|
Questions and Comments We've Received June 6, 2003 Dear Dr. Cowan: It is becoming more and more obvious that the current administration at Tulane has been secretly devising a plan to drop athletics starting with football. The threatened move to Division 3 was the smoke screen for the so-called compromise of just dropping football. It is unfortunate that you, as President, apparently does not even want to try to fix the "money"problem according to the recommendations by our capable Athletic Director, Rick Dickson. Maybe you are afraid it just might work if you give it time. It would be an absolute disgrace to drop any current major Division I sport and a disaster on the horizon for Tulane both financially and academically. Without a complete major sports program Tulane will never be the same. It has also come to my attention that the current student athletic fee is only $75 per year. Raising it to $200 or $250 per year would bring in over a million real dollars to the athletic program. This ispeanuts at the current tuition rate. Furthermore, the athletic scholarship tuitions are only paper costs unless you have someone waiting to occupy the athlete's classroom desk. I'm sure this is not the case. So, why don't you quit trying to make Tulane something it will never be --- a small prestigious academic only university? Presently, Tulane is a complete well rounded academically strong New Orleans Institution, and not something from the East Coast. If you don't like it here, I suggest you take your out-of-town henchmen and your Ivy League mentality and move up the line onto "greener" pastures where you can do your thing - whatever that is. ***** Dr. Cowan, I will be 55 next Thursday and some of my best childhood memories are of my Daddy taking me to Tulane Stadium to see the Greenies play. Please do not eliminate or downgrade the only current link to these wonderful times. Sincerely, ***** To the Members of the Board of Administrators of Tulane University: Please vote to stay the course and keep all Tulane Sports in Division 1. ***** To the Board of Adminstrators: As a member of the executive committee of the Tulane Alumni Association, I never thought I would see the day that Tulane University would alienate its alumni to the point where proud Tulanians would be disgusted with their university. I have always found my fellow alumni to be extremely devoted to Tulane. I will be shocked and saddened if the board of administrators lets the university alienate its alumni and donors by dropping football or Division I-A status. So will many, many alumni. During my 15-year career in nonprofit fundraising, I have learned that the key to success is cultivating your constituency and building relationships. With effort and time these relationships can lead to large annual gifts and significant bequests. For years, Tulane has built a loyal alumni base around the country. Now, that fabric is being torn. Alumni are angry and distraught, and wondering if they are being heard by the board of administrators. Alumni are appalled that they had virtually no opportunity to hear a plan and participate in a solution. Some alumni still probably donŐt know what is going on, as there has been no mass outreach to alumni on this matter. Even if you donŐt like football or college sports, dropping football or divisions would be a very bad development decision. Why? Because it will alienate your constituency. Many people will stop giving, and the effect will be felt many years from now I was treated extremely well as a student at Tulane from 1983-1987 and as an alumnus since then. Because I felt like a part of the Tulane family, I have valued my Tulane affiliation as much as anything in my life. In recent years I have volunteered countless hours for the university, serving as president of a Tulane Club, and on the executive committee of the Tulane Alumni Association. Last year, I received the TAA Award for Outstanding Club. My wife and I do not have children, and Tulane has been designated as the number one beneficiary of our estate. But we are becoming disillusioned. So have alumni in my area, as evidenced by the dozens of alumni who sent me letters to give to Dr. Cowen, and the many who sent messages to the feedback website. Not one alumnus whom I have talked to supports a change in Div. 1-A status. I hope that the board is hearing their voice! I have also been in contact with members of the Tulane Alumni Association, including dozens of Club Presidents around the country. Many of them and their constituents believe strongly that Tulane should keep football and remain in Division I-A, because that is what makes Tulane unique, what makes Tulane alumni proud and loyal, and what ultimately keeps alumni supporting Tulane. All Scott Cowen talks about is money and how this is a financial decision. People can argue about whether $5 million is a lot or a little, but you cannot put a price on the value of Tulane football and Tulane as a Division I-A School. Those things are simply priceless. Please donŐt let your legacy be that you voted for a decision that helped destroy a great university. Sincerely, ***** Dear Dr. Cowen and The Board of Trustees of Tulane University: I am writing to you regarding the future status of the athletic program at Tulane University. According to recent newspaper articles that I've read, the Board of Trustees of Tulane University will decide on June 10 whether to drop football and other sports to the N.C.A.A. division three level. I consider myself a member of the Tulane family (my son graduated last month from Tulane College) and I feel compelled to write you about this decision. I think it would be a grave mistake to drop football or any of the Tulane teams from their current status. I am a graduate of Duke University, class of 1968. I, like my sons, played only intramural sports in college. Sports, however, were an integral part of the college experience and something that helped bind me through the years to my alma mater. My second son is currently a rising junior at Duke. He was accepted by both Tulane and Emory Universities. He attended Emory University his freshman year. Emory is very similar to Tulane in many ways ( both schools have excellent academic reputations and similar demographics). His experience at Emory was not to his liking. I believe a lot of it had to do with the fact that Emory competes in the N.C.A.A. division three level. Jeff said very few students attended any games at Emory, and the campus in general lacked a sense of unity. Emory students consistently cite the lack of Division One athletics as a major source of dissatisfaction with the school. He transferred to Duke for his sophomore year and saw a huge contrast in the two schools. He saw students coming together to cheer for their fellow students in various sports, and immediately felt a part of the whole university. I'm a pediatrician. I consider academic integrity and excellence the number one priority in selecting a university. I'm a sports fan but I'm not fanatical about sports. I follow intercollegiate sports closely, and I love to cheer for both Duke and Tulane teams. With the advent of television networks devoted entirely to sports, I have seen how much national tv exposure can mean to a university's athletic recognition and to the appeal a school holds for prospective students. It is hard to argue that Duke's success in basketball didn't aid it's rise to prominence. Admission officers at Duke say that whenever Duke appears in the national final four tournament it sees a significant rise in the number of undergraduate applications for admission. I am certain that the Alumni Office also sees a significant rise in donations after those appearances. My third son will be applying to colleges for admission this year. He is an excellent student who is considering schools such as Tulane and Duke. I know he feels the same way that I do about dropping Division One sports. It is my sincere hope that you will consider these factors in making your decision about the future of Tulane University. Sincerely, ***** Dear Members of the Tulane Board of Trustees, I am writing you to express my concern dealing with the issue of Tulane Athletics. I feel very strongly that Tulane University should remain in Division 1-A in all sports including football. As a 2 term president of Student Government at the University of New Orleans I have seen first hand how Division 1-AAA (Division 1 in all sports but football) works, and to be honest with you it doesn't work very well. In the south football is the