What to Add?

 In this second post of what is really a two-parter, I analyze a statement soon-to-be-former UT Arlington Athletic Director Jim Baker said to the Shorthorn on a story they ran about his retirement. 

UTA Athletics has been pursuing an athletics master plan that will address current and long-term needs, improvements and facility expansion for most Division I teams. It will also help revitalize the west side of campus. 
Baker said UTA is 95% done with the plan and wants to ensure that it gets passed down to the new administration as a road map. But any decisions regarding the plan will be up to the new Athletics director and UTA president. 
“I won’t have a say in it, nor should I,” he said. “I just wanted to make sure they have all the information.”

The first entry mentioned what is obvious, the facility renovations. However, reading between the lines, along with what I've heard in the background, I suspect the department is once again eyeing an expansion of sports, even if preliminarily.

It mentions "current and long-term needs" of the Athletic Department, but then mentions the other Division I teams. It mentions the revitalization of the west side of campus. Adding new teams does more than what sprucing up and/or improving facilities that are used currently can do. A state-of-the-art tennis center doesn't help revitalize anything. New activity at Maverick Stadium would.

And while facility upgrades certainly would need to be run past the new decision-makers, sports additions are even more necessary. They are recurring expenses and windows to the University that facility upgrades aren't. It's also something the prior Athletic Director shouldn't get a say in. However, if I'm new, I'd certainly want the say of someone who has been here for a decade.

I want to clarify that UTA has been informally looking at sports expansion for decades, since at least the 1990's in some form or fashion. It may be longer, but that's just what I'm privy to since becoming a Maverick.

The Southland Conference added women's golf and women's soccer in the late '90's. While UTA never pulled the trigger on those two sports, they did look at them. Then came the football referendum in the early aughts. When President Spaniolo came to campus and pursued College Park Center instead, he mentioned the University would re-look at football within five years and starting the two aforementioned women sports sooner. After UTA had a couple of close misses for first place in the Bubas Cup (total measure of an athletic department within the Sun Belt Conference), women's golf was started. I even reported once on rumors of a men's soccer team. 

All that said, I may just be reading too much into the quote. But I've been around the Department long enough to know what they have been looking at for two decades now. And it is great commentary in the summer months. If UTA is going to add a sport, they need to look at area supply and demand for athletes along with what they have on campus as far as hosting that sport. Fit within the institutional profile and conference fit is needed as well.

I'm going to list several sports that UTA could start now (off the top of my head), without building a brand-new facility. It may require some investment to bring it up to current standards or additions to an existing place.

When I rank these sports, they will be based on several factors: popularity, need within the athletic season, ability to provide commissioner's cup points, etc. What I'm not including within the ranking is cost. There's a multitude of ways to raise the money and cover the operating expenses. Cost is too much to consider in the scope of this already lengthy post.

I'll start with the sports in the Western Athletic Conference. I don't like the idea of tailoring a department around a conference, as UTA has gone from SLC to WAC, to SBC, then back to the WAC in a shade over a decade. Heck, just in the month or so I've been typing these two posts up, massive changes in the conference make-up of the NCAA have been announced again. However, there are some sports that will work in almost any conference, thus making most of the "missing" sports valuable to UTA's Commissioner's Cup race.

1) Football - First, the 800-pound gorilla. I don't want to make this post about football, but there's no denying the sport is THE topic on campus, trumping even existing sports most times. There is a stadium on campus, a desire for it to be used and noticeable void in the fall semester. But there's other things to consider as well.

UTA lost what looks like a stable home in the Sun Belt Conference because it does not sponsor the sport. Their new home, the Western Athletic Conference has lost New Mexico State, Sam Houston State and Lamar. Then, right before Incarnate Word was supposed to join the conference, they elected to stay in the Southland Conference. Now the WAC, which looked like it was about to take off on the football front, has shifted back to a perilous foothold. There are several schools who are likely long-time FCS schools: Utah Tech (formerly Dixie State), Southern Utah and Abilene Christian. Another school in Stephen F. Austin seems content to stay where they are and offer an overall balanced Athletic Program. Tarleton State has made overtures to Conference USA, but they are still transitioning from Division II and are still ineligible for NCAA postseason play right now. That's only five schools, with six needed to maintain an FCS playoff automatic berth. UT-Rio Grande Valley has a timeline of starting a football program by 2024 and would be immediately eligible for conference titles and championships. Doing the math, that's six, the minimum, with one school actively looking to leave anyway. It sure seems UTA would be doing the WAC a solid by starting a new program.

