I don't understand this rule. College baseball is one of the major sports and why the odd limit of 11.7 that was mentioned in tonight's telecast. Is this due to major league lobbying or NCAA rules or both? Can it be changed? It doesn't make sense to me.

It's an NCAA rule.

Title IX complaints yada yada incoming but the reality is that if you "realistically" want to do something about it, it probably starts with cutting football (and perhaps basketball) scholarships. So, hard to see a "solution."

The root problem at the D-1 level is you have 65-85 football players on scholarship.

Thanks for the reply 2011. I would think A&M can afford more than 11.7 scholarships but perhaps hurt programs like Coastal Carolina or Incarnate Word University.

It is not about affording it , it is about Title IX

College baseball is not a major sport

Title IX requires schools to offer equal scholarship opportunity for men and women's sports. Because football has 85 scholarships and no female sport comes close to that, every other men's sport is forced to offer fewer scholarships than its women's equivalent.

So women's basketball has 15 and men's has 13.
Womens T&F has 18, men's has 12.6.
Women's golf has 6, men's has 4.
Softball has 12, baseball has 11.7 (closer than I expected).

It's also why many schools have women's soccer, or gymnastics but not men's teams. Gotta even out the football numbers.

Those reduced scholarship numbers are then split among the members of the team. You will have walk on athletes, some getting 1/3 scholarship some at 1/2 very rarely does an athlete one of these teams get a full scholarship. Before my son graduated high school he was being recruited as a swimmer. He was good but not great. All State in two event and two third place finishes at the state meet as a Senior. Some D1 schools offered 10% and the Sips offered books. These athletes really have to look around and then decide where they are getting the best offer. He chose a D2 school that gave him 66% which was tied for the highest amount on the team. This really opened my eyes to a lot of what some of these kids are doing. Not only are they going to class, practicing and competing. Many are working a job to cover the rest of the cost of school.

Quote:

---

College baseball is one of the major sports

---

Based on what metric?

It's also worth pointing out that private schools like TCU and Rice effectively have more scholarships that everyone else in baseball because they give so many academic scholarships to baseball players. It's not really a level playing field.

Baseball certainly gets the short end of the scholarship stick. Essentially if all the ships were split evenly among the players on the team, then everyone would be getting about a 30-35% ride. Basketball close to 100%....even men's golf with four allows these guys a higher percentage per player.

Hence the reason very few juniors and seniors get much of anything. Guessing your incoming freshman class uses up at least half of the 11.7, leaving very little left for the rest of the team. Like Boomer last year, he would have to pay to stay.

threeanout said:

---

Baseball certainly gets the short end of the scholarship stick. Essentially if all the ships were split evenly among the players on the team, then everyone would be getting about a 30-35% ride. Basketball close to 100%....even men's golf with four allows these guys a higher percentage per player.

Hence the reason very few juniors and seniors get much of anything. Guessing your incoming freshman class uses up at least half of the 11.7, leaving very little left for the rest of the team. Like Boomer last year, he would have to pay to stay.

---

Unless a player is getting an academic scholarship also, they all are paying for a significant part of their school. Full rides for baseball just do not happen with the new rules of how the 11.7 scholarships are allowed to be divided up. I'm not sure of the exact number but there only so many walk-ons allowed and a minimum percentage for those receiving scholarship. For example, just books is not allowed anymore.

There's 3 major college sports - football, men's basketball and women's basketball. That's by tv ratings.


But honestly only football and men's basketball make much money.

Bedmaiston said:

---

Those reduced scholarship numbers are then split among the members of the team. You will have walk on athletes, some getting 1/3 scholarship some at 1/2 very rarely does an athlete one of these teams get a full scholarship. Before my son graduated high school he was being recruited as a swimmer. He was good but not great. All State in two event and two third place finishes at the state meet as a Senior. Some D1 schools offered 10% and the Sips offered books. These athletes really have to look around and then decide where they are getting the best offer. He chose a D2 school that gave him 66% which was tied for the highest amount on the team. This really opened my eyes to a lot of what some of these kids are doing. Not only are they going to class, practicing and competing. Many are working a job to cover the rest of the cost of school.

---

Bedmaiston,
I commend you, your son, and other student-athletes that do this. That really puts alot of pressure on kids and their families, but it will make them better persons in the long run.

Rusty GCS said:

---

There's 3 major college sports - football, men's basketball and women's basketball. That's by tv ratings.


But honestly only football and men's basketball make much money.

---

The only reason men's basketball is profitable is because of March Madness.

Yep...college baseball sucks scholarship-wise. Pro baseball makes more money than pro basketball, but not so, in college. If it doesn't make money, no one cares about it, truth be told!

atm0812 said:

---

Softball has 12, baseball has 11.7 (closer than I expected).

---

When you consider how pitching affects the number of players needed in those two sports though, it isn't that close.

Last weekend our softball team used four pitchers. If you go back a another week to where we had a midweek game too, we used only three pitchers for four games against Georgia and Lafayette.

Last week our baseball team used 9 and our pitchers were pretty efficient.

