» «

FISHBOWL VIEW OF COLLEGIATE ATHLETICS
(Wednesday, June 12, 10:30 A.M.-Noon)

ANDY MOORADIAN:

Thank you, John. It really is a pleasure for me and an honor to serve as president of NACDA for the following year. Not to take any more time from this last session, I would like to turn it over to the moderator. Thank you very much.

JOE KEARNEY :

It is our pleasure to present the final panel of this 20th annual NACDA Convention. The Executive Committee, when we were looking for a title, tried to determine the overview of intercollegiate athletics. We came up with the title Fishbowl View of Collegiate Athletics. What would be a significant panel as far as an overview of our enterprise, our profession of intercollegiate athletics? We felt we would like to get the perspective of the people who represent the primary source of all of our student-athletes, and that is the high schools of our country. We also have very strong support groups as far as donors, as far as booster, season-ticket holders and alumni, and so we felt we would like to get the alumni overview of intercollegiate athletics. And of course, one group that is with us at all times, it seems like through good and bad, would be the media of this country that cover the sports beats of intercollegiate athletics. We felt that would be an important area. And then because we are first and foremost a very integral part of higher education, we felt a faculty and an academic community overview would be important and in order. So, those are the areas that we are going to hear from as represented by our panel this morning. To launch the panel it is my pleasure to introduce to you a young woman who was an outstanding high school and collegiate basketball coach and an outstanding athletic administrator; the primary women's administrator from San Jose State University, Mary Zimmerman.

MARY ZIMMERMAN :

Now I know why Joe took us all out to dinner last night. He gave me one extra glass of wine, and boy, I must have really said a lot of things. Thank you. I didn't know I was that good. It is my pleasure today to introduce the first of our distinguished speakers and that is Mr. Warren Brown, the assistant director of the National Federation of State High Schools Association. Warren joined the high school association in 1980 after spending the previous 11 years with the NCAA. Warren is the administrator in the high school association of the public, legislative, judicial and national and international sanctioning program. The National Federation membership of 50 state associations and the District of Columbia serve more than 20,000 high schools and ten million high school students involved in athletics and activities. The Federation also provides services for schools in nine Canadian Provinces, Okinawa and the Phillipines. So, without further ado, I would like to present to you Mr. Warren Brown.

WARREN BROWN :

I love that word distinguished. I have not been called that before and certainly not by many of you out there in the audience. I was happy a couple of months ago when Mary invited me to come here and speak at the NACDA Convention in Las Vegas for two reasons really. The last time I was out here, which was within the last year, I was speaking under oath and you can't generalize too much there. I am not too good otherwise. And secondly, more seriously, to have an opportunity to meet some of my old friends in college athletics and acquaintances which were developed when I was at the NCAA. Sincerely"what I miss most about not being at the NCAA are the friendships and associations. I see many of you out there in the audience who are in that category. I am wise enough not to suggest that many of you miss me since my leaving the NCAA, especially given my enforcement background. Mr. Byers nicknamed me and still calls me "sunshine" because every time he saw me coming I was delivering bad news. Some of you probably have th same recollection and same memory of our acquaintances. It is good to speak on a subject today that has nothing to do with enforcement.

The last time I spoke at the national convention was in 1972, thirteen years ago, and Bud Jack was president. He invited me out to take part and make a presentation in a mini-session. Bud kindly asked me if I would explain the one-point-six rule. Do any of you reme~ber the one-point-six rule? For those of you who don't or want reminding, it was a very long rule. It had a number of official interpr~tations. It was criticized virtually by almost everyone. He gave me five minutes to explain it. You couldn't read it in five minutes. I have fifteen minutesnow to give you a high school viewpoint or perspective of college athletics. Although there is more time this year than there was in 1972, it's still going to be a little bit of a difficult task because high schools are really many publics. I would like to identify the publics for two reasons; number one, manyof yo~ may not know. how the high schools of the nation are reallyorganized. You may have a thought but I believe it is more involved than many of you appreciate, and secondly, I would like you to know where I am coming from when I make a few pointed remarks with regar to the fishbowl approach, or how we see college athletics from a high school perspective.

As Mary mentioned, the high schools in the National Federation family,as we call it, consist of state associations in 50 states and the District of Columbia. Theyare much the same as the NCAA, the NJCAA and the NAIA in terms of function, responsibilities and service. We conduct championships, promote athletics, get involved in litigations, television, public service announcements, etc., many of the things you do. We have eligibility rules and enforcement. It involves about 18,000 high schools in the United States; 20,000 including our Canadian members and about five to six million participants in sports alone annually. We have a national athletic directors organization that you could liken to NACDA in terms of its functions and services for the professional growth of its members. We have a national federation coaches associatio with a potential 190,000 membership. We have a national federation interscholastic officials association with about 240,000 registered officials with our member state associations. So from administration to coaching, event conduct, promotion, etc., the high schools are organized as a part of the federation family. But, obviously, there are many views and perceptions that can come from these different high school elements about college athletics. It is not going to be easy unless I generalize. As I said at th, outset, I am pretty good at that having spent ten years trying to interpret NCAA rules.

