LFN: The Financial Crunch Around the Pariot League

[Lehigh Football Nation]

http://lehighfootballnation.blogspot.com/2009/04/financial-crunch-around-patriot-league.html


If you blinked, you might have missed it: a tiny blurb at the end of a Morning Call article about "Kutztown boots soccer, sinks swimming teams". But the harsh realities of the credit crunch and Depression 2.0 finally hit home at Lehigh athletics in a measurable way:

Other area college officials contacted by The Morning Call said they know of no plans to cut sports teams.

Lehigh University, however, is trimming its athletic budget, spokeswoman Linda Harbrecht said.

''In response to the current economic climate, Lehigh is making reductions in total spending -- including the budgets that support the sports program -- in an effort to ensure that sufficient financial aid resources are available for current and future students,'' she said.

I think this is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of financial cutbacks at different schools, and not just around the Patriot League.

Bad news for Fordham's push for scholarships. If only it can be phased in, perhaps over two or three years...

[Ivytalk]

There goes the chartered jet to Easton!:p

[danefan]

the SUNY schools are taking a budget hit in overall budget which will likely result in reductions to athletic budgets also. Albany got hit with a 14% reduction that has been said will be shared proporationally across programs.

Whether that means each sport will get cut 14% or whether the AD will make some "executive decisions" to reduce spending on certain sports is yet to be seen.

[carney2]

http://lehighfootballnation.blogspot.com/2009/04/financial-crunch-around-patriot-league.html



I think this is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of financial cutbacks at different schools, and not just around the Patriot League.

Bad news for Fordham's push for scholarships. If only it can be phased in, perhaps over two or three years...

Same scenario at Lafayette with athletic budgets apparently under attack. As if we needed more bad news, the Lafayette Board of Trustees was totally occupied with budget issues at their meeting a few days ago. The topic of football scholarships was not broached. There appears to be no movement on this issue and things look bleak.

[Ken_Z]

Bucknell: no specifics on athletics, but you can bet they are included in the belt tightening:

We are planning a budget for fiscal 2010 that will strategically reduce departmental operating expenses by five percent to ten percent. We have not implemented an “across-the-board” approach but have held detailed discussions with individual departments to identify how to best reduce expenses where possible. The Offices of the Provost and Vice President for Finance and Administration have been working with every program and department manager to attain this objective.

http://www.bucknell.edu/x48840.xml

[Fordham]

Interesting ... certainly not surprising given the economy. Although I haven't heard any specifics, I would have to imagine that we're dealing with similar overall cuts.

Without re-hashing (ad nauseum) the discussions over costs associated with a switch to scholarships, I wonder what you guys think your coaches would say about this.

Further, let's say your program is currently (hypothetically) spending $3.3MM (most PL teams are in this ballpark, I believe). Do you think they would accept a 10%-ish haircut down to an even $3MM if they were allowed to have scholarships?

I'm surprised more isn't made about what amounts to a squandering of resources when it comes to this issue. Need-based-only aid forces us to all recruit at the margins of the entire recruiting pool. Surprised that one of the drivers behind this is not that in this economy we need to get a bigger bang for our buck.

[ngineer]

Interesting ... certainly not surprising given the economy. Although I haven't heard any specifics, I would have to imagine that we're dealing with similar overall cuts.

Without re-hashing (ad nauseum) the discussions over costs associated with a switch to scholarships, I wonder what you guys think your coaches would say about this.

Further, let's say your program is currently (hypothetically) spending $3.3MM (most PL teams are in this ballpark, I believe). Do you think they would accept a 10%-ish haircut down to an even $3MM if they were allowed to have scholarships?

I'm surprised more isn't made about what amounts to a squandering of resources when it comes to this issue. Need-based-only aid forces us to all recruit at the margins of the entire recruiting pool. Surprised that one of the drivers behind this is not that in this economy we need to get a bigger bang for our buck.

BUT in the PL philosophy, that determines how you measure the 'bang'. In a 'tough' economy there may be more of a push to maintain a 'need-based' grant in aid system by giving athletic grants only to those who really NEED them as opposed to spending hundreds of thousands of dollars for student athletes who come from 'well to do' families and can better afford attending a PL school. This has been the major bugaboo in the PL regarding the philosophy of how and why money should be given to students.

