Will Syracuse add a baseball program? SU is the only ACC entry without a team | Syracusefan.com

Will Syracuse add a baseball program? SU is the only ACC entry without a team

"Is it baseball? Is it women's golf and women's fencing?" DG

Becuase Women's Fencing clearly is in the same category as Baseball.

louiefacepalm.gif
 
I for one would drop the chiefs all together and instantly become diehard SU baseball fan. This needs to happen.

The talent base is great here, see Lemoyne and OCC. see grilli and Corbin.

The bigger question would be where I guess.
 
Yes. A baseball team, IMO, is necessary. It's hard to justify calling yourself a top athletics department when you don't have a baseball team.
 
While we're at it, and I HATE hockey, but why have women's and not men's? In this area it seems necessary.

The baseball argument cannot use weather as an excuse. Our softball team and all the other bball teams in our region play away games in warmer climates in the early season.
 
cpatrocks said:
"Is it baseball? Is it women's golf and women's fencing?" DG

Becuase Women's Fencing clearly is in the same category as Baseball.

View attachment 3997
Expand...

It all has to do with title x or is it IX idk but you need to offer the same amount of women scholarships and men's scholarships so the fencing would have to do with women scholarships so in this instance it's kinda important
 
Clev04 said:
It all has to do with title x or is it IX idk but you need to offer the same amount of women scholarships and men's scholarships so the fencing would have to do with women scholarships so in this instance it's kinda important
Expand...

If the Supreme Court can strike down the Voting Rights Act of 1965, maybe somebody with some common sense can stand up to Title 9 as far too many mens sports programs across America have bitten the dust all in the name of promoting a forced level "equality" which doesn't need to exist.

I'm not saying that women don't deserve an opportunity to play sports - just that men shouldn't be punished because of it.

If the same percentage of girls/young women actually played organized sports through their teens, I'd have no problem with equal opportunities . But the thing is, 13 to 17-year-old boy's interest in playing organized sports far eclipses that of girls.

As such, the number of men wanting to play beyond high school is WAY greater than that of women.

So why the forced equality???

Plus, men who don't play football get penalized by football.

Everyone knows football is the major breadwinner in most - if not all - athletic departments, so it's NEVER going away.

But once you have those 85 football scholarships, you better start adding women's sports and fast - or else you can't add too many more mens programs.

The fact that SU wrestling and mens gymnastics wrestling had to die so women could be on "equal footing" is a crime, IMO.
 
Lawrinson14 said:
If we got invited to the B10 then yes...the ACC not so much.
Expand...
Sure it does -- could be respectable-to-good quickly (at the expense of Clarkson, Oswego, Union, etc.) As the South Carolina poster stated, Syracuse will always be above the Mason-Dixon -- as it will only three or so hours from Canada.
 
OttosBestFriend said:
If the Supreme Court can strike down the Voting Rights Act of 1965, maybe somebody with some common sense can stand up to Title 9 as far too many mens sports programs across America have bitten the dust all in the name of promoting a forced level "equality" which doesn't need to exist.

I'm not saying that women don't deserve an opportunity to play sports - just that men shouldn't be punished because of it.

If the same percentage of girls/young women actually played organized sports through their teens, I'd have no problem with equal opportunities . But the thing is, 13 to 17-year-old boy's interest in playing organized sports far eclipses that of girls.

As such, the number of men wanting to play beyond high school is WAY greater than that of women.

So why the forced equality???

Plus, men who don't play football get penalized by football.

Everyone knows football is the major breadwinner in most - if not all - athletic departments, so it's NEVER going away.

But once you have those 85 football scholarships, you better start adding women's sports and fast - or else you can't add too many more mens programs.

The fact that SU wrestling and mens gymnastics wrestling had to die so women could be on "equal footing" is a crime, IMO.
Expand...

I think Title IX doesn't take the football scholarships into account - only the non-football sports need to be funded equally.

But your overall point is a good one. There should be a more equitable way to ensure funding for women's sports that meets the demand.


To the main point, though, college baseball isn't a very exciting sport. An SU team that plays at a lower level than the local minor league club and also uses aluminum bats? No thanks. And I'm as big a baseball fan as anyone (heck, my father's an SU baseball letterwinner).

