Tomorrow and Tuesday students at USU will vote on whether to substantially raise the mandatory athletics fee paid with tuition. The proposed increase undermines the central mission of Utah’s land grant university- to provide the children of Utah’s rural, working and middle class families with an empowering education at a research intensive University. That mission has blessed hundreds of thousands of lives directly and millions indirectly.
Save the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, no other institution has had such a profound influence for good and improvement in my family’s history. On my father’s side, my Dad was the first college graduate in the Grover family in nearly four centuries in this country. On my mothers side, my great Grandfather, Lyman Rich, was a professor at USU who revolutionized the dairy industry. Both of my maternal grandparents are USU grads. My grandpa ran a construction company that built Romney Stadium, the Spectrum and the Fine Arts Center. Both of my parents attended USU. All of my siblings have or will graduate from USU. My wife is also an Aggie. Since graduation, I have donated time and money to USU. I hope that my children will also have the opportunity to attend USU. If a geneticist were to map my DNA, it would map as follows: T-R-U-E-A-G-G-I-E.
It is those ties to USU that has me worried every time I hear about a fee increase. Every fee increase at USU makes a college education less accessible to rural, working and middle class Utahns. Accessible college education is the foundation of our economy. It is also the most probable means to individuals achieving the American dream. USU has been empowering individuals who have limited financial resources since 1888. Like many of you, I paid my way through USU by working (at least two, and at one point three jobs). I would be heartbroken if one day it was not possible for an individual to pay their way through school at USU because tuition and fees became too large a hurdle. I fear that inch by inch, fee increase by fee increase, we are approaching that threshold. Wouldn’t it be tragic if the next great engineer for NASA or the next U.S. Senate Majority Leader were deterred from USU and a college education simply because they didn’t have the financial means to pay for all the increases in tuition and fees?
I have followed the debate about this subject. Athletic Director Scott Barnes, whom I am overall very impressed with, has made some arguments based on faulty logic. Additionally, many of the claims lack substantive evidence. These arguments beg for logic and refutation.
Athletics is NOT the front porch of the University
From Sunday’s Herald Journal:
Tiffany Evans, director of USU’s Student Involvement and Leadership Center, said she feels involvement in top-level sports helps build a sense of community on campus.
“As our colleagues in athletics have said, athletics is the front porch of the institution — it’s visible” Evans added.
If there really was a correlation between athletics and academic performance at USU, the past 30 years of football would have reduced the institution to an unaccredited community college. There simply is no correlation (or causation). USU is a great academic institution in a way that is completely independent of athletics. USU’s history shows that even if you have the worst football team in the entire free world, you can still be an international leader in engineering, education and NASA experiments. Even with a scant athletic budget and no meaningful fan base outside Cache County, the business school can emerge as an internationally recognized institution. If this “front porch” argument were true, there would be decades of evidence of academic impediments at USU. Instead, we see a school that is a crown jewel.
The Athletic Department will respond to my argument with anecdotal evidence. They will either cite Cinderella stories, like George Mason, or BCS schools that have shown a correlation between athletic performance and academic prestige (most often through increases in applications). Stories like George Mason reflect exceptions to the rule. They are outliers.
There is evidence that having a successful “big time” college football program produces increases in donations form alumni. However, comparing USU to BCS schools is like comparing apples to oranges. BCS schools have nation wide fan bases. They are on national television every week. They are on SportsCenter daily. USU is not and never will be a big time or BCS level football program.
I challenge the Athletic Department to produce peer reviewed studies and evidence that schools similar to Utah State in conference affiliation, media market and fan base have a correlation between the quality of academics and athletics. They will not be able to produce such evidence because it does not exist. There is no correlation.
Rent Seeking Behavior: USU’s Program is at a “Tipping Point”
From Sunday’s Herald Journal:
According to Utah State University Athletic Director Scott Barnes, all of the school’s sports are in financial crisis. Currently, the program is running at a $2.3 million annual deficit, which Barnes said began because USU didn’t budget enough money for the transition to Western Athletic Conference membership four years ago.
“We’ve reached a tipping point,” Barnes said on Tuesday. “We need to overhaul our funding model.”
And by over-hauling the funding model, Barnes means engaging in rent seeking behavior. The Athletic Department can’t force boosters to pay more. It can’t force the State of Utah to pay more. But there is one constituency that can be forced to pay more- the students. Students. Tragically, the group of people least likely to directly benefit from the increase and most likely to be harmed by it.
