Interesting SFA trying to get RID of baseball

meangreenfaninno · September 5

Saw this on their fan site:

TallTexan

1:21p, 6/12/24

Since restarting the program in 2006, SFA baseball has posted a 430-579 record, a paltry 42% winning percentage. We notched just 10 wins the past season.

While there have been a few bright spots for the restarted program, notably Willie Vest & Hunter Dozier playing on the MLB stage, actual success for the program has been few and far between. The team currently plays at the city's little league park and stadium plans have fallen through, even with a lead donor(Bo Pilgrim/Planned Pilgrim Park https://sfajacks.com/news/2006/11/30/Bo_Pilgrim_Park_at_SFA_to_bring_home_11_8_million_a_year_for_Nacogdoches).

According to one parent of an early player, Baker Patillo shared with her that he hadn't even been consulted when the Athletic department decided to re-launch baseball. Which likely led to the tepid support for a major infrastructure project on their behalf.

Today's price tag for a baseball/softball facility in the same range would likely top 25 million, a significant increase from the 14 million price from 2006. Marshall is spending 23 million for baseball only. Kennesaw State is paying 12.3 for a renovation of their existing stadium.Georgia State's new stadium will cost 15.85 million. So SFA is easily looking at tens of millions of dollars for a "college level" park.

We are also facing headwinds from college baseball at large. The House Settlement that is likely to take 300k from SFA's budget a year is also expected to bring full roster scholarships to college baseball's Power 5 teams. Whereas teams can currently only offer 11.3 scholarships per baseball team, Texas, OU & the like would now be able to offer a full ride to all 30 players on their roster. That will make any fringe/tweener athlete instantly jump to take roster spots on P5 teams. Don't get me wrong. That is great for those athletes, but it means even tougher recruiting for a school like SFA.

Sure, SFA could continue to sponsor baseball with our existing facilities, with similar or worse results with the upcoming NCAA changes. Why pay for a program where we are continually fighting with one hand tied behind our back? Where we have no history of success nor the infrastructure to achieve it?

We'll need to likely spend 10-15 mil just to compete with the other teams on our level on a regular basis .Given all of SFA's other needs, both athletically and as a university, we have to sit back and ask ourselves if investing millions in this program makes sense. There is an opportunity cost, and baseball certainly does not bring in the eyeballs of our Football/MBB/WBB teams. Men's Soccer, Volleyball, or Tennis could share some facilities with existing women's teams.

In my opinion, it's time to axe Baseball, once and for all.

GMG_Dallas · September 5

12 hours ago, meangreenfaninno said:

.

While there have been a few bright spots for the restarted program, notably Willie Vest & Hunter Dozier playing on the MLB stage,

Ironically, Hunter Dozier went to Denton High School. Another local product who couldn't stay home for baseball.

vpackrats · September 5

Since when does ONE fan post on a message board about an opinion that maybe SFA should think about cutting baseball equate to a headline of "SFA trying to get RID of baseball". Talk about clickbait! I thought you were quoting, y'know, actual news versus imitating a Daily Beast headline writer. Lordie!

Cr1028 · September 5

I agree with him. The cost isn’t justifiable with a tight athletic budget like they have. Football drives the bus and I bet Colby Carthel’s program could go a long way on an extra million or so each season.

Tom McKrackin · September 5

Those budget numbers he cites seem exaggerated.

wardly · September 6

On 9/5/2024 at 9:48 AM, Tom McKrackin said:

Those budget numbers he cites seem exaggerated.

I can't agree nor disagree with the budget numbers as I really don't know. However a recent UTUBE interview with the OSU AD was very telling. He said that with NIL and the transfer portal athletic departments must be run like a business or they will fail. His example was that if a school supports 18 sports, only football is deemed profitable. In what universe does a business budget 17 out of 18 operations to loose money? Going forward universities have no choice but to shed financial anchors in their athletic departments in order to survive. He also predicted that realignment is far from over and that 50 to 60 schools will spin off from the NCAA .

Wag Tag · September 6

Baseball scholarships will be totally taken over by NIL money.

Matt from A700 · September 7

Unrelated to SFA, but could someone explain to me how many new women's teams/scholarships we'd need to bring back baseball because of Title IX?

greenminer · September 7

1 hour ago, Matt from A700 said:

Unrelated to SFA, but could someone explain to me how many new women's teams/scholarships we'd need to bring back baseball because of Title IX?

I know Title IX gets thrown around some as the reason we don't have baseball, but I always dismissed it as misinformation.

Is this a truth? I always thought lack of baseball had to do with funds and just the overall Master Plan timeline.

