clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Has anyone read this Paul Rabil, NY Times Story?

Is this what it means to be "lacrosse sexy?"
Is this what it means to be "lacrosse sexy?"

In a recent New York Times article, the headline read "Can Paul Rabil make lacrosse sexy?"  If you're a true lacrosse fan, or sports fan at that, why would you want a sport to be sexy?  And why, after this summer's Lebron James debacle, would we (the lacrosse nation) want Paul Rabil, or any player at that to be the "Lebron James" of lacrosse?

I read the article and just found it cheesy and gave a pretty weak understanding of just what lacrosse is and what the lacrosse world is hoping it can be.  We are not hoping it becomes some artsy clothing line (see above picture) and we sure as heck are not hoping to make the sport sexy.

Sexy is a word no coach likes to hear.  Sexy pass, sexy shot, sexy check.  Its not something you teach.  Can sexy draw fans to the stadium?  I guess you could make a case for that.  Will any coach or clinic ever teach behind the back shots that look sexy?  Never.  It just wont happen. 

So that brings us to standstill.  Can Paul Rabil make the sport sexy?  Well I guess with the influence #9 (for you JHU fans) or #99 (for you Cannons fans) has on the sport, he can make it sexy.  With his 111 mph shot and his flow and the under armour shirts and Maverik hats, well I guess he can make it sexy.  I guess what it comes down to is how can we make the sport the most fun sport to watch?  What can Paul Rabil do?  What can people like him, lacrosse amabassors, do to attract more fans?

I dont believe sexy is the right word.  I do believe Rabil has a major influence on bringing fans to the stadiums, but the fact of the matter is NCAA lacrosse is still, and for a while going to be where the $ and fans are at.  And NCAA lacrosse will never be sexy.