102 Replies
untitled
May 12, 5:40 PM
Diabolical article title for all the baseball stans on the board.
Eddie Van McIlhenny
May 12, 5:44 PM
I honestly don’t get it. SMU adding lacrosse in the ACC would be like Houston Christian joining the SEC as a football only member. Baseball is a Texas sport. I keep hearing that it would cost $80mm to start a baseball program, in part because Title IX would require us to add softball too. Two thoughts here: i. we have three women only sports vs one men only sport, so this is not a Title IX issue, ii. there are plenty of D1 baseball programs that haven’t seen $80mm pass through their athletic department accounts over the course of 75 years. Sam Houston, Louisiana Tech, Missouri St and 100+ others. Let’s not do things just to be compatible with the ACC membership. We could be fantastic in baseball inside of 3 years and probably win some football recruits who want to play both sports. And I’m tired of explaining to my friends who are alums of other schools why we don’t have baseball.
stangs777
May 12, 5:48 PM
Eddie Van McIlhenny said:where is the team going to play?I honestly don’t get it. SMU adding lacrosse in the ACC would be like Houston Christian joining the SEC as a football only member. Baseball is a Texas sport. I keep hearing that it would cost $80mm to start a baseball program, in part because Title IX would require us to add softball too. Two thoughts here: i. we have three women only sports vs one men only sport, so this is not a Title IX issue, ii. there are plenty of D1 baseball programs that haven’t seen $80mm pass through their athletic department accounts over the course of 75 years. Sam Houston, Louisiana Tech, Missouri St and 100+ others. Let’s not do things just to be compatible with the ACC membership. We could be fantastic in baseball inside of 3 years and probably win some football recruits who want to play both sports. And I’m tired of explaining to my friends who are alums of other schools why we don’t have baseball.
What's Eating (Garrett) Gilbert Grape
May 12, 5:53 PM
Damon coming from Maryland which consistently has one of the best men’s lacrosse teams in the nation. Have a good feeling about him being able to lead this.
MattyBellsGhost
May 12, 5:55 PM
Eddie Van McIlhenny said:Title IX has nothing to do with number of women's teams relative to men's teams. It has to do with more individualized metrics like scholarships. Hence why having so many football players crowds out other men's sports because no women's sport equals football in terms of roster size.I honestly don’t get it. SMU adding lacrosse in the ACC would be like Houston Christian joining the SEC as a football only member. Baseball is a Texas sport. I keep hearing that it would cost $80mm to start a baseball program, in part because Title IX would require us to add softball too. Two thoughts here: i. we have three women only sports vs one men only sport, so this is not a Title IX issue, ii. there are plenty of D1 baseball programs that haven’t seen $80mm pass through their athletic department accounts over the course of 75 years. Sam Houston, Louisiana Tech, Missouri St and 100+ others. Let’s not do things just to be compatible with the ACC membership. We could be fantastic in baseball inside of 3 years and probably win some football recruits who want to play both sports. And I’m tired of explaining to my friends who are alums of other schools why we don’t have baseball.
BillyEmbody
May 12, 5:56 PM
Eddie Van McIlhenny said:Don't think it has to directly connected as an either/or. Some people would want to fund baseball while others would want to fund other things. That said, all your points about why baseball is/should one day be done at SMU are valid and spot on (although the $80M and the schools you named, it's just different with those) but yes, SMU should be competitive in baseball, if they added it. It is also an expensive sport from an NIL perspective and it eats into rev shares as well at a high clip.I honestly don’t get it. SMU adding lacrosse in the ACC would be like Houston Christian joining the SEC as a football only member. Baseball is a Texas sport. I keep hearing that it would cost $80mm to start a baseball program, in part because Title IX would require us to add softball too. Two thoughts here: i. we have three women only sports vs one men only sport, so this is not a Title IX issue, ii. there are plenty of D1 baseball programs that haven’t seen $80mm pass through their athletic department accounts over the course of 75 years. Sam Houston, Louisiana Tech, Missouri St and 100+ others. Let’s not do things just to be compatible with the ACC membership. We could be fantastic in baseball inside of 3 years and probably win some football recruits who want to play both sports. And I’m tired of explaining to my friends who are alums of other schools why we don’t have baseball.
BillyEmbody
May 12, 5:56 PM
untitled said:Couldn't resist!Diabolical article title for all the baseball stans on the board.
couchem
May 12, 5:57 PM
Cool but why? What's the benefit?
Also "could SMU be close to adding baseball? No." Love it
BillyEmbody
May 12, 6:03 PM
couchem said:Benefit is additional TV time in spring on ESPN properties, continuing to cultivate an already strong base of recruiting for the school with the add of a DI lacrosse team + Texas exploding in popularity with it. Only DI lacrosse team in Texas. SMU has a strong group committed to it from what it seems as well. So with all that, what's the benefit and what's the negative?Cool but why? What's the benefit? Also "could SMU be close to adding baseball? No." Love it
smuhoya
May 12, 6:19 PM
Personally would love to see lacrosse added. My undergrad school is Georgetown and lacrosse was always a great watch. I think SMU would recruit very well out of the mid-Atlantic.
mustang44
May 12, 6:22 PM
stangs777 said:where is the team going to play?
