October 1st, 2020
University of Minnesota Board of Regents
McNamara Alumni Center, Suite 600
200 Oak Street SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455
Dear University of Minnesota Board of Regents,
My name is Megan Smith, and I am an Eden Prairie native and 2011 graduate from University of Minnesota’s College of Education and Human Development at the Twin Cities campus (B.S. Kinesiology, minors in Coaching & Sports Management) and was a member of the women’s track and field and cross country teams for 5 years from 2007-2012. During my time as a Gopher, I was actively involved as a member of the CHAMPS Life Skills program, Fellowship of Christian Athletes, and Student Athlete Advisory Committee where I served on our executive board and represented the Gopher athletic department at the Big Ten SAAC for 2 years. My involvement in all of these activities offered through the athletic department were a defining part of my college educational experience and taught me valuable life skills that that cannot be taught in the classroom and prepared me for life after college. Additionally, I competed for the Gopher’s club running team (TURC) for a year after graduation while taking graduate level courses. I also took on an active role in our local community, serving as Communications Chair for USA Track and Field Minnesota for 7 years from 2010-2016 and served as an official at local meets on occasion. After graduation, my experience as a Gopher athlete helped me earn a graduate assistantship position to coach men’s and women’s track and cross country for two years while earning my Masters in Business Administration in Sports Management from Concordia University Chicago which led me to pursue a full time career as a college coach for the following four years at schools in KY, OH, and PA. To say that track and field and Gopher athletics has played a profoundly positive role in my life would be an understatement as my life would not be the same without track and cross country. Needless to say, I was extremely disappointed to hear the announcement last week of the proposal to cut four men’s sports including indoor and outdoor track and field.
As stake holder in the Gopher track program, the greater track and field community, and native of Minnesota, I write to you today in support of preserving athletic opportunities in these sports and strongly urge you to consider these reasons why you should vote against Mark Coyle’s proposal to cut men’s track and field, gymnastics, and tennis. After hearing this announcement last week, I watched the board of regents meeting and was appalled by the misleading and factually inaccurate information Mr. Coyle provided in support of his proposals in regards to the financial savings, Title 9 compliance, and number of people affected by this decision. After reviewing some of the actual facts and statistics, it is very clear that these proposed cuts will do little to address the massive predictive budget deficit this fall or long term, will put the school further out of compliance with Title 9, and are overall out of sync with the mission and duties of the university as an educational state land grant institution here to serve all Minnesotans. With UMN being one of the largest and leading universities in this country with a strong history in these sports, I also have major concerns over the extremely negative ramifications cutting these teams will likely have on our sport and other Olympic sports at a national and global level. As a track and field alum, I will primarily speak to my knowledge and experience with that sport, but I hope the evidence in support of track and field will highlight why it does not make any sense fiscally nor compliance or local interest wise to cut any of these sports and deprive future generations of the positive educational opportunities these sports provide to young men and women at Minnesota.
Finances
In both his announcement and the September 11th, 2020 Board of Regents meeting, Athletic Director, Mark Coyle, explained the decision to need to cut sports was linked to both financial issues related to the projected $75 million revenue loss predicted for this fall due to COVID19 related cancelations (now likely closer to $30 million with football starting back up) and long term sustainability as well as the need to meet the gender equity requirements of Part 1 of Title 9. In his announcement to cut sports, he stated that these cuts would save a total of $2 million in fiscal year of 2022 and an annual savings of $2.7 million after all the current scholarship athletes in those sports have graduated. I am struggling to understand the logic behind making permanent detrimental changes to the department in order to save only $2 million right now which is only .027% of a massive $75 million predicted budget shortfall due to a temporary problem of the pandemic, while no substantial cuts in spending have been proposed to address the additional $73 million deficit (now $28 million) which is the bigger issue. Mark Coyle stated his plan to address the $73 million remaining was to take a loan out for the university (which is already a LOT of money…at this point if they’re already borrowing that much, why not just borrow $75 million and not make cuts?), yet now that the deficit is closer to only $30 million with football resuming, he is somehow now not okay with borrowing the extra $2 million at an amount less than half of what he previously was okay with borrowing in order to preserve these sports…this does not make any logical sense unless he has ulterior motives behind these cuts. These teams, particularly men’s track and field, have strong alumni bases that surely would have been willing to help come up with funding to make it through the pandemic, yet this was announced just one day before the last board of regents meeting where this was proposed with no alumni or donors given a chance to come up with alternative solutions here. Minnesota previously supported 25 programs for 20 years on much smaller budgets with much success, so the only way it’s no longer possible to support 25 teams is if they have changed priorities from educating students to providing more fancy stuff to try to buy wins in the most profitable sports.
The budget chart showing expenditures by sport that Mr. Coyle showed at the last board meeting was also misleading about the costs of men’s track and field showing a cost of $1.84 million, but that combines three sports into one budget and is not the amount that would be saved by cutting the team. When you look at men’s track specifically and account for fixed costs that would remain due to shared resources and athletes with the men’s cross country team and men’s and women’s track and field teams, the cost savings from cutting both sports- indoor and outdoor track- comes out to around $630,362 or an average of only $315,181 saved per team which is by far the least money saved of all the sports that could have been cut which makes this even more baffling if the goal is to save money. To put this in perspective, when you combine the budgets for both men’s track teams, this is only .48% of the total athletics budget or only .24% when you look at each team individually. When you look at the men’s track/cross country budget without accounting for fixed costs that will remain even if the teams are cut, the average cost to the athletic department for each of those 3 teams lumped into one budget is only $613,629.67 per team which is the lowest operating loss per year out of all of the Gopher sports that don’t turn a profit. When you look at cost per participant, men’s track and field and cross country is already the lowest cost per participant out of all men’s teams (and 2nd overall out of all teams with only women’s track/xc being lower) when all 3 sports are combined into one at $5,730 spent per athlete over 3 sports each year. When you break that down further to account for the cost per roster spot (since that spending is for 3 separate sports) that is an average of only $1,910 spent per athlete by year which is 25% less than the next cheapest sport per participant which is men’s gymnastics at only $7,581 spent per athlete per year. For comparison, this is only 1.49% of what the school spends on each men’s basketball participant per year (which it spends at a 67.28x higher rate per athlete than each men’s track team) where the school spent $128,503 per participant last year which is more than double than even the football team, our most profitable sport, spent per athlete at $58,327 per year. Part 4 of the athletic department’s commitments in its mission statement calls for sound financial management, and there literally is not another “non-revenue” (which actually means “non-profit”) sport for men at UMN that meets this commitment better than track and cross country.