Speaking of UTRGV, they were once the model of a monetarily-poor, badly-run Athletic Department. Finding a home in the WAC helped in some regard. UT Pan American merging with UT Brownwood to become UTRGV seems to have helped as well. However, they still only have won two regular season and two conference tournament championships in nearly a decade competing in the WAC for all sports. While UTA has challenges of their own, who would have put their chips in the UTRGV pot for starting a football program before UTA just a decade ago? I'm not the first to echo this sentiment, but if they can do it, why can't UTA?

Once the Vaqueros start a program, the peers of UTA shrink even more. When I was a student, UTA, UTSA, Lamar, Texas A&M-Corpus Christi and UTPA were non-football playing Universities in the State of Texas. Now, with UTRGV starting a program, there will be now only two schools in the State not playing football.

When I was a student, there were only (only...) 15 Division I football schools. Now there are 22 with the additions of start-ups Lamar, UTSA and UTRGV and the D-II call-ups of ACU, Houston Baptist, Incarnate Word, Tarleton State and, coming this fall, Texas A&M-Commerce. Come 2024, 13 schools will play FBS in Texas, nine FCS and two non-football schools. That's lonely territory for the Mavericks.

Texas dwarfs every other state when it comes to football representation. Even though California is larger in population, they only have seven FBS teams, four FCS (San Diego is non-scholarship) and 15 that play in Division I with no football team.

Florida would be the only other comparable State to Texas in terms of local football talent. There are seven FBS schools, three FCS and three non-football DI schools. Louisiana, with its much smaller population is also similar to Texas as far as University sponsorship, percentage-wise. Of its 12 DI schools, five are FBS, six FCS and one non-football, though New Orleans is rumored to be looking into starting a program. Louisiana also has strict ways of funding athletics, making a football either much harder, or more needed. Certainly, regionally, football matters like nowhere else.

No matter how one looks at the perspective, UTA is in lonely territory. If you do an internet search for any of the California schools without football, there's nary a mention or a desire to have it return or started on campus. Same cannot be said for UTA.

The bonus is UTA has a venue to resume their program, overcoming a hurdle most start-ups have to conquer. Does it need work? Likely. But there are worse FCS Stadiums in existence now than Maverick Stadium. I have posted before what it would take to bring The Mav up to the standards of a competitive FBS stadium. The amount of work needed for FCS is much, much less. Essentially, just the addition/expansion support needs of the team, or step 2 in the blog entry. They'd have to look at ADA compliance issues that would have been addressed in the seating expansion, but that is minimal. 

Maverick Stadium is still a beautiful stadium. It also would house many of the sports listed in this entry.

2 & 3) Men's and Women's Soccer - I'm going to combine these sports, though there are far more women's soccer programs (342) in NCAA Division I than men's (208). There were a total of 358 schools participating in the NCAA Division I at the end of this school year. UTA is one of 18 schools who don't sponsor the sport in the entire country at that level (there are two affiliate members from the lower divisions). When Southland Conference schools, University of Arkansas-Little Rock, the Southwestern Athletic Conference, most of the schools in the Northeast part of the country sponsor it, seems like there's a formula UTA is missing. Outside of the two basketball sports, women's soccer is the most sponsored team sport in the NCAA, ahead of volleyball.  

I did mention women's soccer briefly in the early days of this blog, which can be accessed here. The numbers are out of date, though the points are still valid and the costs are still reasonable.

As far as the men go, most of this post is still applicable here. Like the women, it is a bit out of date (but not as much), but the spirit is still accurate. I'll let that stand on its own. 

As both sports are sponsored by the WAC and Maverick Stadium is available for use, seems like a natural add. One or both would fill the void in the fall that makes being a Maverick fan rough as well as leaving UTA behind in the all-sports race. 

4 & 5) Men's and Women's Swimming and Diving - Few but the most faithful Maverick fans know that UTA once had a men's swimming and diving team. Ironically enough, it was the most successful program, producing national champions and Olympic gold medals in a time when UTA sports were consistently bottom of the Southland Conference. The team was disbanded due to an enduring conflict between the Athletic and the P.E. Departments that stemmed from the use of the pool in the P.E Building. The Cliff Notes version is the P.E. Department wanted more control over the pool and the Athletic Department wanted autonomy for its meets.

The indoor swimming pool at the P.E. Building. The door on the right leads to the outdoor pool.

The bright side is both the indoor and outdoor pools are still there and in use. The three-meter diving board is also still there. The ten-meter platform was removed and would need to be replaced (if the diving portion were to be included in a new program). I spoke to a student who was part of the club team, and he mentioned the pools host roughly one meet a year. He also mentioned that the University doesn't maintain the pool at the level they should, but otherwise the facility works and is usable today.

The outdoor pool viewed from the indoor pool.

