Fall 2002
Articles
- Purposeful Planning:
A Model for Student
Affairs Practitioners
- Finding Funding in
Lean Times
- Honors Student Development
- Understanding Moral Development
From The Field
Book Reviews
Creating a Set of Assessment Standards to Help Division III Institutions Make the Choice Between Having and Not Having a Football Program: A Liberal Perspective
Michael Fulford, Georgia State University
The Problem
What’s the difference between $1,579,800 and $975,600? Football. These are the total operating expenses for Division III athletic programs with and without football respectively in 1999 (NCAA, 1999). The fact that the National Collegiate Athletic Association divides these statistics by football program schools and those without such programs says much about the financial impact the sport has or can have on an institution’s athletic department. What is so significant about football at a Division III institution? That is the question that these institutions have to answer. The decision of whether or not to field a football team at a Division III institution can be tricky. There are many factors that athletic directors, presidents, and administrators have to consider when making such a potentially expensive decision. Assessing these factors at their particular institution in an objective manner can be difficult as well.
There are some schools that felt they would benefit from football who have closed their program and some that might benefit, but never fielded a team due to fear of losing money or some other philosophical issue. Most Division III institutions lack the resources to truly assess the net effect football would have on their institution and sometimes they are not sure exactly how to assess the factors used in deciding whether or not to carry a football team. Some of these factors are financial impact, relation to the institute’s mission, enrollment strategies, effect on campus life, equality within in the athletic department, and the political climate. Being able to objectively analyze these factors can be important to the deciding on whether or not to field a football team.
For instance, Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania, just recently dropped its football program. It also dropped the wrestling and women’s badminton programs, but you would never know by all the discussion and literature. The focus of the discussion was primarily on football. With the exception of maybe baseball, basketball and hockey in the north, few sports create as much of a political and emotional stir as football programs. At Swarthmore, once the decision was made, instantly there was speculation of secret meetings, exclusive decision-making by the administration, and a wave of alumni threatening to pull their financial support. It can be inferred that if the wrestling and women’s badminton team were being removed without the football team included, there would probably not be quite as much backlash.
Addressing the Problem
To understand how to address this issue, one must first understand what we will try to assess. As stated in the problem section, some of key factors involved in deciding whether or not to field a football team are as follows:
- Financial Impact
- Distribution of Resources to All Intercollegiate Sports
- Relation to the Institute’s Mission
- Enrollment Impact
- Effect on Campus Life
- Political Climate at the Institution and within its Community
Understanding how the football program is related to these areas is important to making a good decision about the future of the program. Athletic departments can take a liberal stance to defend its programs. For instance, a liberal perspective would show not just the direct, but the indirect effects the program has on the institution. These correlations are important to justifying the validity of the program to other administrators and members of the institution. The following sections will define each of these areas and how they relate to the football program at an institution.
Financial Impact
As stated earlier, football accounts for the largest percent of expense for Division III athletic programs. Its only close rival would be ice hockey at some northern institutions. This can create a level of inequality and animosity among the various sports at an institution. Football programs call for a larger amount of equipment, personnel, and student involvement than some of the lesser resource intensive sports. For example, to have a football team would require at least 22 players who played offense, defense, and special teams. The coaching staff would generally consist of a head coach, position coaches who doubled as coordinators for offense and defense, and maybe some other specialty assistants. Each player requires a certain amount of equipment (shoulder pads, helmets, other pads, uniforms, etc. There is also equipment for the game such as water coolers, tees, towels, shoes, and various communications equipment. Football also generally demands a field and stadium, weight rooms, and medical personnel/trainers and their equipment.
Compare these needs to basketball, one of the other high profile sports at an institution. Basketball requires at least five players, one or two coaches, basketballs and a gym. They also require uniforms, trainers, towels, etc., but not at the level a football team requires. There are also many incidental expenses, which begin to add up as well. The only real expenditure that Division III institutions don’t incur in relation to their counterparts in other divisions is scholarships, which account for a very large expense line at Division I schools.
