To the Editor,
I am writing to have the attention of OU’s Athletics Department about the need to divide money from the football program. In 2007, the men’s indoor and outdoor track programs were eliminated to engage greater spending on forcible team sports, such as football. Today I am proposing the creation of an NCAA sprint (lightweight) football team with the goal of reintroducing a mens track program with restored funding.
By initiating an NCAA sprint football team at OU, the department can prioritize total football spending between the two football programs and thereby free up and recover former money for re-establishing a men's NCAA outdoor track program and a men's indoor track program. This is the fairest solution because it encourages lighter-weight players to join OU football on the sprint football team while appropriating money for both football teams, and all the while redirecting athletic funds to mens outdoor and indoor track programs.
This funds a wider variety of athletic events and talents, which is more compatible to what a university strives toward. This entails spending less per football position, and/or limiting total funded football positions, to reintroduce quite viable indoor and outdoor mens track programs. Both the sprint and heavier football teams would generate money from their games — the athletic department could blend schedules when marketing football games altogether. Therefore, a wider variety of talents would be competing in football while money was directed toward a restored mens track program.
Storied institutions similar to OU, such as the University of Pennsylvania and Princeton University, have sprint football teams, heavier football teams and fully funded mens outdoor and indoor track programs on this same model with NCAA status. OU athletes benefit with more programs that can, many times, overlap coaching staff (heavier football and sprint football, cross country and track). It goes without writing year-round training and events can help runners by having both cross country and track funded. Additionally, factual leverage from the academic grades received between runners and football players should point to a scenario where track positions wield more gravity in departmental funding decisions.
The existing new facilities are also reasons for sponsoring mens track teams. With renewed focus on track, indoor and outdoor mens track teams are easy to project, especially with an indoor facility now. When the entire men’s track program was eliminated without notice in 2007, there was and is a prevailing notion the program will come back before 2015. The department will need to implement this change to the football program, effective immediately, so that players can adjust to the weight requirements for whichever team best suits their ambitions.
This is a win-win-win for outdoor and indoor track, football, and the community. By seriously reviewing my proposal, the department can achieve integration between the running community and the NCAA that has been absent without a track program for men, as well as institutional equity in decision making that affects us all. The many cross country and track club alumni are anxious for a future at our alma mater for this beloved collegiate sport that President Roderick McDavis himself was member of and enjoyed. In an earnest effort to foster participation on the track as well as the football field, Ohio University has a great opportunity to restore funds for a mens track program with this efficient and moral proposal.
Christopher Myers is an Ohio University alumnus and resident of Philadelphia.