driving force behind any successfull athletic program. While at UNO it was very difficult to get students excited about basketball and baseball games. When asked why they didn't support athletics most students would resond by asking "Why don't we have a football team?". As you can see football is the sport that most students (future alumni) identify with. Football is also important in terms of trying to recruit high school students to enroll at Tulane. Its a fact that after MTV the most watched television channel of high school seniors is ESPN. I would also like to express my concern as to how the Tulane Board has conducted itself in the last few weeks. I think it is very import that everyone make an intelligent and informed decision with all of the facts in front of them. With that being said I think it is important that Athletic Director Rick Dickson be allowed to make his presentation to the entire board. I can't see any reasonable justification for not allowing him to make his presentation to everyone. If you have a reasonable justificaion for denying him this opportunity I would like for you to express that to me. As a former Student Member on the LSU Board of Supervisors I understand the importance of an open process where everyone is involved. I understand that Tulane is a private institution and has decided to keep things "close to the vest" but I feel as though this is not the best way to proceed. By doing this the Tulane Board has given rise to speculation that they are trying to hide something or that they want to keep certain people out of the process. John Quincy Adams once said that "there is only one thing in this world that can not be disputed and those are facts". The simple fact of the matter is that everyone from alumni to students to supporters should be involved in this process. I hope the board takes into consideration what has taken place in the past few weeks. Rick Dickson and his staff have been able to raise funds and sell tickets in record numbers. What is more impressive is that he has done all this without any official voice of support from the university president or board. Rick Dickson has done in the past few weeks what others have not been able to done in over 110 years and for that he and the Tulane Athletic Department should be rewarded. I would like to leave all of you with this final thought: A wise man once told me "I've never seen students, alumni and supporters have a pep rally when a university opened a new building or added a new degree program but for some reason they always seem to get together and have pep rallys just before a football game." Think about it! Sincerely, ***** I have two degrees from Tulane (B.A. - 1969 and Law - 1976). The proposal to drop football would be a disaster for Tulane. I would not have attended Tulane if it didn't have a Division I athletic program, including football, and I am sure that many students consider a school's athlectic program in deciding whether to attend that university. Should Tulane drop football, the decision would alienate a very large number of Tulane alums and would result in their severing all ties to Tulane. Such a decision would rip apart the University and its alumni for decades to come. What will happen to overall contributions in the future? Why not strive for excellance and try to emulate Stanford University? ***** Dear Board of Administrators I want to reitterate my support for Tulane Athletics and urge you to do the same. As you know, this whol process has stunk to high heaven. Tulane has ignored its own mission statememt by holding secret meetings and excluding key stakeholders from participation. (I invite each of you to re-read your own missions statement). The harm done because of the way this "review" has been conducted, not the review itself, is irrevocable to some extent. Decades of trust have been eroded. Taking away 1A football is a sure roadmap to regional university status. The only difference between Tulane and Loyola will be that people won't be willing to pay 27.5K for a regional University. The quality of applicants will erode, further depressing the amount students are willing to pay for a Tulane degree. We live in a TV/Computer generation - disassociating ourselves from television will remove Tulane from the minds of millions. Axing football is clearly not upholding the fiduciary duty to TULANE (which is where the duty lies; not to Scott Cowan's career or personal opinions of !A football, but to Tulane). Rick Dickson has done WONDERS in raising money over the last month. Why has he succeeded? HONESTY, OPENNESS, and INTEGRITY. Funny, those three things are in the MISSION STATEMENT of Tulane University, but have been callously ignored by certain parties over the last few months. The University could do a lot worse than to enlist the services of Mr Dickson when raising money for the university - Dickson Delivers - others talk a big game, but don't deliver squat. Save the WAVE!!!! ***** To the Committee, I had the pleasure of playing basketball on scholarship at Tulane. I chose Tulane over Alabama, Auburn and other larger schools because I was interested in a great education in a cosmopolitan city and Tulane fit the bill perfectly. During the time I was there, Tulane played a strong independent schedule against major competition around the country. We faced conference opponents like Texas, Mississippi State and Kansas State and independents like Marquette and Notre Dame. My teammates majored in pre-law, pre-medicine and engineering and Tulane was on par with Duke and Miami athletically and academically. Unfortunately, we lost the things that attracted me to Tulane for sports with the scandals of the 80s and the consequent termination of the basketball program. Athletic success has benefited Duke and Miami enormously and if Tulane can navigate the ongoing conference re-alignment process and replicate their success then I support that effort. If not, then we might finally acknowledge once and for all that getting out of the SEC many years ago was the end of big time sports at Tulane. I commend the leadership demonstrated by Rick Dickson. Unlike our previous sports administrators, he clearly understands the need to develop support for our programs. For instance, prior to his arrival, I was never once contacted by the athletic department for support in the 28 years since I graduated from Tulane. I wish you the best as you work to determine Tulane1s role in the ever changing world of college athletics. Sincerely, ***** Dear Members of the Board, I have written previously regarding the upcoming vote on status of Tulane Athletics. The thrust of my argument being that Tulane should be a leader to other non-BCS schools in dealing with the current power and revenue structures. But it seems that a decision based solely on economics is what this is all coming down to. Unfortunately, based on information that has been coming out in various local and national media, the true financial picture of the University as a whole and athletics in particular are deliberately being clouded. For instance, the athletic deficit seems to grow daily, and the further from New Orleans it is reported, the more the deficit is! The only conclusion that I can make, which I am slowly having to reluctantly accept, is that this is being done deliberately to deflect accountability. I sincerely hope that this in not the case. In your preparation for voting on this important matter, I hope the following are clearly addressed and the findings made public no matter how you vote: 1) The true costs of Division 1 athletics at Tulane for the past 10 years including real hard costs, soft costs such as scholarships, revenue, and alumni gifts. 2) A comparison of these costs to our peer Division 1 institutions, i.e. Duke, Vanderbilt, Rice, SMU, etc. 3) The affect that a successful sports program has on enrollment, applications, and qualifications of prospective students. Did all this rise after the basketball teams in the '90s make the NCAA tournament and appear on TV? Did it rise after the '98 undefeated football season? If these did rise, what was the positve the financial impact? 4) What is financial status of the entire University over the last 10 years? Has the endowment grown significantly, shrunk or stayed the same (all publicized scenarios)? Has alumni support increased or decreased? Overall expenditures and revenue? etc. 5) How does the financial health of the University compare to all our peer institutions, Duke, Rice, Vanderbilt, Emory, Washington U, SMU, etc.? 6) How does the Athletic department fit in with the overall economic trends of the University? Has it mirrored the trends, lagged behind or exceeded these trends? 