With all the public criticisms of college athletics, I think at first blush what I am about to say might take you a little bit by surprise, but the high schools' perception of college athletics generally i: pretty positive. That may be contrary to newspaper headlines in a number of different areas. There are some problems and concerns that we have with college athletics. I will describe those a little bit later, but on balance, I would say the perception is pretty good. That is for several reasons. First, yol have to keep in mind the high schools and the administration conduct of athletic programs have many of the same problems that you do at the college level. They may be lesser, and in some instances, more intensified, but nonetheless the same types of problems prevail. Therefore, we sympathize with you and empathize with you.

Secondly, there is a formal cooperation in mutual areas of involvement between the schools and the colleges. I don't know how many of you know or really appreciate that there is a real force out there called school college community. Many of you have probably heard those terms used. It is not a figment of anybody's imagination and it is not a catch phrase. It is really a viable force where the high schoo represented by the National Federation, the NCAA. the NAIA and the NJCAA get together and try to cause a1 impact or decision on issues. All of us are doing a pretty good job in that area or at least paying attention in that area and trying to cause some positive affect. I am not quite sure whether in these instances we're inside or outside the fishbowl as the high school organization. I think maybe we might be so close to these items that we don't see them as clearly as we should, but nonetheless. I think in cooperation with you folks we do a pretty good job. For instance. the school college community has had ~ significant impact on going together on federal legislation. Title IX, non-profit status of organizatio1 related to sports and television protection are just a few of the items. We have been together a number of times on pro sports dealings involving agents and signing of kids as undergraduates or as high school students. It caused hopefully some proper and positive results in that area. We generally take the saml position with very little variation with regard to our stance as members of governing bodies in differenl sports and with regard to positions that come up before the United States Olympic Committee. We have

There is one area which I think college athletics makes a mistake. That is when it tries to generalize its academic purposes to the purposes of high school athletic programs. I hope I can explain that to you. First of all, support your ideas that the student, early on in high school, ought to know that college is going to be tough academically. He is going there for the academics of it primarily, and therefore, ought to prepare himself in high school. He should take whatever courses you believe are appropriate so he doesn't get there and suddenly he is going because he can't cut it academically. We support that wholeheartedly. But, you have got to understand that high schools primarily are in the education business. Entertainment of either the athlete or the fan is secondary. Although there are celebrated examples throughout the country of overemphasis in high school athletics, by and large we are in the education business, flat out, or there would not be high school athletics. The tens of billions of boys and girls who go through our programs are far greater than the very small percentage of blue-chip athletes who go on to college. The point I am getting to is that when you try to take the step from college athletes and students coming out of high school and going to college should have a minimum academic average to participate. Remarks by many college representatives that athletes in high school should meet an arbitrary grade-point average to compete, our folks think that is going a step too far.

First of all, if it wasn't inherently educational, it wouldn't be in the school system programs. We believe that high school participation is inherent in athletics is inherently educational. There are all kinds of studies, although they are regional, state-wide and local, that indicate generally there are less discipline problems. There are better attendance records, better retention rates and, for the most part, higher grade-point averages for athletes versus non-athletes. If those values are there supporting high school academic programs, we see no justification for some arbitrary grade-point standard. It ignores the inherent educational values of participation. I haven't even mentioned such things as team spirit, self confidence, learning how to win and lose; the things you are supposed to learn through high school in order to be responsible citizens. So we applaud your efforts to make the blue-chipper able to cut it academically when he gets to college, but we hope in the future you will support the inherent educational values of participation in high school sports. If you are interested, we have undertaken a national study to document the values in terms of grade-point average, attendance, drop-out rates, attitudes of principals, students and to some extent, parents. It is a national study funded by Eli Lilly and should be available this fall. We feel pretty confident that it will indicate the real values that I have just tried to describe to you. game is over and there is a public critizing of game officials, that occurs at the high school level. So 1 call upon you to request that you get a handle on these kind of activities because they are leading to and becoming very destructive at the high school level.

The second area of concern is what appears to be an institutional rebellion by colleges to the application and enforcement of rules. I am speaking now from the perception standpoint. You just don't look too good and it represents a view oftiypocrisy when you spend all your times and efforts trying to say you are going to get a handle on rules and cheating. You are going to get things back in perspective and then have the rule applied; the rule was good until it applied to me. When that happens our schools at the high school level take the same tact. The record shows that before there was a rash of institution suing either their own conferences or their own national bodies, there was very little such lawsu1ts on the high school level. There has become a rash of that over the years and that has been reflected also at the high school level. It would seem to us that until you really mean what you say, accept the application and enforce the rules that you yourselves adopt from the fishbowl perspective. you are not going to look to! good. You have to bite the bullet and accept the results or the negative perception in our view will be there.

