|
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.
|
