TXAggie2011 said:

---

merc said:

---

Baseball is the only one of the big3 I absolutely feel like is in a great spot and has a good return on investment. I know everything isn't equal and it is a can of worms but we have not risen to the challenge in some other sports (not naming any)

---

Women's basketball has done pretty well for itself.

---

No one cares about women's basketball unless you go to uconn

The average attendance at Aggie WBB is probably not too different than at Aggie BB.

TXAggie2011 said:

---

merc said:

---

Baseball is the only one of the big3 I absolutely feel like is in a great spot and has a good return on investment. I know everything isn't equal and it is a can of worms but we have not risen to the challenge in some other sports (not naming any)

---

Women's basketball has done pretty well for itself.

---

but they run a huge deficit. Baseball makes money. If you saying return on investment is success compared to cost.

jja79 said:

---

The average attendance at Aggie WBB is probably not too different than at Aggie BB.

---

The difference is Aggie baseball is a sellout and people are always complaining on here about availability and affordability of tickets...women's basketball does not have that problem

From 2004 to 2013 our average RPI was 25.

heddy Lamarr said:

---

From 2004 to 2013 our average RPI was 25.

---

That's 2 years before RC got here, and the team was struggling when he got here, and doesn't include the last 4 years soooooooo what's your point?

BQ_90 said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

merc said:

---

Baseball is the only one of the big3 I absolutely feel like is in a great spot and has a good return on investment. I know everything isn't equal and it is a can of worms but we have not risen to the challenge in some other sports (not naming any)

---

Women's basketball has done pretty well for itself.

---

but they run a huge deficit. Baseball makes money. If you saying return on investment is success compared to cost.

---

Some years it does. Some it doesn't.

These numbers have been gone through before. I'll just leave it at this: the average Division II women's basketball team draws what more than the average Division 1 baseball team draws, if you're really wondering who around the country cares about which sports.

As for A&M baseball, these numbers have been gone through before also. Baseball doesn't sell out but a minority subset of games; numerous major SEC games haven't sold enough to have actually filled the seating bowl.

No doubt women's basketball doesn't push capacity limits and what not.

TXAggie2011 said:

---

These numbers have been gone through before. I'll just leave it at this: the average Division II women's basketball team draws what more than the average Division 1 baseball team draws, if you're really wondering who around the country cares about which sports.

As for A&M baseball, these numbers have been gone through before also. Baseball doesn't sell out but a minority subset of games; numerous major SEC games haven't sold enough to have actually filled the seating bowl.

No doubt women's basketball doesn't push capacity limits and what not.

---

Alright but for the purposes of what is "the big 3" in collegiate athletics, which is what started all of this, women's basketball is usually not part of that. I guess we can just call it the "big 3" in men's athletics.

Just responding to what was said. Baseball is not usually one of the "big 3" but I don't think "big 3" is much of a thing in college sports to start.

Sure, call it big 3 of men's athletics but I think you'd need to call it "biggest three" because baseball is closer to the others than it is football and men's basketball.

At A&M, sure, but don't kid yourself about the sport because you stumbled onto one of the unique cases.

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Just responding to what was said. Baseball is not usually one of the "big 3" but I don't think "big 3" is much of a thing in college sports to start.

Sure, call it big 3 of men's athletics but I think you'd need to call it "biggest three" because baseball is closer to the others than it is football and men's basketball.

At A&M, sure, but don't kid yourself about the sport because you stumbled onto one of the unique cases.

---

I agree, but looking back I think the poster meant the big 3 at a&m, not big 3 in college athletics.

There is no such thing as "Big 3" for men's college sports. That's always an amusing claim on here. Sure, if you want to limit it to a school, so be it.

Iowa wrestling averages more in attendance than anyone in baseball outside of LSU.

Men's lacrosse programs in the ACC & other "lacrosse schools" average about the same as the baseball programs.

Soccer programs on the west coast outdraw men's baseball

Men's hockey attendance is very similar to Baseball, but slightly higher. N. Dakota averaging 11,500, Wisconsin over 10k, & a bunch between 4 & 9k.

