Apparently, there is some scuttlebutt among the Alabama board that they will be adding sports. Men’s hockey has been mentioned, as Bama has sent out scouts on current college arenas and they have upgraded their club team to a top level. Alabama enrollment has grown tremendously during Sabin’s tenure, and it seems that their board wants more sports to keep attracting northern students.

https://247sports.com/college/alabama/Ar...119241077/

Would have thought Vanderbilt, Florida or Georgia would have been a first mover on men’s lacrosse. But since Alabama has facilities for lax but not for a campus hockey arena, lax might be approved.

Hard to add any men's sports.

The B1G shows it can be done but it's still not easy. You'd need 6 teams to agree to start teams (plus a women's team for Title IX purposes) which is possible

Florida, Georgia, Texas A&M and Tennessee all have old and established club teams that could make the transition the easiest. Newer club teams that seem to be doing well are LSU, Arkansas, Auburn, USC, Bama and Vanderbilt

So who knows

Soccer and lacrosse would do well at any sec school. Hockey would best too expensive and lacking local talent for sec schools.

The fact that the SEC is not a men's soccer powerhouse is sort of bonkers. 12 months of outdoor club soccer playing in the south? That's something that can pretty easily be leveraged into a local strong college program, much more than lacrosse and hockey pulling from disparate areas without a lot of local interest.

It would be very difficult. The mid-atlantic (North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, DC) are really the college epicenter for lacrosse. You're not pulling talent from those teams (UMD, UNC, UVA, Duke, Hopkins, Georgetown etc). So while they may field teams, I don't see them being competitive until their home states get more involved in the game.

(06-22-2018 06:50 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  The B1G shows it can be done but it's still not easy. You'd need 6 teams to agree to start teams (plus a women's team for Title IX purposes) which is possible

Florida, Georgia, Texas A&M and Tennessee all have old and established club teams that could make the transition the easiest. Newer club teams that seem to be doing well are LSU, Arkansas, Auburn, USC, Bama and Vanderbilt

So who knows

SC has had a club team for a few decades now, I think going back at least to the 80s and 90s.

Don’t see it becoming varsity though. We just added beach volleyball a few years ago and by all accounts we are content with that

(06-22-2018 09:35 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The fact that the SEC is not a men's soccer powerhouse is sort of bonkers. 12 months of outdoor club soccer playing in the south? That's something that can pretty easily be leveraged into a local strong college program, much more than lacrosse and hockey pulling from disparate areas without a lot of local interest.

Blows my mind as well. Soccer is HUGE in S.C. and I would assume that’s the same across the Southeast. As far as I know S.C. and Kentucky are the only schools with teams

The ACC would probably happily invite any SEC school starting men's LAX into their conference as an affiliate.

(06-22-2018 12:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The ACC would probably happily invite any SEC school starting men's LAX into their conference as an affiliate.

The AAC (American) has been the prime landing spot for SEC women's lax teams.

(06-22-2018 12:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The ACC would probably happily invite any SEC school starting men's LAX into their conference as an affiliate.

The ACC needs six for an autobid which they don’t have. But lax board rumors say they might get Hopkins or Utah after a couple years. If either of those happen, the ACC would be closed to anyone outside.

Then B1G may need a team, but there iar rumblings about Minnesota.

(06-22-2018 06:50 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  The B1G shows it can be done but it's still not easy. You'd need 6 teams to agree to start teams (plus a women's team for Title IX purposes) which is possible

Florida, Georgia, Texas A&M and Tennessee all have old and established club teams that could make the transition the easiest. Newer club teams that seem to be doing well are LSU, Arkansas, Auburn, USC, Bama and Vanderbilt

So who knows

You need a lot more than that. You need enough high school programs in the state playing at a decent level to be able to field your team with reasonably local talent. Why local? You'll need the interest to be local and the donations to be local. I just don't see that being something that will happen in Alabama in the next 20 years.

