted to go above and beyond and wanted to manage the optics of adding a men's sport without adding a womens sport they could announce plans to add a womens sport in conjunction with FBS football- again the cost would be nominal in the bigger picture.

Those are participation numbers, not scholarships. Adding men's lacrosse would require 12.6 scholarships, but the average NCAA roster size is around 45 per Google search results. That's more than 3x the participation numbers moving FCS -> FBS would cost per the Carr report (199 -> 212).

If JMU were to fully fund the sport (as all other sports), some additional searching suggests the yearly cost would probably be closer to $1M than $300K - $400K.

Exactly, Title IX counts participants not scholarships. LAX would mean having to shutter other sports. And, unlike 2Buck I would not be in favor of getting rid of golf or tennis.

(07-03-2015 10:25 AM)2Buck Wrote:  I'd rather see Lacrosse than Tennis and Golf. It would get more fans and better exposure for the school.

I am certain that JMU Alum and PGA Tour Rookie of the Year 1992 Mark Carnavale would disagree !

Bump

Thought it was interesting that there are several programs with teams in both the Mens and Women's NCAA Lacrosse Championship Tournament

No doubt in my mind that within 5 years JMU Men's Lacrosse would be among the best Nationally. Lacrosse fits the geographic footprint of JMU and the states they draw from better than sports like Tennis and Golf. The Championship tournament has higher ratings and a greater following than those sports as well. Lacrosse is a sport that is growing and those aren't. Ideally you don't need to kill any sports to launch Men's Lacrosse if you add other Women's sports but if that isn't feasible Lacrosse is the better Spring sport for JMU IMO and one where they could do serious damage nationally.

(05-13-2018 06:30 PM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  Bump

Thought it was interesting that there are several programs with teams in both the Mens and Women's NCAA Lacrosse Championship Tournament

No doubt in my mind that within 5 years JMU Men's Lacrosse would be among the best Nationally. Lacrosse fits the geographic footprint of JMU and the states they draw from better than sports like Tennis and Golf. The Championship tournament has higher ratings and a greater following than those sports as well. Lacrosse is a sport that is growing and those aren't. Ideally you don't need to kill any sports to launch Men's Lacrosse if you add other Women's sports but if that isn't feasible Lacrosse is the better Spring sport for JMU IMO and one where they could do serious damage nationally.

In the meantime, GO ALBANY!

Thought this was a new thread.

It's interesting how different our subjective opinions can all be. I would classify lacrosse as almost non-existent in southeast Virginia since public schools don't play the sport. I didn't even know VHSL sponsored lacrosse until I just looked it up.

However, my other anecdotal opinion is that it seems like most JMU out-of-state students are from north of Virginia, so it does seem like a lot of our student population is probably from areas where people play lacrosse.

(05-13-2018 06:30 PM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  Bump

Thought it was interesting that there are several programs with teams in both the Mens and Women's NCAA Lacrosse Championship Tournament

No doubt in my mind that within 5 years JMU Men's Lacrosse would be among the best Nationally. Lacrosse fits the geographic footprint of JMU and the states they draw from better than sports like Tennis and Golf. The Championship tournament has higher ratings and a greater following than those sports as well. Lacrosse is a sport that is growing and those aren't. Ideally you don't need to kill any sports to launch Men's Lacrosse if you add other Women's sports but if that isn't feasible Lacrosse is the better Spring sport for JMU IMO and one where they could do serious damage nationally.

I have no issue adding men' lax if it is financially a good decision and does not require cutting any existing sports. This would require JMU to add some additional women's sports to remain in compliance potentially. If I recall the 'infamous' CARR reports from several years ago, JMU is currently in a position where if JMU chose to move to FBS for football with additional scholarships JMU would not need to add any additional women's sports. I would prefer JMU keep that balance, just in case rather than add some additional future hurdle.

However, I would much rather JMU add back some of the men's side of sports (Track & Field, CC, Swimming & Diving) that were previously cut.

(05-14-2018 11:24 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(05-13-2018 06:30 PM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  Bump

Thought it was interesting that there are several programs with teams in both the Mens and Women's NCAA Lacrosse Championship Tournament

No doubt in my mind that within 5 years JMU Men's Lacrosse would be among the best Nationally. Lacrosse fits the geographic footprint of JMU and the states they draw from better than sports like Tennis and Golf. The Championship tournament has higher ratings and a greater following than those sports as well. Lacrosse is a sport that is growing and those aren't. Ideally you don't need to kill any sports to launch Men's Lacrosse if you add other Women's sports but if that isn't feasible Lacrosse is the better Spring sport for JMU IMO and one where they could do serious damage nationally.

I have no issue adding men' lax if it is financially a good decision and does not require cutting any existing sports. This would require JMU to add some additional women's sports to remain in compliance potentially. If I recall the 'infamous' CARR reports from several years ago, JMU is currently in a position where if JMU chose to move to FBS for football with additional scholarships JMU would not need to add any additional women's sports. I would prefer JMU keep that balance, just in case rather than add some additional future hurdle.

However, I would much rather JMU add back some of the men's side of sports (Track & Field, CC, Swimming & Diving) that were previously cut.

I believe there is no change in moving up in football because Title IX is based on participation/opportunities, NOT # of scholarships.

the JMU football total roster probably doesn't change much in FCS vs FBS. What changes, is the amount of guys on scholarship. 85 vs 63 with no partials.

lacrosse is another story in how it effects us. the sport has a large roster. I counted about 35 girls on the team picture for women's.
If we added men's, those would be NEW opportunities. That would throw off the Title IX balance and would require adding new women's opportunities. And that is something JMU just cannot afford right now.

bottom line....men's lacrosse is not happening anytime soon.

If you are adding men's lax, you do what Richmond did and kill men's soccer.