<p>SOC, what JohnAdams says is true. I have been pointing it out for years now, that private universities manipulate data. But I am not sure why he singles Notre Dame out. Notre Dame is not alone in this practice of inflating their reported incoming freshmen statistics to make itself look more selective. Many private universities induldge in the practice of superscoring SAT results (a practice that statistically adds 20-30 points per section) and in only reporting a fraction of ACT test-takers in order to make their mid-50% ACT range look more impressive than they really are. As Hawkette pointed out, Amherst and Dartmouth do it, as do many other private universities. Let us be honest, reporting an ACT range of 28-32 as Brown and Cornell do does not look as impressive as a range of 30-34.</p>
<p>SOC2015 - so now you are saying that the sacred university with billions of dollars of endowment, Notre Dame, made a “mistake” when it urged its 15,000 applicants on its website that it would be advantageous to turn in both the SAT and ACT scores to ND?</p>
<p>Is this what you are saying?</p>
<p>Are you also saying that Notre Dame, after making the mistake above, also made another “mistake” by falsely stating that not ONE student that is enrolled at the school turned in both the SAT and ACT scores?</p>
<p>Is this what you are saying?</p>
<p>Regarding ND being better than Princeton in LAX, yes you are correct, ND is better than Princeton in LAX this year, just like Connecticut and Navy are better than ND this year in FOOTBALL.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>so SOC2015, when you say “major sports teams”, what are you talking about here?</p>
<p>because, certainly it appears that it has been concluded on this thread that the only major sprots teams in college are football and basketball.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>SOC2015, actually you are a little off on your description of the students aren’t you?</p>
<p>As opposed to the Notre Dame student that spends his time in bars drinking beer and watching football games, the Harvard/Princeton student participates in one or two varsity sports in college. While the typical Notre Dame student wishes that he had the ability to play a varsity sport in college but has to suffice with watching the sport, the Harvard/Princeton student is a better athlete and is actually playing the varsity sport in college.</p>
<p>Regarding the high school years, as opposed to what you claim below, the typical Harvard/Princeton student was captain of the high school football, basketball, Hockey or baseball team, Homecoming King and Valedictorian - and considered the most well-rounded student at the high school - while at the same time among the top ranked musicians or science students in the state.</p>
<p>this might give you a clue as to the amount of kids at ND, Harvard and Princeton that participate in varsity sports:</p>
<p>Number of Undergraduates Students in Varsity Sports
Princeton = 983
Harvard = 1,119
Notre Dame = 912</p>
<p>Percent of Undergraduates Participating in Varsity Sports
Princeton = 19%
Harvard = = 17%
Notre Dame = 11%</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Could you guys take the non-lacrosse p***ing contest elsewhere?</p>
<p>And as far as Princeton goes - the main reason that Notre Dame beat Princeton this year was that the Notre Dame players out-hustled them all game long. Their strategy was somewhat suspect too. Notre Dame’s strength is in its defense, so why Princeton decided to go to a ball-control game was questionable. </p>
<p>Lacrosse will become a major sport when a national championship occurs out of the sport’s traditional hot spots. To that end, it would have been a good thing for Midwestern lacrosse to have Notre Dame win the National Championship. Perhaps Denver will break through one of these years with one of the best coaches in the country (who used to Princeton’s coach). Once it gets big in the West, there will be no stopping this great game.</p>
<p>Mens college Lacrosse will be limited in its appeal for a quite a while (my prediction) because it really can’t expand much. While many colleges have established D1 women’s teams in recent years (U of Florida, for example), fear of running afoul of Title XI has kept mens’ LAX at club level. Plus, as was said, LAX is still mostly regional, with the center of power being the state of Maryland, with hotbeds in Long Island, Central New York State and Northern Virginia. That’s where you find the power high school programs and virtually year-round play, plus the military academies, whom all field pretty good teams.</p>
<p>Finally, D1 college sports is all about revenue, hence the term “revenue sports.” Football runs the show. As far as I know, only a few D1 football powers are giving real attention to getting a foothold in varsity (not club) LAX; Ohio State, for example. It’s good that Notre Dame is a champion but I don’t think they drew tens of thousands to a lacrosse game and had the football coach appear to show support, like what happened at Ohio State a season or two ago. When 30,000 paying customers show up, the college Athletic Director pays attention.</p>