So how do we address the budget issue? Something as simple as cutting this outrageous spending per athlete for men’s basketball to be more in line with football (which is still over double the spending per men’s athlete on most other men’s teams) would increase men’s basketball profits by nearly $1.5 million alone and likely would not take away from anything that actually affects their performance or positive athletic and fan experience. On the women’s side, basketball spent $48,499 per athlete last year (including male practice players, so probably an even higher number when you look at amount spent per actual female player) and volleyball spent $43,384 per athlete, while these teams cost around $6.2 million combined in operating losses per year, nearly 10x more than men’s track or gymnastics. Given the budget shortfalls this year, it seems like poor money management for these two sports to be spending more than double the spending per athlete compared to most of the other women’s teams on campus, when they are operating at significantly higher cost margins than all others teams, and cutting back spending in all sports to more reasonable amounts could help balance the budget. If the school cut back spending on even just those two sports to be more in-line with the other women’s teams, that would save another $3.1 million alone which is more than the cost saved of cutting four men’s teams and no teams would be cut. If the goal of cutting is purely to save money, it makes absolutely no sense to cut the most cost efficient teams on campus with men’s track being the lowest, followed closely by men’s gymnastics (out of men’s teams), golf (endowed), and tennis.
Additionally, the Gopher athletic department has a history of wasteful spending of much high amounts of money than these cuts would save. For example, in 2017, the U’s athletic department had a $8.45 million budget shortfall related to “new AD inherited budget challenges” which included $6.3 million due to “unrealistic ticket sales and scholarship seating projections” and $1.4 million due to an “error in submitted budget” in addition to the $750k buyout to hire Mr. Coyle that was supposed to be covered by the University budget, but then got shifted to athletics; that is $7.7 million lost due to errors by Mark Coyle! On top of this, Mr. Coyle spent $7 million just to change football staff from Tracy Claeys to PJ Fleck, with $5 million of that going to pay coaches NOT TO COACH, which is 3.5x the money cutting these teams would save. It is hard to understand why an educational institution would be willing to take out a $5.6 million loan just to get rid of coaches who were performing reasonably well (and if the reason for firing Claeys wasn’t performance related and was purely related to ethical issues of supporting rape culture, then why was he still owed a buyout in those circumstances?!) but are unwilling to invest a fraction of the same cost into providing life changing, valuable, educational experiences to young men in Minnesota that aren’t available elsewhere in this state. This is clearly a sign of misplaced priorities.
I also find it outrageously appalling that the U would spend over $20 million on track related facility upgrades over the past couple of years only to cut half the teams using them just a year after completing the upgrades to save only $630,362. When a school is willing to spend $20 million on facilities, but not 6% of that cost to keep the team that uses it, then it’s clear we’ve completely lost sight of priorities and our mission as a non-profit educational institution/. I can guarantee you that if you asked any of the women on the track team if they’d rather have the fancy track and no men’s team or just a basic track (or no track) and keep the men’s program, everyone would vote in favor of continuing to sponsor both programs. Mr. Coyle has stated several times that these cuts are not just because of the pandemic and have been considered for years which means he solicited donations while knowing there was a possibility of cutting the men’s team which is fraudulent solicitation of donations given that the track campaign brochure very clearly stated the facility would be used by both teams for years to come. I do not see having world class facilities, winning at all costs, or maximizing profits as part of the University’s or athletic department’s mission statement anywhere, but I do see missions regarding providing educational experiences to prepare students for success in a global world after college which is met by these athletic opportunities. No other activities on campus are expected to turn a profit, yet the university funds them because they add educational value for students. The same is true for sports, and I believe the spending should reflect those values accordingly and be kept in check while continuing to support a wide array of sports and other activities on campus.
While I enjoyed all nice the nice things Gophers athletics offered me during my time here such as traveling across the country, remodeling the weight room, lots of nice clothes, team dinners, massages, and other stuff, none of this was essential to my success. In fact, many of my favorite memories were competing locally with my friends and family and the local track community I grew up with present at the meets, and all of my personal bests were set in Minnesota or an adjacent state. So if you need ideas for areas to make cuts across the board to account for the reduced revenue this year, all teams should consider more regional travel by bus and cut back on unnecessary luxuries such as private jets, international recruiting trips, paying coaches and administrators salaries in the 6-7 figures, hotels for home competitions, ridiculous amounts of clothing issued per athlete, snacks in the athletic buildings, luxurious game rooms for certain teams, nightly steak dinners for athletes on certain teams who already have full meal plans in the dining halls, recruit trips to Vikings games and fancy restaurants with stays in expensive hotels downtown, etc. Mr. Coyle said he has “exhausted all other options” to balance the budget, yet has not announced any overall budget cuts for teams across the board nor has he proposed any of these logical cutbacks as ways to balance the budget, so clearly he has not “exhausted all other options” and is choosing to take the easy way out by not addressing the budget shortfall in a thoughtful or meaningful way.
