Towson University

Over the past weeks and months, the hot topic all around the campus of Towson University has been the "Director of Athletics Michael Waddell recommending a reconfiguration of the intercollegiate athletics program currently offered at Towson University." (Loeschke, 2012). Although it is very important, necessary, and due time to take a closer look at the athletic department and its operations, this recommendation comes with a by note that it is being done for the following: "1.) Establish long-term financial stability of the athletics program; 2.) Increase the competitiveness of the athletics program; 3.) Maintain compliance with federal law concerning female-to-male athlete proportionality." (Loeschke, 2012). The latter has come to be the weakest point of the three though, but in my opinion, none of these are reason enough to cut two well-functioning male teams.

The three key points to Title IX are that there are "(1) substantial proportionality of sports opportunities, (2) a continuing practice of expansion of opportunities for the underrepresented sex, or (3) that the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex have been fully accommodated." (Jones, 2012). To say that Towson has a major problem with Title IX is absurd because as the Baltimore Sun reported, "Too many of the total opportunities... [already go] to women." (Korman, 2012). The leading proponent of the recommendations, Athletic Director Mike Waddell wanted to eliminate "60 roster spots for male athletes. He has insisted the school needs to try to achieve athlete proportionality -- meaning the percentage of women athletes is about equal to the percentage of women enrolled at the school," but at it turns out, his counting was wrong as he forgot to count the women's indoor and outdoor track and field teams as two separate teams. "Doing so adds more than 50 women to the ledger and means that dropping so many roster spots for men would be unnecessary... Title IX proportionality can be achieved by showing that the number of opportunities, not participants, is proportional. Each roster spot on the track teams would count as a separate opportunity." (Korman, 2012). And therefore Towson University is above and beyond compliance with this law.

The second of the three main reasons as to why Towson University Athletic Director Mike Waddell has made a recommendation to cut the men's soccer and baseball teams is to increase the "competitiveness" of the athletic programs. Well as facts shows, in terms of academic competitiveness, Towson men's soccer and baseball have been the most competitive of all. "As student athletes, baseball and soccer players have maintained among the highest GPAs and graduation rates among men's teams (only golf, with many fewer players, has a higher GPA). With the elimination of baseball and soccer and the loss of about 60 true student athletes, the overall men's athletics GPA and graduation rates would decrease significantly." (Save Towson U. Baseball, 2012). In fact, "The Towson University men's soccer team was recognized by the National Soccer Coaches Association of America (NSCAA) this week, earning a Team Academic Award from the organization for the 2011-12 year. It is the third consecutive season the Tigers have earned the award... Towson had a cumulative grade point average of 3.29." (Athletics Media Relations (Towson University), 2012). On the field, the Towson University men's soccer program participated in "the NCAA Tournament in 2006." (Towson University Athletics). Men's baseball has been even more impressive. "In 23 seasons, the Tigers have averaged more than 25 victories per year. There have been two trips to the NCAA Tournament, three conference titles and six appearances in league championship games." (Towson University Athletics2)

In terms of financial stability, the Athletic Director claims his recommendation "comes as a result of not having a budget sufficient in support of the current number of teams" (Waddell, 2012). However, "parents and alumni from the baseball and soccer programs are convinced that Waddell wants to shift resources to the university's football and men's basketball programs in a vain attempt to raise Towson's athletic profile." (Korman, 2012). This comes as a new basketball arena is being finished up in time for mainly a baskeball team who made national news two years ago after going winless and being ranked last in the country out of 344 Division I college basketball programs. (Weinreb, 2012). "The $68 million venue, near the current Towson Center on the school's Baltimore County campus" raises attention not only for its size and scope but also for its timing in the midst of all this. "If colleges were wonderfully wealthy institutions and could afford all sorts of amenities and doodads, then such financial losses would not be an issue." (Sperber, 2008). The new 5,000-seat arena... will feature five premium mezzanine level private suites, 340 premium club seats around the top of the lower bowl and 120 courtside seats." (Sharrow, 2011). But it is very ironic to say the least that Waddell has gone forward to first build a new arena that is substantially smaller in terms of number of seats than the older one that sat 11, 000, and that he chose when the older arena never gets half-filled on big game days yet alone sell out. I would also like to add that the total enrollment at Towson is about 20,000 counting undergraduate students alone. What if half or even a quarter of the student body wanted to catch a game? Furthermore, to say that Towson University's athletic department has a financial problem is an understatement stemming from bad financial decisions implemented by the higher level of this organization who in turn are "recommending" that the lower level of the pyramid - also known as the student athletes - suffer for this.

In closing, I highly am opposed to the Towson University Athletic Director Mike Waddell's recommendation to cut the men's soccer