Iowa State's Athletic Department in Trouble Financially

[NorthKCHawk]

'They're scared.' Iowa State gymnasts left in limbo after season canceled

Iowa State hasn't said publicly what led to cancellation of its gymnastics season. And athletes are left wondering if the program will ever return.

www.usatoday.com

This was a lead story in USAToday. Looks like ISU hired a coach to run their women's gymnastic program off the street. They are now one of the lowest ranked programs in the country and just cancelled their season with no notice because they cannot field a safe and competitive team. This is where Olympic sports are headed for schools outside the Big Ten and SEC except for well-heeled schools like Stanford. Little 12 Community Colleges like ISU were not solvent in their athletic budgets before rev sharing. Now they are drowning in red ink. They cannot cut women's sports scholarships or they will be violating Title IX, so they just wildly underfund them??

 

[haydensly]

Reading between the lines, there is no way they field a team next year whether they will state that or not. If they drop women's gymnastics they will have to drop a men's sport with an equal number of scholarships to stay in compliance with Title IX. This whole thing is the canary in the coal mine.

 

[Fryowa]

They cannot cut women's sports scholarships or they will be violating Title IX, so they just wildly underfund them??

I talked to a friend of mine who's a D2 baseball coach about that and he thinks they'll just start cancelling seasons for reasons "out of their control" in non-revenue sports, and once that happens programs will die out and there won't be any scholarships needed. Like what ISU did. Not saying that was ISU's intent, but they cancelled a season for reasons out of their supposed control.

If you're ISU how do you recruit gymnasts once you cancel a season? You don't. Yeah you're on the hook for the existing schollies but that's child's play compared to supporting a program. And people forget that T9 is applied at each school compared to men's athletic programs. It isn't a ban on cutting women's programs only. Need to get rid of women's gymnastics? Then you get rid of men's diving too.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

Right. That's the point. If you underfund and let a woman's program die, you need to kill a men's program as well. Olympic sports are going to be getting wacked across the country. Men and women.

 

[trj]

I want to talk shit here, but IMO Iowa baseball could very well be on the chopping block in the next 10-20 years. I’m not a baseball guy, but glad it was there, something to check on every now and then. Would hate to see it go despite not having any emotional, financial, or any other investment in the baseball program. But we all know where this is trending……

 

[Fryowa]

I want to talk shit here, but IMO Iowa baseball could very well be on the chopping block in the next 10-20 years. I’m not a baseball guy, but glad it was there, something to check on every now and then. Would hate to see it go despite not having any emotional, financial, or any other investment in the baseball program. But we all know where this is trending……

Could easily happen, I won't argue.

Non-rev sports everywhere are getting less and less support.

I went and watched one of my former HS players play in an NAIA doubleheader last night which wasn't on the schedule (got added with the nice weather). It's crazy how bare bones baseball programs have gotten in the last 15 years even at that level. One umpire, the home JV coach running the scoreboard and pitch clock, etc. Part of that was probably because it was a spur of the moment deal, but the point still remains. The team my player is on used to do a 2 week southern trip every year with a chartered bus and now it's a 6 day trip with vans. This same school ahs a "powerhouse" football team in the NAIA world and they get just about all the AD funding.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

At some point, big schools may need to treat non-rev sports more like D2 and NAIA does. Maybe your don't give out 20 full ride schollies to field a gymnastics team. You split 8 schollies amongst 20 kids and justify the expense of program as bringing 12 additional bodies into the school. I don't love that all the money and resources are being diverted away from Olympic Sports, but schools may need to get creative to keep these opportunities alive for these kids.

 

[BryceC]

'They're scared.' Iowa State gymnasts left in limbo after season canceled

Iowa State hasn't said publicly what led to cancellation of its gymnastics season. And athletes are left wondering if the program will ever return.

www.usatoday.com

They cannot cut women's sports scholarships or they will be violating Title IX, so they just wildly underfund them??

It’s not a particularly popular opinion but I think Iowa State should just only offer scholarships to Iowans for the Olympic sports. Since a big part of the cost is out of state scholarships they shouldn’t pay that. Instate only.

Also they just drop gymnastics and start women’s wrestling.

 

[USBHawk]

At some point, big schools may need to treat non-rev sports more like D2 and NAIA does. Maybe your don't give out 20 full ride schollies to field a gymnastics team. You split 8 schollies amongst 20 kids and justify the expense of program as bringing 12 additional bodies into the school. I don't love that all the money and resources are being diverted away from Olympic Sports, but schools may need to get creative to keep these opportunities alive for these kids.

Non-rev sports have already been doing that at big schools. There are very few golfers, gymnasts or volleyball players on a full ride.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

Sports like golf and tennis will be fine because they are low cost to run. But, sports with a larger squad, heavy equipment needs, more coaches, and increased travel demands due to conference realignment may get squeezed. Baseball, gymnastics, swimming, field hockey.

 

[Fryowa]

Non-rev sports have already been doing that at big schools. There are very few golfers, gymnasts or volleyball players on a full ride.