<p>^LW is spot-on. The future growth of LAX is severely limited at the collegiate level. Sure, T-9 is a factor, but the biggest is cost to run a program. There is no way that ticket sales will come close to covering even operating expenses. Boston College, for example, has long desired to move from Club to D1 in LAX, but that would require not only a big time coach but also athletic scholarships. On top of those expenses, add in travel to ACC schools – EVERY league game would require a plane flight for the team. With college endowments down 30%, it just ain’t happenin’…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sure it will take a while. But, you’re not looking at the big picture of revenue. The AD is beyond simply chasing revenue of the fannies in the seats. That’s important, but the future is chasing sports network revenue. It’s about the BigTen network scheduling spring, winter and fall successfully. Spring sports are ‘light’ (compared to the other seasons) and lacrosse is needed to bolster the TV schedule. This is a big deal and this is big money. </p>
<p>The people at Di$ney aren’t scheduling lacrosse all spring on ESPNU because of the goodness of their hearts - they see it as a growth sport and a potential revenue source. </p>
<p>It will be about the sports that make it on the sports network that matter. And if that incremental revenue makes it that adding two additional sports (men’s lacrosse and another women’s sport) the bigger conferences won’t bat an eye. If for other colleges/conferences, that means that sports need to be cut, well, perhaps wrestling and water polo may need to go. Things always change.</p>
<p>I suspect ESPNU shows Lacrosse games because of the brand strength of the school’s playing more than the game itself.</p>
<p>^ do not agree … or with post #106.</p>
<p>How oftern does ESPN show the NCAA wrestling, gynmastics, water polo etc championships in it’s prime channel live? Lacrosse has caught up with baseball, hockey, and soccer below football and baseball in the public eye.</p>
<p>Any it is growing … over the last 10 years or so there are about 10 more D1 mens programs (and a lot of womens). Adding a men’s team does create a budget issue for schools but given the increased popularity of lax (it is the fastest growing youth sport in the country) I believe more and more schools will add mens D1 teams (this year was the first year the Big East has a lax conference for example) and if schools have a budget issue I’d guess sports like wrestling, gymnastics, and swimming may pay the price to make an opening for lax.</p>
<p>The sport is truly spreading across the country … the NCAAs were held in Boston in 08 and 09 … and the geographic diversity on the top teams is greater every year. Check out Duke’s roster … [Men's</a> Lacrosse - Roster - Duke University Blue Devils | Official Athletics Site - GoDuke.com](<a href=“http://www.goduke.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&SPID=2027&SPSID=25941]Men’s”>http://www.goduke.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&SPID=2027&SPSID=25941) … there are 6-7 kids from very non-traditional areas … and the NJ, PA, MA, and DE players are not from the traditional strongest areas (MD near Baltimore and Long Island and Upstate NY)</p>
<p>But does one NCAA team make money on lacrosse?? At least a few make $$$ on ice hockey. The Title 9 issues are very real too. To add one team you have to add two at most schools today.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Please. When ESPNU shows Virginia, Syracuse, or Johns Hopkins swimming and diving I’ll start to believe in the “brand strength” of those schools.</p>
<p>Do you really think Ivies get their butts kicked in most sports? They actually do reasonably well in the non-major sports (AKA the non-football and basketball sports) with teams that are at least reasonably competitive. Yale’s hockey team was a single game from the Frozen Four this year. As you’ve pointed out, while Princeton isnt the best in Lacrosse, they are competitive.</p>
<p>If you produce some facts backing up your claims that Notre Dame has way more high school varsity athletes than Ivies, so be it. But at the very top Ivies (HYPS), they attract well rounded kids who do play sports. Almost every kid I met at Yales Admit weekend, for example, was either in drama or sports, two ECs that are very similar if you think about the committment and performance aspects (I don’t act, but I played football and wrestled).</p>
<p>While its probably understandable Ivies are going to have more athletes by % (Notre Dame may be bigger but that doesnt mean its going to have more varsity sports) I don’t think its fair for Notre Dame backers to claim high Ivy kids are all a bunch of “dweebs”.</p>
<p>With the Financial Aid the way that it is at the top Ivies compared to Notre Dame (and really compared to any other school), you’re probably going to find more rich kids at Notre Dame anyways. I dont understand the stereotyping when its probably easier financially for a disadvantaged student to attend Harvard than Notre Dame, if admitted to both.</p>
<p>I would like to play Lacrosse, but I’m AA, and it’s dominated by (not trying to be offensive) white people. I’m not the kind of person to break that barrier…</p>
<p>I’ll just stick to looking forward to intramural flag football and volleyball for college.</p>
<p>"Is Lacrosse one of College’s major sports? "</p>
<p>At some of the colleges with good lacrosse programs , lacrosse is likely a major sport. Though not necessarily THE major sport. That was the case at my alma mater anyway.
