UMich or UVa

College Search & Selection
21

<p>Jags, I am not sure I agree that Hockey is on the same level as Lacrosse. If it were, NHL players would not be paid, on average, 40 (forty) times more than NLL players. Most people in the World have heard of Hockey. Very few have heard of Lacrosse. And again, the atmosphere at Hockey games tends to be far more energized than at Lacrosse games. </p>

<p>Like you, I do not see the point of this silly debate. UVa and Michigan are both amazing universities, but when it comes to sport, Michigan has the edge.</p>

22

<p>To the Original Poster, I am a UVa graduate myself (both undergrad and grad school) and my personal experience is that, for a (relatively) large university, the undergraduate experience simply couldn't be better than there in terms of in-class attention from instructors, on-campus surroundings and acitivities, the town of Charlottesville, etc. (although some might prefer the truly personalized attention of a small school). The only drawback may be the relatively preppy/fraternity scene, but I believe that is not nearly as dominant as it once was.<br>
I don't understand the contoversy going on about sports, UVa football may not be on a par with Michigan but it is still big-time and the competition is still a lot of fun. Basketball is ACC which is hard to beat.
I would recommend UVa</p>

23

<p>Alex, thank you for "humoring" me!</p>

<p>As for Lacrosse vs. Hockey - my vote goes to Lacrosse. It is THE fastest growing sport in highschool and college today. I don't really think its a contest - Lacrosse is just more popular than Hockey today.</p>

<p>Remember we are discussing the sport on a COLLEGIATE level. So really discussions about the NHL are really irrelevant (besides don't you listen to talk radio or follow sports media? The NHL has fast become an irrelevant professional sport -- no one cares about it -- it gets no ratings -- this year's All-Star game was beaten in TV rankings by Leave it to Beaver re-runs. Ask the average person on the street to name the last Stanley Cup champion -- no one knows or cares. It doesn't get network coverage and has quickly lost national exposure.) </p>

<p>But back to the point -- there is COLLEGIATE ATHLETICS and there is PRO SPORTS -- they are different. I mean who the heck plays field hockey, for instance, after college? Who plays softball after college? Who plays water polo after college? At a COLLEGIATE level, Lax is a "major" sport. Period.</p>

24

<p>Haha, I have to agree with Jags861, Michigan is in possibly the most overrated sporting conference in all of NCAA sports: the Big 10. What happened to Michigan and OSU this year in football? Oh yeah the Gators and the Trojans? How about in basketball? The Big 10 is so top heavy and the better schools can just pad their record against the other schools. Furthermore, I agree that hockey is pretty much a communist/canadian sport. I would have no desire to watch hockey. College basketball is truly where it is at. </p>

<p>Academically, I know someone will want to slay me, but I feel UVA is the best public in the USA for undergraduate school. I just attended a conference at UVA about a week ago and I loved the school. Definetly my second favorite school I have visited (after Wake Forest of course). It just had a more intimate feel to it. Plus, you have much better weather than Michigan. </p>

<p>Now the OP is in a great position, choosing from possibly the two best publics in the country, so you really can't go wrong. Good luck (but I'd go with UVA).</p>

25

<p>LAX is popular because it is cheap. Hockey requires ice time and expensive equipment but at schools that do it right it makes big $$$ and does lead to multi-million doller pro contracts. Remember the Miracle on Ice--nobody talks about LAX, ever. Wisconsin averages over 11,000 PAYING fans per game for hockey and nets a million dollar profit. Hockey is a game to be seen in person, not on TV.</p>

26

<p>
[quote]
LAX is popular because it is cheap.

[/quote]

1) Football is incredibly equipment intensive and it is the most popular sport in America. Baseball is also relatively equipment intensive, and it is the second most popular sport in America...
2) At any rate by this logic, soccer and basketball should be the most popular sports in America (they are the least equipment intensive sport)
3) Lacrosse isn't cheap: pads, helmets, gloves, stick its relatively more expensive than your average sport
4) Basically that one short simple statement above is so chock full of erroneous contradictions - if you repeat it 10 times you are likely to end up in another dimension.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Hockey requires ice time and expensive equipment but at schools that do it right it makes big $$$ and does lead to multi-million doller pro contracts.

[/quote]

See point one above (i.e. equipment expense has little correlation with popularity) - at any rate, hockey may lead to professional contracts for the best collegiate players, but the schools don't have any net benefit from that - the player who gets drafted does.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Remember the Miracle on Ice--nobody talks about LAX, ever.

[/quote]

Miracle on Ice? Dude, that was almost 30 years ago - back when we were fighting the Soviet Union... umm... remember when the Roman Gladiators were fighting the lions? remember when boxing was a popular and relevant sport? (boxing has been overtaken by MMA / UFC)... times change.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Wisconsin averages over 11,000 PAYING fans per game for hockey and nets a million dollar profit.

[/quote]

That's great for Wisconsin... Let's take a quick look at the US for a better metric:</p>

<p>Hockey: 54 NCAA Division I men's hockey teams
Lacrosse: 57 NCAA Division I men's lacrosse teams</p>

<p>(plus 32 Division II men's lacrosse teams, and 131 Division III men's lacrosse teams. There are also currently 83 Division I women's lacrosse teams, 37 Division II women's lacrosse Teams, and 154 Division III women's lacrosse teams. Additionally, almost 200 collegiate men's club teams compete at the Men's Collegiate Lacrosse Association level, including most major universities in the United States.) -- yeah, I got that from Wiki.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Hockey is a game to be seen in person, not on TV.

