Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, [7], 8, 9, 10 ] |
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Re: Women Hoops -- Rave, 10:14:02 02/03/03 Mon
Useless to you, but non the less, the truth. I know, don't confuse you with facts.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Why do you insist on this sort of response? -- Menzies, 11:32:41 02/03/03 Mon
Would not all FU sports fall into this category? I have a difficult time believing that even Men's bball is profitable if you include the cost of using the arena.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Re: Why do you insist on this sort of response? -- Rave, 13:40:57 02/03/03 Mon
Having the women's team use the arena on seperate days when the men are not playing is where the financial drain is occurring. This is exactly what critics of title 9 are talking about when they say that this law is sucking the the living blood out of colleges.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [>
Thanks for a reasoned response rather than a flame -- Menzies, 16:48:19 02/03/03 Mon
I agree it seems crazy to play in the Arena in front of 500 people. I would imagine also that Gene Doris owes it to the women's program to give them a chance to use the Arena. I don't know what the cost is for these games, but if one, two or three years from now they are still playing in for 500 fans maybe you go back to Alumni Hall.
I think we had this discussion a few weeks back and all agreed that Title IX is a blunt instrument to accomplish the stated goal. But how else do you do it? People (Men's programs run predominantly by male ADs) don't usually give up something ($$$) that they have unless forced to.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Thanks for a reasoned response rather than a flame -- Rave, 08:09:15 02/05/03 Wed
I know where you're comming from, but there must be a better way to do things which are not so cost prohibitive to colleges and not so blatant in reverse discrimination. One thing that might help is cutting women's hoop scholarships from 15 to 13, like the men. There are not enough decent women high school players to stock 10 college teams. That is why there is no parity in the sport. Team's like UConn and Tennesse are actually hurting the sport. Yet the scholarship level stays at 15. Absolutely Ludicrous....
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Is Isidora planning to play next year? -- Menzies, 21:18:02 02/03/03 Mon
While McManus is a good scorer, she would be much more effective if she is not the main or the only main offensive option. Next year could be very good.
-Milkjkovic/Podrug/Faurote
-Hammerer/Dash/Rutherford
-Isidora/Rusie/Murphy
-McManus/Celiberto
-Chartier/the next PG
Do you know who they are recruiting as a PG for next year?
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Is Isidora planning to play next year? -- Bob, 22:48:12 02/03/03 Mon
The only signee I know of is Candace Lindsay, a guard from Christ the King HS in NYC. Don't know if she is a point or not.
As to Isidora, no reason to believe she won't play. She's still part of the team, sitting on the bench during games, etc. Could be a very good team (or better) nest season.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Is Isidora planning to play next year? -- Menzies, 06:59:36 02/04/03 Tue
I believe Lindsay is a 2/3 wing player. I forget if that info came from the paper or this board.
|
Forum timezone: GMT-5 VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB: Before posting please read our privacy policy. VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems. Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved. |