On the revenue side, there is very few direct streams of money coming into Division III programs. Unlike their Division I counterparts, gate receipts are very small, concessions are minimal and require making more than total expenditures, and generally donations go towards non-operating, but certainly helpful additional expenditures. The true indirect measurement of revenue at Division III institutions is tuition dollars that can be attributed to student-athletes. If a school has a football program, from a liberal perspective, it can be said that the fact that these students have come there to play football brings money to the university.
The argument can be made for football programs that indirectly, tuition revenue increases due to the fact that students will come to the college to play football. If an athletic department shows that its players would not have come to the institution if they couldn’t play football, then it has strong evidence to support the need for the program. From a financial standpoint, this argument can be very powerful for proponents of the football program. Unfortunately, this can be a dangerous question to ask because if the answer is not favorable to athletic department, it find itself scrambling for answers.
There are two questions that have to be answered in order to make this correlation. First, did the students who are playing football come there primarily to play football or to be a student at the institution? Secondly, what percentage of their tuition can truly be matched with the expenses associated with their participation on the football team? Answering these two questions concerning revenue stream can be a very important factor in deciding the true financial impact of the football program.
Distribution of Resources to Other Sports
Related to financial impact on the school is the ability to maintain equality among all sports programs in the athletic department. There are numerous stories from institutions where one or two sports seem to get all the resources or get special treatment while a lesser known, and generally female sport, gets less attention and money. One important question to ask regarding resources is whether or not the institution will be able to maintain the level of other sports at the institution as well as the football program. Swarthmore College decided that football was using too many resources to maintain equality and allow other sports to thrive. They cited this as one of the major reasons for cutting the football program. There are also policies within the NCAA that require having an equal number of male and female sports. One positive twist that proponents of the football program can look to is how football helps in recruiting for other sports. In Philadelphia Inquirer article concerning the closing of Swarthmore’s program, Mike Jensen writes, “However, a number of coaches of sports that survived have said that they are concerned about their ability to recruit athletes after the cuts. Some current athletes have said that they will no longer help in recruiting (Jensen, 2001).” Testimonies such as this one can be of help when making decisions about removing the football program.
Proponents of football programs have to scrutinize and be very critical when looking at this factor. A liberal perspective allows one to use the argument of positive indirect impact on the institution financially. Using this argument can also backfire if the there is a huge gap between the football programs resources and cultural capital when compared with other sports. It is important to understand how having a football program will effect these types of requirements as well.
Institutional Mission
It is always important to analyze the addition or subtraction of programs in relation to its effect on the mission of the institution. Most Division III institutions have rigorous academic programs and deciding how athletics fits into that mission is very important to deciding the future of programs at an institution. For instance, Swarthmore College states that their primary reason for discontinuing their football program was to decrease the percentage of students who are student-athletes. Their claim is that there needed to be a focus on the academic program at the institution and have their percentage of students reflect that value.
Assessing the mission of an institution should generally be one of the first steps in assessing the role of a program in the lives of students. Football programs can be a large complement to the academic program and the mission of the institution. Once again, there may be few direct effects, but the importance of finding the long term indirect net effects can outweigh the short-term setbacks. A liberal perspective can allow the proponents of the football program to look at this long-term impact and effect and make a strong argument for the future of the program. One question that is constantly asked in these discussions is how will a football team complement and support the academic mission of the college. Answering this question is vital to making a decision about keeping or adding a football program.
Enrollment Impact
As discussed earlier, enrollment increases and tuition revenue can be shown to have an indirect correlation to having a football program. Another question is what impact does a football program have on the enrollment of an institution outside of the actual students who play on the team. Once again, this sort of indirect impact can be a strong argument for a football program’s existence. There are two questions to look at regarding this factor. First, do students who are recruited for another sport come there with the thought that they may have an opportunity to play football as well? Secondly, do non student-athletes consider whether or not an institution has football when they are choosing a college? Enrollment has such a major financial and philosophical impact on an institution that it is imperative that administrators looking at these factors when making a decision concerning a football program.
