Dartmouth Cuts Men's and Women's Golf Team and Closes Golf Course

[A.G._Crockett]

This "club level" idea as an alternative to intercollegiate teams is just so simplistic.  It assumes that there is little or no cost to club level teams, and that's not true.  There are going to be coaches, there are going to be uniforms, there are going to be officials, there is going to be equipment. 

So you have two choices for the funding of a "club" team; via the athletic department either out of student fees or revenue sharing from other sports (meaning football), or user fees paid by the students themselves. The former is a cost cutting measure by removing scholarships, travel, etc., but NOT a cost elimination, and the latter makes club sports the province of students who have spare money lying around in a country where student loans now exceed credit card debt. 

And I think it's important to understand that cutting scholarships doesn't "save" what many of you are assuming that it does.  A school doesn't pay itself real dollars for a scholarship athlete; it is primarily an accounting matter.  In fact, most state universities are allowed to count out of state scholarship athletes as in state for accounting purposes so that the school can take more high tuition out of state students. 

The debate here is being framed in terms of idealism and putting the genie back in the bottle, both for college sports and youth sports, and that is not what's happening.  The Ivy League isn't going to play football this year, and the dominoes are falling.  The Big 10 has killed non-conference football games, with the ACC sure to follow, and the dominoes from THAT will not only be the non-revenue sports at those schools, but the teams that were counting on getting a couple of million buck for their athletic department for playing at Michigan or Alabama or Tennessee; more dominoes.  If there isn't ANY college football played this fall, which becomes more likely every day, club sports are likely to suffer as much as non-revenue intercollegiate sports.
As to the youth sports thing, the days where kids play sandlot baseball, or pickup basketball, or backyard football are gone forever and they ain't coming back, no matter what happens to college sports and scholarship opportunities.  As a high school coach, I lived thru the sales pitches of travel/AAU coaches about scholarships, but I'm not naive enough to believe that scholarship reductions or the elimination of entire programs are going to take us back to a simpler time in youth sports.  That ship has sailed, and it isn't coming back. Air conditioning, cell phones, cable TV and all the other options that keep kids out of parks and away from pickup sports are still in place.

I don't know what college sports and/or youth sports are going to look like coming out of this situation in which we find ourselves.  But thinking that we are likely to return to some imagined "golden age" of athletics is sort of silly, I think.  Supply meets demand, and I see no reason to believe that elite athletes (and their parents) aren't going to seek elite competition in the future.
One other note: Don Mahaffey is spot on; this idea that funding athletics is somehow different than funding the arts, or music, or drama, or a host of other pursuits at the university level isn't justifiable.  We can argue about proportionality, I suppose, but all the way back to the Greeks, intelligent people have understood that athletic excellence is to be valued and that athletic participation is of value. It is insufferably elitist to believe that a university should fund the arts, but not athletics.

[Paul Jones]

And perhaps youth sports could return to a reasonable perspective(OK now I'm reaching)

or just be a kid and play video games/text whatever.

Jeff-Do you really think that playing video games and texting is the alternative to youth sports? I for one would disagree.

Tim,
How are you doing buddy?  I hope well.
I'll keep this short, as I recall your preference. I think kids should have time to spend however they want (that doesn't do themselves or others harm). When I grew up it wasn't structured youth sports every day of the summer. I doubt yours was either. It was self organized activity.  Some of that time was with the Atari/Nintendo, some was spent on the phone talking to girls. Church camps, or quite a bit was just neighborhood kids playing kick the can, whiffle ball, reading, doing chores. Yeah, the last one we all probably remember having to do chores. Me, my brother and sister were the cleaning lady, lawn crew, laundromat or whatever was needed. I think just about all my friends and family growing up had significant chores to do, I believe we were better for it in the end, although at the time we probably didn't want to do it.

Question then to you Tim.  Do you think youth sports should be the only activity children should participate in and unless pursued the alternatives are deemed no value? I, one of many I'm sure, would disagree.

Jeff,


You make a great point.  I have always told my kids that if they play a team sport, I will not limit their electronics after chores and homework is completed.  Just to be clear, my kids were never "1st String" players, so no dreams of college sports.  My kids are now 16 and 18 and both have summer jobs, so they only have to do chores on days they do not work and sleep at home.

[Kalen Braley]

AG,

I think your last post is pretty spot on, but I would like to offer one point of clarification on the actual cost of club sports. My daughter just completed 4 years of club sport participation.

