Women's Softball

[NYC Duke Fan]

I think that it is time for Duke to add women's softball to the competitive sports at Duke.

Other ACC schools play it and for the most part women's sports at Duke are very successful, so there is no reason to think that softball would not be successful.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Agreed! It's one of the sports that we can't beat the heels in because we don't play it. I don't even care if we aren't successful in it, but it would be nice to field a team. (By the way, unc is pretty good..they lost in ACC championship game.)

[Duvall]

I think that it is time for Duke to add women's softball to the competitive sports at Duke.

Other ACC schools play it and for the most part women's sports at Duke are very successful, so there is no reason to think that softball would not be successful.

Great. Now we just need money and space to build a new stadium.

Duke is trying to raise money to revamp the facilities and endow scholarships for the programs it already has. Starting a new and expensive program would be folly at this time.

[SCMatt33]

I think that it is time for Duke to add women's softball to the competitive sports at Duke.

Other ACC schools play it and for the most part women's sports at Duke are very successful.

There are a few issues with this.

First, Duke is in Title IX balance right now. Adding a women's softball team would likely require adding an additional men's team somewhere to balance it out in terms of new scholarships and funding. Finding an equivalent men's sport is actually harder than it sounds. There are 5 NCAA men's sports in which Duke does not participate: Ice Hockey, Volleyball, Gymnastics, Water Polo, and Skiing. Ignoring the fact that most of these sports are very regional sports whose participants are far away from Duke, only Ice Hockey would truly off set a softball team, as the others have scholarship limits of less than half of those for softball. Duke has had a non-varsity team for years, but a unilateral move to NCAA D-I without other local schools would not be practical.

Second, I'm not sure how a new softball team would fit into the budget or Duke's budget. There is nothing resembling a softball field on Duke's campus. There would be two options to take care of this. The first would be to build one from scratch, which would require taking up new land and cost a lot of money. The second would be if the baseball team moved to DBAP full time and Jack Coombs Field was renovated into a softball facility instead of a baseball facility. This would be a much easier move financially, but I don't know if DBAP could support Duke full time within the Bulls early season schedule or if it would be in the best interest of the Baseball team to move them fully off campus.

Third, Duke's campaign to fully fund the sports it currently has, in terms of endowing scholarships and insuring a sound financial future for team spending, is not nearly complete. As Duvall mentioned, I would love to see this complete first and get the sports Duke has right now taken care of before considering new ventures.

Fourth, even if Duke could afford a softball team (and a new men's team) and fully endow them, it would be incredibly difficult to field a competitive team. Softball is an equivalency sport that allows 12 complete scholarships. Being that tuition is so large at Duke, it's hard to split scholarships, when an offer of a half scholarship from Duke is still more money than no offer from a state school (for an in state student) or only slightly less (for an out of state student). Giving 12 full schollys and filling out the rest of a roster with walk-ons doesn't seem like the path to a competitive team.

Fifth, I don't know the exact size of a softball roster, but I will assume that it falls somewhere between 20-30 athletes. If you double that for adding a men's sport, that's 40-60 new athletes. Also assuming that the team is equally divided for each class, you have 10-15 spots in each incoming class that will need to be reserved for new athletes that would normally be open to the applicant pool. Is the university willing to do this?

I would love to see Duke add sports in the future, and when that happen, softball will be near the top of the list, but there are just too many issues to overcome, and too many other things to take care of before it can happen.

[Bluedog]

Duke considered adding a varsity softball team several years back. They decided to make women's crew a varsity sport instead. There are something like 40 athletes on the women's rowing team so it benefits more individuals. On top of that, the club crew team was already pretty solid (as is the men's crew team), while the women's club softball team is not even close to varsity level. I think the administration made the right decision.

