SFA Tennis

SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SFA Jack Fanatic said:

SFAJack_76 said:

There is some creative headline writing that takes place in an attempt to put a positive spin on a really bad result. Works if you don't read the story.

There's been the same type of "creative writing" for other SFA sports, too, almost every time SFA loses. I've seen it on Twitter, too.

Quit trying to always sugarcoat losses, Mr. SFA athletics publicist. We're big boys and girls. We can take it.


Both golf teams are in tournaments this week. Those headlines should be fun.
SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"Kamal and Misak Nearly Force Third Sets in Respective Singles Matches at Sam Houston State"

A more forthright headline would be "Ladyjacks get swept 7-0 at Sam Houston State without winning one set."

Why attempt to sugar coat a butt whipping?

BigJack85
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Serious talent deficit
SFA Jack Fanatic
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Whoever writes the Atletics website articles these days sugar coats every loss in every sport. He/She never gives the loss results in the headline. It's actually insulting to our intelligence as sports fans, IMO. We're not children. Tell us the score and write the dadgum story.
SFA Jack Fanatic
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another case in point, the headline of the story on the Ladyjacks BB loss today in Katy focuses on our leading scorer, not on the game itself.

I know it's just a minor thing, but that scribe needs to take a class in headline writing!
TallTexan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think in general, that's kinda the direction Athletic Department's have gone on writing press releases. They know regular press will cover the full picture.

It just seems like most departments aren't going to throw out a headline like "Ladyjacks squander Opportunity, lose to faux islanders."
SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"SFA Battles Back from 3-0 Deficit Sunday against UTEP"

And, lose 4-2.

Next two matches are against Grambling and Prarie View. Both very winnable.
Sully
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BigJack85 said:

SFAJack_76 said:

Lost to ACU yesterday, 7-0. Won two sets out of the six singles matches. So, not close.



Ya. Clearly that stretch a few years ago when we were close to being ranked was completely coach driven. I seem to recall the young man quickly moved up to very high paying positions. ACU has put resources into tennis even when they were D2 not surprising that the legacy SLC schools that mostly just put a team Out There and hope will get dominated by a well funded ACU program.
That's generous of you to say, but that coach would be the first to tell you that the rankings and SLC championship was completely player-driven. Sure, he recruited them, but both the athletic administration and international admissions were extremely helpful and made that an area on which we were at least on even grounds with other schools. That is no longer the case and like I mentioned last year, Rice is the only Texas school more difficult for an international athlete to be admitted to. I believe part of that decision was an institutional decision independent of athletics but I believe part of it was an athletic decision to stop supporting academic exceptions in response to tennis coaches recruiting and managing irresponsibly and hurting the team APR by bringing in athletes who were not successful academically and/or transferred out ineligible.

As far as thinking last year's team would turn the corner - I was wrong. But I knew we had the talent to be at least middle of the conference and that is bearing itself out this year with basically the same team winning the matches they should win. Coach Boisclair is a good person and a good coach. For the salary, I think she is better than SFA could have hoped for. That said, I would not expect her results at SFA to be better than her UTSA results (usually middle of the conference, made the tournament semifinals once). The recruiting is harder here and the conference is more competitive now than it was her first time around. Women's college tennis is player-driven. They are all nearly pros or burned out pros by the time they get here. The tennis amateurism rules are different. Most great college players play on the circuit (the "minor leagues", essentially) before getting to college. A great coach can help a team improve a little bit, but there is not nearly as much teaching and development as there is management and there is no gimmick offense or scheme that a coach can use to beat better athletes. You simply have to bring in great tennis players...and then keep them healthy and motivated. It still takes a good coach, but they have to be good at a somewhat different skill set than let's say a basketball coach would be.

SFA certainly has the facility and resources to be competitive in the conference, but don't expect that to happen until the admissions standards are in line with other state schools...and even then you need a coach that can out-recruit larger schools. No chance of that happening when you can only recruit kids perfectly fluent in English before they get here.

After many years of being bad at tennis, the administration decided that they wanted to be good without knowing the extrinsic issues that "being good" brought along with it. They found out that it meant relaxing admissions standards, dealing with high-maintenance athletes (and sometimes coaches!) and having a lot of transfer and dropout issues both because of poor academics and because of higher-profile programs stealing our athletes. They also ran through 5 coaches in 7 years.

All that headache for what? A few Commish cup points? It's not like anyone is packing the stands or shelling out donations as a result. So they have decided to hire a low-maintenance coach, who is a female and looks good on the Title IX end of things, will have a team that is competitive enough & has a good GPA and APR. I can't say that I blame them at all. If some big-money donor wants a change or if there is a general surge in community support, then a change will happen...but as long as there is little or no financial support for the sport, the admin will take the no hassle approach and devote its resources to sports with a bigger following.