SMU_Alum11
May 12, 6:24 PM
untitled said:God aint that the truth. Lacrosse? Ugh. So disappointing. Notice though that Evans didn't say anything about staffing being a problem. Just getting a field. That's because they already have their coach selected. Also, we need to get rid of Title IX. All it does is limit sports, it doesn't expand it meaning it's a net negative on society. Now I wish they could just develop a field that can be easily convertible to a softball field or just let softball players play on baseball fields without it being an issue.Diabolical article title for all the baseball stans on the board.
KurtSMU06
May 12, 6:25 PM
We gotta dominate the "born on third base" sports dammit! I'm all for adding lacrosse!
SMU_Alum11
May 12, 6:27 PM
BillyEmbody said:Is Lacrosse actually exploding with popularity? Is it like 50 people growing by another 50 people and there's now a "100% increase" simply because the denominator was so low?Benefit is additional TV time in spring on ESPN properties, continuing to cultivate an already strong base of recruiting for the school with the add of a DI lacrosse team + Texas exploding in popularity with it. Only DI lacrosse team in Texas. SMU has a strong group committed to it from what it seems as well. So with all that, what's the benefit and what's the negative?
abezotnar
May 12, 6:31 PM
How hard would it actually be to add a sport and build it into a competitive team?
55Truck
May 12, 6:38 PM
Since this thread popped up. I watched my first lacrosse game this weekend. Georgetown vs Virginia. I don't get it. What am I missing. I thought it was rather boring. I never played it. Is that the reason I am not into it.
PonyKai
May 12, 6:39 PM
couchem said:The benefit is a 23-27% reduction in discussing the following topics on this board between the months of April and July: Uniforms Whether to add baseball R Gerald Turner SMU’s legal strategy in responding to prior ncaa enforcement actionsCool but why? What's the benefit? Also "could SMU be close to adding baseball? No." Love it
PonyReb95
May 12, 6:51 PM
We're now in year 3 of receiving no share of conference TV revenue. With only 6 years left, Evans is likely forecasting what's possible once that money begins coming into athletic department in a few years.
Eddie Van McIlhenny
May 12, 7:25 PM
BillyEmbody said:That’s a great point. Any sense for what a Top 25 baseball roster costs?Don't think it has to directly connected as an either/or. Some people would want to fund baseball while others would want to fund other things. That said, all your points about why baseball is/should one day be done at SMU are valid and spot on (although the $80M and the schools you named, it's just different with those) but yes, SMU should be competitive in baseball, if they added it. It is also an expensive sport from an NIL perspective and it eats into rev shares as well at a high clip.
Eddie Van McIlhenny
May 12, 7:28 PM
smuhoya said:Tried to watch it on TV. Super boring. Looks unnatural for everyone involved. Seems like a sport that was made up for people who can’t play any other sportPersonally would love to see lacrosse added. My undergrad school is Georgetown and lacrosse was always a great watch. I think SMU would recruit very well out of the mid-Atlantic.
Eddie Van McIlhenny
May 12, 7:31 PM
PonyKai said:Just because you said this, I set a reminder on my phone to bring all of these topics up every 30 days.The benefit is a 23-27% reduction in discussing the following topics on this board between the months of April and July: Uniforms Whether to add baseball R Gerald Turner SMU’s legal strategy in responding to prior ncaa enforcement actions
HadABlog
May 12, 7:34 PM
55Truck said:I am sorry you don’t like awesome. In all seriousness, it’s higher scoring than most sports and plays fast. It’s a physical sport requiring a lot of skill. It is a sport with a lot of mental reps & requires a short memory. Players are constantly in high leverage situations. There might be 30 goals in a game or there might be a fraction of that.Since this thread popped up. I watched my first lacrosse game this weekend. Georgetown vs Virginia. I don't get it. What am I missing. I thought it was rather boring. I never played it. Is that the reason I am not into it.
HadABlog
May 12, 7:48 PM
SMU_Alum11 said:It was, for a long time, the fastest growing team sport in America. That has since been passed up by flag football, largely because the NFL funds it. Lacrosse is a school sanctioned sport (like UIL) in 24 states. Most recently Tennessee. We had a fair amount of momentum towards UIL sanctioning in Texas pre-Covid, but that has stalled as year over year growth in Texas has stalled as the kids that would have started playing lacrosse in 2020 & 2021 (but didn’t) would now be in HS. But youth numbers throughout the state are back up. We are currently sitting with roughly 80 varsity teams, plus some 6’s teams we are trying to grow in more rural areas. We may add as many as 5 varsity teams in north Texas for 2027. UIL is also wary of adding another sport after water polo failed to deliver on the growth they promised after UIL approval. Water polo is basically the same size as it was a decade ago.Is Lacrosse actually exploding with popularity? Is it like 50 people growing by another 50 people and there's now a "100% increase" simply because the denominator was so low?
PonyKai
May 12, 8:08 PM
Eddie Van McIlhenny said:That’s fine by me I don’t mind discussing them!Just because you said this, I set a reminder on my phone to bring all of these topics up every 30 days.
Thanks for checking out this free message board preview.
Join the full discussion at Hail to the Rhett and the Blue Board