7) What is the percentage of expeditures of the overall University is the Athletic budget? Are there comparable losses from other nonacedemic divisions of the University? 8) Does the economic impact of athletics to the host city of New Orleans have any positive economic impact for the University? 9) Does the plan outlined and implemented by Rick Dickson address the economic issues? Has the success in implemating the plan so far addressed the short term concerns? If not what precisely needs to be done and how much time may be required to achieve it? Finally, it is obvious that I am strongly in favor of keeping Tulane Division 1. There are many strong and compelling non-economic reasons, to maintain Division 1 status that others have raised. I only ask that your responsiblities in this matter include making the facts that you base your vote on is clear and made public to the Tulane community. Your decisions must be accountable. Thank you for your hard work in this matter. I am hopeful that we can all improve and strengthen the University and the City of New Orleans. Sincerely, ***** TULANE ATHLETICS , I HAVE BEEN A TULANE FAN FOR FORTY ONE YEARS. MY FAMILY BROUGHT ME TO MANY TULANE SPORTING EVENTS AS A CHILD. ALL THE FOOTBALL AND MANY BASEBALL AND BASKETBALL GAMES WERE ATTENDED BY MY FAMILY & FRIENDS FOR MANY YEARS. I WILL ADMIT MY ATTENDANCE AT TULANE SPORTING EVENTS AS A MARRIED ADULT WITH TWO KIDS HAS DWINDLED. BUT I HAVE NEVER QUIT ROOTING FOR THE GREENIES. WE LIVE ON A VERY TIGHT BUDGET LIKE MANY DO. WE ARE GOING TO FIND A WAY TO PURCHASE A FAMILY PACK SEASON TICKET TO TRY AND HELP KEEP TULANE FOOTBALL ALIVE AND THRIVING. I BELIEVE TRUE TULANE FANS HAVE BECOME DORMANT BUT WE ARE NOT DEAD YET. SHUTTING DOWN THE FOOTBALL PROGRAM WOULD BE THE LAST STRAW FOR ME. ALL THOSE YEARS BATTLING L.S.U & THEIR OBNOXIOUS FANS. IF FOOTBALL IS DROPPED, AS MUCH AS I WOULD HATE TO, I WILL BECOME A TIGER !!! ***** Hello, I am a 2000 graduate of Tulane. I also worked in the Athletic Department as a student for 3 years, as an intern after graduation and then hired full time as the Assistant Director for Marketing after my internship was completed. I now work for the Washington Redskins. I believe my jobs with the Tulane Athletic Department prepared me extremely well for my job with the Redskins and thus were the reason I was hired at the Redskins. As a student at Tulane, I was very involved and interested in the athletic programs, and I feel that my college experience would have been of much lesser value without Division I Athletics. This is my plea to save Tulane Athletics! I think part of the college experience is to be able to enjoy Division I athletics, whether it be with friends or family. I met so many wonderful people through Tulane Athletics, whether it be athletes, people who worked in the Athletic Department or fans from the community. My life has definitely been enriched by Tulane Athletics. I think it is safe to say, without Division I Athletics, I would no longer be a proud alumna from Tulane and also would not contribute financially to the University. That is how strongly I feel about the importance of keeping Division I Athletics at Tulane. I also believe without Division I Athletics, the support of the community for the University would decrease dramatically. The Athletic programs are the force that brings the community together to support Tulane University. Please do all you can do to save Division I Athletics at Tulane! Without it, I believe the University will suffer greatly. Thank you for your time, ***** Dr. Cowen: An analogy of Tulane's situation is this: You are on a ship...that is being sunk... in a sea battle that was supposed to be a regatta. You note that the ships winning the battle and doing the most damage to your ship are the big ships funded by tax dollars. Despite that, finger pointing is largely internalized, and some of the crew are openly eager to scavenge parts. Your ship has been a source of pride and pleasure in your family for 110 years, but things are going so badly that you are thinking of scuttling and swimming ashore. At this juncture, two things can be said: It is okay to start fighting back and we can quit worrying about any "loose cannons." That brings us to the need to put unspoken truths on the table about college football. There has been little upward mobility in this sport for decades, and its absence underlies the financial crisis that Tulane and other schools are encountering. The dissipation of upward mobility can be explained far more by the disparity of advantages among teams than by any disparity of effort or acumen. The flagship state universities enjoy such unfettered and ensconced advantages that their dominance in the sport has become inevitable. Private schools and non-flagship state schools have been marginalized over the past fifty years and will remain marginalized unless there are substantive systemic reforms. Private schools should not be in denial or embarrassed by this fact. They should be angry, plaintiff angry. They have been subject to glass ceilings for decades. Now some are being run out of business. They have every right to demand reforms on the basis of damages from unfair competition. Tulane is weighing what is in the best interest of the University, but the discussion is limited to staying in or quitting. It would be far better served by studying the bigger picture with a greater purpose. There is a third option, one more principled and more productive, and it is to stay in and fight for a fair contest. I am reminded of the 1970s when a Political Science professor was objecting to Tulane's athletic deficit. He expressed concern that there was much corruption in college athletics, and his answer was to quit. My thought was then as it is now, "Here is a Political Science professor who, when confronted with corruption, wants to quit rather than fight?! I hope that is not what they teach in the Med School. I was an Art History major at the time and I knew that stunk. Is quitting when faced with corruption the example the University should set? My suggestion is that a consortium of private schools and non-flagship state schools commission an objective study about the competitive health of college football. The study should assess the prospects for "turn-around" success. It should be able to distinguish the real from the ideal, the controllable from the uncontrollable and the ethical from the unethical. I think that a study would show that with the above criteria, there is nothing that most private universities and non-flagship state schools could do that they are not already doing - unless they begin cheating or wholesale compromise. A honest study of college football would explode much myth about the sport. Better still, it would bring some crucial truths into focus that can be the basis for reforms never thought possible. We have been led to believe that the difference between college football's haves and have-nots is the difference between the industrious ant and the fiddling grasshopper. In reality, for the struggling programs, it is not a matter of needing to work harder or smarter or take risks or make sacrifices. They already do that. The classic attributes of business success differ little between the perennial contenders and non-contenders in football. It is advantages among schools that differ, and the current system fully allows advantages to be exploited rather than counterbalanced. Winning in college football requires consistently attracting a critical mass of talent. Talent is consistently attracted to the established winning programs or to programs that fit the profile of a winner. That profile does not include most private and non-flagship state schools. The conference alignments, bowl deals, television packages, and the collusive BCS only further raise the profiles of who is or is not a contender. Professional football has a draft for some semblance of balance. College football works the opposite way wherein success in one season increases the chance of success in the next. College football turns on recruiting, a contest in itself that combines the depth of a beauty pageant with the grace of a demolition derby. For decades the most coveted recruits have followed clear patterns by only considering the high profile contenders, and it has created largely predictable outcomes for the games in the fall. The study should also address