Brown University, with a $4.2 billion endowment, cancels men's track and field and men's cross country

I wonder if one could go after Brown on multiple forms of discrimination not covered by Title 9 in their sports program by cutting XC/Track and Field, including race and body type?

I agree with you that universities and colleges can't use their endowments like ATMs. But I disagree about it being legally complicated to access those funds and you cloud the issue by including a hypothetical donation earmarked for a specific purpose. Endowment money itself isn't identified towards specific targets; usually an institution draws annually from its endowment at a very, very conservative rate to finance their operating budget. They don't draw up the budget and then go to the endowment with an amount to draw. They determine based on markets and investments how much they safely, wisely can draw and that contributes to their operating funds. If they're drawing more based on their operating budget then they're either facing a very bad financial climate or they're in their own unrelated financial troubles. If they do it more than one year in a row, they're likely in serious trouble. This is why when colleges want to spend large amounts of money they don't take it from their endowment, they start a new capital campaign to raise the money--the capital--for the building, the stadium, the new campus, the new hires. Donations are different. It's laudable that someone will donate to a specific department or entity on campus and people motivated to do so often target areas they perceive to be underfunded or threatened. "I'm going to write "Track and Field" in the memo line of my $10,000 check." Great. But I've been in meetings where Finance explains why the AD's funding is suddenly $10k light: "we don't need to give them that money because Luv2Run wrote them a check." The $10k cut out of the AD's budget from the college then goes to the president's pet project, while they assure Luv2Run his money went straight to Track and Field. There are LOTS of ways to move around endowment money if you want to, some less sleazy that others . Brown doesn't want to and that's their right.

Luv2Run wrote:

People are really ignorant about how endowments work.

This is not a pot of money that the university can just draw from. Most of it is earmarked for specific things. So a donor gives $10 million to a university but says it and any interest made from it can only be used to study cow farts, then that is how the money has to be used.

There are legal ways around that, but it is really, really hard.

The current team leadership/coaches let the program not matter to the AD. They were comfortable (endowed job) and complacent. The decision was also passed through a committee in Jan. Would be great to hear from that committee membership what the thought process was and why they rubber-stamped the plan put forward by the AD and President. The President notes diversity as part of the decision process, but the track team is one of the more diverse on campus. Does not uphold the Brown ideals they like to talk about.

I'm honestly surprised equestrian was cut-- because of the way college equestrian works being funded as a varsity sport was the only way for a lot of girls to afford to ride or to compete at all, and the team was relatively diverse both socioeconomically and racially (extremely diverse compared to sailing). And the team did 99% of their own fundraising, Brown didn't provide equipment for competitions (since it wasn't Nike, it had to be purchased by the teammate or handed down from a graduating team member), etc. Not saying that some of the girls on the team weren't disgustingly rich, but most are just normal people on finaid, who walked onto the team in the fall.

Seems like they just wanted the football team to win for once, so they're shoveling all of the budgets towards them like it'll help their coach finally figure out how to do his job. Can we all just agree football should've been cut because it is ridiculous to glorify men running headfirst into each other in pursuit of a ball?

Aided by Cam Talbot, the University of Alabama-Huntsville NCAA Division I hockey program was reinstated by the school Friday after supporters raised more than $520,000 to save it.

The Calgary Flames goalie, who played for UAH from 2007-10, and backers of the 41-year-old hockey program had until the end of Friday to raise $500,000 or university officials would follow through on their announcement to end the program immediately due to budgetary concerns surrounding the coronavirus.

Talbot was the face of a GoFundMe effort launched by Alabama-Huntsville hockey alumni and supporters that raised $521,887 from 2,200 donors by late Friday afternoon.

rojo wrote:[/b

Finances have almost always been an issue at Brown - they were the last Ivy to go to need-blind admissions.

You can't be serious. "Need-blind" for the small number of students accepted from middle class and low income families. Those accepted by Ivy League schools are carefully calibrated to their balance sheets - and the Ivies are notorious for legacy admissions.

Luv2Run wrote:

This is not a pot of money that the university can just draw from. Most of it is earmarked for specific things.

