And less than 20 on a softball/volleyball roster. I didn't do well in Mrs. Hesch's finite math class, but 46 + 20 is less than the 100 new athletes Miller claimed would be added if soccer and track were cut and lacrosse and an offset sport were added.
And proportionality is just one way to meet Title IX compliance. Adding VB or softball would have worked, especially since VB and/or softball probably have more full scholarships than lacrosse.
OSU had 18 players on its most recent VB roster. That's fairly typical.
As Trapper said, UR is not seriously committed to a top-flight athletic program, which is sad. There is no reason we can't be as committed to athletics on the FCS/mid-major level as Michigan is on the P5 level. We certainly have the money and facilities.
The offset sport(s) would have been instead of current soccer and track, not in addition.
Despite moves over the past 25 years since my sport was cut for Title IX (and even further back), UR still hasn't reached proportionality by either numbers or scholarships as far as I know.
It may not have needed to happen all at once, but especially given previous Title IX threats I think the university would have been reluctant to make things worse, and so would have wanted to at least match participants and scholarships in its offsets. I don't see any way the university would have added only volleyball or softball as a lax offset. It would have had to have been both or something like rowing.
Something in the range of 100 new athletes is not an unreasonable estimate. I don't necessarily see that as a problem though, so the point is kind of moot.
FWIW, women's volleyball and softball have max 12 scholarships each, men's lax is 12.6. Women's rowing is 20.
Completely agree that money is not the issue. It's leadership, vision, and desire. The athletic admin simply doesn't have it, and have to believe the overall university admin hasn't had it either. Remains to be seen if Hallock will bring a new approach, but he's gotten enough time under his belt that it's time to start seeing what his priorities are going to be.
We've been treading water for 10–15 years as other programs in our conference have improved. Remember back when we first joined the A-10 and we were winning the Commissioner's Cup when that was still being awarded? A-10 championships are much rarer these days, not to speak of national relevance.
Take swimming, for example. We were absolutely dominating the A-10 when we first joined, and making some impact on the national level by at least regularly qualifying swimmers for NCAAs. But then it's as if the program was too good in the admin's eyes, and resources were pulled back. UR kept winning A-10s at first, but by smaller margins. Then other schools began investing more in their programs while we did nothing, and they caught up with us. It's a miracle that we're still among the top teams in the A-10, considering the lack of resources and our cost of attendance, but most years we're not raising the trophy anymore.