W&M Athletics: Framing the Problem to Pursue Solutions October - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

W&M Athletics: Framing the Problem to Pursue Solutions October 8, 2020

“If I had an hour to solve a problem and my life depended on the solution, I would spend the first 55 minutes determining the proper question to ask … for once I know the proper question, I could solve the problem in less than five minutes.” - Albert Einstein 2

Elevating to the Institutional View • Institutional Identity • Budget Stability • Legal Requirements 3

INSTITUTIONAL IDENTITY 4

Potential Institutional Athletics Identities NCAA Division I NCAA Division III • Non-scholarship athletics • Scholarship athletics • Broad participation for individuals • Competitive opportunities at the wanting to compete highest collegiate level • Financial aid investment expected to • Operational investment expected to yield recruitment yield institutional benefit – drives enrollment, tuition revenue, – drives branding, visibility, etc. class composition, etc. • Club offerings provide broad • Club offerings in small sports participation 357 institutions 442 institutions 44% enroll > 10,000 students 77% enroll < 3,000 students 5

W&M’s Athletics Identity • William & Mary is a highly selective, public institution • Our outstanding academics benefit the people of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the nation • NCAA Division I athletics is our niche: congruent with W&M's vision and mission A Strategic Review: Securing the Future (2018), p. 3 6

Question #1 What solutions align with W&M’s institutional identity as an NCAA Division I institution? 7

BUDGET STABILITY 8

Longstanding Issues The Game Reclaimed Securing the Future The year-long study affirmed William & Mary's Led by athletics experts the PICTOR Group and balanced emphasis on excellence in academics W&M’s Strategic Review Working Group, this and athletics. Recognizing the importance of study established a bold vision, strong mission, intercollegiate athletics to the overall academic and ambitious goals for W&M Athletics. It renewed mission, the report called for increased revenue W&M's commitment to the CAA and to the program through annual giving and recommended aligning resources with endowment income. strategic priorities to accelerate excellence. 1975 2006 2015 2018 Decision: To Excel A Championship Experience for Every Student-Athlete and Every Fan After a major examination of the Athletics program, This report, released months before the launch of William & Mary recommitted to Division I athletics, providing students the opportunity to compete at the university-wide For the Bold campaign, the highest levels on the field and the court, and highlighted the need for significant philanthropic support to provide W&M launched an aggressive fundraising campaign. Athletics with resources commensurate with its CAA peers , allowing the program to enhance its competitive profile. 9

2015: "Competitive Excellence" Report In short, Tribe Athletics is under-resourced to compete in this environment. At the same time, the shifting landscape of intercollegiate athletics presents opportunities for even greater success – if we are bold enough and if the alumni and friends of Tribe Athletics are committed to bringing such a vision to fruition (p. 1). A Championship Experience for Every Student-Athlete and Every Fan (2015) 10

2018: The PICTOR Report W&M Athletics’ current organizational W&M Athletics has been uneven structure of 23 varsity sports and its recently in competitive success and has a significant opportunity to financial model are not sustainable improve on the lack of sustained within its current or foreseeable competitive success (p. 2). resources (p. 2). William & Mary must make decisions on the size and scope of its athletics program (p. 2). A Strategic Review: Securing the Future (2018) 11

Financial Resources Remain Low • W&M Athletics has the second- Spending most student-athletes in the Per UG Number of Participant Institution Students Participants CAA as of 2018 – after two James Madison 29,895 546 $84,137 years of roster size Hofstra 6,498 382 $59,940 management (W&M had the Elon 6,277 482 $55,471 most in 2016 and 2017) Northeastern 14,202 586 $54,065 • Even with effective roster Delaware 19,678 708 $51,641 management, W&M Athletics UNCW 17,499 369 $50,427 still has the third-lowest Drexel 15,414 486 $49,336 resources per student-athlete of William & Mary 6,256 640 $45,791 any university in the CAA Charleston 9,600 499 $39,874 Towson 19,619 594 $38,588 12

