By Staff
Coaching Management, 8.6, September 2000, http://www.momentummedia.com/articles/cm/cm0806/bbbat.htm
Although it may not be completely settled, the Great Bat Controversy seems to have simmered down for now. The rules implemented for the 2000 NCAA season appear to have had their desired effect, and further rules have been proposed to close possible loopholes around those rules.
Going into the 1999 season, the rules were changed to require that all bats have a maximum diameter of 2-5/8 inches and a differential of no more than three between length and weight (for example, a 34-inch bat could weigh no less than 31 ounces). Before the 2000 season, another standard was added that allowed a maximum ball-exit speed of 97 miles per hour, and bats were required to be certified as meeting all three standards.
About 70 different models from seven manufacturers were approved after testing by the University of Massachusetts at Lowell Baseball Research Center, including five models that were legal during the 1999 season. With all teams using those bats, the offensive output in NCAA Division I play dropped from those recorded during 1997 and 1998 and was more in line with that seen between 1981 and 1995.
The 2000 batting average of .297 fell about three percent compared to a .306 average in 1998, while runs per game fell to 6.53 last season after a record-high 7.12 two years ago. In addition, home runs fell to 0.80 per game compared to 1.06 in 1998. From 1981-95, typical season figures were a .296 batting average with an average of 0.8 home runs and 6.5 runs per game.
“Two years ago, coaches were calling members of the committee to say that something was wrong and we needed to make some changes in specifications for the bats,” said NCAA Baseball Rules Committee Chair Don Kessinger, the Associate Athletic Director for Internal Affairs at the University of Mississippi, in an NCAA press release. “After this season and the changes we saw in the field as a result of the new specifications, those coaches were calling to say they liked how the game was played this year.”
The Rules Committee has approved several additional recent recommendations from the NCAA Baseball Research Panel, which helped develop the previous standards. “We agree with the research panel that the recommendations it made a year ago restored balance between offense and defense in the college game and made metal bats perform more like wood bats,” Kessinger said. “The panel was concerned this year that there may be some loopholes in our testing procedures that we need to address to avoid problems in the future, and we have tried to do that.”
The Rules Committee’s proposals will be considered by the Division I Championships/Competition Cabinet and the Championships Committees in Divisions II and III during their fall meetings. The Rules Committee’s proposals include:
• Adding a sliding scale for bat swing speed, based on length, to the NCAA Bat Certification Program, effective January 1, 2003. The scale will be based on an exit speed standard of 97 miles per hour for a 34-inch bat. This is intended to reflect the fact that lighter bats can be swung faster than heavier bats.
• Establishing a moment-of-inertia (MOI) standard based on previously certified bats. MOI reflects the distribution of weight within a bat and can affect bat performance. MOIs will be set for each weight-length combination and will not be less than the lowest MOI among certified bats with the same weight-length combination. This means all currently certified bats would meet the MOI standard. No time frame was established for adding MOI to the certification process.
• Random testing of baseballs to ensure compliance with the coefficient-of-restitution (COR) rule, which measures the liveliness of the ball. Starting in 2002, balls will be required to have a COR value of .525 to .555. In the meantime, the NCAA will collect and study data to see if a different standard is needed.
“We want to assure that baseballs being used throughout the season are meeting the standard, and we think this is the first important step,” Kessinger said. “We may want to make adjustments in the future, but we want to take this one step at a time.”
The Rules Committee also agreed to support further study of the effects of work-hardening on bats. Early reports have indicated the possibility that bat performance can improve after repeated use. The Research Panel has asked for further study on the subject with the hope of incorporating findings into future standards.