The Boulder Daily Camera has always had top-notch sports writers. On Friday August 21, 2009 Neill Woelk wrote a timeless article entitled “CU must decide if ‘competitive’ is actual goal.”
Woelk’s focus was on the University of Colorado Athletic Department; however, his commentary applies to the academic side of the university as well. In fact, Woelk’s editorial makes the case that higher education is a tough business. Although he doesn’t say it, many colleges and universities have encountered challenges similar to those facing CU.
A lot has changed since Woelk penned his column in 2009 – CU has new coaches in its marquee sports and a new practice facility for basketball and volleyball. As well, the Buffs are now part of the PAC-12, and Commissioner Larry Scott has aggressive plans for the conference – and CU.
Despite these and other changes, the basic question is still pertinent – CU must decide if it really wants to be competitive (in athletics and academics). If competitiveness is their choice, they must find a way to finance that decision.
Woelk’s comments from 2009 follow:
It seems that every few years, the question arises concerning the University of Colorado and its athletic department. What exactly, are the expectations that should be associated with CU’s programs?
It’s pertinent again today because the upcoming year might just be one of the most important in years for CU’s athletic department.
Important because CU’s fortunes in the “marquee” sports-football and men’s and women’s basketball-have been less than productive in the win-loss column in recent years. Important because a positive step forward by each of those programs is vital to the long-term viability of not only each individual program, but vital to the overall success of the entire department.
And, important because it’s time for the school-not just the athletic department, but the entire administration – to decide whether the Buffs should actually compete in the Big 12 or simply be merely a member of the conference with no expectations attached.
By no means is this the first time such a question has been asked. Fact is, it’s been an issue at CU for decades, and the answer has ebbed and flowed as administrations have come and gone.
It’s no secret that the zenith of Colorado’s athletic successes coincided with the presidency of Gordon Gee (now the president at Ohio State). Gee and then-athletic director Bill Marolt built a foundation for success at CU that set the stage for Bill McCartney’s 1990 national championship team, the opening of the Dal Ward Center in 1991 and what turned out to be maybe the most successful overall stretch ever for CU athletics in the ensuing half-dozen years.
That stretch also set the stage for CU to earn a seat on the national stage across the board. While some members of academia – not all, but some-are loath to admit it, successful athletic programs benefit a school in myriad ways. The marketing potential of successful athletics can’t be over-stated, and CU reaped the benefits in the ’90s.
(If you need to see the correlation between athletics and top-ranked public institutions, check any of the annual lists compiled by a variety of magazines. The top 20 always includes such schools as Virginia, Cal, North Carolina, Washington, Illinois, Utah, Texas, and Florida. Those same schools, of course, all boast successful athletic programs.)
It’s also no secret that when Gee left in 1990, CU’s ability to excel on the field began to slowly erode. McCartney had recruited well enough to keep CU nationally competitive for the ensuing six seasons, but support from the administration was never the same. The result was that maintaining competitive facilities became more difficult, as did the ability to attract the athletes necessary to compete in one of the nation’s most competitive conferences. By the end of the decade, CU had slipped significantly.
Gee’s departure is one of the reasons McCartney finally left in 1994, when support from the administration waned. It’s also one of the reasons Marolt followed suit just a couple of years later, and that lack of support is at least in part behind Rick Neuheisel’s departure after the 1998 football season.
And, it’s one of the reasons CU’s fortunes have since see-sawed, with the successes of the 1900s becoming more and more a memory rather than a constant.
How do administrations play a role in athletic success?
In the case of schools such as Colorado, it means making the playing field relatively level, wherever possible.
Clearly, CU will never compete on a financial basis with schools such as Texas, Nebraska, Michigan, etc. Those schools are economic heavyweights, with the booster dollars to provide whatever is necessary to facilitate success.
But CU can make sure its athletic programs are not hamstrung in other areas, such as academic admissions, necessary facilities, and the day-to-day process of doing business.
Check out CSU’s latest football press guide. In glossy color, it boasts of a $13 million indoor practice facility and a $7 million academic and training center. It’s by no means a Taj Mahal, but it keeps CSU competitive in its conference.
CU can make no such claims in the Big 12.
It terms of admission, I’ve never, ever advocated that CU accept the NCAA’s bare minimum standards. CU should be proud of its academic excellence. No shortcuts allowed.
But there are also cases in which some student athletes are on the cusp and are turned away. That’s not wise. Exceptions can and should be made. It was standard practice under Gee, and the university certainly seemed no worse for the wear.
By no means should Colorado compromise or taint the quality of its reputation.
But if CU officials – and fans and donors and students – do indeed want Colorado to actually compete in the Big 12, the administration should make that clear. Colorado should never hide behind the facade of claiming to be a productive member of one of the nation’s premier conferences if that isn’t actually the case.
Instead, CU administrators should consider another conference, because in the Big 12, the majority of schools see being competitive as a positive experience rather than a burden.
