FB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference

[y_jack_lok]

Seems weird, to me, that W&L, with all its resources, has balked for so long at building a softball field for what appear to be, given the discussion above, financial reasons, when every other co-ed ODAC school has a softball program.

[jknezek]

Seems weird, to me, that W&L, with all its resources, has balked for so long at building a softball field for what appear to be, given the discussion above, financial reasons, when every other co-ed ODAC school has a softball program.

It's not that they can't afford it, it's just that it's not been needed. Why spend the money just to spend the money? If it was an issue attracting female students, or there was a Title IX reason, I suspect it would have been built long ago. But to have softball just to have softball has been the issue. What is the upside and the justification to spend money? Everyone else has one so we need one too?

It's not just the facility. You then have to pay for coaches, training staff time, ad staff time, facility maintenance, recruiting and more. Usually you do this and offset it by saying "we will get 30 more students" or we can "raise the caliber of our students", but that doesn't apply here. W&L gets all the students it wants right now, and the caliber is unlikely to change with a few more athletes.

So really you are spending a lot of money for little or no benefit. Maybe you miss out on a few students that would be a better fit than someone who ends up in Lexington because you don't offer softball, but there is no really revenue or reputation reason to do it.

[y_jack_lok]

^^^ I understand all that and don't have a good counter argument. Still seems weird to me. Under the circumstances you described I guess my only counter is if W&L can afford the facility, the staff, the maintenance, etc., why let the need for some justifiable benefit stand in the way. A softball program would give students who want to both play softball an attend W&L the ability to do both. Might not add to the size of the student body, but so what.

[jknezek]

^^^ I understand all that and don't have a good counter argument. Still seems weird to me. Under the circumstances you described I guess my only counter is if W&L can afford the facility, the staff, the maintenance, etc., why let the need for some justifiable benefit stand in the way. A softball program would give students who want to both play softball an attend W&L the ability to do both. Might not add to the size of the student body, but so what.

Budgets don't really work that way. If W&L spent the money building a softball field, maybe they don't build the natatorium or maybe the renovation of the gym complex would have been less comprehensive. There are unlimited ways to spend money, it's a matter of priority. W&L could build the softball complex and spend the money and get little out of it, or they could spend the money somewhere else. Which is more effective? I don't sit on those committees, or any, at W&L, so I don't know how the allocations work. But while there is land set aside for building a softball stadium, there is no pot of money to do it unless it comes from donors. That means it comes from something else. Whether that something else is cutting into athletic operating funds, other building funds, maintenance funds, or unallocated endowment proceeds, it still has to come from somewhere and spent on a purpose that, in my opinion, has little overall benefit.

All that being said, I agree it is weird that W&L does not have a softball team and I suspect, eventually, it will happen.

On the other hand, other than Bridgewater, W&L participates in more ODAC sports than anyone. Bridgewater has no wrestling team, W&L has no softball team. I think once Lynchburg starts up football they will be in the same category as Bridgewater, no wrestling but everything else.

If it's odd W&L doesn't have softball, it's more unusual to me that R-MC doesn't have cross country teams. Talk about an easy way to add some enrollment. I get why they have no indoor or outdoor track and field programs, but how expensive is cross-country vs how many students you can get? Schools make odd choices sometimes.

[Pat Coleman]

Seems weird, to me, that W&L, with all its resources, has balked for so long at building a softball field for what appear to be, given the discussion above, financial reasons, when every other co-ed ODAC school has a softball program.

It's not that they can't afford it, it's just that it's not been needed. Why spend the money just to spend the money? If it was an issue attracting female students, or there was a Title IX reason, I suspect it would have been built long ago. But to have softball just to have softball has been the issue. What is the upside and the justification to spend money? Everyone else has one so we need one too?

It's not just the facility. You then have to pay for coaches, training staff time, ad staff time, facility maintenance, recruiting and more. Usually you do this and offset it by saying "we will get 30 more students" or we can "raise the caliber of our students", but that doesn't apply here. W&L gets all the students it wants right now, and the caliber is unlikely to change with a few more athletes.

So really you are spending a lot of money for little or no benefit. Maybe you miss out on a few students that would be a better fit than someone who ends up in Lexington because you don't offer softball, but there is no really revenue or reputation reason to do it.

A softball field also can be rented out as a money maker and can provide recreational opportunities for students of all genders.

[jknezek]

Seems weird, to me, that W&L, with all its resources, has balked for so long at building a softball field for what appear to be, given the discussion above, financial reasons, when every other co-ed ODAC school has a softball program.

It's not that they can't afford it, it's just that it's not been needed. Why spend the money just to spend the money? If it was an issue attracting female students, or there was a Title IX reason, I suspect it would have been built long ago. But to have softball just to have softball has been the issue. What is the upside and the justification to spend money? Everyone else has one so we need one too?

It's not just the facility. You then have to pay for coaches, training staff time, ad staff time, facility maintenance, recruiting and more. Usually you do this and offset it by saying "we will get 30 more students" or we can "raise the caliber of our students", but that doesn't apply here. W&L gets all the students it wants right now, and the caliber is unlikely to change with a few more athletes.