Lastly. the major concern that is left is in the area of television. ; won't dwell on that too long except to say that our Friday night football programs are vital to the funding of not only high school football. but all other activities for both boys and girls. We were on the side of the NCAA in the Circuil Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court in the case of the universities of Georgia and Oklahro versus the NCAA. It wasn't necessarily because of our long-standing working relationship with the NCAA. Rather. it was the alternatives did not provide any proven protection for high schools on Friday evenings. So we ask you. as this splintering of an approach to college football telecasting develops. keep in mind wl we think is a necessary protection for our programs. I am through. Thank you very much. If there are anJ questions later. I will be glad to answer them.

JOE KEARNEY:

Our next panelist is a native of Iowa; a graduate of the University of Iowa who began his career with the Chicago Tribune. later the Salt Lake City Telegram. and now currently with the Salt Lake City Tribune. In the last two positions he was the sports editor and featured columnist. He is past president of the Football Writers Association of this country and has been the recipient of the prestigious Jake Ward Award from CoSIDA. He incidentally is the only sports writer who is a member of the Utah Athletic Hall of Fame. He has received the Distinguished Service Award for journalism from the University of Utah. is on the Lombardi Award Committee and is a member of the Honors Court of the National Football Foundation and Hall of Fame. This month he begins his 47th year as a journalist covering college and professional anc high school athletes throughout his career. In my estimation. he is one of this country's finest writers and columnists. But above all. John Mooney is a great friend of collegiate athletics and someone I think ~ of us in this community of intercollegiate athletics prizes very much. From the Salt Lake City Tribune. John Mooney.

JOHN MOONEY:

Thanks Joe. That introduction is longer than my speech was going to be. I imagine the first questirn everybody has is, why does the press always headline the bad news at the expense of the good? Joe was mentioning last night when he was at Michigan State they had a fine promotion lined up. It was going to bj a big picture spread and it was going to be really good publicity for the university. That night before some ex-athlete got into a bar and took on half the guys and wrecked it. So the next day, the headline said, "Ex-football star in riot." The good story was back on page five. I know that all of you have many instances of this. It is a sad commentary, maybe on the human race, but really in the media business bad news is good news. It is a slack day in the newspaper business or radio or television if there are no accidents or bad news. If you don't believe that, look at the success of the scandal tabloids and then compare that with the circulation of the Christian Science Monitor. Obviously, the public wants to read the sex, the brutality, rapes, pillage, whatever else you have. On the sports pages though, I think the Supreme Court Justice said one time, at least half the people were winners and on the front page it was a story of the failures and the tragedies of life. So, we have something going for us even if it's only half the time.

In defense of the media, and I imagine that's what I'm supposed to do, you athletic and academic people are pretty happy day-by-day with what you would consider the good or the favorable news that ought ~o be printed. When the bombshell hits, you are sometimes shocked and it's quite a stunning thing. I know that, but I think you should always remember in criticizing, the media does not make the news, it reports the news. We didn't do it. We just reported it. Another thought that I would like to bring up in this little presentation is that many colleges complain, and have a legitimate gripe, about the year-round coverage of the pro sports. And, I think you have to give some credit to the pro teams becaus' they milk the publicity for all it's worth. I mean they are really serious on it and they make a concert, effort to woo the press on the radio and television. I don't mean woo them on the side with payola or gifts, at least in our areas they are pretty much a bunch of cheap bums up there. If I'm honest John it's because I'm not tempted. I think some of the blame maybe goes back to the colleges too, because I think too many of your publicity people are still doing business like you are the only game in town. As you know, we have pro sports. All pro sports go almost 12 months out of the year. With their preseason and then their regular season, and then their playoffs, and then their signings and drafting, it's almost a 12-month deal. And, the pros have an advantage that in basketball they play 82 games, which means they are going to have 164 stories in the paper to begin with. They are going to have a story saying they play tonight and then one the next day saying they played last night. The colleges will have 11 or maybe at the most, 12 football games, which may be 24 stories. Basketball you may have 26-27 games. So, the pros have more games scheduled. So, they have a big advantage over you, but that is not a reason why you should give up.

I think that with some people there is a thinking that the coaches' lockerroom show and his TV show is good enough to get across the message. That's enough selling they have to do. But, I would say this in defense of the sports information directors. They do get the shaft many times. Their games are once a week in football and if they come in on Monday or Tuesday with a good story, the tendency for the man sitting on the desk putting out the paper is to say the game isn'~ until Saturday. So you will just get shoved aside until maybe Friday or Saturday morning. If on Friday or Saturday morning something really big breaks out you may get lost completely. I think it's a sad thing too for the sports publicity people when they do come up with a great idea, and they get a shot down. I've see it happen many many times where a young man will come in the office, or a young woman with a great idea. They've got two or three pictiures and it's really a good story. They are proud of it. They've done a good job. Then with the way news breaks and various stories come up, the next day they pick up their masterpiece and there is about a three-inch story in a little half column cut for their life's work. I realized this a few years ago. I spoke at a sports information directors' meeting in California.