When you look at cost even further and account for money lost to the university overall in the form of tuition and donations to various university programs and other Gopher sports that aren’t being cut, I believe these cuts will actually cost the university money over time. With only 12.6 scholarships for the men’s indoor & outdoor track and cross country combined, they have the equivalent of 35.4 athletes on the team paying full tuition to attend the university (and most of these athletes came to this school because of this team and likely most of them will transfer if the team is cut) which when accounting for the team ratio of in-state tuition rate to out of state, brings in around $868,455 in revenue per year for tuition and freshmen’s room and board costs which is greater than the amount of athletics money that would be saved by cutting this team. When you account for the average amount spent per student at the U of $14,000/student, the combined savings of cutting this team to the university overall is only $119,637 per year.
The cost saving after tuition revenue is accounted for does not account for the fact that many male and female track alums are major donors to both the U overall and to the athletic department and will now stop giving due to this decision (same goes for gymnastics and tennis alums.) The former women’s cross country/distance track coach and his wife alone have raised over $500,000 to help build TCF Bank Stadium and other facilities for other sports on campus and have donated $73,000 of their own money to the school over the years and have stated they will no longer give or help fundraise due to this decision which negates the cost savings right there. I find it a slap in the face to their efforts when the football coach is unwilling to make any cuts to their budget or his outrageous salary (his 10% cut out of his $4 million salary is liking tossing away pennies) to help save the track team when a former track coach raised $500,000 for his team which is close to the amount saved from cutting this team. I know of other track supporters who have donated in the 5-6 figures to the U and another who is not even an alum from this school who had a large endowment to the men’s team in his will in honor of Roy Griak, but all have stated they will now stop donating and buying season tickets to Gopher sports if these teams are cut. These are just four people I know of out of likely hundreds of the very wealthy and successful Gopher alums who will cut off donations to the school if they cut these teams. You may argue that these admission spots for these cut athletes will just be filled by regular students not on scholarship, which may be true, but I believe those students will be of statistically lower value to the university than these athletes are. Both the graduation rates and average GPA of the men’s track team (3.26 last year) and student-athletes (3.33) as a whole are higher than the general student body (3.21) at the U with the men’s track team leading the nation for men’s track academic All-Americans last year with 16 Gophers earning that distinction. When compared to regular students, Gopher student athletes graduated at 14% higher rates last year. This helps raise the overall academic profile of the university. The athletes on the four teams proposed to cut are typically some of the academic leaders in the department, so losing them will likely lead to a drop in that academic stats for Gopher athletes overall.
Men’s track athletes also typically redshirt a year which leads to a higher percentage of them staying for an extra 5th year or starting a graduate program, just to run a 5th year which generates more revenue per student over their time as a Gopher. Specifically, about 42.8 percent of the men’s track team has redshirted, with most staying that 5th year, which is a 17% higher rate of 5th year students than the general student body which is equal to $106,746 per year in extra revenue from students who stayed an extra year just to run track. The men’s track teams also have students paying out of state tuition at a 17% higher rate than the general student body which also brings in additional revenue that likely would not exist if their spots were filled with a representative sample of the university population.
There also are studies that have found that former-student athletes are more likely to give to the university than non-athlete alums, including a 2008 study in the Journal of Sports Economics that found that former student-athletes were 22% more likely to donate back to their alma mater than their non-athlete counterparts (and significantly more like than former Greek life members to donate) and were likely to give more during years their sport won championships; all the proposed teams to cut have won several championships = more giving! What also will be lost if these programs are cut are the free and positive international publicity these programs bring to the University from all the past and hopeful Olympians and athletes competing at a professional and international level these program have produced. In the last Olympics alone, men’s track had two alums on Team USA make the finals in men’s track and field. There are several athletes affiliated with these four men’s programs who will contend for sports on Team USA again next summer in Tokyo which will bring international attention to the U.
Given that Gopher athletics’ budget ranks in the top 25 nationally in the NCAA for largest budget at $123 million/year and most departments operate on just small fraction of that budget, I have trouble believing it’s not possible to make budget cuts within each program across the department to continue to support all 25 sports. In fact, I know that is possible since hundreds of universities across the country operate successful programs on significantly smaller budgets and the U, itself supported all 25 teams on a smaller budget than they have after the loss this year for years. While I understand the unprecedented hardships caused by the Covid19 pandemic canceling most fall sports and limiting the fans watching football which cuts into profits, this is a one year issue and cutting these teams will not make any meaningful dent in the budget shortfall this fall or problem with the athletic department overspending each year, and the one year deficit could easily be fundraised by alumni. Mark Coyle claimed that the decreased revenue lost now due to football playing would not be enough to save these teams because he claims it’s no longer feasible to support 25 teams at the U and these cuts were being considered long before the pandemic hit. The athletic department budget has increased each of the past 10 years and is up $53 million from a decade ago and Coyle has stated numerous times that fundraising for Gopher athletics is at an all time high each of these years. Yet, rather than using this increase in revenue to help balance the budget or pay back debt from building projects owed to the U, he has continued to increase spending each year despite the massive facilities debt the department owes to the university. The university has successfully supported 25 programs for nearly 20 years with much success across the board in all programs on budgets smaller than the current budget even with the $30 million loss this fall. In fact, in 2009, the budget was $22.7 million less than the 2020 budget after the $30 million loss and they still supported 25 teams, providing more than we needed to succeed, so the only possible way it is no longer sustainable to fund 25 teams when fundraising and the budget are at record highs, is if Mr. Coyle is choosing to no longer support it which I believe is not in line with the University’s or Athletic department’s mission statements.
