It’s time for a look at potential winners of the Bowerman, an annual award presented to the most outstanding athletes in collegiate track and field.

Here’s the latest on some of the best in DI track and field.

THE BOWERMAN: Complete history of the track and field honor

Finalists

Watch lists from the season

Check out every 2025 watch list below.

Semifinalists

*Two-time Semifinalist
**Three-time Semifinalist

PREDICTING: How the Bowerman watch lists predict the award’s final winner

2025 watch list dates

Below you’ll find all of the Bowerman watch list dates for 2025. 

All dates subject to change

PAST BOWERMANS: 2024 – Leo Neugebauer | 2024 – Parker Valby | 2023 – Jaydon Hibbert | 2023 – Julien Alfred | 2022 – Trey Cunningham | 2022 – Abby Steiner

Date of the winner of the Bowerman

The 2025 winners will be announced on Thursday, Dec. 18 at the 2025 USTFCCCA convention at the Gaylord Texan Resort & Convention Center in Grapevine, Texas.

Past watch lists

Watch list update No. 7

The seventh update to the Bowerman women’s watch list was announced on Wednesday, June 4, with the men’s watch list announced on Thursday, June 5.

*Watch list career debut

The following athletes received votes:

• Women
  • Temitope Adeshina, Texas Tech (Jumps)
  • Lexy Halladay-Lowry, BYU (Steeple/Distance)
  • Meghan Hunter, BYU (Mid-Distance)
  • Klaudia Kazimierska, Oregon (Mid-Distance/Distance)
  • Brynn King, Roberts Wesleyan (Pole Vault)
  • Mya Lesnar, Colorado State (Throws)
• Men
  • Makanakaishe Charamba, Auburn (Sprints)
  • Micahi Danzy, Florida State (Sprints)
  • Geoffrey Kirwa, Louisville (Steeple/Distance)
  • Angelos Mantzouranis, Minnesota (Hammer/Throws)
  • Tinoda Matsatsa, Georgetown (Mid-Distance/Distance)
  • Samuel Ogazi, Alabama (Sprints)
  • Abdul-Rasheed Saminu, South Florida (Sprints)
  • Kendrick Smallwood, Texas (Sprints/Hurdles)
  • Kostas Zaltos, Minnesota (Throws)

Watch list update No. 6

The sixth update to the Bowerman women’s watch list was announced on Wednesday, May 21, with the men’s watch list announced on Thursday, May 22.

*Watch list career debut

The following athletes received votes:

• Women
  • Temitope Adeshina, Texas Tech (Jumps)
  • Lianna Davidson, Georgia (Javelin)
  • Rachel Glenn, Arkansas (Hurdles/Jumps)
  • Lexy Halladay-Lowry, BYU (Steeple/Distance)
  • Brynn King, Roberts Wesleyan (Pole Vault)
  • Mya Lesnar, Colorado State (Throws)
  • Jadin O’Brien, Notre Dame (Combined Events)
• Men
  • Micahi Danzy, Florida State (Sprints)
  • Geoffrey Kirwa, Louisville (Steeple/Distance)
  • Angelos Mantzouranis, Minnesota (Hammer/Throws)
  • Jamar Marshall, Jr., Houston (Sprints/Hurdles)
  • Tinoda Matsatsa, Georgetown (Mid-Distance/Distance)
  • Kendrick Smallwood, Texas (Sprints/Hurdles)
  • Ja’Kobe Tharp, Auburn (Hurdles)
  • Kostas Zaltos, Minnesota (Throws)

Watch list update No. 5

The fifth update to the Bowerman women’s watch list was announced on Wednesday, May 7, with the men’s watch list announced on Thursday, May 8.

