Summary of Georgia COIA Meeting May-June 08
COIA meeting 
University of Georgia 
May 30-June 1, 2008 

Discussion of the COIA draft document outlining a rating system for NCAA 
Division IA schools: 

Professor Marie Hardin and COIA rep John Nichols of Penn State will be working with COIA on the preparation of a system that will rate schools on their athletic policies and procedures with respect to how well they integrate athletics into academics. They will be working through the Curly Center for Sports Journalism at Penn State, which will handle data collection and analysis. They will be doing a thorough literature search before undertaking the project. The work will be used in the preparation of scholarly work, but COIA will ultimately determine the nature and specifics of the questionnaire, and has ownership of the project. 

Breakout groups stressed the importance of preparing a pilot survey to be administered to a subset of institutions, perhaps only COIA members, to refine the questions. 

Guest speakers: 

Brit Kirwan, Knight Commission co-chair and Chancellor of the University of Maryland, spoke of his support for the COIA initiatives outlined in the Framing the Future document. He addressed the importance of the NCAA enforcement of penalties for those schools that with teams that have received APR scores below 925. This year, 70% of the Division I teams below 925 cut-off score received an exemption or waiver, and did not receive penalties. He also discussed athletic expenditures, which he said are out of control. While there is a myth that not only are athletics self-supporting, but that they generate income for schools, of the 119 schools in division IA, only 19 had a net surplus in 2006-07 (and only 6 generated a net surplus over the past 5 years). The average annual deficit was $9 million. This only includes operating costs, not capital expenditures. From 2004-2006 there was an increase of 23% in athletic budgets, while academic budgets increased only 8%. Coaches’ compensation packages are now on par with those of the pros. COIA needs to work with university presidents, perhaps through the Knight Commission, to bring about athletic reform. 

Myles Brand, President, NCAA, stated that academic reform is headed in the right direction. The APR scores in football and basketball are up 12 and 11 points, respectively. One-third of DI schools received penalties in terms of a loss of scholarship. 
If those teams remain under 925 next year they could potentially lose the opportunity to participate in post-season play. And if they do not improve by the third year, all of the teams in the entire athletic program will not be able to participate in post-season play. 
Many of the schools that did not fare well in the APR and received sanctions are resource-starved institutions, unable to invest as much money into athletics. However, to improve academic support services for athletes and to meet APR goals, more resources will need to be shifted from the general operating budget to athletics. Schools that showed significant improvement and that had a good plan for further improvement were granted waivers. The point is not to penalize, but to move schools in the right direction. Faculty can have the greatest impact on athletics reform by ensuring transparency and input in athletic budgets. The strength of COIA is in being a grass-roots organization and in finding ways to become informed and work within the campus administration. 

Dutch Baughman, Executive Director of the D1A Athletic Director’s Association discussed the role of his organization. It is not under the umbrella of the NCAA, but works closely with the NCAA. They have created an institute for training of senior level associate athletic directors. They help presidents in the search for ADs. They have worked with the NCAA on increasing the number of minority coaches. He also discussed his concern that it is difficult for the NCAA to collect and compare fiscal data from institutions, since each has its own method of bookkeeping. He feels the biggest challenge facing ADs today comes from the pressures brought to bear by various stakeholder groups. He suggested that COIA meet with the Division IA ADs in March or April of this year to discuss areas of shared concern. 

BCS Panel Participants: 

Dutch Baughman- Executive Director of the Division IA Athletic Directors 

Association 

Malcom Moran – Knight Chair in Sports Journalism, Penn State 

Myles Brand – President, NCAA 

Moderator – Joe Kartaba, University of Houston 

Panel discussion: How the BCS came about was discussed. During the early 90’s conferences were re-aligning. The previously dominant SW conference was breaking apart. People who ran the major bowls saw the push for play- off games as a threat. The current bowl series came about in 1998. The BCS was an attempt to get the #1 and #2 schools to play in a bowl at the end of the season, to determine a national champion. The decision wasn’t just about money, but was about the desire for the bowls to remain relevant. The six top BCS conferences are guaranteed slots, and there are four at large slots. The at large slots most often go to the BCS schools. In its first 8 years, no non-BCS school played in a bowl game. Non BCS schools resented being labeled a “non”. Being a non-BCS school affected applications, ticket sales. 

According to Myles Brand, the real issue is the growing disparity of resources in football. In the last year, non-equity schools had revenue of $4.8 million/year, expenses $5.4 million per year. Equity schools had revenue of $23.2 million/year, and expenses $13.9 million/year (earning ~$10 million/year). Football in the equity schools supports the other 
sports. But even within the equity schools, from top to bottom, there are huge discrepancies. In the last year, only 19 schools made a profit in athletics; only 6 schools over 5 years have consistently made a profit. 

In the coming year: 

Ranking system: COIA will work with the Curly Center for Sports Journalism on a pilot survey as the first step towards the goal of developing a system that measures how well division IA institutions integrate athletics into academics. 

Membership drive: We need more members to have more leverage. Only 56 of the 115 DIA schools that have senates are COIA members (No senate for service academies and BYU). Invite prospective members to attend the COIA meeting as a means of seeing who we are. Emphasize the opportunity COIA provides to participate in the discussion on intercollegiate athletics. Stress that we recognize the diversity among schools, and that each can determine how COIAs recommendations fit at the institution. Each institution has a different culture, but we share common goals. The white paper has given faculty leverage to move their institution in the right direction. 

We need to stress to other schools that the only way to control athletics is through faculty governance. Even schools that feel they have no problems can be a part of the conversation by serving as models for other schools. COIA offers schools an opportunity to participate in reform. We have established a series of guidelines for best practices, recognizing the differences between institutions. Issues we are concerned with include admissions, athletic welfare and education, and fiscal responsibility. 

Preparation of by-laws: As a part of their consideration in joining COIA, several schools have asked to see the by-laws of the organization. In light of the upcoming membership drive, by-laws should be prepared. Gary Engstrand (Minnesota) has agreed to work on a first draft of the by-laws. The by-laws will then have to be adopted by the member senates. 

COIA GOVERNANCE: Professor Virginia Shepherd (Vanderbilt) stepped down as 
COIA co-chair at the end of the meeting. The entire membership acknowledged and was deeply thankful for her hard work and dedication during the nearly 4 years she was co-chair. The current COIA co-chairs are now Professor Carole Browne (Wake Forest), Professor Nathan Tublitz (Oregon), and Professor Joe Kotarba (Houston), the latter of whom kindly agreed to transition into this position as Professor Tublitz phases out of this role at the beginning of next year.