“But Tom, no one is going to be deterred from attending USU because of a $243 athletic fee.”
True.
$243 here for Athletics and $150 here for another fee coupled with regular tuition increases add up. By accepting one fee increase after another, we risk nickle and diming a USU education out of the reach of the families of rural, working and middle class Utahns. If the fee does not directly advance the central mission of USU, it should be closely and skeptically scrutinized.
The Athletic Department will correctly note that relative to other Universities, USU’s athletic fee is small. However, that is not the standard by which we should judge the fee. Other Universities do not have the same demographics as Utah. Utah has larger families and lower wages. These create a greater burden on the student to fund their college education. The standard by which we should judge the fee is whether it can be afforded by the working students at USU.
While tuition and fees go up at USU, wages for college jobs do not. Take a look at the Help Wanted Section in the Herald Journal. Most of the jobs college students at USU qualify for pay around $8 an hour.
My Dad was the first person in his direct line to graduate from college. He arrived in Logan with no resources to help him except working. My Dad worked through school at USU. It wasn’t easy, but he made it happen. My Dad’s degree from USU has allowed him to acheive the American dream for my family. If we continue to raise fees that are not central to USU’s mission, will the next guy in my Dad’s shoes be able to improve the position of himself and future generations of his family?
Why should the Athletic Department be immune from this economy?
Other Departments at USU have been reduced to skeleton resources or eliminated completely. These departments, unlike Athletics, advance USU’s central mission directly. Why should the theatre and music departments be consolidated while the Athletic Department is allowed to mitigate the economic sting through a fee increase?
While I sympathize with Scott Barnes, his financial crisis is not unique. It is the same crisis faced by every other Dean and department head at USU. Unlike Barnes, they dont’ have the option of engaging in rent seeking behavior. They simply have to find a way to make it work.
Vote for preserving an accessible education at USU, Vote NO on the Athletics fee increase!
If you are a student I urge you to vote down the Athletics Fee increase. If you like the idea, nothing is stopping you from donating $130 extra a year to the Athletic Department. You are not voting on whether you should pay $130 extra a year. You can already do that. You are voting on whether to force your peers to pay an extra $130 a year. Are you comfortable in making that decision for them? How can you be certain they can afford it?
If you are not a student, I urge you to contact the students that you know. Let them know there is no correlation between athletics and academics. Tell them the “front porch” argument is sham. As Aggies we must preserve the ability of future generations to acheive the American dream through a college education. A college education at USU should always be available to anyone willing to work for it (like my Dad).
Every once in a while I read something that I wish I had written. Tom’s post is one of those times. So instead of round three on the same subject, I’ll just say Amen and tell you to go vote.
Ryan Yonk
Hmm. I’m thinking you have misunderstood of what you perceive to be a correlation of academics and athletics. As a matter of fact, the quote you use from the HJ says nothing about that. It says athletics ‘build a sense of community on campus.’ Also athletics are the ‘front porch’ in that it is ‘visible.’ What gives USU more national attention? A quality football and basketball program? Or that we just sent something into space? The fact is, people SEE the front porch of the house, and not whats inside. People SEE the athletics program and rarely get a glimpse of the actual institution.
Rob,
If the issue is not about establishing a perceived correlation between academics and athletics, then what is the purpose of the front porch argument?
In one breath you claim it’s about building a sense of community, and internal consideration, but then abruptly switch to an external consideration about the perception of Utah State’s prestige. So which is it, Rob?
How is it that Utah State has put so many experiments into space over the past few decades during a time when our football team has been one of the worst in America?
If we’re to accept the front porch analogy, then USU athletics is asking us to take care of a deteriorating front porch while the rest of the house is on fire.
Do we save the front porch at the expense of saving other parts of the house or the contents of the house? I would say absolutely not, but those who support this athletics tax increase are saying yes.
Wow very very good contributions here by Tom and excellent analogy by Tyler.
In response to Rob and his whole “football is important because it’s the face of USU” I say this : I don’t care. That is quite simple NOT the main or even significant focus of any land-grant state University. These schools were put in place to provide efficient, high-quality higher education, ACCESSIBLE to the residents. That’s it.
To fire 30+ employees, and furlow countless faculty in one breath, then milk to students for a shinier football field is simply shameful. USU Athletics needs to suffer just like the rest of the national, state and USU economy are suffering, if not more. USU was not built and attended for it’s athletics program. It’s an institute of learning. Period.