Sports like golf and tennis will be fine because they are low cost to run. But, sports with a larger squad, heavy equipment needs, more coaches, and increased travel demands due to conference realignment may get squeezed. Baseball, gymnastics, swimming, field hockey.

There are 6 "headcount" sports in D1 athletics that require a certain number of full rides.

Football
MBB
WBB
Women's tennis
Women's volleyball
Women's gymnastics

All other sports are "equivalancy" sports where a pool of money is given to the particular team to be divided out. Very rare for anyone in an equivalency sport to be given a full ride and has been that way forever, far longer than the NIL thing has been around.. You see some at top tier major track and field schools and baseball schools, but that's it. Iowa has zero full scholarships in baseball

Iowa does a few in wrestling but that's it.

Also remember for programs like Iowa, equivalency scholarships can be and are supplemented by NIL (for us it's just wrestling for the most part)..

Women's tennis, gymnastics, and volleyball will be the first dominoes to fall.

 

[BryceC]

Something that was brought up to me yesterday is they increased the number of scholarships in the limit. So Iowa State could just cut gymnastics and increase the girls on scholarship for volleyball or softball to keep an equivalence for title 9.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

Something that was brought up to me yesterday is they increased the number of scholarships in the limit. So Iowa State could just cut gymnastics and increase the girls on scholarship for volleyball or softball to keep an equivalence for title 9.

Correct. It is not sport specific. Just total number of schollies for men and women and any changes must close the gap, not make it wider.

 

[#1DieHardHawk]

It's interesting to see how Title IX has evolved. It has been touted as a tremendous win for women's sports, but skeptics and critics have been there from day one, in many respects due to predictions that are now coming to fruition.

Leveling the "financial playing field" is great until all of a sudden your sport of choice is gone.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

It's interesting to see how Title IX has evolved. It has been touted as a tremendous win for women's sports, but skeptics and critics have been there from day one, in many respects due to predictions that are now coming to fruition.

Leveling the "financial playing field" is great until all of a sudden your sport of choice is gone.

ISU losing its women's gymnastics team has nothing to do with Title IX. It is because Iowa State cannot afford to play in the same sandbox as the Big 10 and SEC, and it is having to squeeze its budget in all places it can across its athletic budget to pay for the House Settlement requirements. By killing some programs, they save the costs of coaches and travel and equipment, but those schollies will have to be added to other women's sports to stay compliant.

 

[#1DieHardHawk]

ISU losing its women's gymnastics team has nothing to do with Title IX. It is because Iowa State cannot afford to play in the same sandbox as the Big 10 and SEC, and it is having to squeeze its budget in all places it can across its athletic budget to pay for the House Settlement requirements. By killing some programs, they save the costs of coaches and travel and equipment, but those schollies will have to be added to other women's sports to stay compliant.

I wasn't referring to ISU's issue per se, but as part of the big picture, there has been a downstream impact on non-rev sports, both men's and women's.

It's not just scholarships, the law also pertains to facilities and coaching staffs, all of which drain monies that could otherwise be used to keep some programs up and running. Universities are now forced to allocate funds in the name of fairness and equity that may otherwise have been used elsewhere.

And, now we have revenue sharing with the student-athletes. The DOE has already declared that Title IX applies there as well. Imagine a school such as Notre Dame having to pay the girl's field hockey, tennis and golf teams 50% of what it pays its football players. It's going to happen.

I'm not anti-Title IX. There have been many positive benefits for women's sports, but, using a business analogy, in some respects it's kind of like legally forcing a business that sells two products - one doing very well and one that just can't get off the ground - to have equal marketing expenditures, equal production lines and an equal number of employees working those lines.

The business recognizes that its best chance to stay afloat and grow is to devote more money and resources to the product that is doing well, but instead it's forced to close other departments and lay off a portion of it's workforce to remain solvent.

 

[kameltoez102]

I wasn't referring to ISU's issue per se, but as part of the big picture, there has been a downstream impact on non-rev sports, both men's and women's.

It's not just scholarships, the law also pertains to facilities and coaching staffs, all of which drain monies that could otherwise be used to keep some programs up and running. Universities are now forced to allocate funds in the name of fairness and equity that may otherwise have been used elsewhere.

And, now we have revenue sharing with the student-athletes. The DOE has already declared that Title IX applies there as well. Imagine a school such as Notre Dame having to pay the girl's field hockey, tennis and golf teams 50% of what it pays its football players. It's going to happen.

I'm not anti-Title IX. There have been many positive benefits for women's sports, but, using a business analogy, in some respects it's kind of like legally forcing a business that sells two products - one doing very well and one that just can't get off the ground - to have equal marketing expenditures, equal production lines and an equal number of employees working those lines.

The business recognizes that its best chance to stay afloat and grow is to devote more money and resources to the product that is doing well, but instead it's forced to close other departments and lay off a portion of it's workforce to remain solvent.