Title IX Compliance
Mark Coyle was clear in his announcements about these cuts that no amount of fundraising or increased revenue from the start up of fall football would change this decision because the cuts were also proposed in order to comply with Title 9. Just two years ago, in 2018, the United States Office of Civil Rights completed a lengthy and costly investigation into the Gopher Athletics Department’s compliance with Title 9 (based on the 2016-2017 school year) and the department was found to be in compliance with Prong 1 of Part 1 of Title 9 which requires athletic opportunities offered for each sex to be substantially proportionate to the ratio of male to female enrollment in the university. You would think the athletic department would take extra care to comply with this law after completing this federal investigation, but in fact, the opposite occurred. In the time since Mark Coyle has been in charge, he has cut the amount of roster spots for women by 58 spots (increasing the gender disparity from a 1.1% gap to a 4.3% gap), despite women’s overall enrollment increasing each of those years which is the reason why the department is now out of compliance with Title 9. Despite an increase in overall enrollment during Coyle’s first three years and increasing athletics budgets those years, he cut participation opportunities by 84 roster spots with 64% of those cuts being women. It was stating during the last regents’ board meeting that “we must adjust athletic opportunities to be in-line with the growing female student population and comply with Title 9.” In no way does cutting women’s opportunities over the past two years “meet the needs of the GROWING female enrollment at the U.” Cutting men’s opportunities also does absolutely nothing to add more opportunities for the growing female population on campus and will actively hurt many men as well as the current women’s team.
When you break down the numbers involved with these proposed cuts, 125 men’s roster spots will be cut which is actually too many male athletes cut and will put the university even further out of compliance with Title 9 with women being over-represented in athletics by 5.4%, making men the disadvantaged sex under part 1 of Title 9 which is worse than the current 4.3% gap. This would then require the university to either add 51 more men back in other (more costly sports) or cut an additional 86 women…you can see where these trends are going. (And it was announced today in the Start Tribune that he does in fact plan to cut 41 women’s roster spots while adding 40 men to other sports.) It’s hard to see the logic behind cutting 40% too many men only to add them right back on other more expensive sports when they could just cut less (or none) to begin with. Instead of cutting too many men and getting further out of compliance with Title 9, the U could simply add the 30 women back to the cross country roster (who all do 3 sports) which would count for the 90 more women’s roster spots needed to be in compliance with Title 9 without needing to cut any men’s teams. I realize cost seems to be the barrier to adding these women’s opportunities back, but besides the fact that they never should have been removed to begin with, the women’s head cross country coach has stated she would gladly increase her roster back by 10-15 women and could do this with little to no addition to her current budget, and I’m sure she would gladly take on more, if asked/allowed, with just a slight budget increase of a few thousand dollars (which could easily be fundraised by track alums.) Or the 30 women could be split between track/cross country and rowing or other sports for minimal cost.
Outsiders looking in will argue that adding these extra women is not adding “real” experiences as many of them won’t compete at the varsity meets and will argue the extra walk-ons drain resources from the good athletes. This could not be further from the truth. In fact, one of the things on my official visit that convinced me this was the right school for me was that a slow, injured red-shirt freshman I talked to on the visit, was glowing with happiness to be part of such a great team of supportive women and coaches. Back in 2004, when faced with Title 9 compliance issues, then athletic director, Joel Maturi worried he’d have to cut sports. Instead, the women’s cross country coach, Gary Wilson, offered to add 30 walk-ons to his roster (which counted as 90 for Title 9 due to track) for the modest cost of only a few thousand dollars in budget increase (which was easily off-set from all 30 paying full tuition with many of them having parents who donate generously to the program.) Within just 2 years of these roster additions, the track team won their first Big Ten team title which led to a streak of 7 titles between 2006-2009 across all 3 teams, which is more titles than the team has won in the time since they have been forced to make roster cuts.
When I competed from 2007-2012, we had around 100 women on the track team and around 50 on the cross country team each year. This counted as 250 women for the purposes of Title 9 and helped balance out the men’s numbers from football. You could ask every woman who competed during that era and they would all tell you they had a wonderful experience on the team that was life changing. Every athlete received attention from the coaches, proper equipment, and competed in a similar number of meets, with the bottom athletes driving themselves to compete at local DII/DIII meets and having a chance to earn a spot on the travel squad. I personally benefited immensely from this experience and may not have made the cut on a smaller roster. This friendly competitiveness on our large team pushed everyone to always be at their best in order to make/stay on the travel team. Countless walk-on women have gone on to be All-Conference athletes and All-Americans including Gabe Anderson (Grunewald) who went from walk-on to second in the NCAA in the 1500 her senior year after overcoming cancer treatments which opened the opportunity for her to run pro for Brooks Beasts and make numerous finals at US Championships and the final in the 3000 at the World Championships. Even more significantly, she used her platform to inspire people fighting cancer and around the globe and started a foundation that has raised millions for rare cancer research. Under the current roster cuts, she probably would never have made the team and none of this would have occurred. Outside of athletic success, this program has taught hundreds of young women invaluable life skills that can’t be learned in the classroom, myself included. I strongly urge you to vote to restore these opportunities in order to meet Title 9 compliance rather than removing more future opportunities for both men and women.
Mission Statement & Commitment to Diversity
It is clear from what I outlined above, that the Gopher athletic department is out of compliance with Title 9 only due to cutting women’s roster spots while the student population increased, and the department has the ability to continue to fund all 25 programs within their current budget as they have for the past 20 years, but is choosing to prioritize the trend of unsustainable and outlandish spending unnecessary fancy stuff in order to increase profits (and salaries) in a few sports over their mission to provide educational opportunities to serve the people of Minnesota. I believe this model we are seeing nationwide with DI schools trying to operate as what’s essentially minor league professional football and basketball leagues chasing profits, is in direct contradiction with their mission and duties as a non-profit, state-funded, land grant educational institution. I also believe the decision to cut these teams directly contradicts the Gopher Athletic Department’s mission statement and commitment to diversity. Why have these statements if we aren’t going to follow them?