Anyone who follows baseball knows that Babe Ruth hit 714 homerung, but nobody knows he struck out 1,333 times or whatever it was. Look at Ted Williams. The last hitter in the big leagues to hit .400.

When you bat .40 that means six out of ten times you failed, and yet Ted Williams is considered one of the great all-time players. So, you have got to keep trying. You are not going to make any sales if you don't ring the doorbells. Unless you are in a lucky situation where you are a university or college in a rather isolated area where there are no pro teams and you have your captive media, you are going to have to go out and hustle. Newspaper space and radio and television time are very nebulous things. When they are gone, that's it. There is no more. You need to go out and hustle. If it's true t~t the squeaky wheel gets the grease, then you better be doing the squeaking. Thanks.

MARY ZIMMERMAN:

Our next speaker is Dr. Emily Watts. Dr. Watts has been a distinguished professor at the University of Illinois for a number of years. She received her B.A. in Latin in '58, M.A. in English in '59 and a Ph.D. in English in '64. She has gone up the ranks at the University of Illinois to where she has been since 1977, a full professor. She has been awarded fellowships; the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship and the John Simon Rubenheim Memorial Foundation Fellowship in 1973. She is a member of Phi Beta Kappa and Phi Kappa Phi honor societies and listed in Who's Who in America, Who's Who of American Women, International Who's Who of Women. Needless to say, Dr. Watts is well known in her area. We have asked her to be with us today because of her association, not only as an academic faculty person at the University of Illinois, a fine institution, but also because of her membership on the Athletic Board of Controls, the Athletic Association at the University of Illinois, the Big-lO Task Force to the Governance of Women's Sports, Big-lO Liaison Committee and the Student Ad Hoc Committee on Admissions and Educational Programs for Student-Athletes. I would like to present to you Dr. Emily Watts.

EMILY WATTS:

First, let me congratulate you on having such a program. Don't expect the honor to be returned. I cannot imagine this kind of a program at the modern language association meeting. Can you imagine? So, I admire you. You are willing to listen. You are willing to listen to us. I am not sure we are always willing to listen to you. We all know that faculty members and their views of athletics pretty much reflect that of the general public. Some faculty members really hate intercollegiate athletics. They never have liked it, and they never will. Some faculty members are great boosters. They join the booster clubs. They are the first in line to get to any bowl games and they are very avid supporters. Others are fair-weather friends, just the way the general public is.

Since Illinois has had a successful football program, our faculty applications for tickets has gone up nearly twofold. And, some faculty members simply don't care. Or, at least you think they don't care until you threaten to limit the faculty discount for tickets, and then you know there are a whole lot of faculty friends and fans around. In the rest of my discussion, I'm going to talk about the concerns of those faculty members, or most of them, who really care. They have some sympathy for and some tolerance for intercollegiate athletics. We are going to ignore those faculty members who don't want anything to do with intercollegiate athletics, because there really isn't much we can do about them. A recent New York

Times poll said that six of ten people in the general public in the United States feel that athletics has been over-emphasized at the college level. I would venture to say that faculty members join that six out of 10. But I think that the concerns of faculty members, those six out of 10 , are perhaps somewhat different or at least can be better articulated than can those of the general public. First of all, it's quite clear that nothing can be more upsetting to the faculty than a challenge to the ethical and intellectual integrity of their home institution. Faculty take pride in the home schools and are jealously protective of their academic integrity. Intercollegiate athletics presently threaten any faculty sense of security in terms of intellectual and academic integrity in two particular ways. The first is the obvious and the worse case. That is actually having received sanctions from the NCAA for academic matters. This is not to say that the faculty think it's alright to receive sanctions for other kinds of unethical dealings, but I really feel that the academic sanctions are the ones most serious to them. In the June 5 issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education, 13 schools which are currently under sanctions of the NCAA, were listed. Three of those schools had academic violations. I would guess that the faculty of those schools and you know who they are, are pretty devastated, pretty upset, and are legislating for different kinds of changes. There is a second threatening area and that is involving admissions of student-athletes who are not competitive with the general student body, in any given university. The recent flury of concern about graduation rates and also, those courses which are specifically designed for poorly-prepared student-athletes are commonly called jock courses. I think faculty are truly concerned, just the way you are, about the success of the individual athlete in this matter, and feel responsible for any student who is admitted to a university. Now some faculty, and we know them, feel that perhaps even the one or two years which any student-athlete spends at a university, before he might flunk out, are important. They are willing to forget the graduation rates. But, I really think most faculty members hope that a student admitted to a university has a chance of graduation, a chance of success.

