EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

[giwan]

It is less then a month away of the 40th anniversary of Title IX (June 23, 1972). If younger players are not aware of this they should read the history or at least a synopsis as I'm sure there would NOT be women's hockey if it were not passed. Good write up in SI but you may need to be a subscriber to get it all.

That being said what are the equitable (or not) splits that you are aware of between men's and women's college hockey? What about at your HS or local assoc? What about college sports in general?

My understanding Title IX has more then one way to state things are equitable, it's not just one scholly for one scholly for example. It can be a survey taken that the women at the college are satisfied with the offers and do not want anything more. (wish I could find the reference I read that from) Though I do not believe that is in the true spirit of the ruling.

I can state that on a recent tour of the AMSOIL facility physically things are close but not the same. Men's locker room and meeting room were both larger but not by much. The women's locker room may have had a few more amenities in the wet room areas then the men's. Otherwise physical space, access, photos, murals and honors, etc were the same. Can't speak for funding etc

[JosephPSchmoe]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

I can state that on a recent tour of the AMSOIL facility physically things are close but not the same. Men's locker room and meeting room were both larger but not by much. The women's locker room may have had a few more amenities in the wet room areas then the men's. Otherwise physical space, access, photos, murals and honors, etc were the same. Can't speak for funding etc

The women's trophy case is considerably more crowded than the men's, but that's probably not one of the things you were asking about.

[giwan]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

The women's trophy case is considerably more crowded than the men's, but that's probably not one of the things you were asking about.

The trophies weren't up yet, the banners did lean one way though.

[LtPowers]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

Aside from sending the men's team up to D-I first (though the delay on the women should have been much shorter if not for the moratorium), RIT has really equalized the treatment of the men's and women's programs in recent years. Same banners, identical locker rooms, etc. I expect the coaching staff to equalize with the move to D-I for the women as well.


Powers &8^]

[PennStateWomensHockey]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

What about media coverage? Does the women's hockey team get as much coverage as the men's team?

[Hux]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

What about media coverage? Does the women's hockey team get as much coverage as the men's team?

Not in your wildest dreams.

[PennStateWomensHockey]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

Not in your wildest dreams.

So how do you change that, even a little? Or does everyone just shrug it off and say, "Oh, well"?

[brookyone]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

So how do you change that, even a little? Or does everyone just shrug it off and say, "Oh, well"?

I know quite a few who've attempted with considerable effort to coerce local media to greater, more equitable coverage for the women. Very little success. I'm pretty sure the media does not feel the amount of interest warrants more attention from them and their staff writers.

[PennStateWomensHockey]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

I know quite a few who've attempted with considerable effort to coerce local media to greater, more equitable coverage for the women. Very little success. I'm pretty sure the media does not feel the amount of interest warrants more attention from them and their staff writers.

That's ironic - media won't cover due to a lack of interest, and interest can't be generated without coverage.

[brookyone]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

That's ironic - media won't cover due to a lack of interest, and interest can't be generated without coverage.

Catch 22. Much as I hate to say it, I think they're right about minimum interest...certainly no widespread interest comparable to the rest of the local sports scene, pro and college. The times they do actually put women's hockey in the sports section I'm skeptical it's read by very many. So I'm not real sure publishing more on the sport would generate a lot more interest. It's still worth more effort and attention from the media if for no other reason than to prove / disprove that theory and try to build interest. I assume they do not consider that their responsibility. They cater to what their readers want rather than attempt to influence them. Most of all, the athletes themselves surely deserve more attention than they get from the press...broadcast media too.

[AggiesHockey]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

In Minneapolis, interest level for women's hockey is nowhere near interest level for women's basketball. In fact, I'd say women's hoops is the only marquis women's team sport in these parts. Back when the Gophers had some Olympians named Darwitz, Wendell, Kennedy, & Stephens, they were drawing maybe a few hundred per game. Meanwhile Whalen and McCarville were filling the barn (15,000+) for women's basketball games.

Catch-22 comes into play some. The local media fixates on the Vikings. Every day is Vikings newsday, even if there's no game, even if they're not in season; if there's no news, they'll find some kind of Vikings angle. Meanwhile, the women gopher hockey team pretty much has to reach the frozen four before they get scant coverage.

I think it's changing a little, some for the better, some not. The StarTribune seems to cover the Gopher women less than they did 5-10 years ago. Some local TV stations give them modest coverage. High school girl's hockey even made the 10 o'clock news a few times last year, starting in the run-up to playoffs.