Maintaining a broad offering of varsity sports at the U to meet the interests of our diverse state is directly in-line with the university’s mission statement which was “founded in the belief that all people are enriched by understanding, is dedicated to the advancement of learning and the search for truth; to the sharing of this knowledge through education for a diverse community; and to the application of this knowledge to benefit the people of the state, the nation, and the world.” A broad based sports offering also is in line with one of the guiding principles in part 2 of the mission statement which states that the university strives to be “conscious of and responsive to the needs of the many communities it is committed to serving.” The mission in a nutshell, is to provide a broad array of diverse learning opportunities to prepare students to succeed in life in a diverse and multi-cultural global world after college. Nowhere in this mission statement does it say anything about educational programs being required or having a main goal of maximizing profits, having world class athletic facilities, or winning at all costs as being part of the mission. It is clear our athletic department has fallen prey to a national trend of Division I athletic departments chasing wins and profits, falling far from the educational mission of the university. As leaders of our university
In several parts of the university’s mission statement, it references a commitment to preparing students to succeed in a diverse and global community. The Gopher Athletic department even has an entire diversity statement that outlines their commitment to diversity. A recommitment to these diversity missions was also made by President Gable and Athletic Director Coyle in the wake of George Floyd’s death and the unrest that followed this past summer. Cutting the men’s track team would be in direct contradiction to these diversity commitments as the track team is probably the most diverse team on campus. At a time where Minnesotan’s have made it clear that they are sick of racial injustices and want a solution to fix the large racial disparities in Minnesota and across the United States, having diverse teams like track and field is now more important than ever. Currently, African-Americans make up 25% of the men’s track team and hold 50% of their scholarships. While the university has committed to serving a diverse group of students from around our state and beyond, currently African-Americans only make up 4.9% of the University of Minnesota’s student body, despite being 10% of our state’s population. By providing these opportunities to so many minority students, the track team is helping make up for the university’s disproportionately low percentage of African-Americans enrolled and is also providing the opportunity to attend college to many students who otherwise would not have been able to afford to attend, some being the first in their families to do so.
Minnesota is home to a large and growing East-African population, including over 53,000 people of Somali background. According to the Minnesota Compass Report, 18% of children in the state this year are immigrants or children of immigrants with Somali’s being the 2nd largest immigrant group in MN and Ethiopians 5th. Yet, despite this large East-African population in Minnesota and the city of Minneapolis (right next to West Bank!), there are only two student-athletes at UMN of East-African decent and both happen to be on the men’s track team which has a rich history of success by students of East-African heritage, most who could not have afforded to attend college without this opportunity. Additionally, there are 8 international students on the men’s track team (and several more on the men’s tennis team too) which aids the school’s mission to extend their reach globally and prepare students for a diverse and multi-cultural world.
The men’s track team, in particular, has been a leader on campus in the area of inclusion and acceptance of LGBTQ+ students and has led many initiatives in the athletic department to educate other students about the LGBTQ+ community. It is well documented that many males who fall on the GBTQ+ spectrum face discrimination on sports teams which causes many of these athletes to hide their identity and suffer mental health issues as a result. The initiatives and welcoming environment the men’s track team has created in this area of LGBTQ+ awareness is directly in-line with the U’s guiding principle to “provide an atmosphere of mutual respect, free from racism, sexism, and other forms of prejudice and intolerance.” Track and field teams are diverse in all ways with men and women of varying body types, races, backgrounds, socioeconomic status, rural/urban/suburban backgrounds, personality types, and skill sets coming together as a team from across the US and the world. I challenge you to find another sport that has the same variety of diversity on it with both men and women working together than you’ll find in track and field. In fact, the only way to excel in a sport that tests such a wide range of skills is to have a diverse team.
Track and field is also unique in that 20% of men’s college track coaches are women, which is rare in other sports. Given the well-documented gender inequities and the glass ceiling women face in the work-place, it’s important for both men and women to see women in leadership positions, particularly in male dominated careers, as this is the first step towards breaking down these stereotypes. The men’s track team currently has two female coaches on staff as well as a male coach who is an African immigrant, another under-represented group in coaching and leadership positions in the work place. As part of its mission to be “conscious of and responsive to the needs of the many communities it is committed to serving” and “to benefit the people of the state, the nation, and the world,” the University of Minnesota is here to serve of ALL Minnesotans which includes both various ethnic minorities and other historically under-represented groups, all which are being well-served by sponsoring track and field.
While offering opportunities to minority students in underserved communities is one way the track team helps address some of the racial disparities in education, it also benefits all students on the team and school by creating a diverse and inclusive environment that gives all students the chance to seek to understand people from different backgrounds and learn embrace each other’s differences which furthers their global view of the world- which is a key to fighting racism in Minnesota and beyond. Each person’s perception of others is shaped by their reality. When someone’s perception of another race is shaped by limited interactions with that group of people and what they see and hear in the media, bias and misperceptions that are different from reality are bound to form. Given the racial segregation of housing communities in Minnesota that has stuck with us since it was mandated by redlining in the 60’s, many Minnesotans grow up with limited opportunities to get to work closely with people of a race or background different from their own. For many student-athletes from the Midwest, their experience on the track team might be their first time really having the chance to have friends of another or meet people from other countries and learn about their culture. The diversity of the men’s track team meets the following guiding principles outlined in the university’s mission statement of “providing an atmosphere of mutual respect, free from racism, sexism, and other forms of prejudice and intolerance” and “assists individuals, institutions, and communities in responding to a continuously changing world” as well as part 4 of the athletic department’s commitments to “champion diversity and inclusion” better than any other team on campus.
