So I wonder if it will pass this time?
Replies sorted oldest to newest
No, because most college baseball programs aren’t funded at a level to even fund all of their scholarships, let alone pay 3 full time employees, benefits, etc.
Unfortunately not. The top 20 programs would probably like it but the majority of d1 programs just have nothing to gain. Sure it improves the quality of training but it also helps your opponent so in the end it only means more costs. Also the programs still find enough volunteers who will do it for a couple years because of the dream to make a living in baseball. I mean there is a reason why entry level stats/data guys in mlb make much less than in the general industry, there are simply many guys who would work for free to be in baseball.
Of course that is bad for many reasons. One of them is that only well off people can afford this. If you are a stat guy trained in harvard from a good family they might tell you "sure you can work in mlb for 3-4 years before starting your real career for reel money" while other people can't afford that especially if they have family (sure there might be an occasional guy doing it living in a trailer, I think Matt lisle was like that).
I would hope they would but I don't think they will because the smaller conferences will not vote for it. I also don't see why they have to attach other things to it. There are those who have said that if they go to a third paid coach then they will push harder for more scholarships so if they vote against the first there will not be a push for the second. It seems interesting that there is so much confusion as to whether the ACC voted no or yes. How can that be?
Until you see the stands filled with someone other than family members, friends, and GF's then I don't see it. College BB simply doesn't make money.
Maybe it's time to break D1 baseball into 2 tiers, kind of like football did. There is such a disparity between the top 100 and the bottom 100 as it is - talent, facilities, financial resources, etc. Does it make sense to lump them into the same division? We're at a point where the bottom 200 is holding back progress for the top 100 teams, maybe it's time to move on and address this in a more structural way.
Smitty28 posted:Maybe it's time to break D1 baseball into 2 tiers, kind of like football did. There is such a disparity between the top 100 and the bottom 100 as it is - talent, facilities, financial resources, etc. Does it make sense to lump them into the same division? We're at a point where the bottom 200 is holding back progress for the top 100 teams, maybe it's time to move on and address this in a more structural way.
This is an interesting idea.
57special posted:Until you see the stands filled with someone other than family members, friends, and GF's then I don't see it. College BB simply doesn't make money.
I understand this across the board but not when you talk P5 schools. There are many P5 schools that are making big time money. They should not be penalized because everyone is not making money.
Smitty28 posted:Maybe it's time to break D1 baseball into 2 tiers, kind of like football did. There is such a disparity between the top 100 and the bottom 100 as it is - talent, facilities, financial resources, etc. Does it make sense to lump them into the same division? We're at a point where the bottom 200 is holding back progress for the top 100 teams, maybe it's time to move on and address this in a more structural way.
I've been saying this for awhile now. I'd even go three tiers. Unfortunately, it ain't likely to happen anytime soon. Kids/PARENTS like saying they/their kid play(s) "D1 Baseball." Second and third tier programs also like to bill themselves as D1 Programs. In their eyes, adding more tiers would cheapen that.
PitchingFan posted:57special posted:Until you see the stands filled with someone other than family members, friends, and GF's then I don't see it. College BB simply doesn't make money.
I understand this across the board but not when you talk P5 schools. There are many P5 schools that are making big time money. They should not be penalized because everyone is not making money.
I don't think ANY programs are making "big time money" off of baseball. Accurate information is hard to come by, but from what I've heard over the years I doubt that more than a handful even break even.
MTH posted:PitchingFan posted:57special posted:Until you see the stands filled with someone other than family members, friends, and GF's then I don't see it. College BB simply doesn't make money.
I understand this across the board but not when you talk P5 schools. There are many P5 schools that are making big time money. They should not be penalized because everyone is not making money.
I don't think ANY programs are making "big time money" off of baseball. Accurate information is hard to come by, but from what I've heard over the years I doubt that more than a handful even break even.
The SEC programs would not be paying large HC salaries if those programs weren’t making money
adbono posted:MTH posted:PitchingFan posted:57special posted:Until you see the stands filled with someone other than family members, friends, and GF's then I don't see it. College BB simply doesn't make money.
I understand this across the board but not when you talk P5 schools. There are many P5 schools that are making big time money. They should not be penalized because everyone is not making money.