*Watch list career debut

The following athletes received votes:

• Women
  • Margot Appleton, Virginia (Mid-Distance/Distance)
  • Lianna Davidson, Georgia (Javelin)
  • JaMeesia Ford, South Carolina (Sprints)
  • Lexy Halladay-Lowry, BYU (Steeple/Distance)
  • Jadin O’Brien, Notre Dame (Combined Events)
  • Manuela Rotundo, Georgia (Javelin)
• Men
  • Kanyinsola Ajayi, Auburn (Sprints)
  • Jordan Anthony, Arkansas (Sprints)
  • Makanakaishe Charamba, Auburn (Sprints)
  • Nathan Green, Washington (Mid-Distance)
  • Garrett Kaalund, Southern California (Sprints)
  • Carli Makarawu, Kentucky (Sprints)
  • Gary Martin, Virginia (Mid-Distance/Distance)
  • Tinoda Matsatsa, Georgetown (Mid-Distance/Distance)
  • Ralford Mullings, Oklahoma (Throws)
  • Auhmad Robinson, Texas A&M (Sprints)
  • Daniel Reynolds, Wyoming (Throws)
  • Kendrick Smallwood, Texas (Sprints/Hurdles)
  • Keyshawn Strachan, Nebraska (Javelin)
  • Parker Wolfe, North Carolina (Distance)

Watch list update No. 4

The fourth update to the Bowerman women’s watch list was announced on Wednesday, April 16, with the men’s watch list announced on Thursday, April 17.

*Watch list career debut

The following athletes received votes:

• Women
  • Şilan Ayyildiz, Oregon (Mid-Distance)
  • Lianna Davidson, Georgia (Javelin)
  • JaMeesia Ford, South Carolina (Sprints)
  • Hana Moll, Washington (Pole Vault)
  • Jadin O’Brien, Notre Dame (Combined Events)
• Men
  • Jordan Anthony, Arkansas (Sprints)
  • Johnny Brackins, Jr., Southern California (Hurdles/Jumps)
  • Simen Guttormsen, Duke (Pole Vault)
  • Garrett Kaalund, Southern California (Sprints)
  • Trey Knight, CSUN (Throws)
  • Carli Makarawu, Kentucky (Sprints)
  • Gary Martin, Virginia (Mid-Distance/Distance)
  • Tinoda Matsatsa, Georgetown (Mid-Distance/Distance)
  • Chinecherem Nnamdi, Baylor (Javelin)
  • Daniel Reynolds, Wyoming (Throws)
  • Kendrick Smallwood, Texas (Sprints/Hurdles)
  • Keyshawn Strachan, Nebraska (Javelin)
  • Kostas Zaltos, Minnesota (Throws)

Watch list update No. 3

The third update to the Bowerman women’s watch list was announced on Wednesday, March 26, with the men’s watch list announced on Thursday, March 27.

*Watch list career debut

The following athletes received votes:

• Women
  • Şilan Ayyildiz, Oregon (Mid-Distance)
  • Alexis Brown, Baylor (Sprints/Jumps)
  • Dajaz Defrand, Southern California (Sprints)
  • JaMeesia Ford, South Carolina (Sprints)
  • Elena Kulichenko, Georgia (Jumps)
  • Wilma Nielsen, Oregon (Mid-Distance)
• Men
  • Jordan Anthony, Arkansas (Sprints)
  • Favour Ashe, Oregon (Sprints)
  • Johnny Brackins, Jr., Southern California (Hurdles/Jumps)
  • Nathan Green, Washington (Mid-Distance)
  • Brian Musau, Oklahoma State (Distance)
  • Chinecherem Nnamdi, Baylor (Javelin)
  • Jonathan Seremes, Missouri (Jumps)
  • JC Stevenson, Southern California (Sprints/Jumps)

Watch list update No. 2

The second update to the Bowerman women’s watch list was announced on Wednesday, March 5, with the men’s watch list announced on Thursday, March 6.

*Watch list career debut

The following athletes received votes:

• Women
  • Anthaya Charlton, Florida (Jumps)
  • Mya Lesnar, Colorado State (Throws)
  • Indya Mayberry, TCU (Sprints)
  • Jadin O’Brien, Notre Dame (Combined Events)
  • Hilda Olemomoi, Florida (Distance)
  • Michaela Rose, LSU (Mid-Distance)
  • Isabella Whittaker, Arkansas (Sprints)

