Jump to content


Minnesota Coach Anderson "Worried about Big Ten Baseball"


Recommended Posts

Minnesota's baseball coach John Anderson is at it again, but this time, he's making (some) sense:

 

University of Minnesota Coach John Anderson is concerned about the future of college baseball in the Big Ten Conference and throughout the northern states....

 

...Anderson can't change the weather, but he'd like to change the way scholarships are awarded. In particular, he's an advocate for changing the way some leagues and some schools can "over-commit" their number of scholarships, while others (including Big Ten schools) cannot.

 

"There's some schools signing 25 to 28 players in the early signing period, because they know they're going to lose 'X' number of players, and they sort it all later," Anderson said. "They worry about it later, and I think that's a huge advantage for those schools."

 

By now we all know about the B1G-only limitations on scholarships and over-signing and the supposed philosophies that surround these ideas.

 

But he also goes one step further, and advocates that we should not only apply the same over-signing rules to all schools, but increase the number of scholarships available per team (something other coaches have asked for as well). Of note:

 

 

He looks at the huge success of the College World Series and sees millions of dollars in revenues, yet sees the NCAA restricting a 35-man roster to just 11.7 scholarships.

 

"It's the lowest ratio of any NCAA sport in aid to participants, and it just doesn't make any sense to me," he said. "The kids -- the student-athletes -- aren't getting, in my opinion, enough of the pot. They're playing the game and they're making all the money for them."

 

There's a lot more covered in Jim Ecker's PerfectGame.org article, located *here*.

 

Granted, this is an article about Minnesota's coach, but he's echoing statements that we've made here (save for his whole 'northern league' crap). Do you think any of this will gain traction with Delaney and Co (read: remove over-signing rules and instead lobby for them at NCAA level), does Delaney and Co. just not give a **** about baseball, or is the truth somewhere in between?

Link to comment

Minnesota's baseball coach John Anderson is at it again, but this time, he's making (some) sense:

 

University of Minnesota Coach John Anderson is concerned about the future of college baseball in the Big Ten Conference and throughout the northern states....

 

...Anderson can't change the weather, but he'd like to change the way scholarships are awarded. In particular, he's an advocate for changing the way some leagues and some schools can "over-commit" their number of scholarships, while others (including Big Ten schools) cannot.

 

"There's some schools signing 25 to 28 players in the early signing period, because they know they're going to lose 'X' number of players, and they sort it all later," Anderson said. "They worry about it later, and I think that's a huge advantage for those schools."

 

By now we all know about the B1G-only limitations on scholarships and over-signing and the supposed philosophies that surround these ideas.

 

But he also goes one step further, and advocates that we should not only apply the same over-signing rules to all schools, but increase the number of scholarships available per team (something other coaches have asked for as well). Of note:

 

 

He looks at the huge success of the College World Series and sees millions of dollars in revenues, yet sees the NCAA restricting a 35-man roster to just 11.7 scholarships.

 

"It's the lowest ratio of any NCAA sport in aid to participants, and it just doesn't make any sense to me," he said. "The kids -- the student-athletes -- aren't getting, in my opinion, enough of the pot. They're playing the game and they're making all the money for them."

 

There's a lot more covered in Jim Ecker's PerfectGame.org article, located *here*.

 

Granted, this is an article about Minnesota's coach, but he's echoing statements that we've made here (save for his whole 'northern league' crap). Do you think any of this will gain traction with Delaney and Co (read: remove over-signing rules and instead lobby for them at NCAA level), does Delaney and Co. just not give a **** about baseball, or is the truth somewhere in between?

Delaney has shown himself recently to be able to adjust positions (see the plus 1 model and various play-offs scenarios) based on the winds and pressures.

The critical point is if he sees baseball as "worthy" enough to put his clout on the line. Sadly, I don't think he cares enough about baseball right now and the "pressures" from outside the conference for him to change are almost non-existent.

The only group advocating change is the league coaches and fans of the B!G itself, so I doubt it.

Link to comment

Doesn't the NCAA have something in their charter about ethics??? So how is over signing a bunch of high schoolers then pulling the schollies of those they deem unworthy ethical? hmmmmm

 

 

inquiring minds WANT to know :)

 

just spitballin' here since I assumed the whole USC/Bush thingie was about benefits and ethics

 

ethics=doing the right thing even if know one is looking or will find out????

