Integrity of the Game vs. Economic Impact · Research Survey

Oklahoma Youth Baseball & Softball Survey — Initial Results

An interactive exploratory analysis of experienced stakeholder responses concerning recreational access, travel/select dependence, public-facility accountability, Little League confidence, rule enforcement, and community-based growth.

11 substantive responses49 survey questionsAug. 21–26, 2026Exploratory stakeholder sample
TAKE THE SURVEY

Survey Scorecards

Each scorecard animates from zero to its measured endpoint when it enters the screen. Percentages are based on the 11 substantive responses in the current survey export.

Sample
0
Substantive survey responses analyzed
Affordable local opportunity
0
Rated community recreational access 4 or 5 in importance
Travel/select dependence
0
Agree or strongly agree Oklahoma is too dependent on the travel/select model
Public transparency
0
Say public-facility users should disclose basic participation, fee, finance and governance information
Rule enforcement
0
Rated consistent eligibility and tournament-rule enforcement highly important
Independent oversight
0
Rated independent oversight 4 or 5 when allegations involve rule-enforcing administrators
New community leagues
0
Agree or strongly agree Oklahoma would benefit from coordinated community-league expansion
Explore new charters
0
Support exploring new Little League charters where community interest exists
Interpretation boundary: these results describe this initial respondent group. They should not be presented as a statistically representative estimate of all Oklahoma families or all Oklahoma youth-sports participants.

Interactive Results Explorer

Select a topic to focus the chart display. The underlying percentages remain tied to the current 11-response dataset.

Governance & Rule-Enforcement Consensus

Share of respondents expressing the indicated high-support position.
Consistent rule enforcement rated 4–5
100%
Unequal enforcement significantly harms confidence
100%
Same rules should generally apply to all leagues
100%
Independent oversight rated 4–5
100%
Public-facility disclosure requirement — Yes
90.9%

Confidence Gap

Mean confidence on a 10-point scale.
0Overall structure of Oklahoma youth baseball/softball
0Oklahoma Little League
All 11 respondents rated Oklahoma Little League at 3/10 or lower; seven selected 1/10. This is a sample-specific finding, not a statewide population estimate.

Community-Based Opportunity

Support for access and coordinated growth.
Affordable community opportunity rated 4–5
90.9%
Additional community leagues — agree/strongly agree
81.8%
Explore new Little League charters — Yes
90.9%
Statewide discussion — Yes/Maybe
100%

Are Accessible Recreational Opportunities Sufficient?

Question 31 shows a divided, geographically sensitive picture.
Yes
27.3%
No
36.4%
Depends on part of Oklahoma
27.3%
Unsure
9.1%

Little League: Current Confidence vs. Future Openness

The survey distinguishes dissatisfaction with the current Oklahoma structure from support for the community-based model.
Support properly operated local Little League — definitely/probably yes
90.9%
Could grow with strong leadership/support — definitely/probably
81.8%
Explore new charters — Yes
90.9%
Current mean Oklahoma Little League confidence
1.64/10

Growth Support

Respondents repeatedly favored community recruitment, charter assistance, transparency, accountability, and consistent enforcement.
81.8%
81.8% definitely/probably believe Little League could grow with strong local leadership and organizational support.18.2% selected maybe/probably not.

Travel/Select Model

Question 9 — agreement that Oklahoma youth baseball/softball has become too dependent on travel/select tournaments.
Strongly agree
54.5%
Agree
27.3%
Neither
18.2%
Disagree / strongly disagree
0%

Financial Cost as a Direct Participation Barrier

Question 10 — whether costs prevented or discouraged respondent's family or a personally known family from participation.
27.3%
3 of 11 answered Yes.8 of 11 answered No.This does not mean families consider costs unimportant; other questions identify fees, travel, hotels, equipment and training as perceived barriers.

What the Initial Data Suggests

The strongest interpretation is not simply “travel baseball is bad” or “respondents want Little League.” The responses point to a more complex governance and market structure.

A Missing Competitive Middle

Several respondents described a structural gap between traditional recreation and high-cost/select competition. The recurring concept is a competitive community-based tier that preserves local access without requiring families to abandon competitive development.

Confidence Is Conditional

Respondents report very low confidence in Oklahoma Little League while simultaneously expressing strong support for properly operated local Little League programs, new charters, transparency, and consistent rules.

Public Facilities Matter

Facility access, availability, condition, municipal partnerships, and disclosure by organizations using public fields repeatedly appear in both quantitative and open-ended responses.

Rules Drive Institutional Trust

Every respondent rated consistent rule enforcement and independent oversight highly. The survey supports a broad governance conclusion about trust, not proof of any individual allegation.

Geography Matters

Respondents do not uniformly say Oklahoma lacks recreational baseball everywhere. Results instead suggest local differences in facilities, league availability, boundaries, awareness, and organizational capacity.

Experienced Stakeholder Sample

Ten of 11 respondents report six or more years of family involvement, and all 11 report being very familiar with Little League. This gives the sample depth of experience but increases issue-awareness and selection-bias concerns.

Respondent Voice

Selected short themes from open-ended responses illustrate recurring ideas. These statements are respondent perceptions and are not presented as independently verified facts.

Competitive structure“Lack of a middle ground between travel teams and rec teams. Competitive rec is needed.”
Facilities“More field time available. There are zero fields available.”
Community growth“Awareness, community sponsorship, and more involvement.”
Development“Too much focus on winning, not on development and life lesson accountability.”

Methodology & Publication Guardrails

These controls are essential if the survey is used in public-policy, academic, congressional, municipal, or youth-sports governance discussions.

What the current survey can support

  • Descriptive statistics for the 11 current respondents.
  • Identification of recurring themes among experienced northeastern Oklahoma stakeholders.
  • Exploratory hypotheses concerning recreational access, travel/select dependence, facilities, leadership, transparency and rules.
  • A basis for expanding the instrument into a larger statewide sample while preserving the existing 49-question structure for comparability.

What it cannot yet establish

  • Statewide prevalence among all Oklahoma youth-sports families.
  • A statistically representative statewide confidence score.
  • Independent proof that any named person, league, administrator or organization violated a rule or law.
  • Causal proof that travel/select baseball caused recreational decline or that any single reform would reverse it.
Sample concentration: 7 of 11 respondents identified Tulsa County; the remaining responses are also concentrated in northeastern Oklahoma. Ten of 11 respondents describe metropolitan or suburban communities, with only one rural response.
TAKE THE SURVEY
Baseball Heaven Research
Oklahoma Youth Baseball & Softball Survey — Initial Exploratory Results · Current analyzed response window: August 21–26, 2026. Percentages may not total 100% in multi-select questions. Findings should be updated as additional responses are collected.