ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Monday, November 18, 1996 TAG: 9611180105
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A4 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: LARRY HINCKER
THIS NEWSPAPER, in recounting the very public and lamentable arrests of several Virginia Tech football players, asked the question in the headline on its Nov. 8 editorial: "Does Tech need big-time football?" Many people with whom I spoke were dumbfounded by such an idea and could respond only with: "Say what?"
However, I feel that it's a fair and appropriate question. Why should a university maintain an expensive program requiring significant resources to support football? The reasons are numerous and quite sound. While my reasons are specific to Tech, they are applicable to most Division I athletic programs.
* Exposure/Awareness. No other program of a university even comes close to providing an opportunity to be named week after week in newspapers and electronic media around the country. For an institution such as Tech with two strange names, one of which is a polysyllabic tongue-twister, awareness is the first step toward eventual recognition of its status as a world-class university. It's no coincidence that applications for admission rose dramatically after Tech's decisive Sugar Bowl win.
Sports are a major force in American culture. It's a reflection of our society that one large section of all daily newspapers is devoted to sports. Sadly, even the award of a Nobel Prize cannot command equivalent space in the news anything like that of sports. For example, this newspaper all but ignored the Nobel Prize awarded Tech alumnus Robert Richardson, noting only in one sentence of a wire-service story that this native Virginian had any connection to this area. No further effort was made to profile this significant feat.
* Support for other programs. Football is the financial engine that pulls the athletic train. Last year, football revenues at Tech were $11.6 million; expenses were $3.4 million. The remainder underwrote about 400 students in 19 other men's and women's sports. Let me hasten to add that in Virginia, unlike other states, college sports are totally self-supporting. Not even sports facilities receive state support.
* Constituency involvement. Football festivities are the social glue that binds the university to various constituencies. We have more than 30 university, college, department or center advisory boards. Virtually all of their meetings are held on football weekends. Class reunions are planned around these games, and thousands of alumni link again with the campus and friends because of gridiron contests.
* Opportunity. Access to higher education remains a major concern for educators. For many, sports is the ticket to a future. This university's former vice president for development once said to me: "If not for my football scholarship, I might never have had a chance." Do not discount the very real upward mobility that starts with an athletic scholarship.
* School spirit. There are almost 25,000 students at Tech pursuing 180 different degree programs and enrolled in 2,500 different classes. Constantly moving in different directions and different spheres, sports acts as a common bonding agent - building a sense of school spirit and common focus. "Go Hokies" is a universally understood refrain beginning early in school and remaining part of a lifelong vernacular.
* Economic impact. While certainly not a reason to mount or sustain a program, the economic effect of a successful Division I program has enormous side benefits. This newspaper noted that the average football weekend pumps about $1 million into the local economy. Extrapolate that by several weekends and add other minor sports, and you have the equivalent of a major industry. While never statistically measured, it's likely that Tech sports contribute $10 million to $15 million annually to the regional economy.
Your editorial stems from the very real embarrassment of too many student athletes in trouble with the law. Obviously, we don't condone such inexcusable behavior. Tech is embarrassed and chagrined. Indeed, we feel that once given the facts, we acted quickly and justly to punish those impugning the integrity of the university and the athletic program. Those problems and issues are separate and distinct from the rationale for sustaining major intercollegiate sports programs.
However, to suggest that the program should be dismantled because of problems resulting from a few athletes is akin to throwing the baby out with the bathwater. We must consider the broader picture. Dismantling the program because of the behavior of a few punishes not only the university, but also the many alumni, students, friends and especially athletes who would otherwise benefit.
Larry Hincker is associate vice president for university relations at Virginia Tech.
LENGTH: Medium: 83 linesby CNB