[breezy]

I'm sure that every school is feeling the punch. Here are some details of the impact at Holy Cross:


Income from endowment alone was down 19% by the end of last year, and could reach 30% by the end of the current fiscal year.

Current strategic priorities include completion of the science facility (new building is completed but renovation of existing Haberlin Hall is ongoing) and financial aid.

There will be no new programs for the duration of the economic downturn. A planned new residence hall, exterior improvements to a group of existing residence halls, and projected improvements to indoor athletic facilities have been put on hold. One project already underway -- construction of a turf field for football practice and lacrosse -- apparently will be completed.

The College is looking to reduce some positions through attrition and early retirement.

***

Notwithstanding the pessimistic outlook regarding HC's position on football scholarships, HC had announced earlier that it will begin giving a limited number of scholarships starting in 2009-2010 for men's ice hockey, field hockey, men's soccer and women's soccer. There was also some hint that other scholarships are under consideration (but no indication if this meant football or other Olympic sports).

[carney2]

The early argument that

given we are in probably the worst economy since the Great Depression, saying yes to football scholarships is not the right signal to send to parents struggling to pay $50,000 (+/-) for a Patriot League school

is starting to hold some water. Arguments about whether football scholarships actually carry a price tag get lost in the emotions of the moment. Fordham's timing could not have been worse.

[Ken_Z]

The early argument that

given we are in probably the worst economy since the Great Depression, saying yes to football scholarships is not the right signal to send to parents struggling to pay $50,000 (+/-) for a Patriot League school

is starting to hold some water. Arguments about whether football scholarships actually carry a price tag get lost in the emotions of the moment. Fordham's timing could not have been worse.

have to agree with my idol and mentor on this point

[Fordham]

BUT in the PL philosophy, that determines how you measure the 'bang'. In a 'tough' economy there may be more of a push to maintain a 'need-based' grant in aid system by giving athletic grants only to those who really NEED them as opposed to spending hundreds of thousands of dollars for student athletes who come from 'well to do' families and can better afford attending a PL school. This has been the major bugaboo in the PL regarding the philosophy of how and why money should be given to students.
There is no PL philosophical attachment to need-based aid given that they offer athletic scholarships in other sports. I understand that this is part of the hodge-podge of reasoning that is (or will be) provided to explain the league opposition to scholarships but that doesn't make it true.

Singling out one sport and treating it different from the rest certainly doesn't make that one uniquely treated sport the philosophical foundation for the league.


The early argument that given we are in probably the worst economy since the Great Depression, saying yes to football scholarships is not the right signal to send to parents struggling to pay $50,000 (+/-) for a Patriot League school is starting to hold some water. Arguments about whether football scholarships actually carry a price tag get lost in the emotions of the moment. Fordham's timing could not have been worse.I agree with this as well. I do think it's an argument that doesn't hold up to scrutiny (I know that's still open for debate) but, as is often the case, perception is more important than reality.

I hold out no hope when many of the die hard PL fans on AGS throw up some of the arguments like we're committed to going to 63 rides, this will definitely cost each institution much more, there are definitively Title IX issues, etc., many of which (arguably all ... but, again 'arguably' not definitively) don't hold up to scrutiny or are outright lies or mis-representations.

What it really comes down to imo is a muddled mix of superficial reasons that involve an emotional attachment to the Ivy league, an aura of superiority from the fact that football "scholarships" are not provided and that it sounds as if it must be fiscally irresponsible to move to scholarships in this economy. Again, I don't think any really hold up under scrutiny but it's understandable to me that institutions who don't want football (or any sport) taking up too much time & attention would not take the time to explain that to alums, faculty, etc. when it's much easier to wave it off and focus on other things ... and, again, that's certainly understandable.

Smart money is on '09 being our swan song in the PL.

PS - I'm still interested in your thoughts (I know it's purely conjecture) on whether your coaches would take a 10% budget hit to go scholarship.

[LUHawker]

Smart money is on '09 being our swan song in the PL.

PS - I'm still interested in your thoughts (I know it's purely conjecture) on whether your coaches would take a 10% budget hit to go scholarship.