Link to comment

IMO, I think the BIG fan base is as much to blame as Delaney. Truth is, when the skers travel to locations in the BIG and get at most 3K fans over the entire weekend, one's hopes have to be diminished. I'm almost certain Delaney and company often say "why change when there isn't any support for change"? The Northwestern facility and the fan base is a total laughable example. tOSU series we had less then 3500 fans show up and when tOSU seemingly rules the roost, well... if they aren't pushing for change, the BIG offices won't either.

 

Erstad and company, along with husker nation and hopefully Purdue and Indiana have to be the teams making noise. Both with results and competition as well as the fan base and $$$. If those three programs can show annual profits, increased national exposure and post season success then maybe, just maybe the BIG offices begin to wake up the the tradgety of the conference ethics rules and push for change. Until baseball fan bases in the BIG make noise, until the teams in the BIG make a commitment to making noise (see Erstad's comments about the BIG teams hosting tourneys in the south) then change is just not going to take place.

 

Honestly, I think there is an obvious reason that Delaney and the BIG presidents aren't concerned with baseball and that was painfully seen in our conference play as well as the conference tourney. Outside of Hawks Field and Husker Nation, no other BIG team's fan base cares. Remove the huskers from the conferance attendance and I'm betting there was less then 50K tickets sold. The huskers had 31 home games (I think, to lazy to check) and if we averaged 2K per home game thats what, 62K fans, yes. I'm almost willing to be we outsold the rest of the BIG combined. If the fan bases won't support the sport, one can also bet the BIG offices won't either.

 

edit:

Ok, thought I'd check on attendance

 

NW = 8250 <<< drop the program, your a joke!!!

Minn = 18050

Purdue = 26193 <<< seriously, a top 10 team draws only 26K fans. That's simply a crime.

Iowa = 26965

Ind = 31064

Ill = 35786

tOSU = 35847

PSU = 40454

Mich = 45199

MSU = 47443

Total = 315251

 

Husker = 90112 (we need to break 100K) An average of 3225 fans per game

 

Though we didn't outsell the conference as a whole, we did generate nearly 1/3 of the total tickets sold. That friends is why Delaney and Co. don't care.

Link to comment

IMO, I think the BIG fan base is as much to blame as Delaney. Truth is, when the skers travel to locations in the BIG and get at most 3K fans over the entire weekend, one's hopes have to be diminished. I'm almost certain Delaney and company often say "why change when there isn't any support for change"? The Northwestern facility and the fan base is a total laughable example. tOSU series we had less then 3500 fans show up and when tOSU seemingly rules the roost, well... if they aren't pushing for change, the BIG offices won't either.

 

Erstad and company, along with husker nation and hopefully Purdue and Indiana have to be the teams making noise. Both with results and competition as well as the fan base and $$$. If those three programs can show annual profits, increased national exposure and post season success then maybe, just maybe the BIG offices begin to wake up the the tradgety of the conference ethics rules and push for change. Until baseball fan bases in the BIG make noise, until the teams in the BIG make a commitment to making noise (see Erstad's comments about the BIG teams hosting tourneys in the south) then change is just not going to take place.

 

Honestly, I think there is an obvious reason that Delaney and the BIG presidents aren't concerned with baseball and that was painfully seen in our conference play as well as the conference tourney. Outside of Hawks Field and Husker Nation, no other BIG team's fan base cares. Remove the huskers from the conferance attendance and I'm betting there was less then 50K tickets sold. The huskers had 31 home games (I think, to lazy to check) and if we averaged 2K per home game thats what, 62K fans, yes. I'm almost willing to be we outsold the rest of the BIG combined. If the fan bases won't support the sport, one can also bet the BIG offices won't either.

 

edit:

Ok, thought I'd check on attendance

 

NW = 8250 <<< drop the program, your a joke!!!

Minn = 18050

Purdue = 26193 <<< seriously, a top 10 team draws only 26K fans. That's simply a crime.

Iowa = 26965

Ind = 31064

Ill = 35786

tOSU = 35847

PSU = 40454

Mich = 45199

MSU = 47443

Total = 315251

 

Husker = 90112 (we need to break 100K) An average of 3225 fans per game

 

Though we didn't outsell the conference as a whole, we did generate nearly 1/3 of the total tickets sold. That friends is why Delaney and Co. don't care.

 

From atleast half of all the attendance to nearly 1/3 to actually 22%.... awesome.