(06-22-2018 09:57 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:35 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The fact that the SEC is not a men's soccer powerhouse is sort of bonkers. 12 months of outdoor club soccer playing in the south? That's something that can pretty easily be leveraged into a local strong college program, much more than lacrosse and hockey pulling from disparate areas without a lot of local interest.

Blows my mind as well. Soccer is HUGE in S.C. and I would assume that’s the same across the Southeast. As far as I know S.C. and Kentucky are the only schools with teams

Add men's soccer and Title IX kicks in to force yet another unprofitable female sport. That's why you don't see men's soccer in the SEC.

(06-22-2018 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:57 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:35 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The fact that the SEC is not a men's soccer powerhouse is sort of bonkers. 12 months of outdoor club soccer playing in the south? That's something that can pretty easily be leveraged into a local strong college program, much more than lacrosse and hockey pulling from disparate areas without a lot of local interest.

Blows my mind as well. Soccer is HUGE in S.C. and I would assume that’s the same across the Southeast. As far as I know S.C. and Kentucky are the only schools with teams

Add men's soccer and Title IX kicks in to force yet another unprofitable female sport. That's why you don't see men's soccer in the SEC.

When I was a student back in the dark ages around the turn of the millennium, rumor on campus was Alabama was paying a $10,000 yearly fine rather than adding a women’s sport; I knew several women who rowed on the club level, and their hope was that they would be the next program up. It didn’t happen until well after my cohort graduated, but Alabama eventually elevated the program and spent $4 Million on a facility for their program.

It probably didn’t help that Auburn was sued in the mid 1990s over Title IX. My hunch is if Alabama takes the plunge on lacrosse or hockey, it will add teams for both genders, and add beach volleyball to chip away at the proportionality deficit.

The key incentive to add lacrosse at the Capstone is to do so before LSU. My high school in Mobile has a team now, and most of their games are in Louisiana and South Mississippi. New Orleans, Mobile, and Birmingham aren’t going to be recruiting hotbeds for lacrosse, but if any potential homegrown talent emerges, a school like Alabama needs those players to develop their program.

I’m not sure what the particular itch for hockey at Tuscaloosa is, but it wouldn’t surprise me to see another attempt to shut down Huntsville’s program again - which will be much more palatable when a true Division I program offers the UAH players a full ride with cost of attendance. Alabama is already outrecruiting public universities in the Midwest for students, so it’s not like hockey is necessary to land students from Illinois.

(06-22-2018 08:49 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:57 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:35 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The fact that the SEC is not a men's soccer powerhouse is sort of bonkers. 12 months of outdoor club soccer playing in the south? That's something that can pretty easily be leveraged into a local strong college program, much more than lacrosse and hockey pulling from disparate areas without a lot of local interest.

Blows my mind as well. Soccer is HUGE in S.C. and I would assume that’s the same across the Southeast. As far as I know S.C. and Kentucky are the only schools with teams

Add men's soccer and Title IX kicks in to force yet another unprofitable female sport. That's why you don't see men's soccer in the SEC.

When I was a student back in the dark ages around the turn of the millennium, rumor on campus was Alabama was paying a $10,000 yearly fine rather than adding a women’s sport; I knew several women who rowed on the club level, and their hope was that they would be the next program up. It didn’t happen until well after my cohort graduated, but Alabama eventually elevated the program and spent $4 Million on a facility for their program.

It probably didn’t help that Auburn was sued in the mid 1990s over Title IX. My hunch is if Alabama takes the plunge on lacrosse or hockey, it will add teams for both genders, and add beach volleyball to chip away at the proportionality deficit.

The key incentive to add lacrosse at the Capstone is to do so before LSU. My high school in Mobile has a team now, and most of their games are in Louisiana and South Mississippi. New Orleans, Mobile, and Birmingham aren’t going to be recruiting hotbeds for lacrosse, but if any potential homegrown talent emerges, a school like Alabama needs those players to develop their program.