$4.2 billion at 2% interest is $84 million per year.

What are they doing with that money?

You can pay 800 professors over $100,000 each with that money.

So why is student tuition so high then?

This notion that university presidents should not be well compensated is pretty silly. I doubt few here have a clue was a university president does. The Univ of GA president makes $600K plus a year. He oversees a budget of $1.7B. That is about 0.4 % of the budget.

As for point #1: There has been a split in terms of how the different divisions govern themselves. P5 has less to do with FCS and Ivies than they used to .

Ultimate, while a super cool sport, has 60,000 members as an organization. I think that is an odd comparison. Albeit ultimate is streamed on ESPN....

andyb262 wrote:

All these posts are ignoring the obvious solution to Title IX ails: women's football. Preferably played in muddy fields. Yabba dabba doo!

In lingerie!!!!!

why?????? wrote:

What is their moral argument in cutting men's track but not women? Do women deserve more than men? Title IX has been a joke since day one.

I disagree. Title IX actually is pretty vague. It is court decisions that have made it what it is. The laziest solution is proportionality.

I have been seeing lots of discussions across many boards and twitter, I feel very confident in saying few know how endowments work.

It seems like cutting 1/2 of something is going to be a decent savings. 1 bus rather than 2. 1/2 as many hotel rooms; reduced coaching staff; 1/2 per diem for each trip. 1/2 the number of trainers needed (or at least hours).

A question I have is does the revenue from tuition make up for the cost on a university level?

To me this seems like more of a philosophical change in that they were not willing to fund the sports to be competitive. It would be like closing a quantum physics lab because they could not get enough good profs to work it and not enough grants to pay for it.

Brown seems like an odd place to me in terms of how it goes about things.

It is not like they were setting the world on fire in those sports that were cut. So some decent HS runner will not get to run there in college.

Or maybe they are just cutting the “whitest” sports on sheer optics... sounds like something an uber-woke, liberal arts school would do,

facts and reason wrote:

Luv2Run wrote:

This is not a pot of money that the university can just draw from. Most of it is earmarked for specific things.

$4.2 billion at 2% interest is $84 million per year.

What are they doing with that money?

You can pay 800 professors over $100,000 each with that money.

So why is student tuition so high then?

That money is limited in what it can be used for. If I donate $1M to my alma mater for research on cow methane then they cannot use that money for anything else. If I endow a professorship, they invest the money, but the principle and interest cannot be used to put a new roof on a dorm.

The listed tuition at an Ivy might be crazy high, but I bet there is no student (okay maybe foreigners) who is paying that full cost.

Luv2Run wrote:

facts and reason wrote:

$4.2 billion at 2% interest is $84 million per year.

What are they doing with that money?

You can pay 800 professors over $100,000 each with that money.

So why is student tuition so high then?

That money is limited in what it can be used for. If I donate $1M to my alma mater for research on cow methane then they cannot use that money for anything else. If I endow a professorship, they invest the money, but the principle and interest cannot be used to put a new roof on a dorm.

The listed tuition at an Ivy might be crazy high, but I bet there is no student (okay maybe foreigners) who is paying that full cost.

Unless you qualify for need-based aid at an ivy, you are paying full tuition. There are no athletic or merit scholarships in the ivy league. They keep it real simple.

ilonggo wrote:

Cut all sports at all educational facilities from HS to college and let parents, athletes, spectators pay for them without burdening those who don't want to participate. The free market of ideas will find a way to make it work. Running club teams and independent runners of the 70's and 80's were able to compete at an international level. Private funding, prize money, sponsors, etc are all available.

+1. Keep the revenue-generating sports, otherwise, the club model works fine.

So do I have to bring my own yacht and horse to school with me in order to represent Brown?

Has a football team and struggled in xc and track.

Luv2Run wrote:

This notion that university presidents should not be well compensated is pretty silly. I doubt few here have a clue was a university president does. The Univ of GA president makes $600K plus a year. He oversees a budget of $1.7B. That is about 0.4 % of the budget.

Bold prediction: neither BroJo will ever be a college president.