You just need more players for a baseball team than a softball team. The softball roster has 4 total pitchers listed. Our baseball team has 16 pitchers on the roster and 14 of them don't have any other position listed.

ColoradoMooseHerd said:

---

It is not about affording it , it is about Title IX

---

Of course it is about affording it. 100%. Title IX makes it more expensive (because you would have to increase the scholarships on the women's side or add a new women's sport) but it is 100% about cost.

I will beat this drum every chance I get.

College baseball absolutely needs more scholarships. It isn't a major revenue generator now but it has so much potential to grow.

The problem is that college baseball has 351 division 1 teams. SEC and ACC and Big 12 could easily afford to add 4 more scholarships but most schools cannot. Most of college baseball is basically a non spectator sport. A couple of dozen people walking up and sitting in lawn chairs.

College baseball needs to pare it down to 120 or whatever Division 1-A teams with 16 scholarships and then everybody else can keep their 11.7. Let them increase softball too to match for Title IX. That would SIGNIFICANTLY improve the quality of play. There are a lot of borderline prospects that would go to college baseball rather than sign out of high school if they could get full scholarships at big programs. And MLB would be thrilled because it is free (to them) development and older, more developed prospects coming into their farm systems.

Time to improve the product and let the sport reach its potential. SEC baseball in particular is really showing the potential of becoming a big time sport. Great facilities, lots of fan interest, great game atmospheres. Coaches are making over a million a year. And yet we have mostly walk on athletes on the field because Bowling Green and Stony Brook can't afford scholarships. It doesn't make any sense.

mdanyc03 said:

---

ColoradoMooseHerd said:

---

It is not about affording it , it is about Title IX

---

Of course it is about affording it. 100%. Title IX makes it more expensive (because you would have to increase the scholarships on the women's side or add a new women's sport) but it is 100% about cost.

---

But baseball is limited isn't it? If A&M added women's gymnastics (needed in the SEC) with 10 scholorships, we couldn't add 10 to baseball.

Quote:

---

Coaches are making over a million a year.

---

Um, no they're not. Maybe one or two in all of college ball are making that much but most are making far less than that.

While I do think the players deserve bigger scholarship amounts, part of me really enjoys that a Coastal Carolina can win the CWS or Dallas Baptist can become a contending team at the national level in a state where there are already established baseball schools.

mdanyc03 said:

---

College baseball needs to pare it down to 120 or whatever Division 1-A teams with 16 scholarships and then everybody else can keep their 11.7. Let them increase softball too to match for Title IX. That would SIGNIFICANTLY improve the quality of play. There are a lot of borderline prospects that would go to college baseball rather than sign out of high school if they could get full scholarships at big programs. And MLB would be thrilled because it is free (to them) development and older, more developed prospects coming into their farm systems.

---

So first, I will start by pointing out that there is a HUGE difference in taking a scholarship worth maybe 100K over the course of 4 years, and signing out of high school. Financially, its a huge difference, and I would have to believe that any prospect being drafted out of high school has people in place to tell him exactly this.

Secondly, based on your logic, why dont we just give scholarships to everyone. Free college! It would not necessarily result in better quality of play. To think so is fairly ignorant.

This is a good discussion. I haven't read the Title IX document, but one question I've always wanted to bring up: could the law be rewritten to take football out of the equation? If it were gone for Div I-A and I-AA, and all other sports required a 1-1 match on # of sports offered and scholarships offered, would not the spirit of the rule be upheld but also the players be provided an equal portion. The football scholarship numbers create such a crazy inequity, yet that program is likely responsible for >90% of the revenue. It seems a simple fix to me, but it would require reasonable politicians on both sides of the aisle.

CapCityAg89 said:

---

mdanyc03 said:

---

ColoradoMooseHerd said:

---

It is not about affording it , it is about Title IX

---

Of course it is about affording it. 100%. Title IX makes it more expensive (because you would have to increase the scholarships on the women's side or add a new women's sport) but it is 100% about cost.

---

But baseball is limited isn't it? If A&M added women's gymnastics (needed in the SEC) with 10 scholorships, we couldn't add 10 to baseball.

---

The law doesn't require that spending is equal. That is a myth. Title IX was blamed for the cutting of men's sports when in reality that money was just shifted to football or men's basketball. SEC schools could pay for 27 full scholarships if they wanted to but it would be a sport of haves and have nots and more programs would be eliminated due to competitive imbalance.

aggiebrad94 said:

---

Quote:

---

College baseball is one of the major sports

---

Based on what metric?

---

Have you been to Omaha for CWS?

MaroonStain said:

---

aggiebrad94 said:

---

Quote:

---

College baseball is one of the major sports

---

Based on what metric?

---

Have you been to Omaha for CWS?

---

Sure, people love to go to Omaha for the CWS, but baseball isnt a money maker for schools.

aggiebrad94 said:

---

Quote:

---

College baseball is one of the major sports

---

Based on what metric?

---

Revenue, regionalization, TV, scholarship limits, attendance, facilities are all factors that say it's not as a whole

College baseball might be my favorite sport for both collegiate and professional athletics, but I also realize that I'm in the minority on that. It is a very niche sport that most people don't pay attention to but the ones that do a very passionate about it.