Bring back the sports that Dr. Gross cut, maybe add men's hockey, and call it a day.
 
Todd Gack said:
Sure it does -- could be respectable-to-good quickly (at the expense of Clarkson, Oswego, Union, etc.) As the South Carolina poster stated, Syracuse will always be above the Mason-Dixon -- as it will only three or so hours from Canada.
Expand...

I've shared this before, but the former AD and SID at Colgate were speculating about how soon SU would field a men's team (I think this was about ten years ago). The thinking there was that it was a matter of when, not if, and that SU would be comparable to a top-half ECAC team within one four-year scholarship cycle of funding the program.

I wouldn't say they were worried, but they seemed pretty resigned to the fact that recruiting would become more difficult when this occurred.
 
half a generation apart. When my friend told Tony Gwynn (they are friends) that my son (who dreamed big at 12) was interested in playing for him at SDSU, Gwynn said the first thing he had to do was move away from Syracuse.

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk 2
 
Capt. Tuttle said:
half a generation apart. When my friend told Tony Gwynn (they are friends) that my son (who dreamed big at 12) was interested in playing for him at SDSU, Gwynn said the first thing he had to do was move away from Syracuse.

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk 2
Expand...
Given Gwynn's lackluster results as SDSU's manager, maybe he could use a more hardnosed approach.
 
title IX also fails to take into account the rest of the college people who want to watch the sport.. a smaller number of kids on campus play than go to school. they are not given a chance to watch the sports as well because of this law
 
upperdeck said:
title IX also fails to take into account the rest of the college people who want to watch the sport.. a smaller number of kids on campus play than go to school. they are not given a chance to watch the sports as well because of this law
Expand...



I've always thought that revenue sports should be treated differently than non-revenue sports. Revenue sports are something the university does for itself- it's basically advertising for the school, with hopes of also making a profit. The non-revenue sports are something the university does for it's students. That's where equal opportunity should be an issue. Title IX should equalize the per capita spending on non-revenue sports. And it should be per capita- if a school had 10,000 male students and 5,000 female students, equal spending for both would not really be "equal".
 
SWC75 said:
I've always thought that revenue sports should be treated differently than non-revenue sports. Revenue sports are something the university does for itself- it's basically advertising for the school, with hopes of also making a profit. The non-revenue sports are something the university does for it's students. That's where equal opportunity should be an issue. Title IX should equalize the per capita spending on non-revenue sports. And it should be per capita- if a school had 10,000 male students and 5,000 female students, equal spending for both would not really be "equal".
Expand...

Now, all you have to do is figure out which are the "revenue" sports. With the creative bookkeeping done at many institutions of higher learning, that might be a very tough job.
 
lummgr said:
While we're at it, and I HATE hockey, but why have women's and not men's? In this area it seems necessary.

The baseball argument cannot use weather as an excuse. Our softball team and all the other bball teams in our region play away games in warmer climates in the early season.
Expand...
Yes softball plays the first 5 weekends on the road at tournaments in California, Arizona, Hawaii and Florida, a total of 25 games. They then play a couple of games in the Dome and have a short home schedule. SU baseball could play their home games at the park on the north side.
 
its got to happen within the next 2-3 years...baseball would be great and between that and lax could bring cuse believing into late may/early june
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sutomcat
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Wednesday for Basketball
Replies
8
Views
552
cuseattle
cuseattle
Cuse12
    • Like
Complete Mismatch with Clemson
2 3
Replies
61
Views
4K
kingtidge
kingtidge
Dave85
    • Like
    • Dislike
Big East Tournament versus the ACC Tournament
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
syrBossHogg
S
SUFan44
2024-25 Roster
Replies
10
Views
1K
dasher
D
D
    • Like
The Syracuse magnificent six
Replies
0
Views
484
Don
D

Forum statistics

Threads
167,710
Messages
4,722,235
Members
5,917
Latest member
FbBarbie

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
17
Guests online
1,535
Total visitors
1,552
Totals may include hidden visitors.


Top Bottom