TallTexan said:

---

SFAXE93 said:

---

Final attendance across all sports (Women's Soccer, Volleyball, Football, MBB, WBB, Baseball, Softball)

1) McNeese - 185,483
2) UTRGV - 131,631
3) Lamar - 128,120
4) Southeastern - 98,351
5) SFA - 84,175
6) Corpus Christi - 71,500
7) Northwestern St - 70,107
8) Nicholls - 68,273
9) East Texas A&M - 49,041
10) Houston Christian - 42,405
11) Incarnate Word - 31,155
12) New Orleans - 25,721

---

McNeese I get this past year, but RGV and Lamar beating us.

---

Baseball and softball aren't great and MBB was improving but still short of our averages just 6-7 years ago.

I think we make real progress once we get a baseball field.

The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley (UTRGV) baseball team ranked 39th among 305 NCAA Division I baseball teams in total and average attendance during the 2024 season.

In the 2024 regular season, the UTRGV baseball team drew 62,132 fans across 28 dates, resulting in a program record average of 2,219 fans per game.

UTRGV welcomed the second and third largest crowds in program history, with 6,044 for a game against UT Arlington on April 6 and 5,374 for a game against Utah Valley on April 13, respectively.

https://goutrgv.com/news/2024/12/24/general-year-in-review-fan-support.aspx

Does anyone have the inside scoop on any upcoming upgrades to our athletic facilities (if any)?

Ignastradamus said:

---

Does anyone have the inside scoop on any upcoming upgrades to our athletic facilities (if any)?

---

Hearing the "campus master plan" will be near completion by November. Then, maybe.

BigJack85 said:

---

Ignastradamus said:

---

Does anyone have the inside scoop on any upcoming upgrades to our athletic facilities (if any)?

---

Hearing the "campus master plan" will be near completion by November. Then, maybe.

---

https://www.sfasu.edu/masterplan

This is a very positive move for athletics. Scott is one of the good ones.

@lumberjackscott is staying in the Piney Woods as Director of Development! 🪓🌲

📰: https://t.co/lrLc9CWsfa#AxeEm pic.twitter.com/Zz8wzzJHof

— SFA Athletics (@SFA_Athletics) June 11, 2025

SFAJack_76 said:

---

This is a very positive move for athletics. Scott is one of the good ones.

@lumberjackscott is staying in the Piney Woods as Director of Development! 🪓🌲

📰: https://t.co/lrLc9CWsfa#AxeEm pic.twitter.com/Zz8wzzJHof

— SFA Athletics (@SFA_Athletics) June 11, 2025

---

Happy to see that!

July 1, 2025, marked a monumental day in the history of college athletics in the United States.

With the approval of the House vs NCAA settlement now final, July 1 marked the day that NCAA Division I athletic departments are able to increase scholarship funding for teams and participate in new forms of revenue sharing with student-athletes. We are excited about how these changes will strengthen our athletics program and help elevate Stephen F. Austin State University as an institution!

SFA has chosen to participate in this new model for four distinct reasons:

[ol]

Scholarship and headcount limits have been removed in favor of roster limits. This is a significant change, allowing for ALL STUDENTS ON A ROSTER to be eligible for at least a partial athletic scholarship;

We will be able to use institutional and donor support to RECRUIT and RETAIN high-performing students who compete for SFA;

We will be able to oversee SFA Name, Image and Likeness (NIL) opportunities for our student-athletes. This means we can work COLLABORATIVELY to build brands, promote and market our teams and the University, and ultimately share in the revenue we are able to generate TOGETHER;

We can CONSOLIDATE and manage all contributions for the athletics program through the University and provide tax benefits to our supporters for all gifts.

[/ol]
Our commitment to sustained excellence in competition and in academics remains steadfast. We expect to compete for and win Southland Conference championships in every sport, and to do so with students who will graduate from SFA and remain lifelong supporters of this great institution. The new era that begins today will only strengthen our opportunities to achieve our goals!

Our past success has been largely dependent on the avid support provided by our fans and donors. It will be even more critical as we point to the future. Now more than ever, we need to be able to count on your support in two ways: purchasing tickets to attend games, and providing an annual financial gift to funds that directly support our mission: the Purple Lights Fund and the newly created, sport-specific Sawmill Funds.

