2017 Women's World Championships

[jumbodaddy77]

Yes Historic Michigan College Men's hockey programs but not 1 D1 Women's program. Perfect choice to host Women's World Championships and Women's Tier 1 National Tournament for U14, U16, and U19 all in the same week... Ha

Couldn't disagree more. If the point is that we need to grow girl's/women's hockey, and that MI is a great place to start given it's history, then hosting the World's there makes more not less sense. There was a good crowd at the US/Canada game a few months back. Conversely, it's tough to promote and grow the game if every big event is hosted in MN or MA.

I'm glad the women appear to be holding together. USA Hockey's response is disappointing, but not surprising. Great leadership by Dugan, Knight, and the Lams.

 

[Quiet Riot]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

a little of the divide and conquer routine.

On the surface it's the right and logical thing to do, so they will earn points with the public/media, but under the hood they know full well that some players might cave and, if so, the players' house of cards comes tumbling down.

neither the girls nor women will cave.

 

[joecct]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

And the backtrack by USAH begins

@Buccigross: USA Hockey spokesman Dave Fischer, told ESPNW's Johnette Howard the deadline was never intended to be any sort of ultimatum

 

[Eeyore]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

And the backtrack by USAH begins

@Buccigross: USA Hockey spokesman Dave Fischer, told ESPNW's Johnette Howard the deadline was never intended to be any sort of ultimatum

Morons.

 

[pokechecker]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

comparing Canadian players to US players is apples and oranges, in the US 90% of people could care less about hockey, men or women
and comparing themselves to soccer , ... I hope not, speaking of Hope, if it weren't for Lochte she would have received far more bad press for her behavior and performance and the team itself should pay more attention to winning rather than whining.

there is no doubt the US women should receive more support, but from whom?

 

[joecct]

comparing Canadian players to US players is apples and oranges, in the US 90% of people could care less about hockey, men or women
and comparing themselves to soccer , ... I hope not, speaking of Hope, if it weren't for Lochte she would have received far more bad press for her behavior and performance and the team itself should pay more attention to winning rather than whining.

there is no doubt the US women should receive more support, but from whom?

The women's basketball team draws 5,000 per game. The men draw 15,000 per game. Title IX does not care. Equal support by the institution's resources is required.

If USAH spends $1 million supporting the men's national teams (Senior, U20, U18), they need to spend the same amount on the women's teams.

 

[Rockytop]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

Well, I don't profess to know what the right terms would be but am convinced that a post graduate adult can't devote the expected time and effort with only the currently provided stipend(s) for support.

I hope USA Hockey very quickly makes a fair financial commitment to the Women's National Team.

In the interim, I hope no scabs emerge as I believe these women are taking a necessary stand for all female hockey players, present and future.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

The women's basketball team draws 5,000 per game. The men draw 15,000 per game. Title IX does not care. Equal support by the institution's resources is required.

The main reason Title IX doesn't care is that it has nothing to do with this situation. Title IX isn't a heading for gender equality; Title IX is the section of the U.S. Code that covers educational institutions. It covers everything about them under federal law, not just gender equity. USA Hockey is not an educational institution, so it does not fall under the aegis of Title IX.

The Amateur Sports Act of 1978 might apply here; it can be found as a part of Title 36 of the U.S. Code. It's applicability isn't clear, based upon my reading, as it demands that a national governing body, such as USA Hockey, must provide

. . . an equal opportunity to amateur athletes, coaches, trainers, managers, administrators, and officials to participate in amateur athletic competition, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, or national origin, and with fair notice and opportunity for a hearing to any amateur athlete, coach, trainer, manager, administrator, or official before declaring the individual ineligible to participate. . .

and it's not clear to me whether that applies when some of the athletes in question are now professionals.

 

[Blackbeard]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

neither the girls nor women will cave.

I hope you are right. Big accomplishments are only possible with big sacrifices and commitments. If these women have the younger ones coming up behind them onside with respect to this issue then USAH is going to be in an extremely mortifying position in a couple weeks. The guests have arrived but the caterer is nowhere to be found. In other words if there are no scabs to be had there is no team to be had.

If this issue remains unresolved and lingers on and enrollment/membership starts to decline significantly next season USAH may have to cave in order to avert an even greater (long term financial) disaster.

 

[Blackbeard]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

The main reason Title IX doesn't care is that it has nothing to do with this situation. Title IX isn't a heading for gender equality; Title IX is the section of the U.S. Code that covers educational institutions. It covers everything about them under federal law, not just gender equity. USA Hockey is not an educational institution, so it does not fall under the aegis of Title IX.