So really you are spending a lot of money for little or no benefit. Maybe you miss out on a few students that would be a better fit than someone who ends up in Lexington because you don't offer softball, but there is no really revenue or reputation reason to do it.

A softball field also can be rented out as a money maker and can provide recreational opportunities for students of all genders.

I don't think I've heard of W&L's fields being rented out for anything besides camps, and those are for W&L's camps. Baseball does do a few. And intramurals are generally not played on varsity fields anymore. I don't think W&L even has intramural or club baseball, they didn't in the olden times I was there, and I can't find a listing for it now. So I don't think that's an issue either. Really, baseball and softball fields are albatrosses except for the spring season the way W&L does athletics.

[y_jack_lok]

If it's odd W&L doesn't have softball, it's more unusual to me that R-MC doesn't have cross country teams. Talk about an easy way to add some enrollment. I get why they have no indoor or outdoor track and field programs, but how expensive is cross-country vs how many students you can get? Schools make odd choices sometimes.

I've also wondered why RMC doesn't have CC and Track & Field.

Speaking of adding sports, do you know if W&L will add men's volleyball now that it is becoming an ODAC sponsored sport this coming academic year?

[Pat Coleman]

I don't think I've heard of W&L's fields being rented out for anything besides camps, and those are for W&L's camps.

Then maybe finances aren't the big deal they used to be.

[jknezek]

If it's odd W&L doesn't have softball, it's more unusual to me that R-MC doesn't have cross country teams. Talk about an easy way to add some enrollment. I get why they have no indoor or outdoor track and field programs, but how expensive is cross-country vs how many students you can get? Schools make odd choices sometimes.

I've also wondered why RMC doesn't have CC and Track & Field.

Speaking of adding sports, do you know if W&L will add men's volleyball now that it is becoming an ODAC sponsored sport this coming academic year?

I haven't heard anything about it either way. But I suspect they would have announced it if they were adding it any time soon.

[y_jack_lok]

Congrats to RMC's David Wallis. Hope we see you in an NFL game someday. https://rmcathletics.com/news/2024/6/4/football-wallis-signs-with-new-england-patriots.aspx

[Macon]

NICE, well deserved!

[R-MC Guy]

Hampden-Sydney's 2024 football roster came out this week. I counted 165 players! 82 freshmen and a few transfers beyond that! Obviously, that's a very large class of new recruits.

[jknezek]

Hampden-Sydney's 2024 football roster came out this week. I counted 165 players! 82 freshmen and a few transfers beyond that! Obviously, that's a very large class of new recruits.

They have as many first years as W&L usually has on the entire roster. Given an enrollment of about 850, 82 freshmen is going to be about 1/3 of all freshman (freshman classes are usually the largest at any school) and almost 1/10 of the entire school. Last year I think there were only about 30 freshman, so new coach, new philosophy maybe?

Or maybe that came from the school down and it was the final straw for Coach Favret. It's not like there is a benefit to having 82 freshman on the football field to start fall camp. The coach knows the 30-40 that he really wanted. The benefit is to the school for those 40-50 more tuition checks.

I'll be interested to see how many sophomores are on the roster next year. 27 are listed this year, pretty good retention from the 30 freshman listed last year. I suspect retention will not be the same going forward. Next year will be about 50, and by senior year it will be maybe 30? Most likely the 30 the coach knew he wanted with a surprise or two thrown in...

Last year there were 25 seniors, I suspect in 2028 it will be about the same despite having a bajillion more freshman this year.

[Hawks88]

Hampden-Sydney's 2024 football roster came out this week. I counted 165 players! 82 freshmen and a few transfers beyond that! Obviously, that's a very large class of new recruits.

They have as many first years as W&L usually has on the entire roster. Given an enrollment of about 850, 82 freshmen is going to be about 1/3 of all freshman (freshman classes are usually the largest at any school) and almost 1/10 of the entire school. Last year I think there were only about 30 freshman, so new coach, new philosophy maybe?

Or maybe that came from the school down and it was the final straw for Coach Favret. It's not like there is a benefit to having 82 freshman on the football field to start fall camp. The coach knows the 30-40 that he really wanted. The benefit is to the school for those 40-50 more tuition checks.

I'll be interested to see how many sophomores are on the roster next year. 27 are listed this year, pretty good retention from the 30 freshman listed last year. I suspect retention will not be the same going forward. Next year will be about 50, and by senior year it will be maybe 30? Most likely the 30 the coach knew he wanted with a surprise or two thrown in...

Last year there were 25 seniors, I suspect in 2028 it will be about the same despite having a bajillion more freshman this year.

That's about how it has worked at Huntingdon. Between 70-80 freshmen each year and end up with senior classes of around 25-30. We had heard at one point last year that we may not bring in as many going forward so we'll see in a couple of months how it looks. We may not need as many with women's wrestling and flag football starting up.

[Ron Boerger]

I looked up the four-year graduation rates for HSC and W&L:

HSC - 57%; W&L - 92%.  (source:  US News comparison)

That tells me that if W&L recruits you to be on the football team (or anywhere else) that the expectation is you will graduate from there and they will work with you to make it happen.