• Men
  • Favour Ashe, Oregon (Sprints)
  • Makanakaishe Charamba, Auburn (Sprints)
  • Eli Kosiba, Grand Valley State (Jumps)
  • Tinoda Matsatsa, Georgetown (Mid-Distance/Distance)
  • Aidan McCarthy, Cal Poly (Mid-Distance)
  • Chinecherem Nnamdi, Baylor (Javelin)
  • Daniel Reynolds, Wyoming (Throws)
  • Jonathan Seremes, Missouri (Jumps)
  • Aleksandr Solovev, Texas A&M (Pole Vault)
  • Keyshawn Strachan, Nebraska (Javelin)
  • Sam Whitmarsh, Texas A&M (Mid-Distance)

Watch list update No. 1

The first update to the Bowerman women’s watch list was announced on Wednesday, Feb. 5, with the men’s watch list announced on Thursday, Feb. 6. 

*Watch list career debut

The following athletes received votes:

• Women
  • Axelina Johansson, Nebraska (Throws)
  • Pamela Kosgei, New Mexico (Distance)
  • Elena Kulichenko, Georgia (Jumps)
  • Mya Lesnar, Colorado State (Throws)
  • Indya Mayberry, TCU (Sprints)
  • Amanda Moll, Washington (Pole Vault)
  • Hana Moll, Washington (Pole Vault)
  • Wilma Nielsen, Oregon (Mid-Distance)
  • Jadin O’Brien, Notre Dame (Combined Events)
  • Michaela Rose, LSU (Mid-Distance)
  • Savannah Sutherland, Michigan (Sprints/Hurdles)
• Men
  • Favour Ashe, Oregon (Sprints)
  • Graham Blanks, Harvard (Distance)
  • Nathaniel Ezekiel, Baylor (Sprints/Hurdles)
  • Eli Kosiba, Grand Valley State (Jumps)
  • Abdullahi Hassan, Mississippi State (Mid-Distance)
  • Chinecherem Nnamdi, Baylor (Javelin)
  • Samuel Ogazi, Alabama (Sprints)
  • Tarsis Orogot, Alabama (Sprints)
  • Jonathan Seremes, Missouri (Jumps)
  • Aleksandr Solovev, Texas A&M (Pole Vault)
  • JC Stevenson, Southern California (Sprints/Jumps)
  • Keyshawn Strachan, Nebraska (Javelin)

Preseason watch list

The women’s preseason watch list was announced on Wednesday, Jan. 8, with the men’s preseason watch list announced on Thursday, Jan. 9. 

*Watch list career debut
#Returning finalist
+Returning semifinalist

The following athletes received votes:

• Women | Aaliyah Butler, Georgia (Sprints)
  • Rosey Effiong, Arkansas (Sprints)
  • Brynn King, Roberts Wesleyan (Pole Vault)
  • Pamela Kosgei, New Mexico (Distance)
  • Elena Kulichenko, Georgia (Jumps)
  • Jadin O’Brien, Notre Dame (Combined Events)
  • Savannah Sutherland, Michigan (Sprints/Hurdles)
  • Chloe Timberg, Rutgers (Pole Vault)
• Men
  • Nathan Green, Washington (Mid-Distance)
  • Kenneth Ikeji, Harvard (Throws)
  • Eli Kosiba, Grand Valley State (Jumps)
  • Rivaldo Marshall, Arkansas (Mid-Distance)
  • Tinoda Matsatsa, Georgetown (Mid-Distance/Distance)
  • Nathan Mountain, Virginia (Mid-Distance)
  • Samuel Ogazi, Alabama (Sprints)
  • Godson Oghenebrume, LSU (Sprints)
  • Colin Sahlman, Northern Arizona (Mid-Distance)

COLUMBIA, Mo. – University of Missouri volleyball head coach Dawn Sullivan rounded out her staff on Monday, July 7, with the addition of Nicki Hauser as director of player development.

Hauser heads to Mizzou with a wealth of volleyball experience as well as experience in athletic administration.

She spent the last four seasons as the director of volleyball operations at the University of Virginia following a one-year stint in the same role at North Dakota State.

While at UVA, Hauser also served as the director of operations for Steve Garland’s Cavalier wrestling program.