I believe continuing to support 25 sports also fulfills this part of the university’s mission: “Teaching and Learning - To share that knowledge, understanding, and creativity by providing a broad range of educational programs in a strong and diverse community of learners and teachers, and prepare graduate, professional, and undergraduate students, as well as non-degree seeking students interested in continuing education and lifelong learning, for active roles in a multiracial and multicultural world” as well as these “guiding principles” of “teaching responsibility, integrity, and cooperation” and “inspires, sets high expectations for, and empowers the individuals within its community.” It also meets part 2 of Gopher Athletic’s “commitments of “providing experiences and resources solidifying or advancing student-athlete’s future success” better than any experience I had in the classroom.
I can personally attest to how participation in this sport has taught me life skills and prepared me for a multi-cultural world as well as how to “win with class and integrity” as outlined in part 1 of Gopher Athletic’s mission statement. My experience with Gopher track motivated me to become a coach which led me on a 7 year coaching journey with stops in Chicago, rural Kentucky, Pittsburgh, and Cleveland. Through this sport, I have traveled to 26 different states, earned a masters degree (paid for by coaching), met my fiancé and many great friends in Chicago, and experienced new cultures and diversity in ways I never would have experienced had I just stayed in Minnesota and not been involved with this sport which has greatly expanded my world view and understanding of others from different backgrounds than myself. Without track and field, none of this would have happened and I have no idea where I’d be today. While my athletic career was not particularly successful in college, the experience was life changing and taught me several valuable life skills that can’t be taught in the classroom. Being part of this sport and the team at Minnesota taught me how to persevere through trials and never give up on my goals. As someone who struggles to stay focused, running taught me discipline, better time management skills, how to handle stress under pressure, and how to channel that focus and dig deeper than I thought I could to push myself when I want something bad enough. I’ve been offered more jobs because of my experience with Gopher track than my degree has ever gotten me. These skills have carried with me and have been invaluable for overcoming difficult situations to achieve success in the workplace. I also had the opportunity to spend numerous hours volunteering in my local community alongside many members of the teams proposed for cuts. The track teams (and members of men’s tennis and gymnastics) routinely lead the athletic department in volunteer hours which meets the “outreach and public service part of the university mission statement and part 6 of the athletic department’s mission statement which calls to “unite our campus, community, and state through outreach and engagement.” From my experience, the track and field programs at Minnesota are the epitome of the Gopher Athletic Department’s mission to “WIN by intentionally focusing on unique athletic, academic, and life changing experiences propelling maroon and gold to greater heights and career success. “
Conference and National Success
During the September 9th, 2020 Board of Regents meeting and in the open letter to the university announcing these proposed cuts, Mark Coyle mentioned that other factors that went into selecting which teams to propose to be cut included: national success, local and national trends in participation and interest in these sports, and local and national impact. If these factors were truly taken into consideration, than I find it even more puzzling how these sports ended up being selected as all these factors lead to a strong argument to keep these sports. When you look at team success at both the conference and local level, Gopher men’s track, tennis, and gymnastics both have long histories of being some of the more successful teams on campus. Over the past 130 years, the Gopher men’s track team has consistently produced champions including: 14 Olympians, 1 NCAA team championship, 15 NCAA Champions, 11 Big Ten Team titles, 150+ Big Ten Champions, 200+ All-Americans. Minnesota men’s track team had two alumni run for Team USA in the most recent Olympics alone (Ben Blankenship of Stillwater and Hassan Mead of Minneapolis South) who both made the Olympic finals. University of Minnesota was one of only 9 schools in the country to have at least two men on the Olympic track team in Rio. They also had an NCAA champion as recently as 2018 when Obsa Ali (a Richfield native) won the NCAA 3000 m steeplechase. They last won a Big Ten team title in 2011, but have consistently finished high in the very competitive Big Ten Championships as a team including a third place finish at the 2020 indoor championships which was the third highest conference finish out of all Gopher men’s teams in 2020. Minnesota men tied two of the most storied and successful men’s track teams in the country, Arkansas and Oregon, for most All-Americans in 2020. I don’t have all the stats on gymnastics and tennis, but I do know that both of those teams have historically been very successful as well. Gymnastics alone also has over a 100 year history of success with several All-Americans, national champions, and Olympians as well, including a current team member who is contending for a national title this winter and a spot on the 2021 Olympic team, and routinely are one of the best in the nation. Tennis won Big Tens in 2015 and has made NCAA’s 9 of the last 11 years. I have enjoyed attending gymnastic matches back in college where I was always impressed with their skills. It’s clear these are some of the more successful teams on campus and in the country, so I’m not sure why these would be proposed for cuts if “local and national success” were factors considered.
Local and National Interest & Impact
When you look at local and national trends in participation in these sports there also does not seem to be any facts that support these sport selections, particularly for track and field. Both nationally and in Minnesota, track and field is the most popular high school sport in terms of participation numbers for boys and girls combined and is second only to football for boys with 17,026 track participants in MN in 2017 (and is leading for girls with 16,458 participants in MN.) A 2017 study from NFSHSA showed that track and field had the largest national growth out of all sports from 2003–2017, increasing by 3,500 students in that time frame. During this same time period, football saw a decline by 4,000 students. While national high school sports participation saw a decline in the 2018-2019 school year for the first time in 30 years, Minnesota actually saw a marginal increase during that same time period. While Minnesota is 22nd in size in the US, it consistently ranks 10th nationally in terms of sports participation. Clearly this data shows there is a strong local and national interest in both track and field and sports in general which a reason the U should continue to offer a wide array of athletic opportunities to meet the interests of the local and national community.
If all four proposed sports were to be cut, then over 30% of men’s sports offerings at UMN would be in football which does not leave a lot of opportunities for men who have other interests or skill sets or for those who wish to engage in a sport they can do for life without such high correlations to negative long term health effects that come with playing football. These cuts would also eliminate 80% of Minnesota’s ethnic minority student-athletes on “non-revenue” teams. A 2018 study by the Aspen Institute at Utah State University looked at the annual cost of youth participation in 22 sports nationally and found track and field to be the LEAST EXPENSIVE sport out of all sports at a cost average of only $190.51 per child aged 3-18. Compare this to ice hockey, a sport where we have five DI schools in the state, which was the most expensive sport with parents spending an average of $2,583.73 a year on one child. If the university wants to serve all of Minnesotans, then they must continue to support sports that are more accessible to children of all income levels, not just the most wealthy of Minnesotans.