We all know very creative and legitimate efforts to help these students. For example, this summer the University of Illinois was going to do something that other schools have done. That is an intensive summer program for both student-athletes and then the weakest of our admitted students from the general student body, in reading and in math, which receives no credit. Most faculty members in this same vein would, I'm sure, be opposed to Proposition 48 of the NCAA. Faculty members know that Proposition 48 is thl creation of the presidents, and most faculty members understand that presidents know next to nothing about undergraduate education. I think you would find that most presidents, most faculty members, would almost unanimously favor no freshman eligibility. I would imagine that would be what you would find. Graduation rates are recent issues that I think is perhaps getting out of hand and is unfair to the student-athletes. faculty. the institutions, and perhaps to you. We have all heard people say. "we graduate 98 percent of our football team or we graduate none perhaps." I think we should look seriously in some kind of consistel manner at graduation rates if we are going to use them at all.

Now first of all, the way academia figures graduation rates is this: in terms of the general student body, one counts the number of people who are admitted as freshman. or transfer students at a lower level, and then one counts the number who graduate. That is the graduation rate of any university or school. For example. Illinois tends to graduate within a five-year period of its general student body. 55 to 60 percent of those who entered. At Illinois we figure that our athletic program should match that 55 I 60 percent. As a person who has been involved in administration and overseeing the academic program, quitl frankly. if I found that our athletes were graduating at 95 percent, I would call in their transcripts and see what kind of courses they were taking and with what professors. Because at Illinois. and I am sure at your schools, we want the student-athlete to be a student and to be like other students. We don't want th, in special courses with specially chosen professors. So. what we are looking for is a graduation rate which matches that of our general student body. no matter what some state legislator in New Jersey feels ought to be the graduation rate. On the other hand too. if the graduation rate is too lowand too far bell that of the general student body. then we ought to be concerned. But this business of saying 98 percent o our students have got to their senior year graduate, isn't unrealistic and makes very little sense to any academics. What we are looking for is the comparison to the general student body. We want your people. yl athletes. to be students more than anything else. I would add too. Mr. Mooney. if you'll forgive me with this. that when you do have academic successes. and I know you all have many, you ought to publicize them. Not on the sports pages, but somewhere where the general body of faculty is going to see them.

For example. in one wonderful semester at the University of Illinois. 15 of 19 of our teams had above a 3.5 on a 5.0 scale average. Most of those were over 4.0. Two of those other teams that didn't make 3.5 or 3.4 were well over 3.0. We had several academic all-Americas in several fields. We had one marshall scholar. and low and behold, our football team had two Phi Beta Kappas. It never got to the faculty. It was never in a place where they would see it or they would know it. Now this has happened at other schools. You ought to' be proud of it and you ought to get it to your faculty members. Theyare interested in it. It will give them more confidence, certainly in the school.

One thing that's quite disturbing to faculty members is a rising suspicion of your tutorial ser' I know you just got them established. Now suddenly, we are suspicious of them. The problem here is more and more tutors are writing the papers for the students. So, I urge you to check who your tutors are and find out what their ethical standards are, or there will really be a master destruction of the whole tutorial service of these programs if ~uch plagiarism continues to go on.

Now, we've talked about generalities and we talked about nationwide things, but I think one of the most distressing things to the faculty is the day-to-day problem of missed classes. All athletes are going to have to miss class and not every professor is going to be placated. I do know too that there has been recent NCAA legislation to limit competition and, therefore, to limit the loss of class time.

But, I think you could do better at home in limiting your own competition and in setting your own standards. This came very clear to me because my nephew is a scholarship athlete in an ACC school, and was having a terrible time, just an awful time with his professors. His grades were suffering and he couldn't make up tests. It was a very bad situation. So, I called the college there and he explained to me that the faculty was totally antagonistic because there were simply no standards. The coach, the athletic association, set up a schedule and that was it. We are doing something at Illinois and we found it's working quite well. Several years ago, a faculty committee set up a series of guidelines. The first guide- line was that only so many classes could be missed by a team in anyone semester. At Illinois it's ten. Thereafter, every year, a faculty committee reviews a detailed copy of every coach's schedule as approved by the athletic directors; even down to the departure and arrival times. What time are you leaving campus? What time are you going to get back? Then it's counted up, somtimes in fractions. Many coaches have had to change their schedules at Illinois. There are, of course, allowances for postseason and exam periods. There are very strict rules, actually, for exam period in many ways. This policy was distributed to the faculty through the Faculty Senate, to the departments and was posted. Faculty members understand that there is a policy at Illinois, that the faculty created and the faculty agreed upon, and we really don't have that much trouble with missed classes. We certainly don't have the kinds of trouble my nephew had at this ACC school.

