What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

>>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

What?? The women aren't good enough for the BCA anymore? This seems like an incredibly sexist and insulting move if true.


Powers &8^]

It's no more or less sexist than the disparity in fans that show up to their games or post in their forum thread on USCHO. Even 75% of the Corner Crew skips out on the women's game, so having them at Blue Cross really didn't make sense.
 
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

It's no more or less sexist than the disparity in fans that show up to their games or post in their forum thread on USCHO. Even 75% of the Corner Crew skips out on the women's game, so having them at Blue Cross really didn't make sense.

When women's program is treated like second class that is all they will ever be. While, I do not know the reasoning behind the move, it seems to be poor form to not have them play there.
 
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

When women's program is treated like second class that is all they will ever be. While, I do not know the reasoning behind the move, it seems to be poor form to not have them play there.

They were given their chance to play in Blue Cross, and how many people showed? And of those people..how many were there for preferential seating for the men's game. RIT has pushed the women's program very hard, but the fans just aren't interested. It's not necessarily fair or nice or whatever, but it's how it is. There's no way to force people to go to the women's games if they don't want to.

They are also playing outdoors at Frontier Field, this year.
 
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

When women's program is treated like second class that is all they will ever be. While, I do not know the reasoning behind the move, it seems to be poor form to not have them play there.

Come now this is silly. Might as well be complaining that the RIT men's squad doesn't get to play in a 20,000 seat arena. Why hasn't the RIT Men's basketball team been given a chance to play at BCA? Or the wrestling team? When was the last time RIT's baseball team played at Frontier Field?

The size of the arena is a reflection of the popularity of the team with fans, not how much the school thinks of the team. Has NOTHING to do with sexism. When the ladies start selling out the Ritter I would bet RIT would be THRILLED to put them in BCA but until then it just doesn't make sense.
 
Last edited:
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

Supply and demand is the move. It probably made financial sense to move the games back to Ritter.

I'm not sure RIT is treating the Womens team as second class.. how many women's hockey teams bring in a huge crowd? Probably Minnesotta... maybe a few others. This just seems common in NCAA women's sports. Perhaps when the lady Tigers start contending for the national title their popularity will grow.

When women's program is treated like second class that is all they will ever be. While, I do not know the reasoning behind the move, it seems to be poor form to not have them play there.
 
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

They were given their chance to play in Blue Cross, and how many people showed? And of those people..how many were there for preferential seating for the men's game. RIT has pushed the women's program very hard, but the fans just aren't interested. It's not necessarily fair or nice or whatever, but it's how it is. There's no way to force people to go to the women's games if they don't want to.

They are also playing outdoors at Frontier Field, this year.

Come now this is silly. Might as well be complaining that the RIT men's squad doesn't get to play in a 20,000 seat arena. Why hasn't the RIT Men's basketball team been given a chance to play at BCA? Or the wrestling team? When was the last time RIT's baseball team played at Frontier Field?

The size of the arena is a reflection of the popularity of the team with fans, not how much the school thinks of the team. Has NOTHING to do with sexism. When the ladies start selling out the Ritter I would bet RIT would be THRILLED to put them in BCA but until then it just doesn't make sense.

Supply and demand is the move. It probably made financial sense to move the games back to Ritter.

I'm not sure RIT is treating the Womens team as second class.. how many women's hockey teams bring in a huge crowd? Probably Minnesotta... maybe a few others. This just seems common in NCAA women's sports. Perhaps when the lady Tigers start contending for the national title their popularity will grow.

All I wrote was that if RIT (or any other college) doesn't treat the women's hockey team as equals to the men's then they never will be. (In terms of support not effort of the players). All of your arguments are just blather for supporting the status quo of having men's sports be the "top dog" and women's sports getting the scraps.
 
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

My argument is that money talks. Until the women's team generates enough money as the mens team.. heck, or even breaks even to justify a venue like Blue Cross Arena, RIT shouldn't feel the need to host them there.

All I wrote was that if RIT (or any other college) doesn't treat the women's hockey team as equals to the men's then they never will be. (In terms of support not effort of the players). All of your arguments are just blather for supporting the status quo of having men's sports be the "top dog" and women's sports getting the scraps.
 
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

My argument is that money talks. Until the women's team generates enough money as the mens team.. heck, or even breaks even to justify a venue like Blue Cross Arena, RIT shouldn't feel the need to host them there.

At some point you have to jump start that growth. Making homecoming a doubleheader event was one way to do that, but one year is not long enough to get that interest revved up. Even the men's team didn't sell out the BCA in their first year there; it takes time to catch on as a tradition.