Local and national community interest in each sport and effects of cutting them at both of those levels were also stated as factors in selecting these sports for proposed cuts. Once again, I’m struggling to find any evidence that suggests a lack of interest in track and field in Minnesota outside of the high school level where it is the most popular sport. In fact, the facts seem to show the opposite, as Minneapolis is routinely ranked one of the best cities for runners in the United States including top 10 rankings in 2016 by Runner’s World (#7); 2017 & 2018 (#2) & 2019 (#5) by SmartAsset. Twin Cities Marathon and TC One Mile have both hosted multiple national championships in the Twin Cities and are both top 10 road races in the country in their respective distances. Twin Cities Marathon has also been named the most “beautiful urban marathon” on more than one occasion and along with Grandma’s Marathon, attract thousands to our state each year from around the country and the globe. Mill City Running, founded by a former Gopher track athlete, is routinely ranked one of the best running shops in the country, largely for their community engagement with local runners of all levels. Minnesota is also home to Minnesota Distance Elite, which has many former Gophers on it, competing professionally for national titles.
The fundraising brochure put out by the Golden Gopher Fund for the outdoor track facility stated that “Minnesota’s track and field community is one of the largest, most engaged, and innovative in the nation” which I would agree with. Youth and masters track and field participation have also been on the rise in the Twin Cities over the past decade. I served as the Communications Chair for USA Track and Field Minnesota Association from 2010-2016 and our membership numbers grew each of those years I was involved and to my knowledge has not slowed in the time since then. In fact, a low key summer all-comers meet hosted by USATF Minnesota often will attracts hundreds of participants of all ages to compete on Tuesday nights throughout the summer, with kids as young as 2 years old competing in the same events as 90 year old participants and several wheel chair racers as well. I challenge you find another college sport that has such high numbers of mass participation by people of all ages and demographics. Minnesota also played host to the National Senior Games in 2015 and had a huge turnout and success in track and field by Minnesota participants and the number of youth tracks clubs and competition opportunities has grown enormously in the 15 years since I was a participant in youth summer track. It’s clear that track and field is truly a life sport that has wide participation and support from all ages across Minnesota. Many of the local post-collegiate and DII/DIII athletes in Minnesota benefit from the opportunity to compete in the first-class facilities at UMN meets against the Gophers which helps push many of our local DIII and DII track athletes to hit qualifying marks for nationals at their level, so cutting the men’s track team would also hurt local athletes at the lower divisions as well as post-collegiates trying to qualify for USATF Nationals.
I can also attest to the fact that many Minnesotans look up to the Gopher track team as the team for our state since track is not a team sport at the pro level which makes the Gopher the top track team in the state (same could be said for gymnastics and tennis.) The dedication of Minnesota track fans to the Gophers was clear from the fact that I ran into around 30 track fans that I personally knew while out in Eugene, Oregon watching many former Gophers compete in the most recent USATF Olympic trials in 2016. That was only the Minnesotans I personally knew…I know there were many more I didn’t know or see who paid their own way to fly half way across the country to cheer on the Gophers. When I coached at small colleges across the country, I would routinely get asked by some of the guys I coached if I knew former Gophers, Hassan Mead, Ben Blakenship, or Heather Kampf and what it was like to run at Minnesota. Many of the guys I coached at Grove City College, a small DIII school in western Pennsylvania, spent their own time and money to drive 45 min from campus to downtown to get the chance to meet Ben Blankenship and Heather Kampf who were both in town for the Pittsburgh Liberty Street Mile that year. It’s clear to me, as a men’s coach, that Minnesota men’s track athletes are not only looked up to as role models by Minnesota athletes, but are role models for aspiring athletes around the country.
Mark Coyle claims that cutting these sports will only affect 58 people on those teams, but that could not be further from the truth. For one, there are actually 72 athletes on those three teams that will have eligibility remaining after this school year, and that could go up to 75 if COVID19 causes winter seasons to be canceled as well. I am not sure how Mr. Coyle came up with the number 58 team members affected, but that number is factually inaccurate. When questioned about that number by Regent Kenyana at the last board meeting, Mr. Coyle also gave a misleading answer saying that some of the athletes weren’t counted due to cross country and that “some of the cross country athletes participate in track and field.” The truth is 100% of the men’s cross country athletes also run track (unless they are 5th years for cross country and have already exhausted eligibility in track.) I am sure Mr. Coyle is aware of this which makes it look like he wants to hide these numbers to downplay the impact of this decision. If he wasn’t aware of that, that just shows how little thought he has put into this proposal and understanding the true impact on student-athletes and the greater community. It is common knowledge to athletes that nearly every cross country athlete also runs track at the DI level as running year round it critical to athlete development. I question why any knowledgeable AD at this level would want to sponsor a cross country team without track as they would not be competitive as very few, if any, good recruits would want to give up competing in track and field in order to only run cross country for Minnesota, when all their peers in the sports are competing in all three which is critical to development and the college athlete experience. I have heard that many members of the cross country team are strongly considering transferring if the track team is cut, so to say this will not impact the cross country team is disingenuous and completely untrue.
