MARYLAND MENS XC AND TRACK CUT

noway wrote:

Isn't Under Armor trying to break into the running business? Saving Maryland's track team might be a good PR stunt for them in that regard.

this, a million times over

but the problem is would Joe Jogger and Sally Slug who spend $3000 (or x other number) a year on running related products and expenses, despite not running 500 miles in the year notice or even care?

Well, as this article explains, he has assisted Maryland under other circumstances. He also has a foundation, and could write off a donationa to save track and field and XC in a heartbeat.

Would Uncle Phil let U oF O XC go by the wayside, and then, out of the other side of his mouth promote trainers and spikes to everyone else? I know Phil Knight was a track guy, but Kevin Plank wants to compete with Nike and Phil Knight, so what better exposure than to become the savior of Maryland's Flagship university's mens' programs?

We need to email Plank, selling this concept. I'll buy a pair of UA shoes today, and forever if he stepped up.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-04-09/sports/bs-sp-terps-kevin-plank-0410-20110409_1_maryland-athletics-maryland-special-teams-ralph-friedgen

I ran on the women's track and xc teams in the 80's. It was a positive, life-changing experience. I learned so many life lessons, and the team experience provided a consistent and welcoming group on a large campus where I might otherwise have felt lost. I am deeply saddened to hear of this recommendation. A signicant part of the Terps legacy and culture will be lost to future students, and the College Park experience will be diminished overall. UMCP boasts solid academic programs but being a great university means much, much more than simply covering the bases academically. Tradition and Personality are part of what makes the University attractive and unique. Don't let UMCP become just another big school.

Many great points are made here and the whole thing about the money spent per athlete increasing being a GOOD THING is entirely bogus. The point was to free up money so that they wouldn't be as in the red. That means the money should not go to the athletes. That means they should stay at $67k per athlete and bring themselves out of the red. Wasn't that the whole point?

It's a bit of a disgrace that the women's basketball team operates at such a net loss. The reason why is obvious: the coaching salaries. The sport loses $1.7 million one year while the coaching salaries account for $700k? Wow. And this is a sport losing $1.7 million just so 10 athletes can play. What about the 166 athletes being cut to free up almost the same amount of money? Incredible!

I would think the fair thing would be to tell every team that they need to resubmit new budgets to make themselves more sustainable. Likely every team would reduce travel costs, unnecessary equipment, and other things that would make them more affordable. It'd be a worthwhile thing across the board. How can you cut cross country -- a sport that costs almost nothing -- without at least giving them a chance to prove it won't cost a dime to keep them on?

So why does cross country cost anything? UMD runners aren't going anywhere fast, so it's not like they need crazy airfare to attend important meets. Coaching salaries are likely the biggest necessary expense. I feel bad for the coaches, but the sport can be kept even if it means practically eliminating the position as a salaried one. Plenty of D3 schools do it. Maryland should be doing everything possible to keep the sport available for students wanting to do it and the Maryland athletic department should find more creative (and legal) ways to help the coaches without them putting the school in debt with salaries.

I'm a graduate of UMD and went their when their Campus Recreation Center was new. The idea of eliminating their swimming and diving teams while having such a beautiful facility is mindboggling to me.

Remember 2001-2005 when the football team was massively popular and profitable? Why was it so profitable? Because they weren't blowing so much money on it year after year when their success began. Like another poster said, they acted like throwing money at it would generate more money. Really they just reduced their profit. They added crappy bleacher seats and useless boxes to the stadium. It was like a moment of panic that they suddenly needed to have a stadium the size of Michigan's just because of a few successful seasons; the success went straight to their brains.

I'm not going to hate on football. If they play their cards right, a profitable football team is what will save all the other athletics at the school. But they need to remember that athletics aren't just about profit, they're about enhancing the breadth of what a student can experience at the flagship university in the state. They're on the verge of forcing the school to have to become a football school when most of its student athletes remember it for different sports.

I'm concerned that there is very little we can do about it at this point. The committee came up with a report that does not make good business sense and did not seem to be going for a solution in the best interest of the several athletic programs. It looks more like they pursued ways to allow the football team to flounder and women's basketball to keep bleeding money.

If you're a Terrapin athlete on the chopping block, it has to hurt this year particularly knowing that millions went towards buying off Friedgen and hiring Edsall. The coaching decisions alone leading to their 2-8 season could have kept 166 students going for another year.

for those of you who want to contact the administrators

If you look down the list, I'm sure they could eliminate a few jobs to help save on their budget

Mac wrote: "There are departments all over the country that struggle with these problems. Yet only one, Northeastern, has had the guts to do the correct thing: DROP FOOTBALL."