I don't think ANY programs are making "big time money" off of baseball. Accurate information is hard to come by, but from what I've heard over the years I doubt that more than a handful even break even.
The SEC programs would not be paying large HC salaries if those programs weren’t making money
I wonder how much value is assigned to having a successful P5 program and, thus, increasing overall school image and desirability for students to attend, therefore doling out tuition money that may otherwise go to a different university or college? That healthy overall tuition bottom line certainly isn't reflected in the turnstile numbers at ballgames but...
On the other end of the spectrum, I know for certain that many/most smaller schools promote sports programs so that student athletes can participate in college sports and, thus, will select their school for spending those tuition $$s. This one is probably a bit more realistic to measure. I often talk to schools who have 40% of their student body on school sports rosters.
Same would be true of Big 12 conference, surely...From 2016 on, Auggie Garrido set the tone for $!M + coaches...As an aside, Huston Street just accepted Student Asst job...so look for him to take over within 5 yrs or so...
I'd imagine that Tex Tech& TCU are over the $1M mark...
Those baseball programs are making money!
A 3rd paid assistant would be roughly the cost of another low to mid-level full time position at the school. This isn't a high paying position, by any means. So, when you look at the "burden" to a school to add another head count, it just isn't that large, IMO.
LeftyDadP9 posted:A 3rd paid assistant would be roughly the cost of another low to mid-level full time position at the school. This isn't a high paying position, by any means. So, when you look at the "burden" to a school to add another head count, it just isn't that large, IMO.
Many of bigger D1 & D2 programs are already finding ways to pay their 3rd Asst by creating a title other than Asst Coach - like Director of Player Development, etc.
adbono posted:LeftyDadP9 posted:A 3rd paid assistant would be roughly the cost of another low to mid-level full time position at the school. This isn't a high paying position, by any means. So, when you look at the "burden" to a school to add another head count, it just isn't that large, IMO.
Many of bigger D1 & D2 programs are already finding ways to pay their 3rd Asst by creating a title other than Asst Coach - like Director of Player Development, etc.
Utah was hit with an NCAA violation last year for doing just this.
Smitty28 posted:Maybe it's time to break D1 baseball into 2 tiers, kind of like football did. There is such a disparity between the top 100 and the bottom 100 as it is - talent, facilities, financial resources, etc. Does it make sense to lump them into the same division? We're at a point where the bottom 200 is holding back progress for the top 100 teams, maybe it's time to move on and address this in a more structural way.
This is no different then the player issues. Everyone, including myself, thinks 11.7 scholarships sucks...but it is a supply and demand issue. As soon as the schools can't field a team properly they will change the totals. Right now there are way more players wanting the spots then spots needed.
Asst. Coaches are no different. There are way more interested candidates then spots needed. Here is an idea, stop working for free. Get a real job, open an academy, give group lessons...tell State U that you can't afford to work for free.
This is simply a case of supply and demand. It is out of whack and until it gets balanced you will only see things remain the same. JMO but I think it is correct.
As far as making big money.....let's assume 6,000 people per game x $12/ticket x 35 home games/year. That's $2,500,000 year in ticket revenue. Figure $5/person/game in concession profits that adds another million, so that's $3.5 mil in revenue. Sure, there are no more than a dozen teams doing these numbers regularly, but that's pretty good money when you're only giving out 11.7 scholarships. For schools like that, paying a third coach $50k isn't going to break them
Smitty28 posted:adbono posted:LeftyDadP9 posted:A 3rd paid assistant would be roughly the cost of another low to mid-level full time position at the school. This isn't a high paying position, by any means. So, when you look at the "burden" to a school to add another head count, it just isn't that large, IMO.
Many of bigger D1 & D2 programs are already finding ways to pay their 3rd Asst by creating a title other than Asst Coach - like Director of Player Development, etc.
Utah was hit with an NCAA violation last year for doing just this.
Only in Utah can you have more wives than Asst Coaches.
"The NCAA estimates that less than 10 percent of baseball programs nationally turn a profit, said Ron Prettyman, managing director of championships and alliances who oversees baseball. The number is probably closer to 5 percent, Prettyman said."
https://www.theadvocate.com/ba...99-c709d5eb08c1.html
Believe what you want.