She also played volleyball at Southern Connecticut State University (NCAA Division II) in New Haven. Hauser was a four-year member of the Owls volleyball program, playing outside hitter/right side for SCSU from 2013-17. She also served as team captain and was a Student Athletic Advisory Committee Representative.

Hauser graduated from Southern Connecticut State in 2017 with a bachelor’s in business administration with a marketing concentration and a minor in Spanish.

She also spent a year as the graduate assistant men’s and women’s volleyball coach at Briar Cliff University in Sioux City, Iowa.

Hauser holds a master’s degree in sports management from Briar Cliff University and a master’s of leadership in sport from North Dakota State.

FOLLOW THE TIGERS

For all the latest information on Mizzou volleyball, please visit MUTigers.com. For up-to-the-minute updates, follow the Tigers on X, Instagram, and Facebook

NORTHRIDGE, Calif. – CSUN women’s volleyball head coach Aquiles Montoya has officially announced the Matadors’ 2025 schedule.

CSUN opens its 49th season of indoor women’s volleyball on Aug. 29, hosting Idaho State at Premier America Credit Union Arena. The opening match of the Ridge Invitational officially opens Montoya’s second season at the helm of the program as the Matadors host a tournament in Northridge for the first time in seven years.

The three-day season-opening tournament also features Pacific (Aug. 20) and future Big West member California Baptist (Aug. 31) coming to the San Fernando Valley.

“The Ridge Invitational will bring talented teams to the Valley and show off our student-athletes to our growing and awesome fan base,” said Montoya.

The Matadors will spend a majority of September on the road, beginning the month in Portland, where CSUN will take on Eastern Washington (Sept. 4), Colorado State (Sept. 5), and the host Pilots (Sept. 6) over the three-day Portland Invitational. A pair of trips to Fresno (Santa Clara on Sept. 11, Fresno State on Sept. 14) sandwich a home date against Lipscomb on Sept 13 at 3 p.m. before CSUN concludes non-conference play in San Francisco. The Matadors will face the host Dons on Sept. 18, before taking on San José State on Sept. 19 on the USF court.

“We will face some tough teams in Portland, Fresno State, San José State, and San Francisco, but our travel keeps us largely on the West Coast, which will be relatively easy travel and a benefit for our student-athletes,” added Montoya. “We have put together a schedule that will test this group for four weeks before Big West play starts.”

The 18-match Big West season gets underway on the road as the Matadors visit Cal Poly and UC Santa Barbara on Sept. 26-27. The Mustangs won the 2024 Big West regular season title before falling to Hawai’i in the Big West Championship match.

CSUN’s Big West home opener is scheduled for Oct. 4 against Hawai’i, the lone Big West team to reach the 2024 NCAA Tournament. A road trip to Orange County to meet Cal State Fullerton (Oct. 9) and UC Irvine (Oct. 11) follows before CSUN returns home for the second of three three-match homestands.

The Matadors host UC Riverside (Oct. 17), UC Davis (Oct. 18), and Long Beach State (Oct. 23) before closing the month of October with a road match at UC San Diego (Oct. 25) and a home match against UC Santa Barbara on Oct. 31 at 6 p.m.

The second half of the Big West season continues against Cal Poly (Nov. 1) and Cal State Bakersfield (Nov. 5) at home before the Matadors travel to Honolulu for their second match against Hawai’i (Nov. 7). Two final home matches against UC Irvine (Nov. 13) and Cal State Fullerton (Nov. 15) precede the final road trip of the regular season as CSUN travels to UC Davis (Nov. 20) and UC Riverside (Nov. 22) before the Big West Championship opens on Nov. 26.

“While we start a majority of the Big West season on the road, I love that our home stretch of Big West play is primarily at home,” added Montoya. “Once again, this will help us in a push to make the conference tournament and allow our student-athletes to be home during finals and midterms, which is always a plus. Fall can’t come soon enough!”

The third incarnation of the Big West Women’s Volleyball Championship is scheduled for Nov. 26-29 at Long Beach State’s Walter Pyramid.