A big part that a lot of people never seem to realize about the non revenue sports is now with NIL and some of the conference incentives for grades etc you have players making more money than some of the coaches. Have a relative that coached at a large Big10 university for softball and had several girls making more money than some of the assistants. At least at that school it created some interesting dynamics and the influx of money did not help create a better locker room environment. It’s also interesting when you discuss the scholarships with people that don’t really know how it works. So many people think that if they play at that level they are on scholarship. The fact is very few are full rides and some are just there with no scholarship or getting books or fees paid for.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

I wasn't referring to ISU's issue per se, but as part of the big picture, there has been a downstream impact on non-rev sports, both men's and women's.

It's not just scholarships, the law also pertains to facilities and coaching staffs, all of which drain monies that could otherwise be used to keep some programs up and running. Universities are now forced to allocate funds in the name of fairness and equity that may otherwise have been used elsewhere.

And, now we have revenue sharing with the student-athletes. The DOE has already declared that Title IX applies there as well. Imagine a school such as Notre Dame having to pay the girl's field hockey, tennis and golf teams 50% of what it pays its football players. It's going to happen.

I'm not anti-Title IX. There have been many positive benefits for women's sports, but, using a business analogy, in some respects it's kind of like legally forcing a business that sells two products - one doing very well and one that just can't get off the ground - to have equal marketing expenditures, equal production lines and an equal number of employees working those lines.

The business recognizes that its best chance to stay afloat and grow is to devote more money and resources to the product that is doing well, but instead it's forced to close other departments and lay off a portion of it's workforce to remain solvent.

Title IX had an immediate and continual negative impact upon non-rev men's sports. That is just plain. ISU no longer has a baseball program. Many schools no longer have wrestling. Etc. That dynamic has not really changed. What has changed in major sports is the House Settlement. The ISUs of the world were barely solvent in their athletic departments before having to give up 25 million directly back to the athletes, plus the drain of donor money that is also going directly back to the athletes and not to athletic budgets. This problem is going to continue to put pressure on athletic departments and will hurt non-rev sports, but my guess is more mens than womens.

Title IX is a good thing. Schools that accept significant federal dollars for educational purposes should not be able to institutionally create more education slots for men than women. The law is slowly evening what used to be a wide gap.

Conflating Title IX and NIL is a real problem. As Fry has argued, kids in high rev sports are either professional athletes or highly compensated employees depending upon your viewpoint, but it is harder and harder to view them as true student athletes.

If just football broke off from the NCAA and formed its own governance, an argument could be made to exempt football from Title IX consideration. Football could be separated out from budgets, scholarships, and be a stand alone enterprise. Then, the NCAA and the schools could manage all other sports under the more traditional model of mainly student athletes. We shall see. There needs to be appreciable reform in the rules to meet the times.

 

[#1DieHardHawk]

Title IX had an immediate and continual negative impact upon non-rev men's sports. That is just plain. ISU no longer has a baseball program. Many schools no longer have wrestling. Etc. That dynamic has not really changed. What has changed in major sports is the House Settlement. The ISUs of the world were barely solvent in their athletic departments before having to give up 25 million directly back to the athletes, plus the drain of donor money that is also going directly back to the athletes and not to athletic budgets. This problem is going to continue to put pressure on athletic departments and will hurt non-rev sports, but my guess is more mens than womens.

Title IX is a good thing. Schools that accept significant federal dollars for educational purposes should not be able to institutionally create more education slots for men than women. The law is slowly evening what used to be a wide gap.

Conflating Title IX and NIL is a real problem. As Fry has argued, kids in high rev sports are either professional athletes or highly compensated employees depending upon your viewpoint, but it is harder and harder to view them as true student athletes.

If just football broke off from the NCAA and formed its own governance, an argument could be made to exempt football from Title IX consideration. Football could be separated out from budgets, scholarships, and be a stand alone enterprise. Then, the NCAA and the schools could manage all other sports under the more traditional model of mainly student athletes. We shall see. There needs to be appreciable reform in the rules to meet the times.

When it comes to the non-rev sports, men's programs definitely are more at risk than women's.

If we are going to view Title IX strictly from the lens of educational slots, then, yes, it definitely is a good thing. It also has allowed women's sports to rise from the ashes so to speak since its inception.

The broader issue is that "legislating fairness" has been a very tricky process over many years. In almost every case, ramifications have occurred that were not anticipated. Forcing any business, be it sports or whatever, to allocate funds based upon gender, race, etc., and not merit, can have major financial implications, as I noted in my analogy above.

And, yes, NIL and Title IX are not the same thing, but nevertheless, it has been ruled that disbursement of those funds still falls under the Title IX directives, so not only do schools get pinched further by having to dole out the money, they have to dole out money in a fashion that will have a dramatically less return on investment.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

This had kinda been building up to this sort of thing over there hadn't it? Ole Matty Campbell I think saw the writing on the wall that continuing to stick around just wasn't the best idea for his career. Wait till TJ jumps ship for whichever blue blood offers him a brinx truck.