She played club lacrosse with uniforms, jackets, gear, 4 coaches, trainer, practice fields and traveled all over the Western US playing various tournaments... and the girls paid for all of it.  As a % of tuition, fees, books, and living costs, it worked out to about 10% additional per year. Compared to the skyrocketing costs that colleges keep increasing year over year, (much faster than the rates of inflation), it was a great and relatively affordable add on to her college experience and she absolutely loved it!

[A.G._Crockett]

AG,

I think your last post is pretty spot on, but I would like to offer one point of clarification on the actual cost of club sports. My daughter just completed 4 years of club sport participation.

She played club lacrosse with uniforms, jackets, gear, 4 coaches, trainer, practice fields and traveled all over the Western US playing various tournaments... and the girls paid for all of it.  As a % of tuition, fees, books, and living costs, it worked out to about 10% additional per year. Compared to the skyrocketing costs that colleges keep increasing year over year, (much faster than the rates of inflation), it was a great and relatively affordable add on to her college experience and she absolutely loved it!

Kalen,
I think you have made my point about who could participate in a club sport if the cost were paid from user fees.  10% of a big number is still a big number, and the kids that are borrowing the money to go to that school, or are getting heavy financial aid to go to that school, or whose families are squeezing every nickel to send their kid to that school, or who aren't at that school in the first place for financial reasons would be excluded.  You might not think that's bad, but that's the reality.
You won't have to search google very hard to find articles about the small number of African Americans in professional baseball today compared to the years after Jackie Robinson up to sometime in the 90's.  The difference is that baseball has become a user fee sport, in which travel teams with kids paying thousands a year are the only game in town.  User fees make sports exclusive, and the better the equipment, coaching, travel, etc., like your daughter's experience, or my son's experience with travel baseball, the more exclusive it becomes.  Some may not consider that a problem; I do.

[Jeff Schley]

As a % of tuition, fees, books, and living costs, it worked out to about 10% additional per year. Compared to the skyrocketing costs that colleges keep increasing year over year, (much faster than the rates of inflation), it was a great and relatively affordable add on to her college experience and she absolutely loved it!

Kalen you are correct. I have a project at work where these figures were needed. Since 1972, using the Bureau of Labor and Collegeboard trends in college pricing statistics we have:

CPI (inflation) = 3.9%
Avg increase in cost of tuition private schools = 6.5%
Avg increase in cost of tuition public schools = 6.9%

So yes college tuition increases 2.6-3.0% higher each year on average MORE than CPI.  However, I can say that the increase has slowed the last 8 years to between .5% and 2.6% over CPI.

[Kalen Braley]

AG,

I understand your point on additional costs, its very valid. However club sports are entirely optional, so for a kid who is just barely trying to cover tuition, I would hope priorities/expectations are set accordingly.  We're all told or realize sooner or later that we can no longer play organized sports and for most that's already going to end after high school. 

That being said, my daughter was good enough to play at the NCAA D2 and D3 level.  Given that she also had good grades, she was offered several academic/playing 4-year scholarships but they were small and fairly remote schools, mostly in the Eastern part of the country.  She wanted to stay closer to home and go to a large school with her friends, so she made her choice.

As for baseball, I know at least out West, traditional Little League is still widely available, even if optional traveling teams exist too.

P.S.  I fully understand inequities exist for most people on several levels in life, but fixing this on the Sports level is fairly far down the list as I see it.  What I don't understand is how schools stock pile massive endowments with an unwritten rule of being miserly to use if any of it all.

[Sean_A]

As a % of tuition, fees, books, and living costs, it worked out to about 10% additional per year. Compared to the skyrocketing costs that colleges keep increasing year over year, (much faster than the rates of inflation), it was a great and relatively affordable add on to her college experience and she absolutely loved it!

Kalen you are correct. I have a project at work where these figures were needed. Since 1972, using the Bureau of Labor and Collegeboard trends in college pricing statistics we have:

CPI (inflation) = 3.9%
Avg increase in cost of tuition private schools = 6.5%
Avg increase in cost of tuition public schools = 6.9%

So yes college tuition increases 2.6-3.0% higher each year on average MORE than CPI.  However, I can say that the increase has slowed the last 8 years to between .5% and 2.6% over CPI.

I don't know about other universities, but UofM went from about $3000 (I think it was the most expensive public university tuition) in 1980ish to $15,000 in 2020. I graduated with with about 1 year worth of tuition debt.  I shudder to think the debt kids these days take on.