I'm not convinced that '09 will be Fordham's swan song. I heard that Colgate is also on board with schollies and it would make complete sense that Lafayette is as well given their recent enormous facilities improvement. It would also hold that if Lafayette moves so does Lehigh because they are attached at the hip. That would give 4 out of 7, so there is some hope I think.

As to your last question, I think Lehigh's Coen would take a 10% budget hit to get schollies. I just hope that hit isn't too much to overcome getting to the I-A counter level.

[carney2]

PS - I'm still interested in your thoughts (I know it's purely conjecture) on whether your coaches would take a 10% budget hit to go scholarship.

Certainly. The budget hit is temporary. The scholarships are permanent.

[Ken_Z]

There is no PL philosophical attachment to need-based aid given that they offer athletic scholarships in other sports. I understand that this is part of the hodge-podge of reasoning that is (or will be) provided to explain the league opposition to scholarships but that doens't make it true.

Agree, and actually believe the administrations understand this as well.


Smart money is on '09 being our swan song in the PL.

call me a cockeyed optimist, but i still have hope, but conceed that it is difficult to make a convincing argument at this time.



PS - I'm still interested in your thoughts (I know it's purely conjecture) on whether your coaches would take a 10% budget hit to go scholarship.

YES, no ifs ands or buts.

[RichH2]

Ken,
I too would like to be cockeyed, but unless there is some negotiation between FU and PL to work out a compromise, I do not see a solution. FU'stiming could not be worse for them and for us

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I think ALL the football coaches would love to have scholarships to offer, even with a 10% pay cut/budget cut.

The coaches are not at issue IMO. If the BOTs and presidents said to them "we'll do exactly what you recommend", I think scholarships would happen yesterday. It's at the AD/presidential/BOT level where there are more reservations - which make sense since they are managing athletic departments, not just football teams.

To this observer - and let me stress this is only opinion - the key really is Fordham's willingness to compromise. What if the league leadership said the following to Fordham's AD:

"We know you want scholarships. So do we, really. But the presidents don't want to have a faculty uprising on their hands when they tell their teachers they have to take a 10% pay cut while we spend a million more $ on football. So here's what we're going to do: we're going to phase this in: you can offer 10 unrestricted scholarships in your incoming class 2009, an additional 15 in 2010, an additional 15 in 2011 and unlimited in 2012. We'll make it optional; if Georgetown doesn't want to play, that's fine. So you'll get full scholarships in four years, and by then the pay cut will be forgotten, the economy will be booming again and our endowments will once again be healthy."

Would Fordham say "OK"? Or would Fordham say "no, thanks"?

It would give some more flexibility to them in the near term, and being a counter shouldn't be a concern (since they are supposedly one already). But I don't know if they would take that deal or not - or if they were ever ready to ever take that deal. That's the dilemma.

[DetroitFlyer]

The NCAA, TODAY, already says that the Patriot League offers ATHLETIC scholarships.... The PL aid is SIGNIFICANTLY different in the eyes of the NCAA than the PFL or Ivy League aid....

I just do not get it.... Most PL schools spend a fortune on the current ATHLETIC aid model. The NCAA has classified the aid as ATHLETIC SCHOLARSHIP aid.

The argument is purely one of semantics.... Pretend to be the Ivy League, while in the eyes of the NCAA you grant the same ATHLETIC aid as any other traditional FCS conference.

Very hard to understand how so many smart people, (read PL Presidents), can get away with such silliness. I can certainly understand why Fordham and many PL fans are frustrated....

Now, here is an interesting thought. What if the PL were to adopt the Ivy/PFL model, rather than going the "State U" route...? Somehow, that feels much more "honest" that the game the PL is currently playing. (Same with going to more traditional athletic scholarships).

Here is the deal, outside of AGS and a handful of other knowledgable FCS fans, many folks still believe that the PL is "non-athletic scholarship". Great sales, (or snow) job by the conference.... If all fans were up to snuff like those here, the Presidents would simply look so stupid that they would have no choice to either poop or get off the pot....

