View Single Post
Old
09-26-2006, 08:08 PM
  #96
dafoomie
blinding rage
 
dafoomie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 14,284
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to dafoomie
Quote:
Originally Posted by stick9 View Post
Ti you do realize that when you ditch the girls teams for the boys team you are doing two things.

1 - You are being selfish. You've put your own needs ahead of the teams and the game itself. You'd rather leave then stay and help develop the woman's program.

2 - You are lessoning the quality of those girls teams.
I don't think women have any obligation to be forced to play at a lower level than their abilities would dictate. If they're good enough for the mens team, with no special treatment or reduced requirements, then let them play. What good does it do to have them be the Bobby Orr of the girl's team when they could continue to improve their skills on the men's team? It does a great disservice to the girl. A woman's team is by definition an inferior team, this is creating a glass ceiling by limiting how good a girl can become in that sport.

To me, this is like letting a younger player play in an older age group. Are they being selfish by lessening the quality of their own age group's team? Do the older kids deserve a shot at the younger kids team? Thats just silly.

I like what another poster suggested. Have one top level team for any gender to play in (which will still be 90%+ men), and two JV teams, one each for men and women. A lot of the time, the men have a varsity and JV team, while the girls just have one team anyway.

dafoomie is offline   Reply With Quote