I’m not sure what the particular itch for hockey at Tuscaloosa is, but it wouldn’t surprise me to see another attempt to shut down Huntsville’s program again - which will be much more palatable when a true Division I program offers the UAH players a full ride with cost of attendance. Alabama is already outrecruiting public universities in the Midwest for students, so it’s not like hockey is necessary to land students from Illinois.

I think the difference will be that Hockey can make money. Lacrosse can attract donors. I would think Tulane would add lacrosse before L.S.U.. That would be a great way for Tulane to possibly land an ACC bid provided they pushed the football too.

Auburn had club hockey and they played in Columbus, Georgia, but I don't know that they are still active. Lacrosse would be the cheaper team to field, but as I said the number of native Alabamians that play is really low.

Now let me give you a great reason for the SEC to look into Hockey. It is mildly a revenue sport. But take the NBA, MLB, and the NFL to go with the NHL. What is one of their overhead expenses that college ball can replace? Lower tier farm clubs for the development of talent. I'm not talking AAA baseball, or upper tier hockey, but 5 of the first picked in the MLB draft this year were college players. Baseball is looking for more mature talent that has been tested against 18 to 23 year olds at a fairly high level. A few years ago some scouts stated that in their opinion college baseball would rank somewhere between AA and AAA farm leagues for producing talent.

So what I'm saying is that the college upper tier could one day essentially replace lower tier professional development leagues and help to form a healthy and more profitable symbiosis with the professional leagues. If Canadian and Northeastern and Northern Midwest hockey talent had the Big 10, the traditional hockey leagues and the SEC putting money into facilities, coaching, and development they could cut some overhead, let the colleges have the small revenue totals they would generate and both could have competitive talent an with a draft the professional leagues could cut some overhead and possibly expand their sport professionally into some regions they really don't reach that well yet.

It's there if they choose to encourage and utilize it.

(06-22-2018 09:57 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:35 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The fact that the SEC is not a men's soccer powerhouse is sort of bonkers. 12 months of outdoor club soccer playing in the south? That's something that can pretty easily be leveraged into a local strong college program, much more than lacrosse and hockey pulling from disparate areas without a lot of local interest.

Blows my mind as well. Soccer is HUGE in S.C. and I would assume that’s the same across the Southeast. As far as I know S.C. and Kentucky are the only schools with teams

I wonder if the runaway success of Atlanta United has Georgia (and Georgia Tech) taking notice. Not that one should lead to the other, but there's definitely a lot of enthusiasm there.

The infrastructure we have for hockey is mostly in place. We have a student run organization that recruits nationally and internationally while managing every other aspect like scheduling with the ice rink in Birmingham. It's somewhat amazing what they've been able to pull off while remaining full time students.

Really, all we need is a local arena and the athletic department to bring everything into alignment and it wouldn't take long to get off the ground.

What I've heard is that officials want two things...they want an arena, but they also want local teams to play. My hope has been that someone at the SEC office is looking into forming a league because there are actually several old hockey clubs in the conference now. Arkansas, as well, has promoted their club to the highest division within the non-varsity ranks.

Lacrosse would be interesting because it would be easy to get off the ground. If it was necessary then you could just add a women's team to go alongside it and not have to worry about additional facilities or Title IX concerns. Probably would be cheaper too as you could just repurpose the soccer field depending on the season. Or heck, build a new one...wouldn't be expensive.

I also wonder if our network partners would be interested in that. It's typical to see a few lacrosse matches on the ESPN family during the season and then they show the NCAA tournament. I bet they'd prefer a few more schools/leagues in their quiver to show during that time of year. In other words, there's always a little money to be made when something is on TV consistently.

There are potentially two major projects on the horizon for us. They're looking at a major renovation of Coleman Coliseum(basketball and gymnastics). They may also be looking at building a new practice complex for football.

If both of those go ahead then there may be some major reorganization on campus and it might create new space for facilities for new sports.

