A sad day in Lumberjack nation.
https://sfajacks.com/news/2025/5/22/untitled-story?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR4vXr99rNkoNdVuPzPrOB1NeyWkv6YX4dtLhCVbHFmDxR2Wa4LaPANYb7dasw_aem_xMJCITWPDahobjy-ciHNHg

Bowling makes zero senes to gut it. Mens and Womens golf has been on the decline even though having that new course built nearby could make it money. Beach volleyball made no sense at the time and the team has been iffy at best.

Im gonna find a way to email him and let him know about Bowling. I encourage others do the same.
https://sfajacks.com/staff-directory/michael-mcbroom/651

djsfw57 said:

---

SCH890 said:

---

Bowling makes zero senes to gut it. Mens and Womens golf has been on the decline even though having that new course built nearby could make it money. Beach volleyball made no sense at the time and the team has been iffy at best.

Im gonna find a way to email him and let him know about Bowling. I encourage others do the same.
https://sfajacks.com/staff-directory/michael-mcbroom/651

---

I emailed him and I was not very polite. I didn't use any foul language, but I did make it clear that this decision is stupid. They don't give a damn I'm sure, but still they need to hear how people feel about this ridiculous decision.

---

Pretty much how my email was worded.

Men's and women's golf make little sense to me.

I can get beach volleyball and bowling because of the profile level. But men's and women's golf, with the new destination coming. ????

I don't love the idea of cutting the bowling team, but I can understand the argument on the other sports.

The few hundred thousand dollars that cutting these sports saves is not nothing, but is not a lotto jackpot if you know what I mean.

But the coming house settlement is going to massively change the allowed scholarships for our other sports. Basically, you'll be allowed to offer a full scholarship to every player on the roster. But note that you do not have to offer the max.

So women's soccer can now offer 28 scholarships instead of 14. 45 women's track scholarships instead of 18.

https://www.ncsasports.org/blog/ncaa-scholarship-roster-limits-2024

And with these sports cancelled we have 18 women's scholarships and 4.5 men scholarships freed up for other sports.

To maintain title ix compliance, we'd likely need to offer about 13 other women's scholarships. So you can add 3 new full rides to soccer, 4 to softball, 3 to volleyball, etc.

Which would make us more competitive in those sports, while our Southland competitors are likely to go the other direction and cut scholarships for more sports.

That means an increased likelihood of making NCAA tourneys in those sports. And you've freed 70 a few hundred k that you can invest in other sports.

TallTexan said:

---

I don't love the idea of cutting the bowling team, but I can understand the argument on the other sports.

The few hundred thousand dollars that cutting these sports saves is not nothing, but is not a lotto jackpot if you know what I mean.

But the coming house settlement is going to massively change the allowed scholarships for our other sports. Basically, you'll be allowed to offer a full scholarship to every player on the roster. But note that you do not have to offer the max.

So women's soccer can now offer 28 scholarships instead of 14. 45 women's track scholarships instead of 18.

https://www.ncsasports.org/blog/ncaa-scholarship-roster-limits-2024

And with these sports cancelled we have 18 women's scholarships and 4.5 men scholarships freed up for other sports.

To maintain title ix compliance, we'd likely need to offer about 13 other women's scholarships. So you can add 3 new full rides to soccer, 4 to softball, 3 to volleyball, etc.

Which would make us more competitive in those sports, while our Southland competitors are likely to go the other direction and cut scholarships for more sports.

That means an increased likelihood of making NCAA tourneys in those sports. And you've freed 70 a few hundred k that you can invest in other sports.

---

I think most of our Southland compatriots and some of our old WAC buddies will also face tough decisions.

The linear TV dollars are nonexistent at our level and the neighboring levels (CUSA , WAC, Summit). The settlement will force compromise. It's coming. For most/all of the schools at our level.

I have never felt Bowling is a sport anyway.. I don't see a problem with cutting it.. Just make sure you honor any scholarships given..

I'm not advocating cutting sports or more sports in general, but how did Tennis survive this axe?

TallTexan said:

---

I'm not advocating cutting sports or more sports in general, but how did Tennis survive this axe?