how money follows the same predictable channels. The schools that enjoy strong ticket sales also receive the lion's share of television and bowl money as well as corporate sponsorships. Those same schools enjoy exposure, fan support, coaching stability, and they build the most impressive facilities - all of which attracts future recruits. For those not so advantaged there is a vicious cycle: they cannot get at the big pay days unless they win, and they cannot win unless they are already winning. These proclivities are disastrous when inequitable advantage is added to the mix. The single most important factor in the prospects for success is the status of the school - is it a flagship state school, a non-flagship state school, or a private school? Is it in the shadow of a high profile state school? More than anything else, that one factor has created the watershed between the haves and the have-nots, and we can chalk it up as "uncontrollable". The most important assignment in American sports would be this: "Compare and contrast the ability of a private university with a major state university to develop a commercially successful football program". It is a question virtually everyone has tiptoed around to the detriment of good sports and fair trade. In the 1950's, when we saw the last of schools like Princeton and Rice appearing in the AP's final season polls, the University of Oklahoma garnered three national championships. The incumbent Oklahoma Governor later said that he felt that the citizens of his state had identity problems and that a successful football program was the ticket to state pride. We can note that it was not the University of Tulsa anointed to represent Oklahoma. With the advent of television the college game began following the model of professional football, becoming more a contest of geographic identity than a contest between universities. In the first five years of the Associate Press football poll, 1936 -1940, over half of the schools named in the final season poll were private universities. This included Santa Clara, St. Mary's, U. Penn, Fordham, Villanova, Dartmouth, Carnegie Tech, and Duquesne. We are now entering a second wave of running off this class of participants. We cannot be surprised here. There is no "official" state religion in America because we do not want government fiat to advantage one entity over others when competing for popular support. We recognize that the "imprimatur" of the state would be to the direct detriment of those lacking this advantage. This is precisely what happened in college football. State schools also benefit tremendously from the direct state subsidies to tuition. This allows a large student body and a large localized alumni base. Their populist appeal garners non-alumni to join in as paying fans. Recruiting across the state is greatly influenced by these numbers. From urban to rural, the local "blue-chippers" are expected to sign on with the main state school, and they feel that pressure. Winning in college football comes down to human prejudices predictably following upon man-made advantage. Only it is largely state-made advantage, isn't it? The flagship state schools have exploited politically-based advantages to not only steal the show but to grab as much of the cash box as possible. Private schools should have raised loud objections to this decades ago demanding measures for some semblance of balance, some controls to prevent whole classes of institutions from becoming marginalized. In truth, having no ostensible handle to mandate reforms, private schools (and you can add the sports media) have remained silent, fearful that admitting to glass ceilings would cause more harm than good. I recently read how Texas Christian University was comfortable with its athletic endowment and the fact it had been to five bowls in a row. The reality check is that in 1938 TCU won the National Championship. The school also frequently appeared in the final AP "Top Ten" polls during the 1950's. Yet since 1959, TCU has not been ranked higher than a twenty-first ranking in 2000, even with its five recent bowls. No one can seriously suggest that TCU or Rice or Vandy or Tulane are unattractive schools or that their sports administrations have been inept or indifferent for the past forty years. These schools simply do not fit "the profile" to garner the critical mass of talent that others enjoy. If TCU went undefeated, it would be accorded an honorable mention ranking similar to Tulane in 1998 when its undefeated team was tucked away politely in the seventh slot. Regardless of the financial situation, the competitor in us should not accept being locked out of a fair chance at the top ranking, and honest die-hard state school fans would likely agree. Many schools do not have endowments sufficient to fill in for the big bucks that the state programs have commandeered. Their message should be, "We are getting run out of business, and it is not acceptable". The handle to reform this mess is decrying the fact of unfair competition and the damages done. Private schools should deliver their study and that message to the doorstep of any federal body mandated to oversee fair competition in this country. That would include Congress, The Federal Trade Commission and the Justice Department. And when the Feds try to run out of the back door, which they might, have a copy waiting there for them also. It may be the most important tackle ever made in football history. We may be uncomfortable at inviting the Federal government onto the field as a referee; but then again, we have state government in the game as the dominant contestant. The Feds hardly need to do more than recognize the issues and give marching orders to the college presidents to come up with a plan ensuring a fairer contest. I suspect that if they issued such an edict, many university presidents would quietly close their big wooden doors and start turning handsprings. Then they would start making phone calls. These issues need aggressive pursuit and not denial or passive hope. This imbalance will never be self-correcting and will only worsen. This subject is a no-win for the sport media; they will not broach these issues. The National Collegiate Athletic Association remains oblivious to the issue of disparate advantages and to the glaring fact that the same advantaged schools win year after year. The NCAA is a bulldog against individual cheaters, but it is a toothless Chihuahua against collective corruption. In the 1980's SMU's chicanery got it high poll rankings but later a "death penalty" from the NCAA. The scandal here was not just that SMU took a short cut to the top. A far greater scandal was that for a private school in the shadow of high profile state schools, cheating was the only path available to the top. That ugly fact went wholly unspoken. The NCAA should "bust itself" for a lack of institutional control. Tulane was right to protest the BCS to Congress but the BCS cartel exists because schools have failed to protect themselves for so long. Protesting the BCS is only treating the symptoms and not the cause. If we returned to pre-BCS days, the same schools would be "eligible" for bowls that they will never be invited to anyway. They will remain locked out of full participation of the bowls and the polls. Tulane can commendably raise money, but it should understand that its pocket is getting picked largely by state governments. It can raise fan enthusiasm with the same laudable efforts it has before, but, leaving all else the same, what it is really doing is fighting hard for the right to remain on the back of the bus. I suppose that is better than getting thrown off the bus (make that "thrown off the bus for good behavior"). None of this should be acceptable. We should not let these issues be quashed with excuses that inequities are inevitable or that the systemic mess is beyond remedy. There is no simple reset button, but the brain trust at our universities should be able to come up with workable solutions. You can get always get the toothpaste back in the tube if you want it badly enough. Likewise, the situation should not be dismissed as "just business." That is a tiresome adage often heard, for example, when a school terminates a traditional rivalry for a better payday elsewhere or extricates a bigger share from its "lesser" rival. It's "just business" when collusive deals such as the BCS are formed. Unfortunately, we have very much allowed the sport to operate as if it were, foremost, a business. That might be more palatable if it were a fair