[laxbluedevil]

Duke has the biggest campus of any school in America besides Berry and Sewanee, so space isn't an issue. Neither is money, far more money than any other ACC school, most of which had softball years ago. Does Duke still have the fewest scholarship athletes every year, if so, why? Forget endowing scholarships or facilities improvements. Hasn't Duke already spent billions on facilities construction recently? Who here picked Duke for its facilities? And endowing scholarships accomplishes absolutely nothing other than costing $1 million or more each, probably much more than that by now. Endowing scholarships accomplishes zero other than draning money away from badly needed scholarships and not paying for top coaches. I seriously doubt Duke is at title IX balance or even close with 85 football scholarships and as many female as male undergrads.

There is no excuse for funding the fewest athletic scholarships in the ACC when Duke has the most money and tons of revenue and donations and is on TV more than any other program in the nation. Schools like Rice, Vandy, Wake, Stanford, Notre Dame, and Northwestern are fantastic at baseball and/or softball, as are UNC and UVA. Duke needs to get better at baseball and add softball. Softball would probably win immediately like every other Duke womens sport and that would put big pressure on baseball to break out of the cellar, so that's a major added bonus.

[anon]

Duke has the biggest campus of any school in America besides Berry and Sewanee, so space isn't an issue.

What?


Neither is money, far more money than any other ACC school, most of which had softball years ago.

If I remember correctly, the athletic department does not turn a profit and depends on the University to subsidize it, with money that is ideally spent on academics. (Let's not delve into a Kunshan debate ;) )


Forget endowing scholarships or facilities improvements. Hasn't Duke already spent billions on facilities construction recently? Who here picked Duke for its facilities?

You mean, like, dorms and academic buildings? I assure you that a LOT of people chose Duke for their facilities. Not everyone is a huge basketball fan.

[Duvall]

Duke has the biggest campus of any school in America besides Berry and Sewanee, so space isn't an issue. Neither is money, far more money than any other ACC school, most of which had softball years ago.

Wait, what?


Does Duke still have the fewest scholarship athletes every year, if so, why?

Well, do they? And is there a more interesting explanation than the most obvious one?

[Acymetric]

Wait, what?



Well, do they? And is there a more interesting explanation than the most obvious one?

I don't know that Duke has the biggest campus...but it wouldn't necessarily shock me...if we're counting Duke forest, and Duke Gardens, and of course our enormous hospital complex with multiple campuses in and of itself. (And do satellite medical centers count?)

[duke09hms]

Duke has the biggest campus of any school in America besides Berry and Sewanee, so space isn't an issue. Neither is money, far more money than any other ACC school, most of which had softball years ago. Does Duke still have the fewest scholarship athletes every year, if so, why? Forget endowing scholarships or facilities improvements. Hasn't Duke already spent billions on facilities construction recently? Who here picked Duke for its facilities? And endowing scholarships accomplishes absolutely nothing other than costing $1 million or more each, probably much more than that by now. Endowing scholarships accomplishes zero other than draning money away from badly needed scholarships and not paying for top coaches. I seriously doubt Duke is at title IX balance or even close with 85 football scholarships and as many female as male undergrads.

There is no excuse for funding the fewest athletic scholarships in the ACC when Duke has the most money and tons of revenue and donations and is on TV more than any other program in the nation. Schools like Rice, Vandy, Wake, Stanford, Notre Dame, and Northwestern are fantastic at baseball and/or softball, as are UNC and UVA. Duke needs to get better at baseball and add softball. Softball would probably win immediately like every other Duke womens sport and that would put big pressure on baseball to break out of the cellar, so that's a major added bonus.

There's so many things wrong with this, I don't even know where to start, but it all comes down to money. We might have the most money in the ACC, but that's because the other schools are mostly public state schools which receive loads of taxpayer money. Also, most of our funds are bookmarked for non-athletic needs, as they should be. The university already supports Duke Athletics to the tune of $16 million a year, since Duke Athletics operates at a loss every year.

We have the fewest scholarship athletes in the ACC because we are one of the smallest schools, if not the smallest in the ACC. A comparison to Stanford may be apt, since they are the same size as us and similarly academically/athletically-focused, but then again they have people dropping $200 million donations to the athletic department. Our drive to endow more scholarships is precisely the way to go for long-term success.

If you want to see a Women's Softball that badly, I suggest you start getting to work. It'll probably take at least a $5-10 million donation to make it happen.