Another thing we do at Illinois is when students miss classes, we don't send around a note from the coach or from a dean or from the academic counselor, or from anybody else. The student must go to the professor him or herself. It's between them. This maintains that special faculty-student relationship that we all like to think exists at every university. In some ways this has worked out very well. Eddie Johnson, a graduate in history from Illinois and now a member of the Sacramento Kings, had to take a senior history seminar from a rather crusty old professor who has never been to one athletic event on our campus in his life. In the course of asking to be excused from class, made such an impression on this professor that the professor is now going to many events and is becoming a booster, which I think is a very healthy thing.

Finally. let me say this. I know many of you have Faculty Control Committees of some kind or another. perhaps not as extensive as the Big-lO. You have Advisory Committees. But you know. faculty at good universities are in the job of consultation with the chief administrators. They are used to being consulted. They expect to be consulted. They want to be consulted. Calling them in for breakfast and saying here are some of our coaches. here are some of our players. ask them questions. That's a patting on the head. What you really want is a Faculty Committee which is strong. Even to the point of consulting with you as you decide on NCAA votes. I think that there might have been a great many benefits. had somewhere along the line a faculty board. and not just your faculty rep. had been consulted on these matters. So what you want is a consultative board made up of respected campus leaders. It's important that the faculty member be tenured so that he or she can take the kind of stand he must take. You want it to be a representative board. You want it to be made up of men and women. of blacks or any other minority group you might want. This should be very carefully done and very carefully planned. You want your board responsible to the faculty. and you want the list of your board members published where faculty members can get to it. Then. you are not going to be called by a faculty member. That board is going to be called by the faculty member. You want them listed among the university committees. You want them to help you when you consider your vote even at the NCAA. on rules such as Proposition 48. I bet there would have been a different concept there if the faculty had been consulted beforehand.

Well, my l5 minutesare about up. I haven't had time to talk about faculty concern; about your salaries at schools where there is not a separate corporation. Nor have I had time to talk about faculty concern when they see a sports palace arrive over here and the library addition gets turned down over there. I will conclude in this way. I think faculty and athletic administrators are interested in the same things. We are both educators. We are all educators. We do care about the student and ultimately we want the student-athletes to be a student with athletics something else that he or she does. I don't think that they are far apart, but I think there are measures which you can take to reassure your faculty that you and they really believe in the same things.

JOE KEARNEY :

Our next panelist is a native of the State of Michigan. During his tenure as a high school athlete he won 13 letters and was an outstanding high school athlete. After high school, he served in the United State Army in the European Theatre. Then entered Michigan State University where he holds two degrees from Michigan State. During his time at Michigan State, he was an all-America collegiate baseball player.

He was drafted by the Boston Red Sox organization; played six years 9f professional baseball. He spent 27 years at Michigan State serving as the director of placement and the executive director of the Alumni Association. During his tenure he served on many regional, local and national boards that had to do with the affairs of the placement office and, of course, the alumni associations. He served as a president of the Walnut Hills Golf and Country Club in Lansing, Michigan where when Iknew him, he was either shooting scratch or one or two or three handicap golf. If you play golf with him don't negotiate at all, just give him the money and go play. That's about what I would do. He is currently the executive director of the Alumni Association at the University of California in Santa Barbara. In my estimation, in all the years I've spent in intercollegiate athletics and having a chance to get acquainted with many alumni directors allover this country, Jack Kinney would be in my list of the top five. He is one of the all time best alumni directors in this country. It is our pleasure to have him as our final panelist this morning. Jack.

JACK KINNEY:

Joe, thank you very much. I appreciate the comments particularly with regard to golf. Playing golf with Joe is quite an experience. I told him after l8 holes that he had been in more bunkers than Eva Braun. I'm pleased to be here, I long believe that intercollegiate athletics are an integral part of higher education. I personally owe a great deal to college athletics and I'm happy to be invited here to spend a few minutes to discuss my constituency, alumni, in relation to intercollegiate athletics. Let me quickly add that I am not appearing here as an expert. I'm not appearing in another role which can be best described by an experience that happened in Santa Barbara recently. One of our professors, who had retired after a long and distinguished career, left the university and unfortunately, several years later his wife of some 50 years passed away and left the old man quite alone. His friends were very concerned about his well-being and finally one of them had the brilliant idea of giving the old man a kitten, which might help his lonliness. The kitten found a home. The old man cared for it. Theyadopted a close relationship and everything seemed positive. However, as time went on, it turned out that the kitten became a tomcat and this started to create some problems for the old man. The cat soon started to stay out late at night, pretty soon midnight. Despite pleas and threats this behavior continued until four o'clock in the morning. The cat was prowling the back streets and alleys and driving the old man out of his mind. So finally, one day in a fit of despair and rage he snatched the cat, put him in a car, took him down to the local veternarian and had him fixed. Well that was thought to cure the situation and seemed to. The cat stayed home and became very lethargic and listless, and seemingly had no interest in life and lulled around. But at least from the old man's standpoint, he wasn't out prowling at night.