fight and if the rewards were truly earned more than commandeered by politically-based advantage. To the extent that the sport does intimately involve business and it affects the quality and quantity of life, it's all the more reason why we should have guarded against government advantage and against discriminatory patterns that are so clear and consistent. College football involves business, but it is not ultimately a business classically defined as "to increase the net worth of shareholders". We see this distinction when the Internal Revenue Service pokes around, scenting the commercialism in college football. Suddenly, folks are backpedaling fast from the "B-word" and frantically searching for a credible Mission Statement. Their green shades are replaced with beanies, and we hear platitudes about Autumn afternoons. The "just business" guys end up hiding behind the skirts of Mama Academia until the IRS goes away. There is an ultimate purpose of college football, and it should supercede the business side for more than fending off the tax man. A study would add value in revealing the disconnect between the culture college football espouses versus the culture it lives. For all its platitudes, in reality, college football has operated with a mission statement of a junket to Las Vegas. We have allowed the sport to be run primarily as a business, but it is uglier than that. College football is a cut-throat business, and that brings us to the low point where we are: The systemic mess of college football is the nasty mix of advantage and discrimination and a "dog-eat-dog" culture that is out-of-control. Of course all this is a recipe for fiscal disaster. It is not much of a recipe for good sports either, and it comes from our institutions of higher learning. The big dogs obviously have no problem putting fatal bites on 100-year-old athletic programs. What we really have here is population control in a crowded field. The one control that seems to work best in college football is population control. Fifty years of automatic dominance by the flagship state schools could start unraveling by asking two simple questions. The first is to ask the flagship state schools to show cause why they participate in "big-time" football. That is a valid question that has never really been asked. Some of the meanest dogs in the fight would suddenly find themselves with no better defense than a tap-dance. States could not defend their presence in big-time football as a public service mandate. College football does not fulfill a function like road building, health care, or police protection or education itself. That is why professional sport franchises are privately and not publicly owned. No school really must be in the business of "big-time" football, and many state universities do not participate in college football at all. States could offer a simple business reason for their participation. However, apart from being unconvincing, emphasis on business only exposes how untenable their dominance is. State governments do not typically own competitive endeavors, and private schools should pound the law, the facts, and the table on that point. Above all, private schools should pound a clear principle: if state government wants to wade into the economic fray in any industry, the state must be responsible for its economic impact on competitors. Certainly, absent a mandate for a universal public service, state participation must carry safeguards against dominance. That should be non-negotiable and private schools should insist the Feds back 'em up on this. The State of Louisiana may have to pay up to two billion dollars for economic impact on oyster beds that were inadvertently damaged in pursuit of public safety. Imagine the complaint if the damage was caused by the state trying to increase market share in the entertainment business. Make no mistake, this is not about Louisiana alone, it is an interstate commerce issue. All the states that want to play big-time football should be called to the table on this one. The issue of damages is clear and crucial. There can be no doubt that the freewheeling presence of the flagship state programs has had an adverse economic impact on less advantaged competitors. There can be no denial that if the states school's advantages had been acknowledged and consciously counterbalanced years ago, millions of dollars would be flowing to schools that are now out of the loop and the Tulanes of the world would not be in financial crisis. Private schools should insist that because of unfair competitive advantage and the damages done, state schools must come to the table for real reforms... or get out. Any federal agency charged with overseeing the health of interstate commerce should be able to call the meeting. If the Feds balk, then let a gaggle of overpaid lawyers extend the invitation. Private schools should be clear that their fight is not about getting anyone out but keeping their venerable programs in. It is about protecting their franchises from unfair competition and unnecessary damage. The state schools are welcome...they can play... they can win...they can even win year-after-year but in a fair fight. Unfettered advantages and automatic dominance are not welcome and neither is the cutthroat culture. In that venue and probably only in that venue could real reforms be introduced. Reforms should include spending caps and revenue sharing among the collective and not just short-stopping the cash flow within conferences. Reforms would include introducing some measures so that talent is better balanced and that profiles do not arise segregating whole classes of institution. Recruits should be able to choose among universities and not just choose among trophy cases. Reforms would include introducing a culture that values achievement over winning and opportunity as much as anything. If state were required to show cause for their participation, their apologists would undoubtedly do the only thing they could do, and that is to present a very sincere and powerful case evoking the many good things of playing the game. They would likely eschew much mention of the tidy sums to be had by playing it well. We should accept the state's "many good things" argument _because it is true_ and that should lead to the second question: "If it is good for a state to participate in a competitive endeavor, why is it also okay for the state to be running the competition out of business? How can it be both ways?" There is not a tap dance in the world that can cover that one. The most eloquent and powerful case that can be made justifying why state governments sponsor sports teams in the first place should also be the prima facie case why those teams should not be allowed to run competitors out of business. We have just never pressed this point. An honest study of this big picture would be the right first step, but the issues revealed must be pressed forth or we will have fifty more years of the same mess. Whatever decision the school makes, it will become the history it later teaches. ***** Dear President Cowen and Board: I am absolutely disgusted that this process is still taking place. It is very clear that the vast majority of the Tulane family wants you to leave athletics alone!!! Despite the fact that you think you have Tulane's best interest in mind, I truly believe that you and the board have no idea how much you are going to hurt Tulane by downgrading any portion of our athletic program. If you change the status quo, you will cause a major rift between Tulane and its alumni. There is a thin line between love and hate in any relationship. Betrayal in any relationship leads to a bitter ending. Tulane alumni are able to have a connection with Tulane through Division I Football and other Division I sports. Take that away and we will feel betrayed. We will be bitter and thus, have no relationship with the school that we once loved so dearly. Thank you for your time and I hope that you see the light and let us keep our Athletic Programs. ***** I am a member of the Advisory Board for University College at Tulane University, have a child who recently has gone through a college search, married into a family with a very long history with Tulane University and am a business executive with a local bank. I think each of these give me a perspective into the current situation concerning the future of Tulane's athletic program. Without going into a long dissertation on each, though, I do want to make a couple of points why I think Tulane will be making a terrible decision if they