I checked the NCAA requirements and compared them to the P.E. Buildings specifications on the UTA website. The indoor and outdoor pools are the exact measurements required by the NCAA. So, any monetary expenditure would go towards upgrading the basic maintenance functions and a new platform. I'm not sure how the P.E. Building compares to other natatoriums of its peers. But I do know that those basic improvements would make for an adequate venue for a swim team. The locker rooms used by the bulk of the athletic teams in the early days of Arlington State's University days is still there and could be used for the team.

It also appears that a swimming program does not have to fully have diving facilities or personnel either, as several schools omit diving completely.

The outdoor pool, seen from the second floor patio of the Activities Building.

There are five full-time WAC members and two affiliates who sponsors women's swimming. New Mexico State's departure won't affect this sport as they will turn into an affiliate once they join Conference USA. Utah Tech will increase the number in coming years as they reportedly will start a program as part of their rise to DI.

As for the men, there's three full-time and three affiliate members, all stationed in the Western United States. 

As for the in-State sponsorship, only five of a possible 24 Universities sponsor Men's Swimming. The number increases to eight for the women's counterparts. Oddly enough, while there's not a lot in the State, but both TCU and SMU have a men's and women's program, while North Texas sponsors women only. That means there's more representation in DFW than Texas as a whole. Houston has two schools, while San Antonio and Austin have one each, meaning seven of the eight are clustered around the major urban areas. UTRGV is scheduled to start a women's team as part of its football package too.

6) Beach Volleyball - I've been looking at this sport for a long time now. It is one of the faster growing sports in the NCAA. That is due larger to the ease of starting a program. While the rosters of other schools I have looked at appear to have no carry over players from regular volleyball, the NCAA allows only six equivalency scholarships. Regular volleyball allows head count 12 scholarships. Equivalencies are a pool of scholarships that can be divided among many players, some less than a whole scholarship. Head count can only be awarded whole. One final asterisk: if a school does not sponsor regular volleyball, beach volleyball can have two more for a total of eight. That certainly gives the appearance that there can be roster sharing. 

I'm not sure how the average budget works, but I suspect it's one the low end, as most equivalency sports aren't. The venues aren't overly extravagant either.

Former Sun Belt Conference rivals Coastal Carolina, Georgia State and Louisiana-Monroe, future SBC member Southern Mississippi and once-again conference rival Stephen F. Austin all sponsor the sport. Abilene Christian did sponsor the sport, but this past year was the last as the sport has been dropped in favor of women's golf. Their facilities are pretty basic. Sand in a rectangle, a net in the middle, boundaries and a viewing area for a small amount of spectators. 

There currently are two separate sand volleyball courts on campus that I know. One is by the College Park Center complex next to the Campus Ministries Building. It has one court and is in a cramped setting. There is no room for expansion, but it has some very cool views from multiple angles using the garage.

Sand volleyball courts in the CPC complex. No expansion capabilities limit its use.

The other is a two-court set-up between the Activities Building and the outdoor swimming pool at the P.E. Building. It also has room to add a second row of courts to get to a four-court setup. Alternatively, the courts could be pivoted, adding a third section, allowing for a three-court setup.

The two-court sand volleyball court at the Maverick Activities Building.

There is an ability to set up temporary bleachers on the basketball courts to the east, open lawn seating to the west, plus the Maverick Activities Building has a second-floor balcony for some higher, though distant, views. Small sections could go in the north and south of the courts for local action if needed.

Maverick Activities Building two-court sand volleyball courts, taken from the second floor balcony.

All UTA seems to lack is the number of courts. ULM has five, Coastal has four, Georgia State and Southern Mississippi have three. Oddly enough, information about other schools is very difficult to find, as most list nothing on their websites. Southern Miss had nothing, but I found a news story, as their program is fairly new. SFA has nothing as well and Google maps only shows an area under construction. Central Arkansas has a team, but that is all I could find. 

ULM's sand volleyball court, seen from Google Maps. This is about as basic a set-up as there is. The Maverick Activities Building courts are already nicer than this,

That alone is reason enough to start a team as the facilities are so basic, no one is taking much pride in it to blast pictures and promotions out to the public. UTA would be on the ground floor of a growing sport. Unlike women's golf, where there were over 200 schools sponsoring the sport before the Mavericks waded in.

I took a screenshot of the Sun Belt hype video of Southern Mississippi joining when their beach volleyball team was shown. Notice the background. Pretty basic venue.

One other WAC school besides SFA has a beach volleyball program - Grand Canyon. SFA brings a natural rivalry. Three sponsoring schools could potentially lead to a search for affiliates and eventual conference championship. Other schools could conceivably start a program fairly easily too.

