A letter to the UMN Board of Regents:
"Firm and strong, united are we" -- those words are chanted by thousands of students and fans with pride -- but are we truly united? On Thursday, September 10th, the University of Minnesota men's track & field program, along with men's gymnastics and men's tennis, were informed by the head of administration that their team would no longer be sponsored following the 2020-21 school year. Less than 24 hours after his announcement to the team, Mark Coyle made his recommendation to the Board of Regents. In a matter of seconds, my life and career vision for the years to come was tossed away, along with 48 of my fellow track and field teammates. A life-altering decision, yet the athletic administrators attempted for this to be reviewed and finalized within 24 hours. The following will unpack and oppose the administration's key points leading to their decision to cut these programs, addressing Title IX, budget/financial, diversity, and the sport.
TITLE IX
First, Mark Coyle and the administration's most significant position was that by keeping these programs, it would break Title IX legislation, however, Mark Coyle failed to fully disclose Title IX compliance to the board and how it contributes to gender equity. For an institution to comply with Title IX legislation, they need to meet ONE of the following three tests:
"1. Provide participation opportunities for women and men that are substantially proportionate to their respective rates of enrollment of full-time undergraduate students;
2. Demonstrate a history and continuing practice of program expansion for the underrepresented sex;
3. Fully and effectively accommodate the interests and abilities of the underrepresented
sex." (ncaa.org)
In the Board of Regents meeting, Mark Coyle presented the first test, claiming that these sports needed to be cut based on the change of the university's undergraduate population being 54% women and 46% men. This information was extremely misleading. Contradictory to what was presented to the board, there are other ways to satisfy Title IX legislation. The University of Minnesota has without a doubt made a continuous and effective effort to accommodate the underrepresented sex. Within the 3 years, I have attended the University of Minnesota, the athletic department has added state of the art facilities to women's basketball, women's track, women's golf, and began providing meals and tutoring to every athletic program, regardless of sport or sex. In addition, a common misconception regarding Title IX ruling is it's path to providing gender equity to athletic institutions.
"Title IX does not require reductions in opportunities for male student-athletes. One of
the purposes is to create the same opportunity and quality of treatment for both female
and male student-athletes. Eliminating men sports programs is not the intent of Title IX.
The intent of Title IX is to bring treatment of the disadvantaged gender up to the level of
the advantaged group." (ncaa.org)
Title IX often becomes a scapegoat for athletic departments when looking for programs to cut. It's vital that you realize the true purpose of Title IX, to uplift women and their sports, not to tear down men's sports. United are we?
BUDGET/FINANCIALS
Second, Mark Coyle and the administration brought this recommendation to the board due to budget issues faced by the athletic department. In their summary, it was stated that they foresee a $75 million dollar reduction in revenue, assuming that they don't receive any revenue from football or basketball in the 2020-2021 season. As unpredictable as this year has been, there is a growing chance that we may have a season in the spring, which would effectively lower this revenue loss substantially. A question asked by a Board of Regents member, addressing Mark Coyle, was: "Why now?" With the potential of a spring season and only offering estimates to the board of regents, the athletic administration is reacting irrationally and abandoning three programs that it promised to care for. United are we? By cutting these three programs, the department is saving approximately $2.7 million dollars annually (after honoring the next four years of scholarships). Therefore, this move by Mark Coyle and his administration is a TWENTY-SEVEN-year plan to cover a ONE YEAR loss of revenue. Another question asked by a board of regents member was: "Is this just the first wave?" It doesn't take a financial analyst to see that these numbers don't align. It begs the question, are these program cuts due to a canceled season, or because an administration mishandled their budget? Why was a $13 million dollar track and field stadium built two years ago when one of the programs it was built for couldn't maintain their 1 million dollar annual budget? It's clear that the athletic department is in a position where it needs financial help, but there were no real efforts to attain it. No alumni were contacted prior to this decision. The team was contacted the day prior to the meeting in an effort to sweep it under the rug with the least amount of noise possible because it sheds a light on the financial struggles that this administration has created for itself. Why was a $166 million dollar facility built without having the funds to support it? Clearly, they did not understand the potential ramifications that this decision could have on the student-athletes it was built for. Please do not let myself and my fellow student-athletes and staff members be the victim of these poor financial decisions.
DIVERSITY
Next, the administration's recommendation to cut a sport such as track and field directly opposes their statement regarding their values for diversity. The current student demographics of the University of Minnesota is as follows: "63.6% White, 8.22% Asian, 4.04% Black or African American, 3.82% Hispanic or Latino, 3.3% Two or More Races, 0.309% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0.0791% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders." Even more concerning, the faculty at the University of Minnesota is 76.% White. This begins to show a trend when they choose the men's track and field team to be cut, with a 20% African American population on the current roster. In addition, the team is called home by athletes from 8 different countries, ranging from Jamaica, Trinidad & Tobago, Germany, South Africa, etc... On June 24th, 2020, President Joan Gabel announced the start of a George Floyd scholarship, stating:
"This fund honors George Perry Floyd Jr. and was established to support undergraduate
students whose identities are underrepresented at the University of Minnesota"
How does a statement like this align with the termination of a team that has 5 times more African American students than the campus percentage? Is this new scholarship simply for publicity sake? Or does Joan Gabel truly care about the university's diversity and inclusivity? Again, I ask the question: United are We?
THE SPORT
The University of Minnesota is a very unique and popular institution, partly due to the fact that it is the only division 1 school in the state of Minnesota. With that fact, however, there lies some responsibility on the university to its home state. According to data presented by the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFSHSA), Track and Field is the second most participated high school sport in the state of Minnesota for boys at 17,026 students and the most participated high school sport for girls at 16,458 students (per 2017 data). When Mark Coyle presented his proposal to cut these programs, he told the board that only 58 student-athletes would be affected by this decision, but I'm here to tell you that this is false. Upon approval to cut men's track and field, there will be thousands of high school athletes that will be deprived of the dream to compete for their home state. Don't expect that to change either, the same study from NFSHSA showed that Track and Field had the largest growth from 2003-2017, increasing by 3,500 students in that time frame. In contrast, football, the most participated sport in Minnesota, had the largest decline from 2003-2017, losing 4,000 students. If these trends continue, Track and Field may soon be Minnesota's most participated sport. The question is: will they have a home state to compete for?
CONCLUSION
Board of Regent members -- myself, my teammates, the state of Minnesota, and the sport of track and field ask that you carefully consider the impact this decision will have, not only on the 58 student-athletes but on high school athletes and college athletes across the country. This is the first power 5 school to propose such an idea, and it has the potential to cause a domino effect at a national level. The current state of Gopher athletics is clearly not in violation with Title IX legislation, these programs have no real impact on the administration's budget and anticipated revenue loss, and cutting these programs would directly contradict the university's values of diversity. Please help save our sports.
United are we?
Jordan Macintosh
Men's Track and Field