Ciao

[JESII]

P.S.  I fully understand inequities exist for most people on several levels in life, but fixing this on the Sports level is fairly far down the list as I see it. 

Interesting. 


Maybe I'm just an argumentative dick, but it would seem to me that youth sports would be a manageable place to try to eliminate inequities...and if so, perhaps a foundation for other areas.








Jeff Schley,


Why wouldn't the 6.9% annual trend in public university tuition be a 77% increase over CPI?   Stating it as 2.6% to 3% certainly doesn't tell the story...

[Kalen Braley]

P.S.  I fully understand inequities exist for most people on several levels in life, but fixing this on the Sports level is fairly far down the list as I see it. 

Interesting. 

Maybe I'm just an argumentative dick, but it would seem to me that youth sports would be a manageable place to try to eliminate inequities...and if so, perhaps a foundation for other areas.

Jim,


I know college kids are young compared to you and I, but they are legal adults and I would not classify college sports as Youth Sports.  Either way, I'd think helping to get a 4 year degree in the hands of poor and under privileged kids would be a far bigger life changer and priority than playing a club sport..

[Jeff Schley]

This "club level" idea as an alternative to intercollegiate teams is just so simplistic.  It assumes that there is little or no cost to club level teams, and that's not true.  There are going to be coaches, there are going to be uniforms, there are going to be officials, there is going to be equipment. 

So you have two choices for the funding of a "club" team; via the athletic department either out of student fees or revenue sharing from other sports (meaning football), or user fees paid by the students themselves. The former is a cost cutting measure by removing scholarships, travel, etc., but NOT a cost elimination, and the latter makes club sports the province of students who have spare money lying around in a country where student loans now exceed credit card debt. 

AG you have a lot there, but to concentrate on one aspect the Athletic Department doesn't fund club sports at colleges. They are primarily funded by the students themselves, sans a small amount of support given by the university out of "student fees" or "recreation fees".  Some don't even have a coach, but a student/coach. A co-worker's son plays a club sport, Lacrosse, at Gonzaga (good player too). They get small support $3-5k a year for the entire team to buy whatever (unis, tournaments, etc.) however it never covers everything. He estimates he has to kick in another $1k or so himself to participate.


I don't think club sports are anywhere near the financial burden of intercollegiate athletics and should be more commonplace. We are seeing the titanic shift already and doubt once started it will reverse anytime soon.

BTW we shouldn't confuse club sports, with intramurals. In club sports you play other colleges, for intramurals you play against your own student body, basically just for pure fun no skill required.

[JESII]

P.S.  I fully understand inequities exist for most people on several levels in life, but fixing this on the Sports level is fairly far down the list as I see it. 

Interesting. 

Maybe I'm just an argumentative dick, but it would seem to me that youth sports would be a manageable place to try to eliminate inequities...and if so, perhaps a foundation for other areas.

Jim,


I know college kids are young compared to you and I, but they are legal adults and I would not classify college sports as Youth Sports.  Either way, I'd think helping to get a 4 year degree in the hands of poor and under privileged kids would be a far bigger life changer and priority than playing a club sport..

You're right...when I saw Club, I thought of the "Club" process that I'm currently dealing with for two of my 7th and 9th grade kids.

[Jeff Schley]

Jeff Schley,


Why wouldn't the 6.9% annual trend in public university tuition be a 77% increase over CPI?   Stating it as 2.6% to 3% certainly doesn't tell the story...

Jim,
The 6.9% avg. increase in public tuition is separate from the 3.9% CPI increase.  Thus the delta is 3.0% per year of tuition increase above CPI.  Is that what you mean?  You can email me and I can send you the spreadsheet btw.

BTW for Sean's inquiry about cost.  Here is the absolute cost.

• 1972 private: $1950
• 1972 public: $500
• 2019 private: $36,880
• 2019 public: $10,440

EDIT: the above $ are average tuition per year, certainly some are higher than lower.
EDIT/EDIT: Important to note is the ratio in the average is fairly firm from 25% public/private in 1972 to 28% in 2019.

[Kalen Braley]

Makes sense Jim,

They call that club too so it can get confusing.  Even moreso, they have the Womens Club Lacrosse Association at the college level, with D1 and D2, not to be confused with the NCAA governed levels.   

Jeff,

Good points.  My daughters team has tryouts and this past year about half of them didn't make it.   But then again, Utah is consistently rated near the top of the WCLA rankings and they were really hitting on all cylinders this year before it was cut short.