#GoMatadors

James Mixon

Managing Attorney

California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District

See more…

Picture this: A law firm’s H.R. director stares puzzled at her
screen. The new AI recruitment tool consistently recommends candidates named
“Chad” or those listing water polo experience. Is the algorithm
harboring a strange affinity for aquatic athletes? No — it’s simply mirroring
patterns from the firm’s historical hiring data, where several successful
associates happened to share these traits. Absurd? Perhaps. But consider the
real-world consequences unfolding at tech giants across Silicon Valley.

In 2014, Amazon embarked on an ambitious experiment to
revolutionize hiring. Their engineering team developed 500 specialized computer
models designed to crawl through resumes, identify promising candidates, and
essentially automate recruitment. The system analyzed 50,000 terms from past
resumes, learning which patterns predicted success.

As one Amazon insider told Reuters, “They literally wanted
it to be an engine where I’m going to give you 100 resumes, it will spit out
the top five, and we’ll hire those.”

By 2015, however, Amazon discovered its AI had developed a
troubling preference: it systematically discriminated against women.

The system had been trained on a decade of Amazon’s technical
hiring data — drawn from an industry dominated by men. Like a digital
apprentice learning from a biased mentor, the AI taught itself that male
candidates were preferable. It penalized resumes containing terms like
“women’s chess club” and even downgraded graduates from women’s
colleges.

Despite engineers’ efforts to edit the programs to neutralize
these gender biases, Amazon ultimately lost confidence in the project and
disbanded it by 2017. The lesson? AI doesn’t create bias out of thin air — it
amplifies the patterns it finds, including our own historical prejudices.

Beyond hiring: How AI bias manifests in language itself

This bias extends beyond who gets hired; it permeates the very
language AI systems produce. Consider a common scenario in today’s workplace:
using AI to draft professional communications.

When asked to “write a professional job application letter
for a software engineering position,” an AI system might produce:

“Dear Sir, I am a highly motivated and results-driven
software engineer with a proven track record…”

This seemingly innocuous response contains several linguistic
biases:

1. Gendered language (“Dear Sir”): The
AI defaults to masculine salutations — reinforcing outdated gender assumptions.

2. Clichéd corporate jargon
(“results-driven,” “track record”): The model reproduces
formulaic corporate English, which may not be appropriate for all cultural or
regional job markets.

3. Erasure of identity markers: AI may strip
identity-specific phrasing or “neutralize” tone based on a biased
conception of professionalism.

Legal arguments are compromised through subtle framing

This linguistic bias becomes even more concerning in legal
settings. When asked to draft legal arguments, AI often exhibits subtle but
significant biases in framing and vocabulary.

For example, when prompted to write a legal argument that police
used excessive force, AI might default to:

“While officers are generally afforded wide discretion in
volatile situations, the suspect’s behavior may have reasonably led the officer
to believe that force was necessary. Courts often defer to the officer’s
perception of threat in fast-moving scenarios.”

This response reveals several linguistic biases unique to legal
contexts:

1. Presumptive framing: The language privileges
police perspective and uses loaded terms like “suspect,” reinforcing
law enforcement narratives.

2. Asymmetrical vocabulary: Phrases like
“wide discretion” and “volatile situations” invoke
precedent favoring police while omitting key phrases plaintiffs’ attorneys use.

3. Erasure of marginalized narratives: AI might
avoid directly addressing systemic bias or racial profiling — sanitizing the
rhetorical force of the argument.

This matters because legal rhetoric carries ideological weight —
language like “suspect,” “noncompliant,” or
“reasonable threat perception” is not neutral; it frames the facts.
This is especially dangerous in civil rights, immigration, or asylum law, where
linguistic tone and framing can shape judicial outcomes.

The stakes for California attorneys

When AI bias enters your practice, it transforms from a
technological curiosity into an ethical minefield with potential disciplinary
consequences.

If an attorney delegates routine document analysis to an AI
tool, and that system consistently flags contracts from certain demographic
groups for “additional review” based on historical patterns, the
attorney, oblivious to this algorithmic bias, could face allegations of
discriminatory business practices.

California Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 5.3
(Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistants) places the responsibility
squarely on your shoulders. This rule extends beyond traditional supervision of
human staff to encompass technological tools making decisions in your firm.

