A path to a sixth ACC team?

JeremyCuse

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
32,152
Like
32,770
And Pitt is adding WLAX next season.

Doesn't mean a thing.

This ^, there won't be a sixth ACC team for awhile unless the ACC goes outside of the conference which they don't want to do.
 

NazLax30

Starter
Joined
Sep 30, 2018
Messages
1,004
Like
856
There has to be Title IX compliance, obviously. If Clemson could add two women’s sports, they were severely lacking somewhere or there could be further room for growth.
 

ForCuseSake

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
11,331
Like
14,531
There has to be Title IX compliance, obviously. If Clemson could add two women’s sports, they were severely lacking somewhere or there could be further room for growth.

Could be that Clemson's male/female ratio has changed enough to drive the addition of new women's teams.

Or participation rates in other women's sports has declined while existing men's rosters might've expanded.

I believe this is referred to as proportionality. Title IX requires schools to offer opportunities in proportion with their students' gender ratio.
 

NazLax30

Starter
Joined
Sep 30, 2018
Messages
1,004
Like
856
Could be that Clemson's male/female ratio has changed enough to drive the addition of new women's teams.

Or participation rates in other women's sports has declined while existing men's rosters might've expanded.

I believe this is referred to as proportionality. Title IX requires schools to offer opportunities in proportion with their students' gender ratio.
That would be the severely lacking angle.
 

ForCuseSake

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
11,331
Like
14,531
That would be the severely lacking angle.

Looks like they did it to avoid backlash for originally cutting men's track & field

1623973479801.png


No room for further growth.
 

wgdsr

Scout Team
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
275
Like
183
clemson was already good on proportionality for participants:

be interesting if we ever know why 2 womens team adds now.
 
Last edited:

Hoo's That

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
13,917
Like
28,713
Clemson is adding women’s lacrosse.


There has to be Title IX compliance, obviously. If Clemson could add two women’s sports, they were severely lacking somewhere or there could be further room for growth.
You've answered your own question. If a school has a women's program already, it's unlikely they'll add a men's program because they're probably using WLAX to counterbalance football's 85 scholarships for Title IX. Clemson has a roughly 50-50 male-female ratio, courtesy of its STEM programs.
 

PhatOrange

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
23,481
Like
31,576
The state of South Carolina has a handful of schools playing division two lacrosse. Popularity is through the roof. So you never know.
 

Shrmdougluvr

Ice cream connoisseur
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
4,876
Like
7,757
The state of South Carolina has a handful of schools playing division two lacrosse. Popularity is through the roof. So you never know.

The only school that really makes sense for the ACC is Georgia Tech. They can probably navigate title ix better than most (my guess is they throw a boat load of money at any qualified female applicant, so who cares about extra scholarship money for women anyway). Then, they can offer in-state tuition, good academics, and draw from a pretty deep pool of players, which should make them competitive fairly quickly.

I could see some non-power five schools adding. A non-football school is probably best positioned. Candidates could be a Florida public like FGCU or N.Fla, a South Carolina public like College of Charleston or Winthrop, or one of the Nashville privates (i.e., Lipscomb or Belmont). The other three I could see as viable are BYU, Grand Canyon, and Liberty.
 
Last edited:

Hoo's That

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
13,917
Like
28,713
The only school that really makes sense for the ACC is Georgia Tech. They can probably navigate title ix better than most (my guess is they throw a boat load of money at any qualified female applicant, so who cares about extra scholarship money for women anyway). Then, they can offer in-state tuition, good academics, and draw from a pretty deep pool of players, which should make them competitive fairly quickly.

I could see some non-power five schools adding. A non-football school is probably best positioned. Candidates could be a Florida public like FGCU or N.Fla, a South Carolina public like College of Charleston or Winthrop, or one of the Nashville privates (i.e., Lipscomb or Belmont). The other three I could see as viable are BYU, Grand Canyon, and Liberty.
Ga Tech and BYU have very strong MCLA teams. Ga Tech has been in the Final 4 several years and BYU won the 2021 championship, beating (who'd a thunk it!) Ga Tech.
 

wgdsr

Scout Team
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
275
Like
183
The only school that really makes sense for the ACC is Georgia Tech. They can probably navigate title ix better than most (my guess is they throw a boat load of money at any qualified female applicant, so who cares about extra scholarship money for women anyway). Then, they can offer in-state tuition, good academics, and draw from a pretty deep pool of players, which should make them competitive fairly quickly.

I could see some non-power five schools adding. A non-football school is probably best positioned. Candidates could be a Florida public like FGCU or N.Fla, a South Carolina public like College of Charleston or Winthrop, or one of the Nashville privates (i.e., Lipscomb or Belmont). The other three I could see as viable are BYU, Grand Canyon, and Liberty.
nc state has a majority male population. and boo corrigan is now their AD. i'd see state as the most likely in the acc along with ga tech if it ever happened.
 

Newhouse_83

Walk On
Joined
Jan 15, 2019
Messages
52
Like
116
nc state has a majority male population. and boo corrigan is now their AD. i'd see state as the most likely in the acc along with ga tech if it ever happened.
The last time NC State made a major decision about men's lacrosse, it was in the early '80s. It led to Roy Simmons Jr. getting a call from a pretty good attackman out of Yorktown who suddenly needed to transfer to a lacrosse-playing college that would admit him ... and give him the opportunity to score 103 (!) points the next season, win the next three Enners awards, and set his new school's record for assists in a game, season and career. Yes, the second half against Hopkins was primarily the Brad Kotz show, but without Tim Nelson, SU likely doesn't have the '83 championship, and maybe we never get to cheer for Colsey or Kavovit or Carc.

So I'd be happy to hear that NC State was returning to the lacrosse world, even if it's difficult to see that happening right now.
 

Orangeman

All Conference
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
2,796
Like
2,140
When Title 9 was enacted, the Male/Female grad split for college nationwide was 54%/46%.

The Graduation rate is now 67%/33%...only it's Female over Male now.

Why do we still have these laws?
 

longtimefan

All American
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
6,985
Like
8,578
When Title 9 was enacted, the Male/Female grad split for college nationwide was 54%/46%.

The Graduation rate is now 67%/33%...only it's Female over Male now.

Why do we still have these laws?
It's not about getting degrees. It's about equality of (athletic) opportunity.
 

wgdsr

Scout Team
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
275
Like
183
It's not about getting degrees. It's about equality of (athletic) opportunity.
title ix is about equity in all manner of education, longtime. sports was not mentioned at all in the original statute (which is brief).
a congressman 2 years after enactment even tried to have an amendment passed that exempted sports.
proportionality has turned into a (the) strongest litmus test. so orangeman... title ix means that not only must women not be discriminated against in giving them spots in classes to graduate, but they should also have some sort of proportional amount of athletic opportunities.

i don't love title ix across the board, but the more simple answer to why orange is so we're no longer cavemen.
 

longtimefan

All American
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
6,985
Like
8,578
title ix is about equity in all manner of education, longtime. sports was not mentioned at all in the original statute (which is brief).
a congressman 2 years after enactment even tried to have an amendment passed that exempted sports.
proportionality has turned into a (the) strongest litmus test. so orangeman... title ix means that not only must women not be discriminated against in giving them spots in classes to graduate, but they should also have some sort of proportional amount of athletic opportunities.

i don't love title ix across the board, but the more simple answer to why orange is so we're no longer cavemen.
Which is why I put "athletic" in parentheses.
 
Top Bottom