[johnb]

I came up with no footnoted list of the largest campuses but did find this on campus confidential:

Berry College 26,000 acres
Air Force 18000
Sewanee 13000
Duke 8600
Stanford 8200

Oh, and I'd be against adding women's softball--it's always good to see us win, and I have no doubt that we could recruit for softball as we do for every other women's sport, but why use up the money and a half dozen spots in the freshman class for a sport that few would follow? Of course, I'd also like the NCAA to limit football scholarships to, say, 60, including red shirts, and am wary of anything that diminishes our usual admissions process.

[uh_no]

I came up with no footnoted list of the largest campuses but did find this on campus confidential:

Berry College 26,000 acres
Air Force 18000
Sewanee 13000
Duke 8600
Stanford 8200

Oh, and I'd be against adding women's softball--it's always good to see us win, and I have no doubt that we could recruit for softball as we do for every other women's sport, but why use up the money and a half dozen spots in the freshman class for a sport that few would follow? Of course, I'd also like the NCAA to limit football scholarships to, say, 60, including red shirts, and am wary of anything that diminishes our usual admissions process.

Unfortunately most of that (afaik) is the duke forest, which is not exactly open to be developed. More of it is the WaDuke, and further more is the medical center. Duke's available space is actually pretty limited.

[SCMatt33]

Here's a link from GoDuke to Duke's 2008 Strategic Plan for Duke Athletics (http://www.goduke.com//pdf2/127971.pdf?DB_OEM_ID=4200). The document is 3 years old, so many of the initiatives outlined have already either been implemented or scrapped, but it provides a good sense (if you're willing to browse the entire document) of what the priorities are for Duke athletics. Mostly it reiterates what has been said here already that Duke's plan is to further endow the sports we already have, by raising money for new scholarships and new (or updated) facilities.

[laxbluedevil]

Having the fewest scholarship athletes is indefensible considering Wake struggles at everything including revenue and costs more per student at a much smaller school, yet funds more athletes. Every school has issues finding space for softball fields, didn't stop most ACC schools and all of Duke's peers around the nation from getting them. Duke has more money than 99% of softball schools, and more space than all of them.

Hiring and retaining top coaches with top contracts is most important, as with Coach K and hopefully Danowski. Then funding a respectable number of athletes if not the most like UNC or Stanford or Duke's other peers, should be a priority. Then with what's left over, improve facilities because it's not that important, for recruiting or winning. Last of all, endow scholarships since that has zero impact on recruiting, winning, or anything else other than taking money away from paying top coaches or providing a level playing field against UNC and others. Funding all athletic scholarships costs hundreds of millions, facilities cost tens of millions, nonrevenue coaches cost hundreds of thousands, and scholarships for a softball team hundreds of thousands. Conveniently enough for supposedly cash strapped Duke, the most important and urgent things cost the least.

Featherston wrote a long article in 2005 about Duke football which is relevant to paying for top coaches or funding scholarship athletes each year vs facilities. In the middle he talks about Coaches K, Dean, Guthridge, Doherty, Bobby Bowden, Mack Brown, Bunting, Torbush, Amato, and their success with mediocre facilities or failure with great facilities:


http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/articles/?p=20472


"I’ve always been skeptical of such terms as “university commitment” and
“facilities” – reasons that coaches like to toss around as excuses for
their failures....

My conclusion: facilities reflect success … they don’t cause it.

So what does?

I would suggest that it’s simple: coaches create success. The right coach at
the right time."

[sagegrouse]

Having the fewest scholarship athletes is indefensible considering Wake struggles at everything including revenue and costs more per student at a much smaller school, yet funds more athletes.

Laxbluedevil: I admire the bravado in your posts, but could you back up what you are saying? The last time I saw a list of athletic scholarships by ACC school, IIRC (a) Duke was not the lowest in the conference in athletic scholarships; (b) the difference among schools was relatively small; and (c) some of the differences depended on how many and which sports are offered (there are different NCAA maxima for each sport).

