FWST: Did the Big 12 whiff by not supporting a third assistant for baseball and softball?

[TopFrog]

Did the Big 12 whiff by not supporting a third assistant for baseball and softball?

By Drew Davison

TCU wanted a third full-time assistant for its baseball program. Coach Jim Schlossnagle was so passionate about it that he had to issue an apology for negative comments he made about Big 12 programs that weren’t in favor of it this week.

In the end, the majority of the Big 12 didn’t support the proposal and that was one of the significant reasons it didn’t pass by the NCAA Division I Council this week.

If the Big 12 had supported it, the proposal likely would have passed. The Big Ten is the other Power Five conference that opposed it.

Read more here: https://www.star-telegram.com/sport...niversity/article229470479.html#storylink=cpy

 

[Moose Stuff]

Yes

 

[tcujsauce]

I just can’t fathom a no vote on this. I’d understand it more if it were coming from a school that couldn’t justify the paid position in their athletic budget, but this is shameful from schools like UT/OU/Tech/etc.

 

[Realtorfrog]

I just can’t fathom a no vote on this. I’d understand it more if it were coming from a school that couldn’t justify the paid position in their athletic budget, but this is shameful from schools like UT/OU/Tech/etc.

So can we assume they are already paying someone under the table?

 

[Moose Stuff]

I just can’t fathom a no vote on this. I’d understand it more if it were coming from a school that couldn’t justify the paid position in their athletic budget, but this is shameful from schools like UT/OU/Tech/etc.

The crazy part is that if it passed all it did was give schools the OPTION to pay a 3rd assistant. It did not REQUIRE them to. So schools who didn’t want to do it could simply carry on without changing a thing.

 

[Despite the odds Frog]

The crazy part is that if it passed all it did was give schools the OPTION to pay a 3rd assistant. It did not REQUIRE them to. So schools who didn’t want to do it could simply carry on without changing a thing.

Exactly , so what's the rub? Why did these other schools say no? Had to be selfish reasons. How does saying no give them a competitive advantage? Tech is only going with what UT or OU tells them. What advantage does it give UT and OU?

 

[Pharm Frog]

The crazy part is that if it passed all it did was give schools the OPTION to pay a 3rd assistant. It did not REQUIRE them to. So schools who didn’t want to do it could simply carry on without changing a thing.

If only it were that simple. It's not (and most definitely not for public schools). Even Kendall suggests as much when he tweets about scholarships and current lawsuits. Personally, I'm not in favor of adding any staffing to colleges and universities unless they teach at least 12 hours of degree-advancing curriculum. And, I'm in favor of eliminating massive chunks of "administrative" positions. But the behind-the-scenes concerns I'm hearing on this "optional" hiring proposal is that it would be highly complicated on the softball side of the aisle in particular. Not saying or even implying that this is right or the way things should be done but just a brief glance at how much exposure college and high school women's sports received in the recent Equality Act hearings and you can see why some AD's (and softball coaches) may want to take a look at this issue in more depth (and probably consult a little more with their risk management and Title IX staff. I know FOR A FACT that this is happening in Oklahoma (and Oklahoma City is the epicenter of the softball world)