The Amateur Sports Act of 1978 might apply here; it can be found as a part of Title 36 of the U.S. Code. It's applicability isn't clear, based upon my reading, as it demands that a national governing body, such as USA Hockey, must provide

and it's not clear to me whether that applies when some of the athletes in question are now professionals.

My question would be that if USAH is in fact mandated to provide said equality is it possible to legally force them to do so?...and, if so, why hasn't it already been done instead of playing nice with their master?...and I'm not necessarily referring to this group of women/players but to previous iterations of the team as well.

Is part of the problem/excuse the supposed difficulty in comparing the men's situation to the women's situation at the senior level?

 

[BoSox3066]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

If USA Hockey get funding from the Gov/Congress then you could just get some Congress people to theeaten to cut it off.

If they dont then there's really no recourse besides public pressure.

Wondering if the IIHF has any kind of penalties they could invoke if there is no team, either financially or in taking away future qualifiers or hosting opps?

 

[Eeyore]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

My question would be that if USAH is in fact mandated to provide said equality is it possible to legally force them to do so?...and, if so, why hasn't it already been done instead of playing nice with their master?...and I'm not necessarily referring to this group of women/players but to previous iterations of the team as well.

You would have to find someone who both wants to sue them and has standing to do so. My guess is that the senior national team members don't have standing to sue over a lack of youth opportunities, and that those who do have standing don't want to be the ones that sue, for a variety of reasons, including the fact that the 17-year old player whose family does sue will likely find herself not making the cut to play on USA Hockey teams.

Is part of the problem/excuse the supposed difficulty in comparing the men's situation to the women's situation at the senior level?

In regards to the current situation, that almost certainly plays a big role. My guess is that the USOC and Hockey USA probably aren't "supporting" the men's national team to a much greater extent than the women. They don't worry about paying the men a stipend, given their NHL salaries, and the accommodations for the men's team at the Olympics are bargained between the NHL, the NHLPA, and the IOC. So, from a legal standpoint, USA Hockey isn't discriminating here. They pretty clearly are at lower levels, but, as I said, the senior national team likely doesn't have standing in that regard.

My hunch is that the players are going to have to fight this without recourse to the courts.

 

[D2D]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

It would be interesting to know just where all of USA Hockey's funding comes from, and is there separate accounting for boys vs. girls membership/participation fees. For example, what percentage comes from the fees that the parents of young players must pay to make their kids eligible to roster on USA Hockey sanctioned youth teams, and play in various tournaments? If the percentage is significant it would raise more questions unrelated to gender equity, i.e. how much should the parents of young players' be expected to pay to fund the expenses and stipends of national team members?

Obviously there remains far more boy hockey players than girl hockey players, which begs another question: what proportion of the total membership income should go to fund the men's vs. the women's national teams?

Which in turn begs yet another question: What would be the consequences if USA Hockey were to be split into two separate organizations, one for male and one for female hockey players? Would the girls/women stand to gain, or lose, if that kind of a split would ever come become reality?

 

[Eeyore]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

Which in turn begs yet another question: What would be the consequences if USA Hockey were to be split into two separate organizations, one for male and one for female hockey players? Would the girls/women stand to gain, or lose, if that kind of a split would ever come become reality?

One consequence is that it could no longer be the national governing body for hockey in the U.S. One thing that the Amateur Sports Act is clear on is that, if a sport is featured for both men and women in the Olympics, the USOC can only recognize a governing body that represents both the men and the women. If USA Hockey split, it would effectively cease to be. So, this is a non-starter.

 

[LtPowers]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

I am very curious as to where the $85k figure comes from and what sort of mathematical gymnastics they are doing to get to that number.

The $85k figure includes the $60k or $65k (can't remember which) that ALL American medal winners get from the USOC.


Powers &8^]

 

[D2D]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

One consequence is that it could no longer be the national governing body for hockey in the U.S. One thing that the Amateur Sports Act is clear on is that, if a sport is featured for both men and women in the Olympics, the USOC can only recognize a governing body that represents both the men and the women. If USA Hockey split, it would effectively cease to be. So, this is a non-starter.

Interesting, thanks for the info.

 

[IDK]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

Does anyone know if any men's national team-level players have come out in support of the women?

 

[KTDC]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

Does anyone know if any men's national team-level players have come out in support of the women?

Some former olympians have-John Carlson, Brooks Orpik and Kevin Shattenkirk, for example.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

Brooks Orpik

NlCE.

 

[thirdtime's . . .]

Re: 2017 Women's World Championships

Patty Kaz (expenditures)? Concussions (younger players)? Ultimately no thread on the forum is going to be untouched by this issue:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/16/...latest&contentPlacement=8&pgtype=sectionfront