downgrade their athletic program by any means. In general, it is important to recognize that the desirability of any product, city or university to prospective consumers is the entire package. A Snickers candy bar without caramel or peanuts, the city of New Orleans without the Saints or spicy food, or Tulane without a good academic reputation or a strong athletic program all are lacking necessary ingredients that make each of these attractive to a portion of the consuming public. When my son recently chose his college, he told us that one of the deciding factors was its strong athletic program and participation in Division I sports. While he wanted an academically challenging environment (he was valedictorian at his high school and had SAT scores in excess of 1,500), he also wanted the atmosphere that only Division I sporting events can add to college life. I do not think that this is unusual. Most people consider the entire package when choosing their college. To leave out any important component only diminishes the attractiveness of Tulane University to prospective students. It is not an either-or proposition; Tulane needs to have it all. As a business executive, I have frequently been in similar situations where a product or unit has been consistently underperforming profitability requirements. In determining future steps, I always try to understand the true profitability of the product or unit. As it concerns Tulane, are the athletic and/or football programs underperforming on a fully allocated basis but covering their incremental (variable) costs? If Tulane eliminated the athletic and/or football programs, would it adversely impact the profitability of other departments? Unfortunately, the answers to these questions are very subjective, but their importance needs to be recognized and the impact estimated. For example, if profitability is being determined on a fully allocated basis, will elimination of the program(s) result in elimination of all allocated expenses of fixed and variable costs of administrative overhead? Generally not. In fact, in many cases, only the direct variable costs are recovered. It is even conceivable that the elimination of one or more programs could decrease the profitability of the university. Another important aspect to consider is the strategic importance of the athletic and football programs. While this also can be hotly debated, I would suggest that they are both strategically important for reasons as mentioned in my first paragraph, for alumni support and for its potential for creating national recognition. As such, it is not a question as to whether to cut the programs or not, but more of a question as to how to increase its profitability or at a minimum, decrease its losses. Goals need to be set, plans developed and the proper individuals hired to execute them. If the goals are not met, don't kill the program, change leaders, and keep doing so until you find the right person. Remember, though, as you create your plans, it might require a larger investment to build a successful program. Doing anything less only dooms Tulane to failure. Finally, I have to add that I think the whole process considering this proposal has been somewhat underhanded. I have been an avid fan and supporter of Tulane since being a child, and I am very disappointed in this administrations' disenfranchisement of its alumni, students, fans, and city and state residents. I can't help but think that this proposal is an attempt to hide other shortcomings of the administration. I would propose that when this proposal is put behind us, that a similar review be made of the University's success or lack thereof in all other financial matters. I apologize for the long e-mail, but I feel very passionately about Tulane athletics and would hate to see Tulane make what I would consider to be a monumental mistake if it were to cut its athletic and/or football program. Feel free to contact me should you need any assistance or require any further comments. ***** Gentlemen, As a 1969 A & S graduate, let me express my grave concern over the possibility of dropping athletics to Division 1-AAA or worst yet, simply dropping football. I was granted the privilege of attending Tulane via an athletic grant in aid (Baseball). This opportunity to live my dream would not have been possible with out the benefit of my scholarship. The student-athletics at Tulane are truly that. I graduated in four years with a B.A. in Economics plus an additional 30 hour minor in History. I might add that I graduated in four years while taking a full load, playing ball, and as a married student my junior and senior years. I taught and coached for the next six years in New Orleans, and for the past 27 have served as a senior officer with the Whitney. My Tulane experience, while not typical, was a major contributor to my success, and enabled me to serve my community in numerous ways as a businessman, mentor, and social advocate. I would hate to think of my life without Tulane, and have attempted to support the University since my graduation in every way possible. I would fear even more the thought of New Orleans without Tulane, and that unfortunately would be the reality for the young men and women, who like me, lack the financial capacity to attend our University without aid. We, the Tulane community, would deprive ourselves of the opportunity to call these student-athletics family, if we do away with Division 1 athletics, and the dream it offers many of our future leaders. Student-athletics at Tulane represent a special breed. They are motivated leaders, who are self starters, who understand teamwork and sacrifice, who will serve as the future coaches in our business community, and one day serve as the back bone and leadership of our fine city and state. Don't let this dream disappear. Please give our coaches, students, and community the opportunity and time to step up and save our University. Once we decide to put out the light, we will lose the magic forever. ***** I agree with those who have written that Tulane should aspire to greatness. America's best universities should be models for Tulane. What do the top 3 national universities in the US News rankings have in common? For one thing, they are all Division I schools playing non-scholarship football. ..something to keep in mind if I-A football is too expensive. ***** PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE do not change the status of Green Wave athletics from Division I to Division III and PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE do NOT drop football from the program altogether. Doing either of these things would take Tulane from a first-class institution to a far lesser one. Not only would it be unfair to the athletes that are there now, it would certainly diminish Tulane's appeal to future students. I know most certainly that my son who will be a senior in high school next year and really wants to go to Tulane in the fall of 2004 would change his mind if there was not a football team or if the school was Division III. Aren't there other alternatives? Can't the football games be at Ted Gormley instead of the Superdome? Can't the athletic budget be cut in other ways? Does the football team really have to stay in a hotel on Friday night before a home game? Can't we raise money from alumni? This decision really affects the lives of many, many students. I implore y! ou to not take either of these measures---it would simply be disastrous to the university. Thank you, ***** I have read all that has been said, and I am totally perplexed. Why would anyone consider downgrading this University? Does it not occur to all involved that the elimination of football (or any of the other major sports for that matter) or the shift to a lower NCAA Division will inherently diminish the prestige of Tulane University? Among those with whom I've been talking and communicating over the past several weeks, there is a rock-solid agreement that anything other than "staying the course" would be a monumental mistake. The reported commentary regarding other institutions which compete in Division I without football is misleading: those institutions never had football, and have concentrated on other sports. As a result whatever national reputation each has is in no way dependent on its football program, per se. In the case of Tulane, that's not a fair analogy, because Tulane was a football powerhouse many years ago. I dare say, had the University not made the three major mistakes recognized by everyone who has considered the