Set your expectations accordingly.


BigJack85
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sully said:

BigJack85 said:

SFAJack_76 said:

Lost to ACU yesterday, 7-0. Won two sets out of the six singles matches. So, not close.



Ya. Clearly that stretch a few years ago when we were close to being ranked was completely coach driven. I seem to recall the young man quickly moved up to very high paying positions. ACU has put resources into tennis even when they were D2 not surprising that the legacy SLC schools that mostly just put a team Out There and hope will get dominated by a well funded ACU program.
That's generous of you to say, but that coach would be the first to tell you that the rankings and SLC championship was completely player-driven. Sure, he recruited them, but both the athletic administration and international admissions were extremely helpful and made that an area on which we were at least on even grounds with other schools. That is no longer the case and like I mentioned last year, Rice is the only Texas school more difficult for an international athlete to be admitted to. I believe part of that decision was an institutional decision independent of athletics but I believe part of it was an athletic decision to stop supporting academic exceptions in response to tennis coaches recruiting and managing irresponsibly and hurting the team APR by bringing in athletes who were not successful academically and/or transferred out ineligible.

As far as thinking last year's team would turn the corner - I was wrong. But I knew we had the talent to be at least middle of the conference and that is bearing itself out this year with basically the same team winning the matches they should win. Coach Boisclair is a good person and a good coach. For the salary, I think she is better than SFA could have hoped for. That said, I would not expect her results at SFA to be better than her UTSA results (usually middle of the conference, made the tournament semifinals once). The recruiting is harder here and the conference is more competitive now than it was her first time around. Women's college tennis is player-driven. They are all nearly pros or burned out pros by the time they get here. The tennis amateurism rules are different. Most great college players play on the circuit (the "minor leagues", essentially) before getting to college. A great coach can help a team improve a little bit, but there is not nearly as much teaching and development as there is management and there is no gimmick offense or scheme that a coach can use to beat better athletes. You simply have to bring in great tennis players...and then keep them healthy and motivated. It still takes a good coach, but they have to be good at a somewhat different skill set than let's say a basketball coach would be.

SFA certainly has the facility and resources to be competitive in the conference, but don't expect that to happen until the admissions standards are in line with other state schools...and even then you need a coach that can out-recruit larger schools. No chance of that happening when you can only recruit kids perfectly fluent in English before they get here.

After many years of being bad at tennis, the administration decided that they wanted to be good without knowing the extrinsic issues that "being good" brought along with it. They found out that it meant relaxing admissions standards, dealing with high-maintenance athletes (and sometimes coaches!) and having a lot of transfer and dropout issues both because of poor academics and because of higher-profile programs stealing our athletes. They also ran through 5 coaches in 7 years.

All that headache for what? A few Commish cup points? It's not like anyone is packing the stands or shelling out donations as a result. So they have decided to hire a low-maintenance coach, who is a female and looks good on the Title IX end of things, will have a team that is competitive enough & has a good GPA and APR. I can't say that I blame them at all. If some big-money donor wants a change or if there is a general surge in community support, then a change will happen...but as long as there is little or no financial support for the sport, the admin will take the no hassle approach and devote its resources to sports with a bigger following.

Set your expectations accordingly.







Great detail Sully. I probably should have said the coach recruited great players. I get it. It's not worth the trouble if all you get is a bunch of coddled athletes with unrealistic expectations and poor English or academic capabilities. I played at a reasonably high level in the late 70's so I get it. Hell, the better players in our Northwest Houston league are a pain in the a$$.


SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Welcome back Sully. I appreciate your knowledge and insight on college tennis, and SFA tennis in particular.

It will be interesting to see how the minor sports, including tennis, are handled under Ivey. I know he technically hired Scott, but given the timing I wonder if that was well along when he got here. Out of curiosity, I looked up Austin Peay tennis. They have both men's and women's teams with a head coach and an assistant that are responsible for both teams. Both coaches have both been at AP for six years, so their hiring would have preceded Ivey. The women are currently 12-0, starting conference play this weekend. (The men aren't doing as good.) In the head coach's bio, they make some very positive comments about the academics of both teams. One of the eight girls on the roster is from the US.

In addition to recently renovated outdoor courts, Austin Peay has an indoor facility that the community can pay to use. Since it is simply called Govenors Tennis Center, there must not have been a big money donor behind getting it built.
SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Next up is La Tech on Sunday. Should be competitive.
SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dominated 4-0 by a mediocre La Tech. Did win one set at the #6 singles.

"SFA's Two-Match Win Streak Snapped at Louisiana Tech"
Sully
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thanks for the kind words. I miss Nac and SFA and hope for great things for all of the 'Jacks teams.