FY20 Budget (in $ millions) FY20 Actual (in $ millions) $30 $30 $15.15 $0.00 $2.87 $14.98 $25 $25 $20 $20 $(9.82) ($10.04) $15 $15 $2.57 $1.37 $2.65 $0.83 $10 $5.43 $10 $2.58 $(11.03) ($10.90) $5 $3.98 $5 $4.02 $(7.02) $0 ($7.59) $0 Endowments Tribe Club Giving Operating NCAA University Tribe Club Reserve Scholarships Salaries Operating Endowments Tribe Club Giving Operating NCAA University Tribe Club Reserve Scholarships Salaries Operating

Tribe Club Reserve Balance $9 Millions $8 $7 $6 $5 $4 $3 $2 $1 $0 FY15 FY 16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 Restricted Balance $7,260,880.37 $6,936,517.67 $6,711,257.14 $5,352,681.81 $5,014,880.82 $2,406,291.98 Unrestricted Balance $1,137,904.97 $677,319.41 $194,138.64 $279,993.15 $313,004.33 $7,389.83 Unrestricted Balance Restricted Balance

Question #2 How can W&M Athletics achieve budget stability, addressing the structural deficits exacerbated by COVID-19? 15

Levers to Address the Structural Deficit Unavailable Budget Levers Available Budget Levers • By state law, Athletics must be self-sustaining ü Reduce number of games – W&M cannot shift funds from other sources to subsidize ü Reduce travel (i.e., road games) Athletics ü Personnel actions (support staff) • Student fees ü Fundraising initiatives – W&M has among the highest student athletic fees in VA. Significant growth is not viable. ü Debt restructuring • Unrestricted private funds ü Sponsorship – Already designated for other mission-essential needs X Cut all sports’ budgets – less savings, diminished – The pandemic increases demand for these funds everywhere competitiveness • Reduce sports offerings – Temporarily suspend sports – less savings, requires suspending more sports – Discontinue sports – more savings, affects fewer sports, reclassification possible as club sports 16

Sports Discontinued 10 12 Sport Sponsorship Reductions George Washington Stanfor d 0 2 4 6 8 Brown William & M ary LaSalle Alask a-Anchorage Dartmouth East Carolina UConn Minnes ota Iowa Appalachian St. Akr on Wright St. Cenral Michigan Boise St. Wis consin-Green Bay Fur man Northern Colorado Hampton Southern Utah Winthrop Chicago St. Florida International Cincinatti Old Dominion • • • As of September 29, 2020: and more Big Ten, Pac-12, Ivy League teams have been discontinued In total, 94 NCAA Division I have discontinued sports 26 NCAA Division I institutions 17

10 12 0 2 4 6 8 Tennis Swimming & Diving Program Eliminations by Sport Track & Field (In. ) Baseball Golf Gym nastics Track & Field (Out.) Cross Country Discontinued NCAA Division I Teams as of Sep 29, 2020 Fencing Men Rowing Soccer Squash Wre stling Ice Hockey Lacro sse Lightwe igh t Rowing Skiing Volle yba ll Water Polo Tennis Swimming & Diving Golf Squash Fencing Gym nastics Skiing Women Softball Volle yba ll Equestrian Field Hockey Lightwe igh t Rowing Rowing Sailing Synchronized Swimming Water Polo Coe d Sailing 18

Total NCAA Div. I Sports Added and Dropped by Year Added Dropped Net Change 150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 * Provisional members are included in these numbers. Note: These data do not include schools that dropped membership in each year. 19

W&M Sport Sponsorship Over Time M/W Gymnastics M/W Swimming W Fencing M Fencing M Track (In. & Out.) M Lacrosse M Wrestling W Volleyball eliminated eliminated eliminated 1984 1985 1991 1995 2011 2021 W Golf W Basketball M/W Diving M/W Fencing M/W Swimming & Diving eliminated M Swimming & Diving M Wrestling (M/W Swimming M Lacrosse proposed for elimination continues) proposed for elimination 20

Declining NCAA D1 Sport Sponsorship, 1989-2018 (bubble size reflect number of D1 programs) Swimming-W 0% -10% Soccer-M Field Hockey Sport Sponsorship ∆ since 1989 -20% Gymnastics-W -30% Swimming-M -40% -50% -60% Gymnastics-M -70% -80% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Pct. of D1 Schools Sponsoring, 2017-18 21

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS 22