[/quote]

That's too bad, because the big bucks are in TV.</p>

27

<p>"Hockey: 54 NCAA Division I men's hockey teams
Lacrosse: 57 NCAA Division I men's lacrosse teams</p>

<p>(plus 32 Division II men's lacrosse teams, and 131 Division III men's lacrosse teams. There are also currently 83 Division I women's lacrosse teams, 37 Division II women's lacrosse Teams, and 154 Division III women's lacrosse teams. Additionally, almost 200 collegiate men's club teams compete at the Men's Collegiate Lacrosse Association level, including most major universities in the United States.) -- yeah, I got that from Wiki."</p>

<p>So what? There are more than 60 Division I swimming teams. Does that make Swimming a more major college sport than Lacrosse?</p>

<p>The_prestige, you are ignoring a very important fact. Attendance. How many LAX games attract more than 5,000 spectators? 10%? Maybe 15%? Roughly 75% of College Hockey games do. And how many LAX games acctract more than 3,000 spectators? 30%? Maybe 40%? Close to 100% of College Hockey games do.</p>

28

<p>Alex, are you suggesting that Lacrosse is NOT a major college sport?</p>

29

<p>That is not what I am suggesting. What I am suggesting is that Lacrosse is not as important a college sport as Hockey. It is obviously more popular than Wrestling or swimming, but it is not in the same league as Hockey. </p>

<p>I was amazed to see that half of UVa's LAX games played in Charlottesville this year attracted between 500 and 1,200 spectators. I mean, UVa's LAX program is supposed to be one of the top 2 or 3 in the country right now. Hell, more spectators go to women's gymnastics or swimming meets at Michigan. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.mgoblue.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=23472%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.mgoblue.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=23472&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://www.mgoblue.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=24144%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.mgoblue.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=24144&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://www.mgoblue.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=24217%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.mgoblue.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=24217&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I cannot remember the last time a Michigan Hockey game played at Yost attracted fewer than 4,000 fans. The typical game at Yost will attract over 6,000 students.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.mgoblue.com/results.cfm?section_id=287&top=2&level=3%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.mgoblue.com/results.cfm?section_id=287&top=2&level=3&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>You should see the waitlist for Hockey games. Students camp out of the ticket office to buy a single ticket. And the atmosphere at Hockey games are electric. Like I said, I went to a Johns Hopkins LAX game a few years ago (they were playing Syracuse I think) and the atmosphere was really not that great. And Michigan Hockey isn't unique. Maine, Minnesota, Cornell, North Dakota, Coloraro College, BC etc... all have equally special Hockey programs.</p>

<p>How much do students have to pay to watch a LAX game at UVa? Is there a waitlist that leaves out the majority of fans who wish to watch LAX games? Michigan Hockey games cost quite a bit and the majority of students who wish to watch games must share season tickets with other students. Hell, one must pay $10 just to get on the waitlist! LOL! </p>

<p>I am sorry man, but there is no comparision. I am sure LAX is popular, but it is not in the same league as Hockey.</p>

30

<p>
[quote]
What happened to Michigan and OSU this year in football? Oh yeah the Gators and the Trojans? How about in basketball? The Big 10 is so top heavy and the better schools can just pad their record against the other schools.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Right.</p>

<p>Let's talk about how Penn State did against Tennessee.</p>

<p>Or how Wisconsin did against Arkansas.</p>

<p>But you, being the typical ignorant sports fan you are, can ignore those games, and just look at BCS games to make broad conclusions about an entire conference.</p>

31

<p>How can you call a sport that attracts less than 1,000 fans per game on the average a POPULAR spectator sport? How do you define "popular"?</p>

32

<p>Michigan State wins 2007 Hockey championship before over 19,000 fans.</p>

<p>" Justin Abdelkader snapped a tie with 18.9 seconds to go, seconds after ringing a shot off the post in Michigan State's 3-1 victory over Boston College in the NCAA hockey championship game Saturday night.
Chris Mueller added an empty-net goal with 1.2 seconds left to clinch it for the Spartans (26-13-3), a lightly regarded No. 3 seed in the Midwest Regional when the tournament began. Michigan State, playing in front of a record crowd of 19,402, won its third championship and first since 1986.
Tim Kennedy tied it midway through the third period, and set up the go-ahead goal from behind the net when he spun off his man and passed the puck in front. Abdelkader, the MVP of the finals, beat Cory Schneider for his 15th goal and first in nine games."</p>

33

<p>"However, the NHL has rebounded better than expected from the longest labor dispute in professional sports history. Fans returned in force -- according to league figures, attendance was up 2.4 percent to 16,955 fans per game during the regular season, a record. Revenues will likely exceed $2.1 billion, some $300 million more than projected."</p>

<p>Not a small amount of money.</p>

34

<p>"Michigan State's 3-1 victory over Boston College in the NCAA hockey championship game Saturday night." (sobbing)</p>