Three practical safeguards every California attorney should implement

1. Practice intentional prompting

The difference between ethical and unethical AI use often comes
down to how you frame your questions. Compare these approaches:

Problematic: “Who should we hire from these
candidates?”

Better: “Which candidates meet our specific
litigation experience requirements?”

Problematic: “What’s our best strategy for this
case?”

Better: “What procedural deadlines apply to this
employment discrimination claim in the Northern District of California?”

Train everyone in your firm to recognize that open-ended
questions invite AI to make value judgments potentially infected with bias.
Specific, factual prompts produce more objective results.

2. Implement cross-demographic testing

Before relying on AI recommendations, test how the system
responds to identical scenarios with varied demographics:

 Submit the same legal question about different clients
(corporate vs. individual, varied backgrounds)

 Compare research results for similar issues across
different California jurisdictions

 Test how client characteristics might affect case
assessment recommendations

Document these tests and address any disparities before
incorporating AI outputs into your practice.

3. Adopt the “human-in-the-loop” rule

Establish a firm policy that no AI output directly affects a
client’s matter without meaningful human review. The attorney must:

 Independently verify key AI conclusions

 Document their review process

 Take personal responsibility for the final work product

 Be able to explain the reasoning without reference to
the AI’s conclusion

This approach treats AI as a supplementary tool rather than a
decision-maker, preserving your ethical obligations while capturing
technological efficiencies.

Linguistic bias as a legal issue: Beyond ethics to liability

What makes AI linguistic bias particularly concerning is how it
intersects with existing legal frameworks:

1. Employment discrimination (Title VII): AI
recruitment systems that consistently produce gendered language in
communications or systematically disadvantage certain groups may create
disparate impact liability even absent discriminatory intent. The EEOC’s recent
guidance on AI in employment decisions specifically warns that
“neutral” automated systems can still violate federal
anti-discrimination laws through their outputs.

2. Due process and equal protection: In criminal justice
contexts, AI systems providing risk assessments or generating legal documents
with subtle language biases in favor of law enforcement may implicate
constitutional protections.

3. Legal malpractice and standard of care: As AI
adoption becomes standard practice, attorneys face evolving questions about the
standard of care. Does adequate representation now require understanding how
linguistic bias in AI-generated work product might disadvantage certain
clients?

4. Discovery and work product: Linguistic patterns
in AI-generated outputs may reveal underlying biases that could become
discoverable in litigation.

The path forward

The question isn’t whether AI will transform legal practice — it
already has. The true challenge is whether California attorneys will harness
these powerful tools while maintaining their ethical obligations.

By understanding potential AI biases, both in content and
language, and implementing proactive safeguards, you can navigate this
technological transformation without compromising your professional
responsibilities. The attorney who treats AI as an unquestioned authority
rather than a carefully supervised assistant does so at their ethical peril.

California’s legal community has always been at the forefront of
technological adoption. Now we must lead in ethical AI integration,
demonstrating that innovation and professional responsibility can advance hand
in hand. The future of our profession — and the equitable administration of
justice — depends on it.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are
solely those of the author in their personal capacity and do not reflect the
official position of the California Court of Appeal, Second District, or the
Judicial Branch of California. This article is intended to contribute to
scholarly dialogue and does not represent judicial policy or administrative
guidance.

EVANSVILLE, Ind. – University of Evansville President Christopher M. Pietruszkiewicz announced today that Dr. Kenneth “Ziggy” Siegfried, Director of Athletics, has signed a contract extension that will keep him in the role through 2030. Originally hired in the spring of 2022, Siegfried will now continue his leadership of Purple Aces Athletics under the new agreement.

“Dr. Siegfried’s leadership has transformed our athletics department and energized both our campus and the wider Evansville community,” said President Pietruszkiewicz. “I am confident in the direction he is leading us, one that prioritizes competitive excellence, elevates the student-athlete experience, and positions our Athletics programs for bold, strategic growth that reflects the spirit and ambition of our entire University.”

Since arriving at UE, Siegfried has led the development and execution of the Pathway to Excellence strategic plan, a comprehensive vision that has elevated the profile of Aces Athletics across the board.