The cross country coaching position might also become less desirable without a track team which also has potential to lead to more regular turn-over in coaches which typically harms programs. Much of Minnesota’s success in both men’s and women’s track teams can be attributed to the consistency in coaching with long tenures by all of their coaches (succeeded mostly by their former athletes upon retirement), most notably, Roy Griak, who dedicated nearly his entire adult life to the men’s team up until the day he died. It is rare to have such long tenures for college coaches, so to have so many of them in the track/cross country programs is a testament of the positive environment in those programs and is an exemplary example of the programs meeting part 3 of the Gopher Athletic Department’s commitments in its mission statement which is to “align a team of committed professionals, passionate about maroon and gold.” The fact that alums spanning decades from these programs are coming together now to try to save them (and tennis and gymnastics too) is a clear sign that graduates of these programs are aligned with that part of the mission as well as the over mission of “together are we.”
Further, this would also cost the equivalent of two full time coaches their jobs, as NCAA DI track limits paid staff to only 3 per gender for track and just one for cross country. This not only decreases the ethnic diversity of Minnesota’s athletic staff, but also will seriously impact the livelihood of those coaches and their families. In addition to losing the shared synergies of a combined team, his would also hurt the women’s track team as they would lose shared coaches specializing in coaching specific unique field events. In fact, last year every NCAA track team at schools that only sponsored one gender finished in the bottom 10% of their conference meets. In addition to the team members impacted, this decision will impact many more people including the hundreds of alums who take pride in supporting these programs, and more importantly, the thousands of youth in Minnesota who play these sports and dream of competing for the Gophers one day and will no longer have these opportunities. Do we really want to see our best athletes in Minnesota go represent the Badgers or Hawkeyes in college and beyond?
As a female athlete, clearly I was never part of the men’s track team, yet as a Gopher alum and men’s track coach, this deeply impacts me too. I find the trend of cutting women’s roster spots at Minnesota, despite the rising enrollment rate, to be deeply concerning and find it more concerning that this injustice is now being used as a cover to take more opportunities away from men in order to create a gender imbalance that will allow them to take more opportunities away from women. My high school coaches, many whom are Gopher men’s track alums were positive mentors that helped me achieve two state titles in high school which allowed me the chance to join the Gopher track team for college as a walk-on (which turned into a book scholarship.) These coaches were influenced by their participation in men’s track at various schools which in turn influenced me as a young athlete and now a coach. I turned down big scholarships at other DI schools to attend Minnesota due to the strong academics and the chance to compete at the highest level in my home state and be part of the family-like atmosphere the coaches instilled in the teams here. I was also influenced to attend MN by the good experience I had a cross country camp hosted by the Gopher men’s coaches here and also by the success of other athletes from my high school who went on to become Gophers, including Adam Steele who was the 2003 NCAA Champion at the 400 meters and earned a gold medal at the World Championships in the 4x400.
Even now, 9 years removed from this program, I still feel deeply connected as part of the Gopher track due to the family like atmosphere of respect the coaches created. The values I learned at Minnesota have carried with into my coaching career and have helped turn around several track programs at other schools and have impacted hundreds of young men and women I have coached at these schools. Some of these athletes have gone on to coach and spread the impact even further to their athletes. I hope if I were to have a son one day who has takes interest in track, tennis, or gymnastics that he would have the opportunity to compete for his home state and benefit from these programs like I have, if he had the talent or desire to do so. It makes me very sad to think that if I were to have a son that he would not have the same wonderful educational opportunities available to him that I had.
We’ve already seem a trend of cuts to Olympic sports at colleges across the country, but Minnesota is the first Power 5 school to propose cutting men’s track. As a program with a storied history of success at the national level, this got the attention of track fans across the US as it is seen as a direct threat to the future of our sport. People like Vin Lananna, the President of USA Track & Field, the national governing body of our sport, have spoken out in disgust and concern over these proposed cuts along with several high profile professional athletes with Olympic credentials and prominent DI coaches across the country as well as coaches and fans at all levels of our sport. NCAA DI track and field and gymnastics are the direct feeders into the professional and US Olympic teams. Minnesota is just one of 13 remaining Division I men’s gymnastics programs which makes this a unique draw for athletes from around the country to consider attending Minnesota. Do we really want to help kill one of the most popular sports to watch in the Olympics when instead we could take pride in sending more of our own to compete for Team USA? If a power house with 130 years of national success can get away with cutting men’s track and other sports under the disguise of Covid19 and Title 9 cuts, then who’s to stop other schools from following? This decision has potential to set off a profoundly negative domino effect nationally (that’s already started at other schools) and destroys Olympic sports and the educational opportunities these provide at the college level.
It’s clear that an unsustainable funding model based on misplaced priorities in attempt to “keep up with the Jones’” has plagued college sports nationally and everyone knows we need to find a better way or we will watch college athletic opportunities disappear each year. But we aren’t the Jones’; we are the Gophers and we stand together- “United are We.” Minnesota has the chance now to be a leader and step up and recommit to our priorities and values as an educational institution and find a sustainable funding solution that will allow us to continue to offer these valuable educational opportunities in college sports for generations to come. The actions outlines as values in the Gopher Athletic’s mission statement include: “Be accurate. Be Competitive. Be Honest. Be Inclusive. Be Kind.” It’s clear right now that Mark Coyle is only embodying “be competitive” and only seems to value that in the profitable sports. I urge you as leaders of our university system to step up and be the leaders I know as fellow Gophers and vote no to this proposal to cut sports or at minimum delay the vote to give more time to more thoroughly research the facts and impact of this and explore other funding solutions. Further, I challenge you to hold Mr. Coyle accountable for his actions and his duty to uphold the mission statement and values of the university and athletic department as part of an educational institution here to serve all Minnesotans and find a sustainable funding model that is in line with those values. If you have any questions or would like to discuss any of this in-person, I would be more than happy to answer those questions or speak over the phone. Thank you for your time and consideration and your commitment to serving all Minnesotans.
United Are We,
Megan Smith
B.S. Kinesiology ‘11
Gopher Track/XC Alum ’07-‘12