Donors to the Purple Lights Fund provide unrestricted gifts that support all student-athletes, coaches and teams, specifically in the areas of scholarships, academic support, sports medicine, strength and conditioning, marketing, coaching salaries, travel and recruiting. These gifts are the difference in an average athletic program and a championship program. The annual Purple Lights Fund campaign is now underway and you can pledge your support here: Give to the Purple Lights Fund

The Sawmill Funds are made possible by the House vs. NCAA settlement. You now have the ability to directly support teams by helping coaches attract and retain the very best students to play for SFA. Gifts to these funds are directed to each sport and provide additional, allowable income to students above and beyond scholarships. This income will be in the form of increased scholarships, academic performance awards, monthly cost of living stipends, retention awards and direct compensation for marketing activities that promote SFA. Funds given to a sport's Sawmill Fund stay in the fund until disbursed to members of the team, at the direction of the head coach. An online giving platform for the Sawmill Funds will be available soon. In the interim, if you have an interest in supporting a team through its Sawmill Fund, please contact Scott Allen, Senior Associate AD for Development at (936) 468-3986 or email him at allends1@sfasu.edu.

Each of these funds offers a clear path for you to provide direct support to our students and coaches. The accounts are managed by the SFA Foundation, are tax-exempt and fully compliant with new NCAA guidelines.

As part of the new structure, the Sawmill Collective's role will be evolving to support the new Sawmill Funds. Gifts that previously have been made to the Collective can now be made directly to SFA and the Sawmill Funds. I can't say thank you enough to Matt Rocco and the board of the Sawmill Collective who have been so instrumental in bringing SFA into the NIL space a few years ago. The Collective was able to bring our athletes together with many non-profits and young people in Nacogdoches. The impact has been significant! Although the role of the Collective will be modified going forward, the opportunities for local non-profits to connect with our teams will not! Further, I am excited to continue working with Matt and his team as the industry continues to evolve and grow.

In closing, I want to thank you for your unbridled support of our students and coaches. Whether your support comes in the form of time, treasure and/or talent, you are valuable to us and we greatly appreciate you. The people of SFA are truly what sets it apart and because of this, I know the future is bright and together we will embrace and champion this new era in college athletics!

Axe'Em Jacks!



Michael McBroom

Director of Athletics

Ljacks&Longnecks said:

---

Ugh. College sports no longer exist, just paid "semi-pros". I look forward to this house of cards collapsing.

But Hey, since SFA is now going to be raking in the riches then certainly McBroom can reinstate the Sports he just cut. I mean since SFA is going to be flooded with dough he could do the right thing.

---

I agree fully. College sports as America has known it for a century has been destroyed, IMO. The almighty dollar and courts have won, for now.

I've never cared much for professional athletics, always preferring college and high school, simply because they played for their schools, for each other, and for their enjoyment of competition and the games they played. College sports has now gone professional, and some states are moving toward NIL for high school "athletes" (aka kids). Makes me sick!

Quality young man.

Catch the new job title 👀

Welcome, @bdogfromtexas, to his new role as the Director of Marketing and Revenue Generation!

📰 : https://t.co/1LPOa5D53a#AxeEm pic.twitter.com/TSlfthPwco

— SFA Athletics (@SFA_Athletics) July 16, 2025

Based on Weaver's remarks yesterday, it appears that SFA is going to make a huge push this year for a dedicated athletics fee. This has failed multiple times in the past, but it appears that without such a fee current levels of athletic spending are unsustainable given SFA's needs for money to address other pressing issues. SFA's athletics budget is roughly the same size as UTRGV's, which has 34,000 students and a dedicated athletics fee.

Thoughts on the likelihood of success, and if unsuccessful, what will SFA do in response?

Sorry for bringing this up, but if we had 20,000 applicants for the fall why will only 11,600 be accepted?

NacMan said:

---

Based on Weaver's remarks yesterday, it appears that SFA is going to make a huge push this year for a dedicated athletics fee. This has failed multiple times in the past, but it appears that without such a fee current levels of athletic spending are unsustainable given SFA's needs for money to address other pressing issues. SFA's athletics budget is roughly the same size as UTRGV's, which has 34,000 students and a dedicated athletics fee.

Thoughts on the likelihood of success, and if unsuccessful, what will SFA do in response?

---

Depends on how the message is packaged. SFA has a lot going for it, with the UT System helping with infrastructure and basic facilities rationalization.

College athletics is going through an immense upheaval. Commentary from some in the board would indicate that SFA is in a unique position. I've studied Knight Newhouse data. Just a guess (and a conservative one) 80%-90% of FCS schools amd close to 50% of FBS schools will have to rationalize.

From the get go the move should have been to "axe" baseball. Push our limited resources into MBB, WBB, WVB and football. Alas that was not to be.

Housing is not an excuse. Let the kids stay where they want . Most universities only require the freshman year.

D2 is the only option.

Only about 3,500 in the freshman class. So, 20,000 applicants yielded probably around 4,500 enrolled when including both new undergrads and transfers.

