Column: Making a Case for Columbia Varsity Hockey

On college campuses, there are certain things that give students a
full undergraduate experience.

Every first-year must be on the meal plan, so she can suffer the
aggravation of dining at John Jay. There are clubs and
organizations so that each student can graduate knowing he had
the opportunity to be part of at least one thing in which he believed.
Every student should be badgered by a protester at least once in
her career.

And at Northern colleges every student should have the opportunity
to go to his own college's hockey game.

In the otherwise fulfilling City of New York, Columbia University has
robbed its students of the right to experience college hockey.

Why college hockey, you say? The potential rewards that men's
and women's hockey would bring to Columbia are endless. For
those who have not been to a collegiate hockey game, let me try to
explain.

Imagine 2,000 screaming, liquored-up fans squeezed into a tiny,
cold arena, an arch-nemesis within earshot. The hitting is intense;
the fans are so close that a check against the boards feels like a
guy elbowed you in the back of the head.

Hockey traditions, like throwing hats onto the ice for a three-goal
performance and cheering a fight, are enough to make even me
excited.

Don't get me wrong. I am not a hockey fan, and if a Rangers game
came on TV, I would immediately switch to the Game Show
Network. But experiencing college hockey in person, with all of
your closest friends joining you in berating the opponent, is so
much different.

Remember Penn/Princeton Weekend? Now think Penn/Princeton
Weekend times 10. Hockey games are like that.

Besides the incredible entertainment that hockey would bring,
having a hockey team would provide many other benefits to
Columbia's campus.

I am not just talking about men's hockey. Women's hockey
happens to be one of the fastest-growing college sports in
America. The Ivy League is the best league for women's hockey in
America, and it wouldn't hurt if Columbia were ahead of the
learning curve for once.

Almost all the other Ivy League schools have teams. If recruits go
to Dartmouth or Harvard for hockey, why wouldn't they go to
Columbia?

For a school that considers its diversity a true asset, adding
hockey players to the student body would enhance the Colleges'
population. It would add a batch of students who would not
otherwise attend Columbia.

Isn't this what the school means by diversity?

From another point of view, dual hockey programs would vastly
increase the number of students satisfied with what Columbia has
to offer. Alumni giving might even increase as a
result.

Columbia has the means to create a men's and women's hockey
team. According to Columbia's financial report, the University
endowment grew by $803.9 million in 2001 to $6.751 billion.

The interest for varsity hockey teams exists on campus, as evinced
by the 18-member club team (17 of which are men).

So why doesn't Columbia have a varsity hockey team? It turns out
there are a few roadblocks.

Roadblock No. 1: Title IX. The cause and solution to many an
Athletic Department's problem, Title IX is a national statute that
requires schools to offer equal athletic opportunities to both
genders, taking into consideration the percentages of enrollment
at the school. According to Athletic Director John Reeves,
Columbia couldn't create another men's sport, even if it created a
women's sport at the same time.

While Title IX can and has been interpreted to mean that the men's
and women's athletic programs as a whole should be
proportionately equitable to the school's gender percentages, it
can also be satisfied if the school can "fully and effectively
accommodate the interests and abilities of the underrepresented
sex," according to the NCAA website.

The provision does not say that the overrepresented sex should
not be accommodated. So if both men and women receive a
hockey team, everyone is satisfied, and nothing changes.

Roadblock No. 2: Hockey teams need a rink. With the space
limitations of New York City, finding a neighborhood spot to put a
rink would be tough.

Columbia has a few options. It could build a rink under South
Lawn, as it built Dodge underground. This might be expensive,
although the school does have plenty of money. Morningside Park
could house a rink, although the issues of 1968 might come up
again. Still, a rink would add hockey to the list of community
activities, and Columbia would be responsible for it. The
neighborhood would love it. And the school could make extra
money selling valuable ice time.

Another more feasible solution would be to negotiate with the city
to renovate Riverbank Rink, on 145th Street and West Side
Highway, which the club team uses now. Remodeling the rink
would benefit everyone.

Roadblock No. 3: How many teams can the school support? At
least two more, especially with the other benefits. Even so, Dr.
Reeves raised an important point: How many student athletes
should there be at this school?

Recruiting seven first-years a year, as Harvard did, would add 14
students who would not otherwise attend the school. While the
percentage of athletes in the student body is now 17.3 percent,
adding 14 first-years for the two teams would increase the
percentage by only one point to 18.3 percent. The school would
have 243 recruits instead of 229.

Clearly, the increase in athletes, and the varsity hockey team they
would bring to Columbia, would help the school and the student
body more than they would hurt.

Who knows? With the president of athletic powerhouse Michigan
joining our ranks next year, maybe Columbia will have varsity
men's and women's ice hockey teams in the near
future.