Now you are probably right and I am probably wrong, but you are the one making the bold assertions and drawing conclusions from them. It would be good to see some data.

sagegrouse

[sagegrouse]

Much has been made in this thread by posters lamenting the fact that a 0.5 scholarship leaves the student athlete with over $25,000 in expenses, making Duke not competitive with the public schools in the conference. For the past 50 years or longer, it was my belief that Duke had a need-blind admission policy and was committed to providing financial aid (scholarships or loans) to any student that needed it. So does Duke's willingness to help ameliorate the financial situation of the partial scholarship student-athlete? Or, does the NCAA prohibit such aid and require canceled checks from the parents as evidence that students are not getting more than the allowed aid?

sagegrouse

[SCMatt33]

Much has been made in this thread by posters lamenting the fact that a 0.5 scholarship leaves the student athlete with over $25,000 in expenses, making Duke not competitive with the public schools in the conference. For the past 50 years or longer, it was my belief that Duke had a need-blind admission policy and was committed to providing financial aid (scholarships or loans) to any student that needed it. So does Duke's willingness to help ameliorate the financial situation of the partial scholarship student-athlete? Or, does the NCAA prohibit such aid and require canceled checks from the parents as evidence that students are not getting more than the allowed aid?

sagegrouse

DISCLAIMER: I am not any kind of compliance officer, just a person who has downloaded the DI manual and interpreted the rules as I thought they were.

Rule 15 of the Division I manual (like many other rules in the Division I manual) is an absolute behemoth, but from what I understand, an athlete (who wasn't recruited to play football or basketball) can receive non-athletic financial aid and not count against the scholarship total, so long as the school has the proper paperwork to prove that the aid was awarded legitimately. Here is the relevant rule I found:


15.5.1.1 No Athletics Aid—Certification Required. A student-athlete (except for a recruited football or basketball student-athlete) who does not receive athletically related financial aid per Bylaw 15.5.1-(a) through Bylaw 15.5.1-(c) but receives institutional financial aid (as set forth in Bylaw 15.02.4.1) shall not be a counter if the faculty athletics representative and the director of financial aid that the student athlete’s financial aid have certified was granted without regard in any degree to athletics ability. The certification shall be kept on file in the office of the athletics director.

You can pretty much ignore the other Bylaws referenced here as the simply define athletically related aid, and general institutional aid, and they both mean exactly what you think. This rule only defines whether or not a student athlete is a "counter." It basically says that an athlete can be on financial aid, and still be a walk-on (even a recruited walk-on), so long as the aid is legit and the sport isn't basketball or football. This only partially answers the question since it doesn't address someone who is getting a partial athletic scholarship. That answer is in the following rule:


15.5.3.2 Equivalency Computations. In equivalency sports, each institutional financial aid award (per Bylaw15.02.4.1) to a counter shall be computed as follows:

(a) Once a student becomes a counter, the institution shall count all institutional aid (per Bylaw 15.02.4.1) received for room, board, tuition and fees, and books up to the value of a full grant-in-aid. Exempted government grants per Bylaw 15.2.5 and exempted institutional aid per Bylaw 15.02.4.3 specifically are excluded from this computation. (Revised: 1/9/96 effective 8/1/96, 4/29/04 effective 8/1/04, 10/20/08)

Basically, this says that once an athlete crosses the threshold of being a counter, all aid counts towards how much they count against the limit. In other words, if Duke gives someone a half scholarship as an athlete, and then gives them other financial aid to cover the rest, the NCAA would count it as a full athletic scholarship. BTW, the exceptions referenced in the rule don't appear to be anything close to every day financial aid.

For an easy scenario, lets say that student A qualifies for full financial aid based on the standard criteria. He could then play any sport (other than football or basketball) without counting towards the limit. Student athlete B on the other hand, qualifies for half financial aid (lets say $25,000 at Duke). Student B can receive that aid and play without counting towards the limit, but if the school then gives additional athletic aid above that (lets say another $12,500), the student would then count as .75 towards the scholarship limit, and not .25 (even though theoretically only a quarter scholarship was given in athletic aid).

[BlueDevil16]

This is actually being considered again this month.