It's pretty common for students nowdays to apply to 10+ different universities before deciding which one to actually attend. SFA likely got thousands of applications from people who had little intention of attending here unless all their other schools rejected them.

SFA Jack Fanatic said:

---

Jackdad22 said:

---

D2 is the only option.

---

With all due respect, I will ignore your suggestion, just as I'm sure that thousands of other SFA alumni will.

---

He's talking to the wrong people if he wants to drive down SFA. I'm sure there's an agenda.

Why don't you (jd22) email Weaver?

No agenda, not someone who falls in line with the good old boys system. SFA is going to make cut that won't be popular or they will have to generate millions to keep operating as is. They do not have money to keep operating as is. They will have to cut athletic staff ,cut the maintenance budget, cut the travel budget even more, cut athletic stipends, drop the revenue sharing, drop sports that have no potential for revenue. Cut the salaries of the athletic staff that is left, or drop to d2 . Even then you still have to upgrade facilities . I suggest the old ways be forgotten and let the new take over. Can't be D1 on a beer budget and old way of doing business.

Do you realize Mcbroom made the comment that it would take a million dollars to bring back the sports that were dropped. Where is that money coming from? It is posted on ketk and KTRE

Wow, rather than discussing ideas. We are met with anger and hostility, where have I seen that before. The question was how will SFA respond if the athletic fee is voted down, which has happened EVERY time it has come to vote. The days of pouring money down the toilet are over. If the AD is asked to cut say 5 million out of the budget to make room for upgrades and expansion, where does it come from? People are just now discovering the university has priorities that many on this board do not like. They are trying to stay D1 but for how long.

I don't necessarily agree with Jackdad22 that D2 is the answer, but something needs to happen with the athletics budget, either more revenue via an athletics fee (preferable) or major spending cuts (second alternative).

Those of you on the outside don't know how much of this place has been patched together by purely short-term moves over the last 20-30 years. Weaver and the UT system are trying to change that with long-range planning. But the changes that need to happen will all require money, and SFA is getting less support from the state, not more.

We now access to PUF. With the correct planning monies will be there..

That wasn't hostility. I apologize if you took it that way.

You didn't answer my questions. Who are your inside sources, if any? If there are none, admit it. What's your educational background? Who are you loyal to, because it sure isn't to SFA.

You know I can't and won't tell you who I speak with. No I am not a graduate of SFA , My Wife and all my kids are graduates . I have an Engineering and mechanical background. We are supporters of SFA just not the way it has been done for the last 20 to 30 years as nacman has mentioned.

Jackdad22 said:

---

You know I can't and won't tell you who I speak with. No I am not a graduate of SFA , My Wife and all my kids are graduates . I have an Engineering and mechanical background. We are supporters of SFA just not the way it has been done for the last 20 to 30 years as nacman has mentioned.

---

Have you done any research beyond what you have "heard". Consider looking at the "breadth" of D1 (FCS specifically).

If you have factual information that supports your position… I have studied D1 and FCS budgets / funding extensively. If you look at our enrollment / academic profile / funding models etc you will find that SFA fits well in the FCS classification.

We are larger in : enrollment , endowment, historical success than 70% of our peers. Three of our Louisiana conference mates have enrollment close to 6,000. Significantly lower than SFA's projected enrollment of 11,600 this fall.

I wish you the best I come to this site for a positive look at SFA. Criticism is welcome, but I think you are here to push the D2 agenda. I hope you take it elsewhere.

If I had an agenda it would be to move up to FBS. FCS is nothing anyone looks forward to. If you don't believe me just go ask any of the kids playing what game will be the highlight of the year for them. The overwhelming answer is the University of Houston. Many of the kids on campus go watch Texas A&M on Saturday instead of watching their own team. Even last year a large group went to Sam Houston state to watch them play Hawaii. My opinion is if you can't move up then drop down where you can win a national title. Witchita State is a good example of a D2 school with the same enrollment numbers and limited budgets. Sorry you don't want to hear opposing views so I will honor your request to stop posting.

Jacks4460 said:

---

We now access to PUF. With the correct planning monies will be there..

---

PUF funds are for capital expenditures and construction, and they will help there a lot. However, SFA is still trying to get its operating budget sorted out. For example, the UT system has basically told SFA to solve its own low salary problems from SFA funds (they are giving us a small annual supplement to address faculty pay, but that supplement expires in a couple years). Staff pay in particular is at a near emergency level now in terms of causing staffing shortages. I know multiple staff people personally who have left SFA this year because they just can't pay for living expenses on an SFA salary. SFA has been offering salaries in the mid-30ks for full-time, mission critical support staff, and there have been only two tiny cost of living increases for existing staff since 2018. Weaver recognizes the issue, but it will take millions of dollars a year to address.