Here is a link to the Massey Ratings. I find these to be fairly accurate, especially later in the season when there is a bigger sample size. I believe that they populate from the ITA results, and many teams are slow to enter both their schedule and their results. That's normally the SID's job, but it seems like ours is overwhelmed trying to come up with creative ways to spin poor outcomes. BTW SIDs are categorically overworked, underpaid and are just doing what they are told. I do think that it's a little bush league to go as far as some of those headings have gone (calling a loss a "comeback" is disingenuous)...but if you take issue with the headlines, you are shooting the messenger.

https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=ctw&sub=NCAA%20I

We are ranked #238 before the LA Tech loss. They were ranked just ahead of us at 231, so 0-4 is definitely a disappointing outcome.

Here is the link to the entire conference:

https://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=14112&s=307377

SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sully said:

Great Thanks for the kind words. I miss Nac and SFA and hope for great things for all of the 'Jacks teams.


https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=ctw&sub=NCAA%20I

We are ranked #238 before the LA Tech loss. They were ranked just ahead of us at 231, so 0-4 is definitely a disappointing outcome.

Here is the link to the entire conference:

https://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=14112&s=307377


I can see it now;

"Ladyjack tennis ahead of 69 teams in latest Massey ratings!"

Thanks for the links.

Jacks4460
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SFAJack_76 said:

Sully said:

Great Thanks for the kind words. I miss Nac and SFA and hope for great things for all of the 'Jacks teams.


https://www.masseyratings.com/rate.php?lg=ctw&sub=NCAA%20I

We are ranked #238 before the LA Tech loss. They were ranked just ahead of us at 231, so 0-4 is definitely a disappointing outcome.

Here is the link to the entire conference:

https://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=14112&s=307377


I can see it now;

"Ladyjack tennis ahead of 69 teams in latest Massey ratings!"

Thanks for the links.


76 I love your headlines...
SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"Ladyjacks Battle Lamar in Beaumont Friday Afternoon"

Or, SFA loses 7-0.

SFA Jack Fanatic
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SFAJack_76 said:

"Ladyjacks Battle Lamar in Beaumont Friday Afternoon"

Or, SFA loses 7-0.


Do the goofballs that write those headlines have any idea how silly they're making themselves look to actual sports fans?
Sully
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm a lot more disappointed with the 7-0 loss without winning a set to a very bad Lamar team than I am with the poor kid writing the headlines & trying to make lemonade.

Here's something interesting I found while poking around that Massey site - they have end of year rankings going back to 2009. Here are our rankings along with our conference finish & the conference champ's rank in parentheses.

2009 - #206 - 8th place (UTA #94)
2010 - #214 - 7th (NWLA #64)
2011 - #157 4th (UTA #58)
2012 - #48 1st (SFA Regular Season & Tournament Champs)
2013 - #157 5th (TAMCC #104)
2014 - #183 6th (TAMCC #97)
2015 - #115 1st (SFA Regular Season Champs - NWLA #120 tournament champs)
2016 - #158 3rd (TAMCC #37)
2017 - #235 9th (TAMCC #84)
2018 - #272 10th (McNeese #79)
2019 - #298 before the Lamar loss yesterday. (SHSU currently #119)

Looks like SFA started playing D1 women's tennis in 1994 and here are the year-by-year conference finishes since then:

1994 - 8th
1995 - 9th
1996 - 8th
1997 - 6th
1998 - 5th
1999 - 2nd
2000 - 3rd
2001 - 6th
2002 - 8th
2003 - 10th
2004 - 7th
2005 - 10th
2006 - 10th
2007 - 10th
2008 - 9th
SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Lost 4-1. Won one of the doubles matches but lost the other two to lose the point. Won the #2 singles. None of the other five singles won a set.
nacluth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sully, Looks like so far that this is a particularly bad season for the conference and for the Ladyjacks specifically.
Sully
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bad season for us, yes. Seems like maybe more parity than before around the conference. Top half of the league is all very solid.
SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Did not see this coming. Way to go ladies!
BigJack85
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That's huge. Maybe some improvement!
SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Remaining matches are at McNeese and at SLU. Today's win gives them a chance to make the eight team SLC tournament.
Sully
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big win!
BigJack85
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fingers crossed!
SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Lost to McNeese 6-1 yesterday and are eliminated from the SLC tournament. Final match of the season is Sunday at SLU.
SFAJack_76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Finished the season today with a tight 4-3 loss to SLU. Won the doubles point and two singles points. Two of the singles matches SFA lost were in three sets.

Finished the season with a 3-8 conference record. Marginally better than the 2-9 record last season. Only one senior on the team. Quite frankly, I don't if that is good or not.
nacluth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
All you can ask of coaches is to be better than last year. New coach was better. Now she can be better next year too.
BigJack85
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ya. Let's at least make the tournament next season.
Sully
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fair enough.
Page 4 of 4
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.