There is Football >>>>>>>> Basketball >>>>>>>> Everything else

I was under the impression we were talking about A&M sports and the three that I think get discussed the most on this forum. I don't care too much about what other schools are doing in sports I don't even think we have. I do think it comes from the major American sports being NFL, NBA, and MLB. Either way major or not the point stands that we have been getting very good bang for baseball buck.

I think A&M has a big 2 or a big 4 as far as resources being spent and received and all that.

We've spent some pretty serious money on baseball lately; I'm not sure we are getting great bang for buck anymore but I admittedly don't view this like it's an investment firm so it's not a big deal to me.

Coach Childress came to A&M as a 1st year head coach so it's very normal to expect him to evolve from his initial years as head coach and treat his initial years differently from his recent years. The coaching pool he could hire from was likely more limited in his early years compared to now when assistant coaches see his track record as a coach now. His facilities were different, too. Coach Martin at FSU peaked a long time ago. Not Childress who will learn and keep growing as a head coach. I expect him to have a lot more success at the CWS level in the next 12 years.

1) just like in business you have to judge the body of work (resent past and early on)
2) if you did well in the beginning but you are stagnant you have a problem
3) if you slowly built up and now you are over the hump, awesome
4) if you built slowly and you aren't over the hump in 12 years, what is the problem
5) if you get close but never make money (win in the college World Series) you have a problem
6) if you are set for success and fail (2015-2016), seems like a problem
7) in the end, is the program getting and developing the talent it should (players and coaches) given the time and money spent on the program - this is the challenge I see. When we have to ask why we don't have a replacement at SS or 2nd or why we can't throw strikes in big games... we have a problem. Why? Because the competition can!

For the record, I'm not a big RC fan, but given the talent level this year, it probably is one of his best 3 years of coaching.

Is it his coaching or the luck of the draw from the NCAA in the playoffs?

Three years ago you could have made a case to fire Childress - if the goal is to have a top 10 program. Three years ago we were coming off three straight years of not getting out of regionals, only had 3 supers in 9 years, only had 1 CWS in 9 years and no wins there, and coming off back to back sun .500 sec seasons in our debut. I know everyone has different expectations but to many that wasn't a great level of performance over a long tenure. But since then two really strong seasons ending in supers and a rebuilding year crafted into a CWS appearance.

I appreciate all the facts posted in the thread relating to CWS wins, CWS appearances, national seeds received, average rpi, etc. The "we will break through" and "oughta be good next year" type posts are appreciated because I also like to be positive and have hope, but that I honestly realize mean squat when evaluating a program and coach that cost the school a lot of money.

Since the thread is about state of the program I'll say I feel the past three years are a solid top 15 performance - maybe top ten. Over the past 12 years I'd say too 20-25 - it subjective, you can go by total wins, postseason appearance streaks, postseason wins blah blah blah. But I give a lot of weight to high ceiling performances and less to regional appearance streaks.

We've had a very strong three year run and I hope we can build on it.

Complete Idiot said:

---

Three years ago you could have made a case to fire Childress - if the goal is to have a top 10 program. Three years ago we were coming off three straight years of not getting out of regionals, only had 3 supers in 9 years, only had 1 CWS in 9 years and no wins there, and coming off back to back sun .500 sec seasons in our debut. I know everyone has different expectations but to many that wasn't a great level of performance over a long tenure. But since then two really strong seasons ending in supers and a rebuilding year crafted into a CWS appearance.

I appreciate all the facts posted in the thread relating to CWS wins, CWS appearances, national seeds received, average rpi, etc. The "we will break through" and "oughta be good next year" type posts are appreciated because I also like to be positive and have hope, but that I honestly realize mean squat when evaluating a program and coach that cost the school a lot of money.

Since the thread is about state of the program I'll say I feel the past three years are a solid top 15 performance - maybe top ten. Over the past 12 years I'd say too 20-25 - it subjective, you can go by total wins, postseason appearance streaks, postseason wins blah blah blah. But I give a lot of weight to high ceiling performances and less to regional appearance streaks.

We've had a very strong three year run and I hope we can build on it.

---

The last three years have been top 10, literally ranked...maybe RC could have been fired after 2014 and not many people would have batted an eye...but he's on a roll now and no reason to stop the train when it's picking up speed

If we're a three seed again next year I have no problem showing him the door (barring significant injuries of course)