---

Well…. In the Daily Sentinel interview McBroom mentions facilities. We already have tennis facilities.

Bolting on Beach Volleyball courts wasn't a big deal. It seems like bowling wouldn't haven't been hard.

I'm of two minds on this. Part of me understands the need to trim expenses and concentrate limited resources on the 6-7 sports that alumni pay attention to.

At the same time, having a broad range of athletic programs seems beneficial (on the surface)to the university . Golf in particular, seems to be a very low cost sport with a decent profile . Not that bowling or beach volleyball would be particularly expensive. It's just that golf is played by even smaller schools. Having a new / premier golf resort 20 miles from campus is a no brainer.

What all did I miss ? Other than the dollars. LOL.

BigJack85 said:

---

I'm of two minds on this. Part of me understands the need to trim expenses and concentrate limited resources on the 6-7 sports that alumni pay attention to.

At the same time, having a broad range of athletic programs seems beneficial (on the surface)to the university . Golf in particular, seems to be a very low cost sport with a decent profile . Not that bowling or beach volleyball would be particularly expensive. It's just that golf is played by even smaller schools. Having a new / premier golf resort 20 miles from campus is a no brainer.

What all did I miss ? Other than the dollars. LOL.

---

I'm with you there. I get why investing in the "alumni and fan prominent sports" makes sense.

But I bet once you factor in tuition paid by the students without scholarships, that all those programs are near break even for the university. Which can be important for a university that is trying to grow.

https://www.extrapointsmb.com/p/while-other-mid-majors-drop-sports-pacific-is-adding-them-here-s-why-5045?_bhlid=4aaea58d2a41379ec272f8f2b34d235434584678&utm_campaign=while-other-mid-majors-drop-sports-pacific-is-adding-them-here-s-why&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_source=www.extrapointsmb.com

Here's a good interview of a school taking the opposite approach.

I personally wish we'd get with the Southland and figure out how to have a league for almost every sport. Goodness knows we all could use the students.

Men's volleyball? There's 20 students paying their own way. Same with men's soccer. Tumbling. Rifle. Hell see if we can get a Southland disc golf league going.

We don't necessarily have to put a kid on the PGA or LPGA tour to make these sports worth it. Lacrosse is full of above average income families. Those are the kids who might be running the 4th generation family dynasty by 30. Same for a lot of these less recognized sports.

nacluth said:

---

Well it's got to be a disappointment for such a solid program to just be cut loose. Live up to all expectations and then get dropped. It's about as harsh as college athletics gets.

---

For bowling, one consideration had to have been the cost of travel rather than the cost of scholarships. Those ladies traveled to tournaments all across the country.

And no, I'm not saying that I support "axeing" them. Absolutely not. They were wonderful ambassadors of the university.

Yeah I get the business reasons for cutting bowling.

My only point is when you're brought in to do a job with little help, exceed all expectations and bring the spotlight in your field to your job and still get axed is disappointing. Two national championships without any facilities has to be the pinnacle of what anyone could deliver.

Maybe baseball brings in more revenue somehow, but they haven't ever delivered using the same metric. But there's probably just not any bowling donors in east Texas out there.

nacluth said:

---

Yeah I get the business reasons for cutting bowling.

My only point is when you're brought in to do a job with little help, exceed all expectations and bring the spotlight in your field to your job and still get axed is disappointing. Two national championships without any facilities has to be the pinnacle of what anyone could deliver.

Maybe baseball brings in more revenue somehow, but they haven't ever delivered using the same metric. But there's probably just not any bowling donors in east Texas out there.

---

The economics are hard to explain. Baseball is probably one of the more expensive sports. Lots of scholarships and equipment. Balls, bats , gloves and specialty gear for catchers etc.

Bowling …. Shoes and a ball. And I doubt the ball breaks very often. Does bowling bring great attention to SFA ? Probably not.

If I was czar over SFA sports , I would have looked hard at baseball. The balance between big team sports like baseball and sports that are more individual (golf/bowling/tennis) is hard to figure In the end it seems that there is no "perfect " route on the subject of cutting sports. Kind of a "Sophie's Choice"