situation (de-emphasizing sports in the 50's, leaving the SEC in the 60's and tearing down the stadium in the 70's), Tulane might well be a major power to this day. Those decisions are water under the bridge, unfortunately, but the lesson from them is crystal clear: this is a one-way street, and for the most part whatever the University does cannot be reversed later. So, what will happen if Tulane drops football or moves down to Division III? Nothing good, I would be willing to bet. And, just as was learned after the 3 separately disastrous mistakes, not only are such mistakes irreversible, they tend to cumulate. I predict that any move other than keeping athletics exactly as it is (or, ideally "growing" athletics at Tulane) will reap the wind, and Tulane will become "minor league" in many more aspects than just sports. It is unquestionable that all save a few of the colleges playing Division I football are hurting financially. But this is a problem for the collegiate community as a whole, not something that should be handled institution-by-institution, piecemeal and too hastily. Take it up with the NCAA and air the grievances. Find a way for ALL 1-A institutions to reduce the deficits and prosper. On two other fronts, I would (a) strongly urge Tulane to align itself with a different conference, and (b) recruit locally, locally, locally in football. The ACC is seeking additional members - why not throw our hat into that ring RIGHT NOW?? If we could switch to the ACC, I daresay we could compete on a fairly even basis, and we would be gaining immeasurably: TV markets, larger shared conference payouts, etc. It's a natural because of the historical rivalries there - Georgia Tech, Virginia, Wake Forest, Duke, NC and NC State, Florida State and even, yes, Bowden U (Clemson).......... If that doesn't work out, watch the fallout after the ACC does whatever it's going to do, and look for other potential alignments. Conference USA is never going to be a competitor of the SEC or other major conferences, but there is a possibility of forming a break-off with So. Miss, Virginia Tech, TCU, and a few other schools which DO have a national following and can compete with the big boys. On the recruiting issue, I do not understand why Tulane doesn't look more closely in its own backyard. Many local athletes are ignored, despite evidence provided by predecessors that such athletes can and do contribute in a major way. In recent years I have had sons on the Jesuit football team and have had the opportunity to observe Catholic league play. There are many young men in that league alone who would LOVE to play locally for Tulane if given the chance. A few have done so, like Brant Hocke and Brandt Quick. If Tulane really wants to put fans in the seats at the Dome, then give the locals a chance. Couple this with entertainment before and after the games, and move the games back to Saturday nights, for goodness sake, and I suspect you'd see an almost immediate difference in attendance. NO disrespect, intended, ladies and gentlemen, but I do not think you are thinking clearly or prospectively at all. Please come to your senses and put the kabosh on this nonsense once and for all. A&S '70, L '72 (and season ticket holder ever since '73) ***** The alumni and student body have come out overwhelmingly against the idea of changing the status of our athletics program. Rick Dickson has done a wonderful job. Even our money losing football program has the current highest rated QB for the 2004 NFL draft (J.P. Lossman) on ESPN. This means yet another Tulane quarterback will go first round next year. Excellent school recogntion, especially with our student-athlete graduation rate. Name recognition is a serious problem for this school, and will continue to deteriorate without this type of national exposure. That aside, I always felt Tulane was special because the students were full of personality and life. They didn't want to be at some mid-ranked Tier 1 University because they didn't get their first choice; they wanted to be at a special school with a fine reputation, and Tulane is just that, even if it is ranked five or ten spots lower than some would like. Incidentally, when did the opinion of U.S. News and World Report become more important than the opinions of the student body and the alumni? I have talked with every alumni I know and have met in the last six months, and it seems most or all of us will stop supporting Tulane. I am proud to have been educated by Tulane, but I also hold a degree from the London School of Economics. A lot of your other alumni have other alma matters to which they might funnel their donations as well, institutions interested in tradition and maintaining positive ties to its alumni. The financial fallout of ignoring such a vocal alumni community will be far worse than allowing Rick Dickson to execute his workable and seemingly already successful plan. New Orleans already resents Tulane for the perceived notion that our University does not care about our community. Tulane used to be "New Orleans' Team," and it needs to be again. I think, perhaps, a new UC can wait. I saw it the other day; it seemed to be standing strong. And so, to the board I humbly recommend this: do not test the student and alumni resolve in this matter. You will likely not enjoy the results. ***** I think what Dr Cowen is doing is horrible. It has been reported that he has been doing underhanded stuff for the past couple of months. He has no clue what the school and fans are about. He should be fired today and hope he is. Please give Rick Dickson a chance we can do it. ***** Mr. Cowen, is it true you were hired to cut football no matter what the outcome of success the football program had, and you hired on the board non - Tulane grads. with no interest to New Orleans and Tulane Athletics. Why will you not listen or even look at Rick Dixon numbers. Why are you guys trying to sneak all this thru. from the beginning. Is this how you and the elite board practice business. We have all the board members names, and we will boycott any business affiliation with any of these names. Why can't you go into the public or on the radio with Rick Dixon and take phone calls to explain why you refuse to give Mr. Dixon alumni phone numbers to raise money. Why are all you guys hiding? This is not Tulane, this is more like Tu-Lame. ***** I am an avid supporter of Tulane University and have always been proud to say I am a member of the Tulane family. However, at this point in time, I must say I am dismayed to think that my school would give up major time sports without a fight! Shouldn't we have a can do spirit that we can overcome any obstacles that are placed before us. Aren't we creative enough to figure out a way to maintain the Tulane tradition as it has been for over many more than one hundred years. If we drop football or downgrade our sports program, Tulane will never be the same again. I know I speak for thousands of people who love Tulane for what it stands for- an outstanding university in every way!! Don't let the tulane spirit die! ***** President Cowen and the Ad-Hoc Board: I have a possible solution. Abandon Conference USA and move to where you belong: The South-Eastern Conference. The travel is less burdening on students and would cut some travel/lodging expenses. The SEC has a proud tradition and DRAWS ENORMOUS CROWDS at events. We could start packing the SuperDome finally. Look at your student body too; roughly 50% of your students are drawn from the Southeast including Louisiana. Vanderbilt, a school we at Tulane always compare ourselves to ad nauseum, resides in the SEC. We won't lose any recognition among "southern Ivy league" schools. Those rascals up the road from Baton Rouge would be an immediate rival for us, as if they aren't already. Think of television ratings and ticket sales if we play in the same conference as LSU. More games with them equals more school spirit. More school spirit gets more people into the stands and more revenue to support the athletic program. The switch to the SEC has got to have crossed your minds. It's too beneficial for Tulane to not explore. With Miami ready to jump ship from the Big East and mess that conference up, maybe another school would be persuaded to join us and make an even 14 teams (SEC has 12 now). I'm sure the SEC would welcome us proudly, with our high academic and athletic standards. Revenue sharing, as I'm sure you all are interested in, was exceptional last year as the SEC distributed nearly $100 million to the 12 member institutions. Just