(06-22-2018 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:57 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:35 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The fact that the SEC is not a men's soccer powerhouse is sort of bonkers. 12 months of outdoor club soccer playing in the south? That's something that can pretty easily be leveraged into a local strong college program, much more than lacrosse and hockey pulling from disparate areas without a lot of local interest.

Blows my mind as well. Soccer is HUGE in S.C. and I would assume that’s the same across the Southeast. As far as I know S.C. and Kentucky are the only schools with teams

Add men's soccer and Title IX kicks in to force yet another unprofitable female sport. That's why you don't see men's soccer in the SEC.

I’ve actually long thought Women’s beach volleyball could be an SEC sport soon. SC, LSU, and Miss st already have teams. Florida and Georgia would be natural fits too.

(06-22-2018 09:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 08:49 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:57 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:35 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The fact that the SEC is not a men's soccer powerhouse is sort of bonkers. 12 months of outdoor club soccer playing in the south? That's something that can pretty easily be leveraged into a local strong college program, much more than lacrosse and hockey pulling from disparate areas without a lot of local interest.

Blows my mind as well. Soccer is HUGE in S.C. and I would assume that’s the same across the Southeast. As far as I know S.C. and Kentucky are the only schools with teams

Add men's soccer and Title IX kicks in to force yet another unprofitable female sport. That's why you don't see men's soccer in the SEC.

When I was a student back in the dark ages around the turn of the millennium, rumor on campus was Alabama was paying a $10,000 yearly fine rather than adding a women’s sport; I knew several women who rowed on the club level, and their hope was that they would be the next program up. It didn’t happen until well after my cohort graduated, but Alabama eventually elevated the program and spent $4 Million on a facility for their program.

It probably didn’t help that Auburn was sued in the mid 1990s over Title IX. My hunch is if Alabama takes the plunge on lacrosse or hockey, it will add teams for both genders, and add beach volleyball to chip away at the proportionality deficit.

The key incentive to add lacrosse at the Capstone is to do so before LSU. My high school in Mobile has a team now, and most of their games are in Louisiana and South Mississippi. New Orleans, Mobile, and Birmingham aren’t going to be recruiting hotbeds for lacrosse, but if any potential homegrown talent emerges, a school like Alabama needs those players to develop their program.

I’m not sure what the particular itch for hockey at Tuscaloosa is, but it wouldn’t surprise me to see another attempt to shut down Huntsville’s program again - which will be much more palatable when a true Division I program offers the UAH players a full ride with cost of attendance. Alabama is already outrecruiting public universities in the Midwest for students, so it’s not like hockey is necessary to land students from Illinois.

I think the difference will be that Hockey can make money. Lacrosse can attract donors. I would think Tulane would add lacrosse before L.S.U.. That would be a great way for Tulane to possibly land an ACC bid provided they pushed the football too.

Auburn had club hockey and they played in Columbus, Georgia, but I don't know that they are still active. Lacrosse would be the cheaper team to field, but as I said the number of native Alabamians that play is really low.

Now let me give you a great reason for the SEC to look into Hockey. It is mildly a revenue sport. But take the NBA, MLB, and the NFL to go with the NHL. What is one of their overhead expenses that college ball can replace? Lower tier farm clubs for the development of talent. I'm not talking AAA baseball, or upper tier hockey, but 5 of the first picked in the MLB draft this year were college players. Baseball is looking for more mature talent that has been tested against 18 to 23 year olds at a fairly high level. A few years ago some scouts stated that in their opinion college baseball would rank somewhere between AA and AAA farm leagues for producing talent.

So what I'm saying is that the college upper tier could one day essentially replace lower tier professional development leagues and help to form a healthy and more profitable symbiosis with the professional leagues. If Canadian and Northeastern and Northern Midwest hockey talent had the Big 10, the traditional hockey leagues and the SEC putting money into facilities, coaching, and development they could cut some overhead, let the colleges have the small revenue totals they would generate and both could have competitive talent an with a draft the professional leagues could cut some overhead and possibly expand their sport professionally into some regions they really don't reach that well yet.