[Ken_Z]

Bucknell: no specifics on athletics, but you can bet they are included in the belt tightening:

We are planning a budget for fiscal 2010 that will strategically reduce departmental operating expenses by five percent to ten percent. We have not implemented an “across-the-board” approach but have held detailed discussions with individual departments to identify how to best reduce expenses where possible. The Offices of the Provost and Vice President for Finance and Administration have been working with every program and department manager to attain this objective.

http://www.bucknell.edu/x48840.xml


okay, so now we have word from the AD:


Even with the games going on as a backdrop, it is evident that our department is going to be facing unprecedented financial challenges moving forward. As all of us are painfully aware, we are currently living through a very difficult financial climate. As much as we would like to carry on as normal in our everyday lives, most of us have been forced to make financial sacrifices while we ride out this historic economic downturn. For Bison Athletics, this means that for the foreseeable future, we will not be operating in the mode of “business as usual.”

While we do not yet know the full extent, it is almost certain that our department, like many others at Bucknell, is going to be faced with an operating budget reduction. This is not unique to Bucknell. Institutions across the country are facing cutbacks, in some cases by as much as 20 percent. Hiring and compensation freezes, staffing reductions and even the elimination of varsity programs have already occurred across all levels of higher education.

As I have noted repeatedly in this space and elsewhere, the education and welfare of our student-athletes is our No. 1 priority, and it will remain our No. 1 priority as we deal strategically with our future budgetary situation. There is no doubt that we are going to be faced with some difficult choices, but protecting the competitive opportunities for our student-athletes in our varsity programs must be our focus.

On a related and equally pressing note, these economic times have also impacted fundraising and charitable giving activity in all walks of life. Understandably, Bison Club giving is behind last year’s pace, and we have some catching-up to do in order to reach our goal of $1.8 million for 2008-09.

http://www.bucknellbison.com/genrel/040309aad.html

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Thanks for the heads-up Ken_Z. While Lehigh's announcement was almost an afterthought, Bucknell's formal announcement puts the issue front and center. I'd expect more PL schools to follow.

I'm worried about Bucknell now. I don't know if the Bison would dare drop football - but I can't say that they wouldn't, either.

BTW, I'm planning to do a CSN piece soon about the credit crunch and how it affects a bunch of schools across all of FCS.

[Ken_Z]

I'm worried about Bucknell now. I don't know if the Bison would dare drop football - but I can't say that they wouldn't, either.

i would be shocked, SHOCKED I TELL YOU, if the Bison dropped football. while it may not be evident in the near term due to the financial times, i think Bucknell's commitment to football is more likely to increase (think modestly in relative terms to the rest of the PL) than decrease. now if the PL ever really fell apart, they might close up operations.

[colorless raider]

i would be shocked, SHOCKED I TELL YOU, if the Bison dropped football. while it may not be evident in the near term due to the financial times, i think Bucknell's commitment to football is more likely to increase (think modestly in relative terms to the rest of the PL) than decrease. now if the PL ever really fell apart, they might close up operations.

When you hear of across the board cutbacks one can not help lament the creation of tenure. Layoffs of unproductive faculty-just like business-should be part of the financial equation.

[DTSpider]

One thing that was interesting was that when UR was considering it's move to the PL is that there would have been a cost increase to be in the PL compared to the CAA.

[OLPOP]

How would a move to the PL cost more for Richmond?

[DTSpider]

I wasn't involved in all of the details, but apparently PL teams give grant-in-aids to more than 63 players. I don't, I just know that the board of trustees cited increased costs as a disadvantage of the PL.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I wasn't involved in all of the details, but apparently PL teams give grant-in-aids to more than 63 players. I don't, I just know that the board of trustees cited increased costs as a disadvantage of the PL.

PL schools give partials, just like any FCS school. I'm not certain but one of the reasons the Richmond leadership wanted to switch to the PL was that it would save costs. My understanding was that one of the first things the PL folks told them was that the spending was about the same. So what I heard is different from what you heard about them saying there would be "advanced costs".

[bison137]

I wasn't involved in all of the details, but apparently PL teams give grant-in-aids to more than 63 players. I don't, I just know that the board of trustees cited increased costs as a disadvantage of the PL.


They can't give more than 63 equivalencies, no matter what they are called. In fact, none of the PL schools give close to 63.