SFA and Conference Realignment

And the article on their website.


sfajacks.com/news/2024/5/29/sfa-accepts-bid-to-southland-conference-for-2024-25-season

Again, major reasons:
1) Travel costs
2) Games closer to home and more opportunity to attend.
3) Better over-all experience for athletes - less tired, better chance to win and renew rivalries, etc...

We have been led to believe - by SFA, primarily - that they are a bigger deal than they are. They have had national recognition over the years especially in basketball and volleyball and I respect that, for sure. But the landscape is changing and SFA doesn’t appear to have the resources or the will to keep up. So they have taken a step backwards. In the SLC, only McNeese wants to compete in all sports. So SFA will go back to winning conference championships and they will be happy. Travel is a real issue and this move will help their bottom line. The other excuse … so mama and them can see Johnny and Jenny play … doesn’t ring true in the ESPN+ era.

Tarleton and ACU, on the other hand, are ambitious. Tarleton wants to be a mid-major power and ACU wants national recognition for the university. Don’t see the SLC in either future.

Watch this space.

SFA has a new President and Athletic Director -- both coming on-board this month. The new SFA President came from GA Southwestern where he was President. GA Southwestern is a school that is D2 and has every plan to stay at that level. He also served a stint at WTAM as the VP. The new AD came from WTAM, one has think that it was a package deal -- the new President would bring his old friend from WTAM with him. WTAM has steadfastly resisted going D1 for several years -- even with some community support behind it. Their mantra at WTAM has been "stay D2 with schools that have similar missions and that are long-time rivals." Sound familiar? SFA has also been dealing with slowly declining enrollment, although their freshman class this year may signal a upswing is on tap for them. The former AD at SFA was virulently anti-SLC -- he tangled with the former SLC admin constantly. A new AD can gracefully return to the SLC and not have to grovel at the feet of the very people he demeaned just a few years ago. Plus, the SLC has new leadership in place as well.

Concerning student involvement in athletics at ACU, there is a stat that would indicate that it won't change anytime soon -- ACU enrollment is 65% female and 35% male -- getting very close to 2/3rds female. National figures are getting closer to that -- 56% female and 44% at 4-year institutions nation-wide. Female populations on campuses have historically attended sporting events at a lower rate. The trick for ACU will be how does it appeal to a female population is growing rapidly. Throw in the fact that ACU admin was dead-set at moving club (I know it is called "Greek" at ACU now, but I will never call it that) pledging to the spring. So the clubs can no longer insist on their pledges attending football games, because they have no pledges in the fall. I just don't see large numbers of students coming to any campus sports event anytime soon. And, that leaves it to getting a larger number of townspeople to come to the meet and that is a tall order in and of itself.

I am with you but it is a difficult balance because we need to be competitive in a conference that also gives us both value among academically likeminded and recognized schools, as well athletically recognized ones, then you throw in vision.  There simply wasn't a lot of choices around to do that.  The SLC certainly didn't offer that.  It is HIGHLY regional athletically, and although it gives you the chance to compete for a championship and get streamed, how many of those schools have recognition outside their circles?  They certainly didn't have vision to move forward and improve their facilities or their brands.  They seem content to keep doing what they are doing.  It fits them and probably their school's student bodies and townships.  There wasn't another good, valued mid-major conference in the region that offered true recognition, value and success among a good mix of likeminded institutions (both private and public).  The WAC was really the only one that offered some of that, but at the price of travel and a mixture of interests.  Now, some of that travel will decrease but stability will be an issue if the schools don't want to stay.  It still offers the bigger footprint, higher value and national recognition.  We had the same attendance issues when we were in the SLC, but funding could go further.  The issues Trackfan brought up are good and still stand.  The problem is that the SLC has said they are done expanding at 12.  The experiment of large conferences didn't go well for other conferences, including the WAC.  Also, many saying the bridge is still burned with the SLC.  The ASUN would equally be huge travel.  The only reason I originally brought up the idea was I asked the question, given the big conference/split division route.  The problem is that realistically, the ASUN is facing some of the similar issue the WAC is.  The Summit, MVC or OVC aren't necessarily options either: 1) They aren't offering, 2) Both the Summit and MVC would cause issues for FB.  The Big Sky has been happy the way it is for a while.  ACU doesn't need to try and go FBS and have a budget that goes even higher in a landscape where we don't even know what college football will look like in 2-3 years.  Going back to DII is definitely not the answer.  SFA made their choice.  I wish they would have been more ethical and responsible with scheduling and waited until 2025 but nothing we can do.  I have been taking the road that the WAC holds value because of the quality of schools in it, the level of competition in it and the AQ is there.  

I'll add that the Summit/MVC, or OVC would all cause heavy travel as well.

Speak to people on campus with management of other budget areas, and they'll say the same thing about those areas. The university seems proud to have achieved R3 status and hopeful to receive R2 status (in Carnegie tiers) but its budgets and staffing on the academic side outside remain (or are smaller) what they were when the university was a Master's level institution. The university wants to be D1 on a D2 budget in athletics and an R2 on an M1 budget academically. At some point the enrollment has to pick up for the administration to be able to pay for its ambitions.

Whoa!  KEEPING "...the local ACU student body and community involved..."?  Have I been missing something all of these years.  I never noticed this happening.