Powers &8^]
 
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

All that matters is the definition of opportunity. That's all that should be equal. The argument here is that different people define "opportunity" differently. E.g. "The women's teams should have the opportunity to play at BCA if it is clear the event can at least break even." vs. "The women's team should play at BCA because the men's team does." vs. whatever.

Which is equality? Choose your poison.
 
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

They were given their chance to play in Blue Cross, and how many people showed?

To answer your question:

YALE (0-2-0) vs. RIT (3-3-0)
Date: Oct 20, 2012 Location: Rochester, NY Arena: Blue Cross Arena
Attendance:1150 Start time:2:30 pm End time:4:25 pm Total time:1:55

I wonder if you were ask the coaches and players on the woman's team if they'd rather play in a well packed 'Ritter Rink' or a sparsely filled BCA, me thinks they'd take the Ritter every time.
 
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

I wonder if you were ask the coaches and players on the woman's team if they'd rather play in a well packed 'Ritter Rink' or a sparsely filled BCA, me thinks they'd take the Ritter every time.

I agree here.
 
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

I wonder if you were ask the coaches and players on the woman's team if they'd rather play in a well packed 'Ritter Rink' or a sparsely filled BCA, me thinks they'd take the Ritter every time.

If it was the majority of their games I would agree, but since its one game I think the ladies would enjoy playing at Blue Cross. Not many people get to play in an arena like that...
 
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

If it was the majority of their games I would agree, but since its one game I think the ladies would enjoy playing at Blue Cross. Not many people get to play in an arena like that...

In a perfect world, both games would sell out, there'd be a massive block party downtown between games and everybody could take an elevated train back to Henrietta or parts south and sleep the day off but I think you have the following factors working against you....

Renting out the BCA vs Attendance. No idea of the cost for it and sure, the school should eat it but it is a business after all.

What do you do for the people hanging out downtown between games for 2.5 hours. Remember that for most, this is their first time in the downtown area.

Going to the first game vs the other on-campus events that are more closely matched to the student's \ parent's interest.


I hope they market the hell out of the women's game and see no reason why it shouldn't sell out.
 
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

What?? The women aren't good enough for the BCA anymore? This seems like an incredibly sexist and insulting move if true.


Powers &8^]

First off I can understand this move. It costs a lot of money to have a game or event at Blue Cross Arena. If you are not bringing in the fans than you will be losing a lot of money.

Women sports just are a tough draw. Look at the Soccer leagues that have come and gone. They had the perfect timing of the Women’s World Cup on US soil when nothing else was going on back in the late 90s. That ran a women’s pro soccer league, but only a few years before they ran out of money.

There are exceptions, but on average women are not as strong and athletic as men. Not that there have not been fantastic female athletics. There have been some greats, Rochester has one of them. However it’s a matter of numbers, not as many girls on average are good athletics or even interested in athletics as most men are. I helped coached one of my sister’s softball teams back in college. I remember one girl was a great softball player. She could have been all state, she was a better ball player than I was. However, she quiet (sadly to me) after her sophomore year of high school. It was just not as much fun of her playing at that high level as just playing for fun.

Now that is not every female athletes, but I good many are like that. It’s kind of like RIT spending money to find out why women just are not interested in Engineer or IT as much as men. Curiously they don’t seem to study when so many less men like to be Nurses, or Social Workers, or Speech Pathologist. They seem to get that men just are not as interested in those fields, ON AVERAGE, as women are.

You know the idea of Title IX is a good one (It implementation has been a disservice of sports since day one). Women should have the opportunity to play if they want to. And I think a university should try to do just as much to get people interested in those Sports as their male sports. However, people have limited time and money and they generally want to see the best when they spend that time and money. The overall skill level of females to their male counterparts is noticeable lower in most sports. Tennis is the one sport where I think it’s a lot closer. Again this is all on average, so it’s tough to find that one great female game. Not that there are not great females games out there and we certainly have seen a few yawner of Men Hockey games at the Ritter.

Point is that these are tough decisions balancing give women all the chance in the world vs. also having to worry about having enough money to do these things. Hey how would you feel being a female hockey player from Niagara who recently dropped their program? Think they would not like to be playing at the Ritter if they had the chance. Niagara, a stone throw away from a so called City of Hockey. Think about that, before you start throwing insults and calling people names…
 
Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<

It's too bad that Female Fans don't support women's sports, they would have many more fans. I personally really like watching the RIT women's team play - they are very entertaining, well coached and the games are fun to attend. Women's hockey is different than the men's hockey. Women actually play systems very well and the games are very tactical. Men are significantly more powerful and physical so everyone thinks that the game is better. Its not better, just different.

I think that the RIT Women's hockey team are among the leaders in D1 attendance.
 
Back
Top