Women vs. Men vs. Coed

[Huck]

I have always thought that the women would need a separate division to draw them into the sport. Alas, after a conversation with Andy Macmillan of the CRHL and now with DannyG's comments about his girls' teams, there is a line of thought that contends that roller hockey, or college roller hockey at least, will morph into a coed competition and skip the separation of men and women all together.

I would like to ask the following questions:

What are the pros and cons of separate Mens and Womens Divisions?

What are the pros and cons of keeping things Coed?

Some thoughts to entertain; thank you for your time.

Huck

[RichardGraham]

Hi Huck,

It might be wise to keep the men's and women's divisions separate, as the women's divisions have not yet been polluted by "mystery goals." /wtimages/icons/wink.gif

Sincerely,

Richard Graham
Editor
Inline Hockey Central

[DannyG]

thoughts:

Women - Men..
1. the game can be played by either gender with enthusiasm, skill, and creativity. The "sheer, pure" attributes of power, heavy strength, and brutal physicality that have been part & partial of the men's game are not necessary to a spectator enjoyment (my opinion, others obviously differ).

2. The Womens Game compared to the Men's Game is an apples-oranges comparison. You can buy into either set of game evaluations as you wish.

Women...
1. If the NCAA is looking at a way to give a dozen more scholarships on the female side of the Title 9 balance sheet, women's varsity inline hockey teams might come considerably before the men's game in collegiate levels.

2. Inline hockey has the potential, especially south & west of the Mason Dixon Line, to become a collegiate "revenue producing" sport (magic words). This would be especially imortant if the sport became a WOMAN'S revenue producing collegiate sport.

Co-ed...
1. Presently, on our local scene, the fact that a) the recognized, premier goalkeeper, b) the hands-down best defender, c) the fastest pure skater, and three-of-the-top-four pure scorers are all girls in both the 10's and the 12's age divisions has enabled the male mindset to accept the assertion that "girls are just as good as..." at least up to age 12.

2. The "scientific" thought still runs toward, "wait until the girls hit the 14's group...the bigger guys will eat 'em up. Next year, we'll see. Frankly, the three girls that will be evaluated in this environment are on the floor 10-15 hours per week, the boys average 4-5 hours per week. My opinionated evaluation is that the girls' developmental curve continues to be way ahead of the boys'. The girls are getting better much faster than their male age-counterparts.

3. It therefore won't be until next year that I will be able to take the concept of actual, real gender equality in our local program and ram it down the boys' throats ( at least, up to age 14 this time). I am telling you today, that it will happen, but nobody else will believe it until they see it.

4. I can't believe anybody will seriously consider women's hockey equal to men's hockey until there are enough girls coincident with boys, and everybody grows up all the way through the process...maybe we need the rest of this generation.

5. Co-ed adult teams become two games: "the girls vs. the girls, while the boys on each team square off against each other in the real game on the floor."

6. I will pay money to see the top 7 skaters from the L.A. Riot play the top 7 skaters from the Toronto Typhoon any day. The women are there, the organizational structure hasn't tapped into them yet.

That's more than enough, but at least something to work on...

[SpeedDemon]

Huck,

I know that the physical nature of the men's game might compromise having women join. Many girls play boy's ice hockey nowadays, but have to quit at pee-wee's when checking begins. It just doesn't mix.

I don't think you can realistically expect to have co-ed further than early teens because of this reason. Sure, there might be a handful of women who would have no problems handling themselves, but I don't think the majority would benefit at all from playing in a men's league.

[columbus_RHstar]

With no disrespect to the girls, at younger(12's, 10's) divisions I see girls better than guys all the time. Most girls are developing physically at that time while the boys have a few more years and the play is not especially physical. When you get into older (14's 17's) divisions the guys have develpoed beyond the majority of the girls. The play is also more physical and alot of the girls who are much lesser developed (musculary) struggle, while some are able to play at top levels, it is not the number that is present at the younger age groups. I mean it's no secret that overall men are stronger than women (except those bodybuilding ones!!Those chicks are scary!!). In time girls will begin to lift weights just like their male counterparts they will be able to compete physically with the boys and you will see more and more emerging in the top divisions.

PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
When I was 10 about 1/3 of my team was female, when I was twelve it was about 1/4. In 14's there were only 2 and on my 17 team there are none. This is where I got the facts for my staement above. Granted those are my travel teams and not my house teams where the girls numbers were more 10's-1/2, 12's-1/2, 14's-1/3, and 17's-1/4. Again these are just my personal experiences.

[missionhockey21]

I totally agree. Hockey is a physical game, and while I know some girls who are probably more tough and physical than guys on my team, as a group girls cannot physically compete with boys in older age groups. Maybe skill and talent wise, but not physically.