... followed shortly thereafter by Hofstra the very same year. (2009)

I have long been critical of the University of Maryland. Its academic and athletic endowments are disappointing, in fact, beyond disappointing. The school - deprived of state support in the 60's and 70's when it needed it most - the welfare state in Baltimore (now that has worked out well, hasn't it) was preferred over developing a world class university 12 miles from Capitol Hill. Couple this with a lousy location in PG County, and there is very little alumni passion for the school, notwithstanding the apparent loyalty demonstrated by alums here.

This all has culminated in Maryland having very little margin for error, and it is a shame that they will have to cut sports, and in particular, men's track and field. But to me it is more of the same. The school and the state have shown very little leadership, and the athletic department, despite some quality athletes and coaches, has followed the same. I know this rubs some the wrong way, but the lack of endowments says it all. There is no reason the only flagship university in the state, located in a place where they should have a lock on the sports media market in what is now the wealthiest area of the country, should be in this position.

I believe LaSalle and Iona did a similar thing.

You again?

good post.you need to write an email which hopefully you have already done.

email uncle phil. I'm sure he would love to step into UAs territory.

Northeastern dropped football after they watched arch-rival Boston University drop football while simultaneously improving in every other sport as well building a gorgeous new ice hockey arena. Unlike a school like Hofstra, for BU and Northeastern their only revenue generating sport is ice hockey. Slightly different scenario.

maryland is disappointing wrote:

... a world class university 12 miles from Capitol Hill. Couple this with a lousy location in PG County, ....

recognizing that my question is a little off topic, here you first highlight the proximity to capitol hill as a good thing, then immediately say the school has a lousy location. how is it a "lousy location"?

some flagship state schools do well in the middle of nowhere, others do well in mid-sized state capitals/cities (e.g., austin, madison), while others are in or in the suburbs of major cities (e.g., UCLA or berkeley).

so are you objecting to the fact that UMD is inside the beltway and not in, say, annapolis or, i don't know, frederick? or are you suggesting that college park is difficult to get to? that it is an undesirable place to live? where would you put the university today if you had a choice? potomac?

Under Armor is trying to break into the running business and expand in general and one component of the marketing here has been sponsoring the athletic departments at the major universities in Maryland, starting with UMD College Park. They also sponsor Towson and the money sports(lacrosse and basketball) at Loyola and are looking to outfit the rest of the teams within the next few years.

However the Towson cross country team races in Boathouse uniforms while wearing UA warm-ups. If they're choosing to wear uniforms from a different brand then the one that sponsors them it doesn't say great things about the quality of UA's XC uniforms.

kaitainen wrote:

so are you objecting to the fact that UMD is inside the beltway and not in, say, annapolis or, i don't know, frederick? or are you suggesting that college park is difficult to get to? that it is an undesirable place to live? where would you put the university today if you had a choice? potomac?

he's objecting to the presence of blacks and Latinos. seriously. read the last thread on UMD

In the local DC news, they did a segment on this and talked to the UMD football and basketball coaches.

The slant pointed the blame at decreasing revenues of those two sports being responsible for the possible loss of the other programs.

The college, not the revenue sports, should support the non-revenue sports.

Plenty of schools have track programs that are funded by other sports.

I would just like to point out one of my best friends Mamadou Niang left here at Seton Hall after we cut the program only to transfer to Maryland and to have this happen. From having been there, the cut at Seton Hall was an incredibly terrible experience. I couldn't imagine having this happen twice.

Oh, yes, play the race card. Let me tell what drives me crazy about PG County, and why I find it one of the most incomprehensible places in the country.

Every single educational study out there demonstrates that there is a strong correlation between income and educational achievement. It is an incredibly strong correlation. PG County is the 70th most affluent county in the country, yet it has the State's worst school system and indeed ranks very low nationwide. This is just inexcusable. I can't ascribe to anything other than a lack of accumulated social capital and incompetence. And it darn well impacts the culture of a place like College Park. It ought to be discussed openly, because if that does not happen, things will not get better.

What I find so amusing is that so many Maryland graduates agree with me. Again, I think they intuit the opportunities lost.

Let's occupy Maryland University's Athletic Department! We are the 99%. Anyone else in?...