This behavior continued for several months and then gradually it began to change. The cat started to go out again. My God, much to the old man's amazement the cat was back to its old habits of being out prowl- ing the back streets and alleys. So he confronted the cat one day and said, "I took you in and gave you a home. Then as you grew older you were out fielding your oats. I had to take you to the veternarian and thought that would end the matter. Now you are back to your old habits, if this doesn't stop, I'm going tc have to put you away." Well, the cat was quite alarmed and said to the old man, "I owe you an apology. I've caused you a great deal of anxiety. As I grew up I was out leading a life of luxury and entertaining my own selfish pleasure. You were right to take me to the veternarian. I want you to know after that happened, I thought my life was over. I had no will to live. I was despondent and I contemplated suicide But in recent weeks a wonderful thing has happened to me. Hopefully, you won't deny me this, I am having more fun now than I ever had before. I have a new lease on life. Please don't stop it." The old man said, "what are you doing now?" The cat said very proudly, "I'm now serving as a consultant."

So we have a lot of consultants others how to do it.

Let's talk for a few minutes about alumni and intercollegiate athletics. You need to know your audience, which has been described by some of the other panelists, but let's put alumni into probably three basic types. One, that percentage which is hostile and opposed to intercollegiate athletics. Thj believe they are over-emphasized, too commercialized, too expensive; too much cheating and exploitation students. They are just not in their mind compatible with the aims and objectives of higher education. You've heard this. They want intercollegiate athletics put on a strictly amateur basis with no scholarl and where winning is not emphasized. Spectator participation is not emphasized; cheap, no radio, TV commercialism, and so on. There are a lot of those out there and you need to know it. Unfortunately, i are many faculty and administrators on our campuses who share the same feeling very strongly.

Now we also have many loyal, dedicated alumni who support the athletic program. These are the peo] who donate to your fund, help you with recruitment, help you get summer jobs, support the teams and fol the teams. They live and die with the teams. If you win the big game they are in a state of ecstasy. Conversely, if you lose the big game they are plunged into a state of despair. They are avid. If they graduate from the University of Michigan, and they are suffering from a horrible toothache, they would 1 consider letting a dentist who obtained his degree from Ohio State look in their mouth.

If you check their track record, they have little business telling

Then we have this vast middle group of lukewarm alumni. These are the people who probably don't donate to your fund. They wouldn't know how to help you recruit. They aren't interested in helping you with summer jobs. They like to go to the big game because of the social implications. Theyare with you win or tie. They make pretty good spectators. From my standpoint, this is basically the constituency that you and I have to deal with. These three types.

What's happened to that over the last 30 years? I'd say that the hostile group, percentage-wise, has probably stayed the same. You may have, particularly in recent years, lost some ground in this area. The loyal group, percentage-wise, has probably stayed the same. You may have gained some ground slightly in this area. The lukewarm spectator group remains the same; this vast middle arena. That's the constitu- ency that you must relate to, that we in the alumni profession must work with in terms of your professor.

Let's talk about some areas of alumni involvement very quickly, that I think you should be concerned about. One is your athletic fund raising. Athletic fund raising has increased tremendously in recent years. It's taken on a great deal of professionalism. It's nice to know that the athletic fund raisers are meeting in conjunction with this conference. However, on many of the campuses, there still remains some suspicion that athletic fund raising is somehow taking dollars away from institutional advancement. I have never believed that. I think it's a lot of gobble-d-gock. There is no doubt in my mind that if your athletic fund is being run in cooperation and coordination with the total development effort, there should not be any competition. Just out of curiosity, let me ask how many of you are not, let me emphasize that, are not at the present time involved in a formal athletic fund raising program. How many do not? How many dQ? More do. Just out of curiosity, how much money are you raising? How many are raising over $1 million a year in your athletic funding program? How many are raising over $2 million?

How many are raising over $3 million? How many of you are raising less than $1 million? How many of you are satisfied with your athletic fund raising programs? How many of you are dissatisfied with your program and feel that it should do better? Well, here is the potential that you need to work on. If you are raising less than $1 million, say $500,000 or $600,000, any market survey is probably going to tell you that you have the potential to at least double that. If you are raising a million, you probably have the potential to double that. It's there, and the new techniques with regard to phone mail corporations and foundations, plan giving and matching gifts and so on.

But a word of caution: athletic fund programs need to be developed carefully. There are many fund raisers table hopping around the country reporting to be fund raisers, who are doing more harm than good. We've got too many people chasing after over $100 to grab $10. Your fund program needs to be developed and nurtured carefully. You must remember that you have to till the soil and grade the climate and build. If you'll do that, the potential is there. The dollars are there each year that you can count on with improvement each year. This is an area where you should be working closely with your alumni relations office, in terms of identifying people and getting your athletic fund raisers involved with the alumni programs, particularly those that are athletic oriented. I suspect that many of you are doing that.

