Re: >>> RIT Tigers - 2013 Offseason: The Future Looks Bright <<<
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.
Money in this specific instance should not be a factor. It’s not like RIT is making money on any women’s sport and most likely not on any men’s sport either (maybe hockey but I seriously doubt that too). So this is not a valid excuse for me.
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.
I don’t see that this really has anything to do with this specific situation. One RIT women’s hockey game at one specific site is being discussed not if women’s pro soccer can financially exist.
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.
To me, this is all backhanded complements boarding on sexist excuses. Women athletes aren’t strong enough, aren’t smart enough, get pigeon holed into specific careers, blah, blah, blah. The sports are different, but that doesn’t make them any less. But apparently it does in your eyes.
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…
This I do agree with to some extent. They are tough decisions that have to be made but in this case RIT got it wrong. Plain and simple. There is not a valid excuse for excluding the women’s hockey team at the same venue as the men’s team at the premier event of the season. To not give those women and their fans the same opportunity is wrong.
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.
These are all weak excuses in my mind. Does it really cost that much more to host a second game on the same day? So what if it does. RIT should be in the business of education students and since athletics exist, creating a positive student experience through those athletics. The athlete’s gender should not come into play, and even more so at this specific event.
My point was that RIT has done a lot for Women's hockey compared to some schools and it is very unfair to call their move sexiest...
This for the most part is true, but that doesn’t mean that RIT should get a pass for scr
ewing up here, nor should they not strive to become leaders instead of followers.
And my point is that just because RIT is ahead of the pack doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement, and it shouldn't exempt them from all criticism. It's like telling a woman complaining of pay discrimination that she should just be thankful she even has a job.
Powers &8^]
Good point. And I agree. RIT should not be exempt from criticism, but we are in the minority that think so on this board.
I think RIT did the Women a favor on Homecoming Weekend. If the speaker ends on time, people can get to that game. Otherwise, they wouldn't bother going from there to BCA. Having 1000 people at the Ritter is easily a more favorable environment than 1000 (at best considering the schedule) at Blue Cross.
This is crap. Doing them a favor? So instead of doing better planning by RIT or promoting a women’s game at BCA they should be thankful that RIT did them the favor of scheduling a game on campus where hopefully the speaker ends on time and people can rush over to the game? That a positive somehow?
My issue with this scheduling is that if RIT is going to have both a men’s and women’s DI hockey team then they should both be treated like it with equal status. Whether it was intentional or not, scheduling the men’s game at the BCA and the women’s at Ritter is unequal and smacks of sexism. In this specific case, money should not be the defining issue, nor should the timing of the game. As for the issue with attendance, yes most likely the women’s game will have much less, but the obligation is on RIT to promote that game and do everything they can to make is as positive an experience for those young women and their fans at the BCA. RIT for whatever reason has elected to not do that and I think it is wrong.