Unlike say wrestling, where they have a really good program but it generates little campus-wide interest.</p>
<p>At colleges without good lacrosse programs, or among people in general without a collegiate affiliation- IMO lacrosse is essentially not on the map, as wider interest in the sport seems somewhat localized. </p>
<p>But why care about those people? if you like lacrosse, and you are at a college with a good lacrosse program, you have the opportunity to enjoy the sport. I developed an appreciation for the sport during my college years, and I think it’s one of the great ones. Not too little scoring, like pro hockey or soccer, not too much scoring like basketball. Just right. I think college hockey is also a great sport. And is “major” at some colleges, and not in others.</p>
<p>monydad, I have personally been impressed with the 40-50,000 size crowds that Lacrosse is getting for semi-final and champsionship games lately…</p>
<p>very impressed</p>
<p>NCAA Lacrosse Team Championship records</p>
<p>Team Championships/Appearances
Syracuse 10/16<br>
Johns Hopkins 9/18<br>
Princeton 6/8<br>
Virginia 4/8
North Carolina 4/5
Cornell 3/7
Maryland 2/9
Duke 1/3<br>
Navy 0/2<br>
Massachusetts 0/1<br>
Towson 0/1<br>
Loyola (MD) 0/1<br>
Notre Dame 0/1</p>
<hr>
<p>note: figures have been updated with the 2010 Duke/ND game</p>
<p>Glad to see we are back on topic.</p>
<p>I realize it is about the money, but I think NCAA does a disservice to Lacrosse by its championship site locations. 2008 and 2009 were back-to-back Boston area events and 2010 and 2011 will both be in Baltimore (before going back to Foxboro in 2012. It seems short-sighted not to do a tri-state area event (NY/NJ/CT) or get some excitement by doing the Chicago area. Getting young fans into the game is a far more important goal than just another championship game in Maryland. </p>
<p>I also don’t like the press release. You would think they were awarding the Olympic games to a host city rather than it being about a location where they can fill the seats with a stadium that’s offering the NCAA a good deal. Please. </p>
<p>[NCAA</a> Men’s Lacrosse 2010, 2011 and 2012 Site Selections Announced - NCAA.org](<a href=“http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/NCAA/Media+and+Events/Press+Room/News+Release+Archive/2009/Championships/20090206_men_lax_10_11_12_champsites_rls.html]NCAA”>http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/NCAA/Media+and+Events/Press+Room/News+Release+Archive/2009/Championships/20090206_men_lax_10_11_12_champsites_rls.html)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think the NCAAs agrees with you more than you realize. The NCAA is purposely holding the NCAA weekends two years in a row at a sight … the idea being the first year will build interest for the second year … it certainly worked in Boston where the buzz in the lax crowd was much bigger the second year even including more non-lax folks. Coming to Boston was an attempt to hold the championship in one of the emerging markets (youth lax is growing immensly around here) … going back to Baltimore was an interesting choice since they have had a ton of championships … it will be interesting to see where they go next; I would think NYC, Philly, and Chicago would be on the top of the list … and I’d guess the championships will be there soon … this would be great for lax (and not so good for a Boston based lax fan).</p>
<p>sry guys. but holding the tourney in the Windy City is downright silly. With the exception of the Northwestern women’s powerhouse, and a couple of others, the midwest doesn’t do lax. Isn’t Denver the only college NOT in the eastern time zone? Besides ND, THE Ohio State and Denver, which other D1 schools are more than an hour’s drive from the Atlantic? </p>
<p>‘Building it and they will come’ only works in the movies. (Holding a tourney in an empty stadium is not good for PR, nor does it pay to turn on the lights…) The Metrolands makes great geographical sense, but my guess is that the cost to turn on the lights is just too high. (Stadiums need to bid $ to hold the tourney…) The hold the tourney in the east bcos that’s where the fan base is…not to mention the teams, players & families. </p>
<p>[2010</a> NCAA Men’s Lacrosse RPI](<a href=“http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/weeklyrpi/2010MLArpi1.html]2010”>2010 NCAA Men's Lacrosse RPI)</p>