[SlewFoot]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

In Minneapolis, interest level for women's hockey is nowhere near interest level for women's basketball. In fact, I'd say women's hoops is the only marquis women's team sport in these parts. Back when the Gophers had some Olympians named Darwitz, Wendell, Kennedy, & Stephens, they were drawing maybe a few hundred per game. Meanwhile Whalen and McCarville were filling the barn (15,000+) for women's basketball games.

Catch-22 comes into play some. The local media fixates on the Vikings. Every day is Vikings newsday, even if there's no game, even if they're not in season; if there's no news, they'll find some kind of Vikings angle. Meanwhile, the women gopher hockey team pretty much has to reach the frozen four before they get scant coverage.

I think it's changing a little, some for the better, some not. The StarTribune seems to cover the Gopher women less than they did 5-10 years ago. Some local TV stations give them modest coverage. High school girl's hockey even made the 10 o'clock news a few times last year, starting in the run-up to playoffs.

Yes and no. I think Gophers Women's basketball was at its peak with Whalen and McCarville playing but currently its not that popular either. When Whalen was on the team there was a blip of local media coverage and hype that helped the Gophers basketball team immensely just like there is a small blip up for the Minnesota Linx right now. Women's hockey has its fans, just like Women's basketball has its fans but neither fan base in my opinion is very deep or rabid like it is for the Vikings, Twins, or Wild (and if they win, the Timberwolves). I think there are lots of problems such as lack of media coverage of the womens' teams, the dearth of good competition and the perception that the product is second class to the men's game. On top of all that essentially three teams have won the national championship and generally there isn't a lot of suspense in the schedule. I don't think anything will change anytime soon. Improvement in this situation will be slow. If it weren't for Title IX I don't think the women wouldn't be playing right now. All we can do as fans is to keep talking up women's hockey and hopefully build it up slowly but surely.

[Hux]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

So how do you change that, even a little? Or does everyone just shrug it off and say, "Oh, well"?

There is only one way. You have to have a writer in a position of power at the local paper. If that person is generating content and is able to get inches for it in the paper, then you will have coverage. Otherwise the best you can hope for is a box score. In the case of Penn State I think you will see some coverage of the men's and to a lesser extent the men's since it is their first season as varsity teams. However, for the men to have regular press coverage it will take knocking off the big boys here and there and having a winning record.

[pgb-ohio]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

It's ironic, but the existence of USCHO and other internet sites actually takes some of the pressure off of the daily newspapers and local broadcasters to provide coverage. USCHO's reporting of scores is excellent, and the columnists are very good. Game summaries aren't available for all match-ups, but combining the articles that are available with info from the Message Board gives you a pretty decent idea what's going on -- at least within your own conference. With all that available on our computer screens, there's simply less incentive for us regulars to pester the mainstream media for coverage.

But while the tendency to sit back is quite understandable, it does need to be fought. The problem, of course, is that even if we have access to the info, the websites can't do much to get newcomers to come to the rinks. People tend to find the websites only after they're hooked on the game. Regular reports in the major media would be much more effective. But as has been pointed out, that's pretty much a pipe dream.

My suggestion is this: Local reporters and columnists have become increasingy accessible by e-mail. Got an idea for a feature story or a column? Feed 'em a lead! Just succinctly identify a story line or a player worthy of some attention. It won't work every time. And if it does work, the article may wait for a slow news day. But you may be surprised at the nice replies you receive and the results that are possible.

IMHO, you should avoid angry lectures denouncing the media's usual absence from the rinks. Put yourself in their shoes. If it was your job to cover a wide range of sports, what sort of info what push a storyline or player to the front of the line? That's the stuff to send.

Should we "have" to do this? Is this really a fan's job? Well, no and no. But if the choice is to complain among ourselves or to do something positive, doing something positive has its selling points.

[JosephPSchmoe]

Re: EQUITABLE split between men's and women's hockey?

Ditto what pgb said. I'd add that it's a lot easier to post a story about women's hockey or an interesting player feature on a website than in the print edition of a newspaper. That's another angle to shoot for if nothing else. I would guess most newspapers get more website visitors than subscribers to their printed editions these days anyway. Exposure is exposure. I'm not sure this is possible, either, but maybe some would accept freelance stories for their websites from people who can write in complete sentences. Or even Gopher fans.