Effect on Campus Life
What does it mean to the campus community to have a football program? There are varied positive and negative aspects of including a football program in the campus life of an institution. Social events and community building activities are built around football programs such as homecoming, parties, and pep rallies. If a team is doing well, students may come to the games to cheer on their team and show pride in their institution.
Some of the potential negative aspects of having a football program are related to behavior. Generally, many of the policy violations and vandalism that happens at schools involves male students. In many cases, these incidents involve male athletes. Adding a football program can potentially lead to an increase in policy violations and negative events within the community.
Taking a liberal perspective concerning the effects of a football program on campus life can be positive or negative. A football program can show that it has a positive impact on the institution if students are happy about being at an institution and take pride in the school because of the athletic events and those events surrounding athletics. However, if it is shown there is a direct or indirect negative impact, a program may come under scrutiny using the very same perspective. Therefore, it is important for administrators to make preparations and create policies that would address some of these negative impacts to help maintain a positive image.
It is important to maintain a strong knowledge of the pulse of the student body and look at how factors related to campus life will be affected by the addition or subtraction of a football program.
Political Climate at the Institution and Within the Campus Community
The politics of an institution can have a large effect on any decision. The effect of politics on athletics can create dangerous waters for administrators. Athletic programs account for a large percentage of the male enrollment at Division III institutions. This can mean that many of the school’s donors will have been a part of the athletic department and specifically the football program. Understanding the politics within the campus community is important to understanding how decisions might be viewed among alumni and other influential members of the community.
For instance, after the decision to close the football program was made official at Swarthmore College, there was a backlash from members of the alumni and the campus community. Members of the campus community made accusations that the President held secret meetings and made decisions without considering the position of the alumni. The football program was important to many people within the campus community. Candlelight vigils were held, the coaches spoke against the decision, donors threatened to pull money and not support the institution any longer. These are all very difficult situations to deal with when a decision of this magnitude is made. A couple of questions need to be answered concerning the politics of the campus. First, what is the political climate and influence within the institution and its alumni in regards to football? Secondly, how will the backlash be addressed? These are a couple of broad questions that begin to help a decision maker understand what may happen when a decision of this magnitude is made.
Conclusion
Understanding these factors and how they relate to an institution are vital to making a good decision concerning adding or subtracting a football program. Maintaining a high level of objectivity and being able to defend a decision with solid evidence allows administrators to have a strong foundation from which to discuss their decision with constituents of the institution.
Taking a liberal perspective when assessing a football program can be a benefit for justifying its importance. A liberal perspective takes in to account indirect factors and long-term equalizing effects. This type of perspective allows administrators to look at the program from a big picture perspective and doesn’t focus solely on some of the negative fiscal issues such as the high expenses and large resource use. There is a need within Division III institutions for reform within intercollegiate athletics. Addressing this issue carefully and with enough information is important, but addressing it with the right perspective is just as vital to making the right decision.
References
Andre, J. & James, D. (1991). Rethinking College Athletics.
Brown, J.D. (1968). Liberal University: An Institutional Analysis.
Breneman, D. (1994). Liberal Arts Colleges: Thriving, Surviving, or Endangered?
Duderstadt, J.J. (2000). Intercollegiate Athletics and the American University: A University President’s Perspective.
Frey, J. (1982). Governance of Intercollegiate Athletics.
Jensen, M. (2001). “Swarthmore Board Stands Firm.” The Philadelphia Inquirer. Jan. 5, 2001.
Knight Foundation Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics. (1993). Reports of the Knight Foundation Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics.
Millett, J.D. (1992). Financing Higher Education in the United States.
National Collegiate Athletic Association. (1999). 1999 Revenues and Expenditures for Division III Institutions. www.ncaa.org.
National Committee to Revise Volumes I and II, College and University Business Administration. (1968). College and University Business Administration.
|
|
 |