here, I've rattled off many reasons why this could be a great move, and I'm sure I missed many more. But, please, please DON'T GIVE UP! Plenty of good ideas have been floated on your message board, as I'm sure have at the meetings with the board. As a student, I would be heartbroken if in my last year, the football team and baseball team went into the preverbial toilet. That's the pride of Tulane to me. You might as well have a hurricane come wash the whole university out to sea (knock on wood). Most of the alumni have come out against the decision to drop down to Division 3 and your students feel the same way. Please take every suggestion, comment, and critique to heart. Maybe you don't want to jump on the SEC bandwagon, but that seems like it would start to solve the money problem by cutting back on travel and adding fans to the seats. I don't see Charlotte or East Carolina coming in droves to New Orleans by the way. Georgia and Alabama sure would. Please, DON'T GIVE UP! ***** President Cowan and board of Tulane - I am a '74 graduate of Newcomb, and my late husband was a '74 graduate of Tulane. The current talk of the fate of Tulane sports has caused me to reflect on many of my college memories. I was a cheerleader, and my husband was a fullback on the football team. From singing the national anthem in the old Sugar Bowl Stadium to watching the Green Wave beat LSU in '73, the quality of athletics at Tulane played a major role in my college experience, the college experience of my friends, and the experience of many of our children. While I know sports will continue at Tulane, Division 1A status adds an excitement and a prestige that should be preserved. The quality of a Tulane education is vital, and I feel that a thriving athletic program constributes immeasurably to the Tulane experience. I hope you will strongly consider giving Rick Dickson's plan a chance. My opinoin is that you will lose more dollars from donors than you will gain by cutting athletics from the school. And I believe that not having Division 1A football will hurt the admissions process. I hope that everything possible will be done to continue and improve what has been such a joy for so many Tulane graduates: past, present, and hopefully future. Most Sincerely, ***** I attended Tulane undergraduate, medical school and residency along with my entire family including my father, brother and sister. We have been a part of Tulane and Tulane has been a part of us for the last 45 years. We come to this discussion in regards to Tulane athletics not as innocent bystanders but as a family greatly affected by the unique qualities of Tulane. We as a family come to this discussion not simply because my brother and I participated in a Division 1 varsity sport at Tulane University but also because each and everyone of us understands and is commited to excellence in academics. We understand that academics is the number one priority at a university having been and are still actively associated with several medical faculties and in my case a departmental chairman and director. Coming to this discussion with this unique perspective I feel that Tulane would be making a grave mistake and possibly even a fatal mistake if they consider dropping down to Div. 3 and or consider eliminating the football team. Frankly it is quite alarming that you and the board are wiiling to disregard the overwhelming support for Div.1 athletics by Tulane alumni, fans,students , parents and the entire City of New Orleans establishment. It is an insult to each and every person who bleeds Tulane. It is sickening to find out that many of the people who would be making this decision are from out of town. Some of these people I am told do not even have ties to Tulane and could not possibly understand the important role of Tulane Athletics and the association that Tulane Athletics has with the city of New Orleans. If you were around for more than five or six years perhaps for as long as 110 years you could begin to understand how both athletics and academics can coexist and flourish with one complementing the other. Coming from a background of academics and higher learning I understand that there is no academician that should be concerned and threatened by athletics. If the truth be told athletics at its highest level the Div1 category enhances a school striving for academic excellence. They feed off of each other and in fact the so called complete student who applies to Tulane may cease to exist if there is not a commitment to be the best at academics and athletics simultaneously as Tulane has strived to do for an entire century. I plead to the board to understand that academics and athletics at the highest level is what Tulane University has always been about. This is what defines Tulane in every way and there should be no compromise. Please do not become shortsighted and put a stranglehold on the athletic program. Give our athletic director Rick Dickson a fighting chance not just 6 weeks but several years to prove himself in regards to solving the athletic financial situation as he has confidently laid out. Whether you agree with his plan are not you as the president of this prestigious university owe the athletic director , the Tulane Alumni, students , parents and perhaps most importantly the City of New Orleans and the State of Louisina this opportunity to rectify this situation.After all you as the president of Tulane were given a similar chance to succeed in 1998 upon your arrival. Rick Dickson can turn this around because if he does not or if you and the board do not give him a chance to turn this around Tulane University will cease to be regarded as a complete university , a top research university with a highly successful Div1 athletic program, one in which is second to none both athletically and academically. Tulane deserves the very best leadership. Leadership which strives to be the best at both academics and athletics and does not cave to the financial pressure and the pressure of higher education in the twenty first century. Great leaders find a way to succeed in every endeavor they take on. They do not give up and they find solutions and invest in these solutions. They are forward thinkers who do not tear down century old institutions but find ways to rejuvinate them. This is what is needed at Tulane University and I hope you Scott Cowen and the entire Board of Trustees will begin to understand this and act accordingly. ***** Please keep Tulane Football as is..... ***** Tulane should remain in Division I. Changing the division only causes discontent in the students and alumni on what the university is interested in maintaining for the overall good of the university. Tulane, though not always the best in athletics, does stand out in many areas of athletics and should remain supporting those individuals that bring another avenue of pride to the university. Thank you for hearing my opinion, and please do not change the athletic division standing. Sincerely, ***** Just in case you are not one of the 1.5 million visitors to the Tulane Greenwave website (in May alone), go to www.tulanegreenwave.com, and watch the video...will make ya proud! It will also make you so angry that this discussion continues, and that there would even be a chance that the board would vote against their constituents. One and a half million visitors to a small university's website-incredible! So is there anyone out there who thinks reducing Tulane's athletic presence in any way would be a positive? Tulane Board, I urge you to use this momentum for the betterment of the university-as proof to other conferences that there is a following that can be built upon. This is the direction you are being given! ***** I am not a Tulane alum, but being from the Southeast, I have always had a great deal of respect for your school. I can safely say that I, as well as EVERYONE I have spoken to (both Tulane alum and non-Tulane alum), are stunned that Tulane is even considering either dropping out of Div I or dropping football entirely. I can't imagine Vanderbilt without Div I sports, and I can't imagine Tulane that way either. Having Tulane in Division I helps keep Tulane in people's consciousness. The only reason many people have even heard of Tulane is through sports. Without Div I sports, Tulane would become just some other college no one ever hears about. Tulane deserves better than that. By the way, if you do decide to drop Div I sports or football, I think you owe all the people who donated money in response to this "crisis" a refund. Sincerely, |