Basically what I have heard is that the system wants SFA to be self-sufficient in its operating budget within another 2-3 years. This operational self-sufficiency is an expectation the system has for all of its campuses.

Bringing it back to athletics (because this is the Athletics Department thread), this is why the system and Weaver want the athletics portion of the university to be more self-sufficient, so that some of the tuition revenue currently being transferred to athletics each year can be re-purposed elsewhere.

Jackdad I would invite you to keep on posting, different ideas/viewpoints need to come up now and again.

To your point that the kids name UH as their most looked forward to game, that just makes sense. The small school vs the Big school. However if the Jacks finally break through and make the FCS playoffs then I think you would find that those games will become highly important to the same guys.

SFA students following A&M, UT, OU whoever they have always followed has always been a thing. I used to get quite upset way back in my SFA days of the lack of interest from so much of my fellow students towards SFA sports while still worrying about the Big schools. Mind you SFA was NAIA back then and most of us have not heard of many of our opponents but my take was and still is, SFA is your/our school and should get our support.

FBS should remain a non starter for SFA. We are not ready and the budget issues would also say no.

DIv 2 might solve some budget issues or make a difference in the Title IX mess McBroom got us in BUT if you believe that our players and students don't follow and support SFA now, there certainly would be even less in the lower classification playing other unknown small schools. Our quality of athletes would of course drop as well as the better ones want D1 schools. Donations and gifts from alumni would drop accordingly. Only way I see Div2 would be if SFA was absolutely gutted financially and that became a last choice to save athletics.

A lot of this talk and mostly the budget issues will likely in the end be determined by what all the big schools do and how the NCAA flubs it all up. All the money and conference rearranging is still quite fluid and may end up forcing many of the SFA type programs to make dramatic changes or even come up with a different version of D1 or a super conference of all the rich schools while the rest of us start over under different classifications.

NacMan, Appreciate your insights and comments as well. Good to get a bit of inside info from on the ground.

While I wish Weaver all the luck in getting the athletic funding we need, I just don't see how they would ever get an athletics fee passed on student vote. Firstly, as I mentioned in previous post, the SFA student body as a whole is just not as interested in SFA sports as they are the Big schools that they or their family have always followed.
Far beyond that I believe it is plain economics. College is expensive. Students and their parents are strapped. Given an opportunity to vote on an additional fee, most are likely to vote no. Some on here will blame the faculty for brainwashing students to vote no and there is likely a few who would but it all comes down to the economy and family To ignore that is to ignore reality. They would have to come up with an original plan to somehow get enough students on board.

I guess I'm a little confused on getting "approval" for the athletics fee that is being mentioned and has been mentioned for years. Why are we seeking an approval? Can't we just add it like every other school. Looking at the fees for my kids when they were in college was just like a sucking vacuum! They were there and we had to pay if we wanted the degree! Even at TJC, there are many fees that are added. Student Life fee, health services fees (which 95% of the kids don't use), etc, etc, etc!

The Texas legislature requires specific legislation to allow a university to apply an athletics fee, and all the previous pieces of legislation for every university has specified that a majority of students must vote in favor of it.

SFA already has the enabling legislation back in 2015 authorizing up to $10 per credit hour. The vote has failed each time it was tried. I would argue $10 per credit hour is not enough. That would only raise about $2.5 million per year for a $24m/yr athletics budget. I would think SFA would want to ask the legislature to amend so they can ask for $20 per credit hour if not more.

BTW, almost every faculty member I know personally favors an athletics fee because that will free up money to improve academic programs.

Jackdad22 said:

---

If I had an agenda it would be to move up to FBS. FCS is nothing anyone looks forward to. If you don't believe me just go ask any of the kids playing what game will be the highlight of the year for them. The overwhelming answer is the University of Houston. Many of the kids on campus go watch Texas A&M on Saturday instead of watching their own team. Even last year a large group went to Sam Houston state to watch them play Hawaii. My opinion is if you can't move up then drop down where you can win a national title. Witchita State is a good example of a D2 school with the same enrollment numbers and limited budgets. Sorry you don't want to hear opposing views so I will honor your request to stop posting.

---

Your ignorance is glaring. Wichita State IS NOT A DIVISION 2 school. Hasn't been for many many many years.

Look it up.

I agree that different points of view are needed and valuable. Wichita State was a member of the division 1 Missouri Valley for decades. Recently joined the American.

My take is that SFA is probably about where we should be (Southland) in the mid major layer of D1. We can make some compromises. We should make some compromises.