Link to comment

A few points:

 

1. Attendance:

 

Using HHacker's numbers (thanks for the legwork, btw), here are the percentages by program:

 

Total B1G Baseball Tickets Sold: 405,363

 

Percentage by Program:

Northwestern: 8,250 (2.04%)

Minnesota: 18,050 (4.45%)

Purdue: 26,193 (6.46%)

Iowa: 26,965 (6.65%)

Indiana: 31,064 (7.66%)

Illinois: 35,786 (8.83%)

Ohio State: 35,847 (8.84%)

Penn State: 40,454 (9.98%)

Michigan: 45,199 (11.15%)

Michigan State: 47,443 (11.70%)

Nebraska: 90,112 (22.24%)*

 

*Note: From rounding, there was .01% left over. I gave it to Nebraska because, well, I can.

 

Now, it's not as impressive as saying 1/3rd of the tickets, but saying 1/5th of the tickets sold for baseball is still a pretty big deal.

 

The takeaway from this is that our fan support is unparalleled by the B1G and should allow Nebraska some modicum of influence in the future of B1G Baseball at the conference administration level. Nothing immediate, but say, three to five years down the road, provided the fan support is still there (and with Erstad at the helm, I have no doubt it will be), Delaney will be bending the ear of our AD and coaching staff when researching baseball decisions.

 

2. Conference Improvement.

 

Hacker had a few comments about the teams above, and I wanted to expand on that...

 

Northwestern: Yes, their baseball field looks like a Pee-Wee league field. Hell, I wouldn't doubt that they even have a schedule for when the Northwestern players' mothers are to bring snacks and pop after each game. Just remember though, if you want to insult Northwestern, you have to do so while using correct grammar and punctuation, or they'll just laugh at you and mess your tax returns up so you get an audit from the IRS. :)

 

The good news is that Northwestern does have a facilities upgrade plan in place. The bad news is that it has been in place since 2010, and has yet to be approved.

 

Purdue: Don't forget they were in the process of upgrading their baseball facilities and stadium, including putting more seats in. We need to take their attendance with a grain of salt in this regard.

 

Plus, we've seen where Michigan State, Minnesota, Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio State either have recently or are in the process of upgrading their baseball facilities, so there is investment in the sport in the B1G. And with these improvements comes a natural upgrade in expectations of the programs and their results.

 

Once the results and the overall improvement in the conference happens, then we'll start to see the B1G have some influence in NCAA baseball discussions again. But for now, the B1G just needs to win and get multiple teams into the post-season like they used to.

 

3. The Future.

 

One thing to remember is that the B1G has a network to get original content for. And one thing that ESPN discovered early on is that live content, even if it's something like a tractor pull or lumberjack competition, keeps more viewers on the channel than running a repeat/best of/taped program. If the BTN wants more revenue, they'll soon realize they need to run more live content (read, more baseball/softball) to increase live inventory. And the higher quality of content, the more eyeballs they'll get.

 

Long story short, the quest for ad revenues will eventually force the BTN to increase live baseball games on the network, which will, in turn, improve NCAA Baseball play in the conference (by want of a quality product to air). This may not be tomorrow, or next year, or in two or three years.

 

But long term, it will happen, and hopefully Nebraska's program will be ready to show the rest of the conference the way.

Link to comment

Actually... we did break 100K. Those figures were from an OWH article that only ran totals up through April 18. Our figures ended up being 114,154 over the season. And that included several early games that weren't very good in attendance. If this team can start it rolling out of the box next year, we'll probably see those numbers jump a bit over the season. I'll see what I can figure from the other schools. Give me a few.

Link to comment

Interesting. I went strictly off attendance figures from the stat sheets that the Big Ten has on their website. Went down and totaled numbers for home attendance, and I don't get near the numbers the OWH ended up with, so I'm not sure where the difference is accounted for. Likely tickets sold, but not used? Not sure. Anyhow, this is what I ended up with, again going off the team statistics page, and going into the sheet for each and totaling the attendance for each home game, non-conference and conference, for the different teams. Those were the only totals I found when searching through.

 

The totals end up like this:

 

Northwestern:

Link to comment

Gah... sorry about that... let's try again.

 

Northwestern: 5,805

Purdue: 9,745

Iowa: 12,059

Michigan: 18,761

Illinois: 19,812

Minnesota: 20,726

Indiana: 22,845

Penn State: 25,335

Michigan State: 26,698

Ohio State: 29,340

 

For a total of 191,126. So ours actually does end up at over half the others attendance combined, according to the attendance statistics listed on the stat sheets for the teams. With those numbers, we figure out at just under 37.4% of the total league attendance. Anyways... what I came up with.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...