NT80 · September 7

1 hour ago, greenminer said:

I know Title IX gets thrown around some as the reason we don't have baseball, but I always dismissed it as misinformation.

Is this a truth? I always thought lack of baseball had to do with funds and just the overall Master Plan timeline.

"Although most institutions are not in compliance with Title IX, no institution has actually lost any federal money."

https://www.sadker.org/TitleIX.html

Mean Green 93-98 · September 7

1 hour ago, greenminer said:

I know Title IX gets thrown around some as the reason we don't have baseball, but I always dismissed it as misinformation.

Is this a truth? I always thought lack of baseball had to do with funds and just the overall Master Plan timeline.

Title IX was the reason some men's sports got canned 30+ years ago, but I was under the impression that we are more than Title IX-compliant at the present.

greenminer · September 7

12 hours ago, NT80 said:

"Although most institutions are not in compliance with Title IX, no institution has actually lost any federal money."

https://www.sadker.org/TitleIX.html

I see that this foundations awards and programs ceased after 2015. It could be worthy, but do you trust it?

regardless, it’s not the path I want this conversation to go down. “If nobody is complying anyways, why should we care?”

11 hours ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

Title IX was the reason some men's sports got canned 30+ years ago, but I was under the impression that we are more than Title IX-compliant at the present.

if by “more than compliant” you mean, yeah we can do baseball and still meet Title IX, then that’s what I thought too.

Edited September 7 by greenminer

Mean Green 93-98 · September 7

37 minutes ago, greenminer said:

if by “more than compliant” you mean, yeah we can do baseball and still meet Title IX, then that’s what I thought too.

Yes, that was at least included in what I meant.

NT80 · September 7

49 minutes ago, greenminer said:

I see that this foundations awards and programs ceased after 2015. It could be worthy, but do you trust it?

regardless, it’s not the path I want this conversation to go down. “If nobody is complying anyways, why should we care?”

It's like you can't pay or bribe players.....until everyone does it anyway....ok, now it's alright.

greenminer · September 7

1 hour ago, NT80 said:

It's like you can't pay or bribe players.....until everyone does it anyway....ok, now it's alright.

Do you have any insight on our baseball program?

Edited September 7 by greenminer

NT80 · September 7

3 hours ago, greenminer said:

Do you have any insight on our baseball program?

10 programs (11 with Army) in the AAC have baseball. What are they doing different with Title IX or better than us to afford it?

https://theamerican.org/standings.aspx?standings=109

I know it's on our Master Plan. However with donors now giving to NIL instead of program projects, plus NCAA settlement debt, athletic budgets become more difficult. It would take a major sponsor/donor. Or we could cut some non-revenue, non-attendance sports like track, swimming, and golf to provide a more fan-friendly spring sport!

Edited September 7 by NT80

wardly · September 7

10 minutes ago, NT80 said:

10 programs (11 with Army) in the AAC have baseball. What are they doing different with Title IX or better than us to afford it?

I know it's on our Master Plan. However with donors now giving to NIL instead of program projects, plus NCAA settlement debt, athletic budgets become more difficult. It would take a major sponsor/donor. Or we could cut some non-revenue, non-attendance sports like track, swimming, and golf to provide a more fan-friendly spring sport!

One major problem is lack of a venue.

greenminer · September 7

1 hour ago, NT80 said:

10 programs (11 with Army) in the AAC have baseball. What are they doing different with Title IX or better than us to afford it?

I know it's on our Master Plan. However with donors now giving to NIL instead of program projects, plus NCAA settlement debt, athletic budgets become more difficult. It would take a major sponsor/donor. Or we could cut some non-revenue, non-attendance sports like track, swimming, and golf to provide a more fan-friendly spring sport!

8 AAC programs also have men's soccer.

I don't have an answer. Just wondering what the true problem is.

My curiosity wishes I could see all the AAC membership schools, and what sports they offer outside of the bigger three (FB, MBB, WBB). Could be all over the map, or possibly reveal something I am not thinking of. That would take too much time to put together, though.

DentonLurker · September 7

At the end of the day, adding baseball costs money we just don’t have. We barely pay for what we have. How are we going to add more? Baseball does not operate in the black, as a general rule.

Edited September 7 by DentonLurker
Fixed it

wardly · September 7

2 minutes ago, DentonLurker said:

At the end of the day, adding baseball costs money we just don’t have. We barely pay for what we have. How are we going to add more? Baseball does not operate in the red, as a general rule.

I think you meant that baseball does does not operate in the black, which is profit, vs. red, which is loss. I took basic accounting 101 three times to learn this.