Now very quickly moving on. Let's talk about alumni varsity clubs or letterwinners clubs. How many of you have formal alumni letterwinners or varsity or whatever you want to call them clubs? How many have those clubs? How many of you look upon that club as a strong resource? How many of you feel that your club is weak and poorly organized? Here again, I would like to suggest that a formal alumni athletic letterwinners or varsity group can be very important to your program. Properly organized, it's a source of support for many projects and programs, for donors, recruiting summer jobs, awards for alumni athletes, reunions of teams and communications.

How many of you have an undergraduate or student varsity club? How many of you do not? Here again, I think there is an opportunity for you to build something that can be very harmful to your organization. Too long on the campuses we have waited until students graduated and then looked upon them as alumni. The best time to develop alumni is when they are on campus. The best time for you and for us to develop alumni in the athletic area is when they are on your campus. I would strongly suggest that you consider developing a formal undergraduate student varsity program. That can become a natural transition to your alumni organization. Let's talk a little bit about alumni records and computerization. How many of you have your alumni varsity people, your letterwinners, whatever you call them, computerized? How many do not?

I think there is a tremendous opportunity for you to build a real resource, keeping these up-to-date working with the alumni records department. These are the people who can become for you the prospects as donors, to help you with recruitment, jobs again, special projects, merchandise, tickets and so on. You should build this resource.

If I were an athletic director, one of the first things I would do is put somebody to work in terms of getting that resource computerized, where we had access to it with regard to communications. I think this is very important. These areas of alumni records and varsity clubs can be very important with regard to your recruiting efforts. Letterwinners, identified, can be very helpful. Donors, key alumni, all of this is important to you. I think most athletic departments have been very weak in this area. We tend to re-invent the wheel each year. We repeat, year after year, the prospects, the alumni key people in that community who are available for summer jobs. It's the same way with recruiting. There are always certain areas where your coaches are going to recruit? Why do we have to go over it every year and give you names of people when you should be coding that resource and developing it. I think this is very important to you. You need to be much more systematic in this area. It should be a total athletic department endeavor. Alumni travel, where there is an opportunity, to bowls and tournaments. Many of you are doing this. Many of you have alumni serving on athletic policy boards, advisory committees for the department, fund raising committees, varsity clubs, awards and recognition committees. But remember, there are many alumni in your communities that can be an excellent resource for you in terms of areas like marketing and advertising. There are architects and contractors. These people for the most part are flattered and eager to help you if you will turn to them for advice and counsel. You should not forget that. Let me also say that finally, in talking about the area of communication, I think has been from your standpoint, very weak. It pains me deeply from my past athletic background to see the bum wrap that athletic departments are get ti I don't think it's fair. I think overall, athletic departments are doing a tremendous job. Frankly, I am amazed at the number of intercollegiate sports and activities that you are sponsoring based upon some of the problems that you have, particularly in financing. I think it's tremendous. But your story is not being told. We talked about the fishbowl, but there is just too much negative information out there.

We in alumni relations spend a great deal of our time defending the athletic program. Invariably, when alumni get together, it splits into the two groups; those who are violently opposed to athletics and get into the drugs and cheating and scandals, and those who are very loyal and dedicated. But you need to get organized to tell this story. You can't rely on your SIbs to do this. They are pretty good with regard to facts, books, and programs, and taking care of people in the press box and press releases aIid building all-Americas, but you need greater resources.

I suggest it's time for you to go on the attack in this area. It's just negative, negative, negative. Yesterday's survey in the Los Angeles Times is just another illustration of supposedly how the public feels about intercollegiate athletics. It's tough for the NCAA. If you go out on the street, ask the first 10 people what the NCAA is all about, it's going to be negative. Am I right? It's going to be in terms of sanctions, investigations, probes, edicts. That's unfortunately what happens. The same thi~g from the conferences. I'm sorry. You are on local television, you are in the newspaper, you are on radio. You get a chance for some comments at half-time at basketball games on TV, but that's not enough to get this story out. It needs to be done. I would suggest you get on with it. There are a number of people who can help you with this. I strongly suggest that you do on the attack in this area.

Summing up, let me just say quickly, there are a great number of areas that the alumni organizations al alumni associations coordinate and cooperate with the athletic department, directly in fund raising. Your alumni varsity organizations, your alumni records, your recruitment, job placement, alumni's resources and, particularly in this area of information in education, can help. I appreciate the opportunity to visj with you. I hope we've left you with some food for thought. Thanks for the opportunity to be with you.

MARY ZIMMERMAN :

Thank you, Jack. We do have a few minutes left. We would like to invite you to step to the microphone and ask questions of any of our panelists. Anyone have anything? Well I guess that means tl did a very thorough job. We would like to thank you once again for staying for this last session, and t to our panelists. I know that I received some insightful things to take back to our campus. Thank you for coming to the Convention and see you next year. Thank you.

ADJOURN