More Rice

[50's PONY]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted on Thu, May. 06, 2004



Athletics deficit forces Rice to explore options

By Damien Pierce
Star-Telegram Staff Writer

For as long as any professor or coach can remember, the Rice University campus in Houston has been surrounded by a row of hedges.

The hedges have served as a dividing line between the university and the outside world.

"Rice isn't like other campuses," said Wanna Hadnott, president of the R Association, a booster club for former Owls athletes. "We've always had the atmosphere of being inside the hedges, and outsiders can't really see inside. The only time someone from outside the community can see Rice is when they are coming onto campus for sporting events."

The brush might soon be getting thicker.

After 90 years of competing at the highest level of intercollegiate athletics, Rice officials are considering overhauling the athletic program and perhaps ending football altogether in light of a recent 104-page report detailing the school's athletic shortcomings.

The McKinsey & Co. report has questioned Rice's ability to compete in the expensive state of college athletics and has fueled a debate between scholars who believe Rice should pull inside its hedges and keep its focus on academics, and those who believe the school will lose visibility and alumni identification if it de-emphasizes athletics.

The report documented nearly a $10 million annual deficit in the athletic budget and expressed concern over how Rice's student-athletes are admitted and perform at the highly regarded academic institution.

The school's board of trustees reviewed the report during a weekend retreat and released a statement Tuesday that read, in part, "At this point, the sense of the board is that Rice should continue to compete at the Division I level based on demonstrated success."

The board did not specify which level of Division I.

The report's four solutions are to either remain in Division I-A football, drop to Division I-AA with no football scholarships, drop to Division I-AAA with no football team or drop to Division III, which allows no athletic scholarships. The trustees have invited input until May 17 and will make their decision by the end of the month.

"There is obviously a lot of concern and apprehension," Rice athletic director Bobby May said. "We've always played in big-time college athletics. It's been 90 years, and I don't know what Rice would be like without it."

The Rice faculty council has at least envisioned the possibility.

The council released poll results Monday that found a large portion of the faculty was in favor of Rice not awarding athletic scholarships. The poll, which included 229 respondents, found that 129 faculty members listed dropping to Division III as their first or second choice, while 103 supported an attempt to organize a Southern Ivy League without scholarships as their first or second choice.

Thomas Haskell, a history professor and member of the faculty council, has been at the forefront of pushing for change at the school, which has an undergraduate enrollment of about 2,800. Haskell's concerns are bolstered by the McKinsey report's findings that male athletes on average possess a grade-point average a half-point lower than other male students, and that most athletes tend to "gravitate toward" a major in kinesiology. The report also said student-athletes were admitted with lower academic qualifications than other students.

Haskell declined an interview Wednesday, citing his schedule, but he recently told the Houston Chronicle,"There is a strong sense on campus that playing in Division I-A is an absurdity for a school the size, character and selectivity of Rice."

For its part, the athletic department has noted it possesses one of the highest graduation rates among Division I-A schools. The NCAA's most recent report listed Rice's athletic graduation rate at 81 percent in 2003.

Rice has dealt with plummeting attendance for football games since the decay of the Southwest Conference. The school does not receive money from the Bowl Championship Series or steady television revenue because it is a member of the Western Athletic Conference, a non-BCS league. The Owls haven't earned a bowl invitation -- or a bowl payout -- in 42 years.

The football program alone contributes $3.4 million annually to the annual deficit, according to the McKinsey report, and the outlook isn't expected to change when the school moves from the WAC to Conference USA in 2005.

Rice, however, hasn't been invisible in college athletics.

The baseball team won last season's national championship and teams in other sports, such as tennis, have excelled.

"I don't fear anything will happen," Rice baseball coach Wayne Graham said. "This is just an examination of Rice athletics, and the school will be better off because of it. When we won the national championship last season, I was told our applications were up. The visibility counts for something."

Others aren't quite as sure.

When Hadnott learned of the recent examination of Rice athletics, she helped launch a Web site called friendsofriceathletics.org. The site is being used to rally support for keeping the Rice program in Division I-A.

It's sort of Hadnott's effort to keep outsiders peeking over the hedges.

"There are things we can do better with our athletic program, but let's improve it, not get rid of it," said Hadnott, a former Rice tennis player. "I don't want to see them get rid of football because if they do that, who's to say they won't decide women's sports aren't beneficial in a few years? I've been a part of Rice for a long time, but if they change the athletic program, I'll disassociate myself from Rice. And so will many others."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ONLINE: www.riceowls.com
ONLINE: www.friendsofriceathletics.org
Damien Pierce, (817) 390-7760 dpierce@star-telegram.com





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© 2004 Star Telegram and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.dfw.com

[Water Pony]

Like Tulane's introspection last year, Rice may use this report and forum to get a greater commitment from the alumni and boosters.

But with less that 3,000 undergrads, this is a tough problem long term. How does a school simply accept that long term losses are necessary and to be expected in order to compete year after year? Even better attendance in this case won't have a dramatic effect on the economics.

Rice has a sterling academic reputation, a long tradition of support for Division 1 sports and competes in the best FB region in the country. To lose them hurts college athletics as a whole. I don't like Darwin's Theory as a acceptable or desirable answer. Extinction is not a good thing in this case.

I wish them and hope this is simply a mechanism to recommit to Division 1

[OC Mustang]

Notice that the outfit recommending the drop is Mckinsey...no kidding? In the late 80s and early 90s, I served on a Board committee and had fairly unfettered access to a number of Board members. Not to defend Pye because he made his share of mistakes (I liked him personally...real interesting, no bull---- kind of guy), but if you want to know where the recommendation was actually thought up, look no more...McKinsey probably dusted off their recommendation to SMU, tweaked it for Rice, and saved themselves a few hours of time.

These guys get paid the big bucks by corporations to recommend pretty much the same thing. Outsource, outsource, outsource. Well, this must be their highly sought-after advice for private universities because I've heard this number at least 4 times in a decade.

If anybody on this board works for them, or used to work for them, I envy you. Never have I seen as diplomatic a shakedown of businesses as I have seen by Mckinsey. State the obvious, don't hang around for solution, and then collect a nice big fat check.

[Water Pony]

OC Mustang,

I loved your post and smiled while reading it. As a consultant but infrequent competitor to McKinsey, your insight is spot on, especially for them. My experience has been implementing and living with clients when they transform themselves. Living with the consequences drives you to better decisions and these steps are not their forte.

Rice, SMU, etc. need to take recommendations and even the insights/conclusions such as these with a grain of salt. Findings are easily tailored to the answer the audience wants to hear. The findings are less valuable and not as vetted, if you are not engaged to implement and/or ensure its' success.