Additionally, Siegfried oversaw what is believed to be the largest gift in UE Athletics history. In May 2024, UE alum Kyle and Ashley Freeland announced a $3 million gift that secured the future of the Freeland Clubhouse, a transformational facility that will significantly enhance the baseball program’s training and recruitment efforts. The Freeland’s philanthropy serves as a pivotal component of the Pathway to Excellence plan.

Under Siegfried’s leadership and guidance, UE student-athletes performed in the classroom, achieving the first and second highest cumulative GPAs in the history of the athletics department. In addition, the Aces have achieved notable success on the field and record-breaking engagement in the stands. Last summer, the baseball team delivered a season for the ages, capturing the Missouri Valley Conference Tournament Championship and earning its first trip to the NCAA Tournament since 2006. Their momentum did not stop there, and the Aces went on to win their NCAA Regional and advanced to the Super Regional for the first time in program history. This championship run not only captivated fans across the country but also helped drive the highest ticket and group/gate revenue in program history.

Men’s soccer returned to prominence with a Missouri Valley Conference Tournament title and an NCAA Tournament berth for the first time since 1996. The program’s success reignited campus pride and demonstrated the strength of student-athletes on a national stage. Meanwhile, men’s basketball has seen a dramatic transformation under Head Coach David Ragland. In just his second year, the program more than tripled its win total from the prior season and secured its first postseason berth in nearly a decade. It stands as one of the most remarkable turnarounds in the country. This on-court progress, paired with Siegfried’s strategic leadership, has also contributed to record-breaking attendance and renewed excitement in the stands.

Across its seventeen Division I sports, UE recorded its highest total ticket revenue in the past decade. Over a three-year period, Siegfried has also successfully hired new head coaches in men’s basketball, volleyball, men’s soccer, track and field, swim and dive, and softball.

Driving this momentum is a bold vision for the future. Siegfried has also spearheaded development of a comprehensive Athletics Facilities Master Plan which has already completed or is in the process of completing $7.6 million in capital projects. These include a $4.5 million baseball clubhouse, a $1.1 million turf softball field, a $1.2 million intramural and soccer practice field complex, enhancements to the basketball practice facilities for both men’s and women’s programs, an expanded baseball press box, and Phase I of a new Sports Performance Center.

Philanthropic support has surged under Siegfried’s tenure, contributing to a more sustainable and competitive future for all athletic programs. His leadership has not only invigorated campus pride but also strengthened the University’s bond with alumni, fans, and supporters throughout the Tri-State.

“I’m incredibly thankful to President Pietruszkiewicz, our Board of Trustees, and the entire University of Evansville community for their continued belief in our vision,” said Siegfried. “It’s been an honor to work alongside such dedicated student-athletes, coaches, and staff. I’m excited to keep building on our momentum and creating an athletics program that reflects the values and excellence of this institution.”

The University’s decision to extend Siegfried’s contract ensures a strong, stable foundation as Purple Aces Athletics continues to grow its impact locally and nationally.

Shreveport – Joshua Spivey has been named an assistant coach for the Centenary volleyball program, Director of Athletics and Recreation David Orr announced.

Spivey, a Manteca, Calif. native, joins head coach Kayla Black’s staff after coaching at California State University, Stanislaus in Turlock, Calif. He graduated from San Joaquin Delta College in Stockton, Calif. in 2019 with his AA, and then received his BA at California State University, Stanislaus in 2025. Spivey has coached at the high school and college level prior to coming to Centenary.

“I am excited to have a hard-working dedicated volleyball enthusiast join my staff,” said Black. I believe Josh will impact Centenary and the entire Shreveport-Bossier community through the sport of volleyball. His passion to help each athlete reach their full potential on and off the court is going to be dynamic and vital with restarting our program.” 

“Josh brings 10 years of high school coaching experience, five+ years of club volleyball coaching experience and two years of student assistant college coaching experience. His extensive knowledge of the sport at various levels provides a recruiting opportunity I believe this program has never had before.” 

See the complete Ladies’ 2025 season schedule here: https://gocentenary.com/sports/wvball/2025-26/schedule

#GoCentenary #CTheOpportunity