However, I will say I've noticed the popularity growing a lot over recent years and proof of that is the investment put into getting games on the stream and on live tv more. It used to be you rarely could watch a game on tv until the super regionals started.

CapCityAg89 said:

---

mdanyc03 said:

---

ColoradoMooseHerd said:

---

It is not about affording it , it is about Title IX

---

Of course it is about affording it. 100%. Title IX makes it more expensive (because you would have to increase the scholarships on the women's side or add a new women's sport) but it is 100% about cost.

---

But baseball is limited isn't it? If A&M added women's gymnastics (needed in the SEC) with 10 scholorships, we couldn't add 10 to baseball.

---

The 11.7 limit is not Title IX's doing.

Title IX didn't tell the NCAA to give basketball 13 for 5 starting spots and football 85 for about 24 starting spots and baseball 11.7 scholarships to fill its requirements.

That's on the NCAA and it's members' priorities.

Want to add 10 baseball scholarships? Make football coaches deal with not having a 3-4 deep at every single position.

Quote:

---

I haven't read the Title IX document, but one question I've always wanted to bring up: could the law be rewritten to take football out of the equation?

---

Removing a men's sport that's offering 70+ scholarships and all the grand facilities and all of that kind of defeats the purpose of Title IX as far as sports are concerned, doesn't it?

TXAggie2011 said:

---

CapCityAg89 said:

---

mdanyc03 said:

---

ColoradoMooseHerd said:

---

It is not about affording it , it is about Title IX

---

Of course it is about affording it. 100%. Title IX makes it more expensive (because you would have to increase the scholarships on the women's side or add a new women's sport) but it is 100% about cost.

---

But baseball is limited isn't it? If A&M added women's gymnastics (needed in the SEC) with 10 scholorships, we couldn't add 10 to baseball.

---

The 11.7 limit is not Title IX's doing.

Title IX didn't tell the NCAA to give basketball 13 for 5 starting spots and football 85 for about 24 starting spots and baseball 11.7 scholarships to fill its requirements.

That's on the NCAA and it's members' priorities.

Want to add 10 baseball scholarships? Make football coaches deal with not having a 3-4 deep at every single position.

---

Actually, the 11.7 is a number set by the NCAA. It's set so that no school has an advantage, as there are schools that do not have football programs, but have baseball and basketball.

Yes, the NCAA and its membership set the limit.

Why it's at 11.7, or why any limit is what it is, that's a complicated issue but yes, certainly part of that is often to make sports more affordable and competitive for smaller schools.

CapCityAg89 said:

---

mdanyc03 said:

---

ColoradoMooseHerd said:

---

It is not about affording it , it is about Title IX

---

Of course it is about affording it. 100%. Title IX makes it more expensive (because you would have to increase the scholarships on the women's side or add a new women's sport) but it is 100% about cost.

---

But baseball is limited isn't it? If A&M added women's gymnastics (needed in the SEC) with 10 scholorships, we couldn't add 10 to baseball.

---

Well obviously.

Point is that the reason why there is not support for increasing the number of scholarships in baseball from the body of the NCAA is that it makes the sport more expensive and there are about 250 college baseball programs that generate almost zero revenue.

Which is why they have no business competing in the same classification as programs that sell out 10,000 plus seat stadiums.

about women's basketball...my understanding is that the A&M women's basketball program finished $3 million in the red in 2015-16. Is it really a major sport?

also with all the cord cutting going on and ESPN's woes...could the TV revenue propping up women's basketball take a significant hit? Such that only the Elite Eight / Final Four are broadcast?

jkag89 said:

---

Quote:

---

Coaches are making over a million a year.

---

Um, no they're not. Maybe one or two in all of college ball are making that much but most are making far less than that.

While I do think the players deserve bigger scholarship amounts, part of me really enjoys that a Coastal Carolina can win the CWS or Dallas Baptist can become a contending team at the national level in a state where there are already established baseball schools.

---

1. So you are taking one sentence out of context. I realize that. My point is precisely that there are a handful of programs that are ready to become big time major sports programs and willing to invest but they are all held back by the 11.7 scholarship rule put in place to placate the lawn chair/ city park bulk of college baseball.

2. I understand that many long time college baseball fans appreciate the folksy, small time, local feel of college baseball and that is fine. While I think college baseball should retain its culture and feel, I'd love to see the sport grow and get more exposure nationally. There is plenty, plenty of room to grow before it becomes like college football, for example.

Quote:

---

Which is why they have no business competing in the same classification as programs that sell out 10,000 plus seat stadiums.

---

Maybe a handful of programs draw crowds that size on a semi-regular basis. A lot of great baseball played on the left coast, few of those programs draw crowds of 2,000 +, even those with a great history. So inother words, even what many would consider big boy programs would be hesitant to raise scholly limits. Do what you want and college baseball becomes even more regionalized. I think we need to be patient and give time for the sport to grow in popularity on the collegiate level.