It's there if they choose to encourage and utilize it.

I agree I think one day (20-30 years from now) it could happen. Having major college hockey in the south would generate a ton of interest for a mostly regional sport

(06-23-2018 06:38 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 08:49 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:57 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Blows my mind as well. Soccer is HUGE in S.C. and I would assume that’s the same across the Southeast. As far as I know S.C. and Kentucky are the only schools with teams

Add men's soccer and Title IX kicks in to force yet another unprofitable female sport. That's why you don't see men's soccer in the SEC.

When I was a student back in the dark ages around the turn of the millennium, rumor on campus was Alabama was paying a $10,000 yearly fine rather than adding a women’s sport; I knew several women who rowed on the club level, and their hope was that they would be the next program up. It didn’t happen until well after my cohort graduated, but Alabama eventually elevated the program and spent $4 Million on a facility for their program.

It probably didn’t help that Auburn was sued in the mid 1990s over Title IX. My hunch is if Alabama takes the plunge on lacrosse or hockey, it will add teams for both genders, and add beach volleyball to chip away at the proportionality deficit.

The key incentive to add lacrosse at the Capstone is to do so before LSU. My high school in Mobile has a team now, and most of their games are in Louisiana and South Mississippi. New Orleans, Mobile, and Birmingham aren’t going to be recruiting hotbeds for lacrosse, but if any potential homegrown talent emerges, a school like Alabama needs those players to develop their program.

I’m not sure what the particular itch for hockey at Tuscaloosa is, but it wouldn’t surprise me to see another attempt to shut down Huntsville’s program again - which will be much more palatable when a true Division I program offers the UAH players a full ride with cost of attendance. Alabama is already outrecruiting public universities in the Midwest for students, so it’s not like hockey is necessary to land students from Illinois.

I think the difference will be that Hockey can make money. Lacrosse can attract donors. I would think Tulane would add lacrosse before L.S.U.. That would be a great way for Tulane to possibly land an ACC bid provided they pushed the football too.

Auburn had club hockey and they played in Columbus, Georgia, but I don't know that they are still active. Lacrosse would be the cheaper team to field, but as I said the number of native Alabamians that play is really low.

Now let me give you a great reason for the SEC to look into Hockey. It is mildly a revenue sport. But take the NBA, MLB, and the NFL to go with the NHL. What is one of their overhead expenses that college ball can replace? Lower tier farm clubs for the development of talent. I'm not talking AAA baseball, or upper tier hockey, but 5 of the first picked in the MLB draft this year were college players. Baseball is looking for more mature talent that has been tested against 18 to 23 year olds at a fairly high level. A few years ago some scouts stated that in their opinion college baseball would rank somewhere between AA and AAA farm leagues for producing talent.

So what I'm saying is that the college upper tier could one day essentially replace lower tier professional development leagues and help to form a healthy and more profitable symbiosis with the professional leagues. If Canadian and Northeastern and Northern Midwest hockey talent had the Big 10, the traditional hockey leagues and the SEC putting money into facilities, coaching, and development they could cut some overhead, let the colleges have the small revenue totals they would generate and both could have competitive talent an with a draft the professional leagues could cut some overhead and possibly expand their sport professionally into some regions they really don't reach that well yet.

It's there if they choose to encourage and utilize it.

I agree I think one day (20-30 years from now) it could happen. Having major college hockey in the south would generate a ton of interest for a mostly regional sport

Hockey had a spurt in the South in the 90s but that's about it. As attendance goes, Nashville and Tampa Bay do great now but they're also two of the best franchises in the NHL. Florida and Carolina are near the bottom, and Carolina will probably be the subject of relocation rumors until they finally move. Atlanta lost two teams. The AHL has two teams in Texas and one in North Carolina. Most of the South's presence in pro hockey is in the ECHL or lower leagues.

I guess I'm skeptical that even SEC hockey would generate the kind of interest that largely doesn't exist out of the 90s boom period.