re: Ranking SEC Athletic Departments : MSU and UK improve, AU and TN drop

Ehhh...I don't know if I would phrase Barnhart's moves as entirely reactionary to Jurich. I think certainly some of their successes over the last decade or so have helped increase pressure on him in areas other than basketball, but I really think he just cares more about building the athletics department all around. I wish he'd do more to push baseball to what it could be, and Lord knows I don't have the answer, but I want some winning football damnit.

quote:

---

That's what the Director's Cup and SEC All-Sports Trophy do.

---

You mean the title IX cup?

quote:

---

Most of our moves are designed to compete in the SEC. Any success Louisville has may simply increase fan ire, and by proxy, fire under Mitch to do something.

---

They are now but that is not the history. We couldn't compete in anything in the conference except basketball because that sport was all that the fans and administration cared about.

Of the Big 3 sports, we're the only SEC team that hasn't been to the CWS and we haven't been relevant in football since The Bear left. We have a total of 11 national championships (8 in basketball, 1 in women's cross country, one in rifle and a dubious claim to the 1950 football natty) in our entire history.

Some might say that the uptick in our overall competition in most sports over the past 20 years was just coincidental with Louisville's rise. I think it is because of their arrival on the scene.

Our SEC rivalries had all but died because we couldn't compete in anything but basketball and, actually, no one has consistently competed with UK in that sport over the decades. Worst of all, we had accepted our weird status in the conference.

quote:

---

I'm still not really 100% sold on either Dave Hart or Butch Jones

---

Dave Hart is one of the poorest most over regarded athletic directors in recent history.

quote:

---

You mean the title IX cup?

---

Yeah, because the OleMiss way means the pretty girls shouldn't be allowed to play sports. They should just look pretty for their rich white daddies until it's recruit pleasing time. Then in order to "do their duty" for the team, it's ok to lower themselves to whatever it takes to get them "boys" to come to the plantation.

quote:

---

Basketball and Baseball 15%

---

there is no way baseball should get as much weight as basketball , it makes 0 money, matter a fact it loses mine at 100% of the schools

People who claim it's part of the big 3 , are ridiculous baseball lovers. Not realistic. And I like watching college baseball , but come on.

There is 1 sport that makes money, serious money, football, some schools have money makers in men's hoops, and fewer will have success financially with some sport, but that success is not the norm nationally , i.e.. Womens basketball at UT and UCONN.

Think about this when it comes to baseball , there were 1200 MLB players on the 40 man roster in 2015, 87 played some college baseball. baseball has been regulated to soccer and hockey in the college ranks .

quote:

---

Think about this when it comes to baseball , there were 1200 MLB players on the 40 man roster in 2015, 87 played some college baseball

---

This is not close to accurate

There was 87 college players on postseason rosters in the AL alone.


Pretty sure college players make up the majority of the mlb now

quote:

---

So if that is the norm, that's 480 out of 1200.

---

I wonder how many of these were div 1 vs juco, etc...

quote:

---

The fact doesn't change that college baseball is a losing proposition financially and no more than a 3rd tier sport.

---

I agree nationally, but not in terms of the SEC. Here are the SEC programs where baseball draws the same attendance as Basketball

LSU
MSU
SC
Arky
OM
Texas A&M

So that is 43% of the league. I think it is fair to rank them the same for SEC purposes