Does this year of 13-40 get you another year?
They only had two Seniors so maybe, but my guess would be no. They hired an assistant from Baylor so maybe he was brought in to step in. Our pitching was terrible, particularly the relievers. Lots of games lost in high scoring games. Baseball has been bad for many years, I really can’t remember when we last had a team in the NCAA’s. The only worse team is women’s softball.
All done for O’Brien
Why stop with Mize.
The softball program has been an absolute joke since it began, and my strongest vote would be to get rid of the whole program and add women’s lacrosse, which has competed successfully as a club program for a long time. Better institutional fit for SCU anyway, in my opinion. SMC plays, it’s a growing sport in the west, popular at Catholic schools on both coasts.
In the first five years of the program, SCU Softball went 5-70. All time, they’ve gone 512-1,362. That’s a .273 winning percentage. There have been 4 coaches who have only won SINGLE DIGIT games in their TENURE, and only one was a 1 year coach…. I don’t know Coach Mize from a stranger. That is saying something, because I follow this entire athletic program very closely and wrote for the Santa Clara while she was a coach. So the fact that I couldn’t pick her out of a police line up says a lot. If people are honestly upset that a coach whose best team went 15-35 (out of 8 seasons), they need a dose of the real world. She never won double digit conference games. The only reason she got as long as she did is because they were playing off-campus (a tremendous handicap), and have since moved to an on-campus facility. The program was at the bottom of the barrel- not in the league but in the country- and was moving sideways or worse.
Morale is often low when a lax environment becomes a demanding one. Santa Clara can ill-afford to treat varsity head coaches like tenured professors. We were long blessed with a succession of long-tenured coaches for whom this was something of a destination job- Malleys in football, Williams/Davey, and currently Wallace, Smith, and Rast- all of whom could pursue bigger options if they wanted (maybe not Rast right now). But all of those men have earned exalted spots by winning and winning often.
A University’s reputation, like it or not, can be largely shaped by athletic success and perception of the athletic program generally. That reputation reflects on the tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of SCU’s living alumni- not to mention those who have passed on, a large number given the rich and long history of this institution, who deserve to be honored as well by the standard the University keeps. Any coach who thinks their feelings or job security trump the real world consequences of the perception of thousands of people’s alma mater is sadly mistaken. Anyone who attended this school will, for the rest of their lives, have their name inexorably linked with that of Santa Clara. That we should demand progress towards athletic success is far from unreasonable. And anyone who maintains that academics and athletics cannot co-exist need not look far to be proven wrong. Indeed, most the nations top schools that play division 1 athletics do so at a very high level.
Someone who produces results like Lisa Mize or comports themselves like Kerry Keating largely did on the sidelines would not be retained for very long in most private sector work. I, for one, am glad the University is finally holding them to a real standard- even if that means the dismissal of wonderful and well-meaning men like Coach O’Brien, who I greatly admire (but whose results I cannot defend).