One last point for beach volleyball. We know the Mavericks have looked into it recently. The Dallas Morning News did a Freedom of Information Act request and discovered that when UTA did an internal feasibility study regarding football, they looked at adding a beach volleyball program too. The link is here, but it is behind a paywall.

7) Bowling - The Hereford University Center used to have a bowling alley, but a renovation is 2016 removed them. There's likely no place left in the U.C. to re-add the lanes. There are several commercial bowling alley's in Arlington, but the nearest is a couple of miles of campus. Since the point is to help the campus, that makes this fall lower on the list.

There are several nearby schools that sponsor the sport already. The costs are reasonable. The sport is growing, though not fast by any stretch. There's less than 100 teams spread across all three divisions of the NCAA. Sam Houston State, Stephen F. Austin, Prairie View A&M and Texas Southern are the only Texas schools to sponsor it. There are no other WAC schools.

This is the start of the unlikely part of the list. I just don't see these as suitable candidates for sport expansion. However, they do have suitable facilities on campus to start them.

8) Gymnastics - This sport came on my radar years ago when a long-time poster to the UTA message board brought up the idea of the sport. I was unable to find anything about the facility requirements online, but pretty much every school that hosts the sport does so in their basketball arena. They don't meet as often as basketball does, which would help balance the winter schedule out so the teams wouldn't compete for much of the same dates. Seeing as how CPC is not on the west side of campus, this sport falls below the likely line.

Most every school that has gymnastics, save a handful, park the program in a specialty, one-sport conference. The WAC is no different as only Southern Utah has a program

I'm not including the men in this one, as the demand for that regionally is exponentially less. To comply with the spirit of this post, a men's gymnastics team would fall to 16.

9) Wrestling - This is the sport that most often comes to mind when the topic of Title IX cuts comes up. Even South Park did an episode about it. To call it a stable sport offering would certainly be a misnomer. However, there are several nearby schools that sponsor it and a geographically-compatible conference for UTA. There are nearby schools in Arkansas and Oklahoma, though none in Texas. With fertile recruiting ground in Oklahoma and the nearby mid-west, UTA could put together a winner and quickly.

Two other WAC schools sponsor wrestling in Utah Valley and Cal Baptist. There are several affiliates in the WAC footprint that belong to other conferences, particularly spread-out conferences. A possibility exists of a three-team WAC finding other schools to sponsor the sport.

CPC is an adequate wrestling venue, immediately giving UTA a potential home. It's a winter sport, creating potential basketball scheduling conflicts, but they aren't insurmountable.

10) Men's Volleyball - CPC already handles the women's counterpart and the sport is offered in the spring. There's just a hair over 50 schools sponsoring this at the DI and DII levels. None are in Texas or a contiguous state, so this has about as much chance as UTA football beating Alabama in 2030.

11 & 12) Men's and Women's Water Polo - The same reasons UTA has the facilities to host a swimming team are the same for water polo of both genders. The main drawback is, once again, school proximity. The clusters of participating Universities are on the West Coast and Northeast. UTA could make a splash by having the first Texas team, but lack of rivalries and travel are prohibitive.

13, 14 & 15) Field Hockey, Men's and Women's Lacrosse - These are the least likely of all the options to this point. Every school that plays field hockey is located in the Northeast, with the nearest school several states away from UTA. Three non-northeast schools play men's lacrosse (though still a ways from UTA) and it nears a dozen for the women. No school in Texas has any of the three.

That said, Maverick Stadium has the proper dimensions for a team, as NCAA field hockey requires 100 yards by 60. Similar to soccer. Lacrosse seems to be an outlier as there is a range for the women. Men are 110 yards by 60, while women are 110-120 by 60-70.

One advantage is that private schools in Texas do offer these sports. Those that are good enough for a scholarship have to travel multiple states away. UTA could grab a few of the good ones who do not wish to go so far from home.

If Maverick Stadium wasn't acceptable for whatever reason, the Intramural Fields nearby could accommodate any of the three teams as well. 

17) Fencing - This is a co-ed sport where both genders can play. A small fraction of the handful of teams that sponsor the sport provide only women's team. CPC is an adequate facility, as would be the Maverick Activities Building. The catch: like with every other sport, there's nothing nearby as it all clustered in the NE or West.

Fun fact: UTA sponsored a team in the early 1980's. They were added in response to the NCAA requiring a large number of sports for D1-A football. When UTA dropped to 1-AA in 1982, a large number of sports were dropped, including fencing.

Those sports were what I was able to come up with the last few months. Include any sports I may have overlooked, over- or under-ranked in the comments below.