Fair Game

By Connor Doyle

Arizona Summer Wildcat

The UA Athletic Department responds to claims that it doesn't spend enough money on women's sports.

In the politically charged climate of major collegiate athletics, perhaps the most important issue faced by athletic departments around the country is ensuring gender equity.

This seemed to be a balancing act the University of Arizona athletic department managed well, considering that it finished 8th in this year in the Sears Cup, the annual award given to the most successful athletic department in the nation.

The award is based upon the aggregate success of all the sports programs on campus - both men's and women's.

So when the most recent issue of Street & Smith's Sports Business Journal hit the newsstands this past week, the UA athletic department was surprised to see the publication list Arizona as one of the lowest spending teams - by percentage of total money spent - on women's athletics in the country.

The Journal reported that UA finished 103rd out of 114 eligible Division I schools in their report on the Sears Cup final standings.

This statistic was met with skepticism by an athletic department that prides itself on not only the treatment of female athletes, but also the level of success those athletes have attained over the years.

Are the statistics off base?

Jim Livengood, UA's Athletic Director, argues that the information in the Sports Business Journal - while correct - is also misleading.

"The article that was in the paper last week that just showed UA 103rd in spending is accurate, but it's all how the Journal gets the information," Livengood said. "As we go through it and do our reports, we find we spend a great deal of money (on women's athletics). Equity is one of the big things we believe in."

John Perrin, UA's Senior Associate Athletic Director in charge of business affairs, contends that UA's standing both nationally and within the Pacific 10 Conference is in fact high.

"Out of all Division I programs on the women's side, we rank 11th out of 115 schools in operating expenditures per participant," he said. "In men's, we rank 14th out of 115 (schools). Then if you look in the Pac-10, we rank second for the women and fourth for the men. I think that's a better gauge of what you're spending on your student athletes."

Livengood also said he felt the report implied the Journal had reported with an agenda.

"What's interesting is the fact that the Journal picked this particular statistic," Livengood said. "One of the great things about the Sears Cup is that it's not about the men's programs or the women's programs, it's your total program. So someone's trying to make a point, even though it's not relevant (to the Sears Cup), and it's interesting that they did that."

It would seem that the numbers provided by the UA would be in direct contrast with those of the Journal, but - as Livengood pointed out - the apparent contradiction is the result of a process that does not leave all schools on an even playing field.

The matchup
UA men's sports by the numbers · Number of sports - 8 · Total scholarships* - 102.55 · Total operating expenses UA - $2,005,331 NCAA ranking - 33rd Division I average - $887,335 · Operating expense per sport UA - $250,666 NCAA ranking - 17th Division I average - $97,017 · Operating expense per athlete UA - $7,373 NCAA ranking - 15th Division I average - $3,200	UA women's sports by the numbers · Number of sports - 11 · Total scholarships* - 130.03 · Total operating expenses UA - $1,054,413 NCAA ranking - 25th Division I average - $491,010 · Operating expense per sport UA - $95,856 NCAA ranking - 25th Division I average - $49,018 · Operating expense per athlete UA - $4,974 NCAA ranking - 14th Division I average - $2,489
*Athletic scholarships are counted as equivilancies. One scholarship can be divided over more than one athlete.

How the disparity exists

Each year, all programs in the NCAA must submit an Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (EADA) report, which is a breakdown of all the revenues and expenditures from the past year. When a publication like the Journal does a report on spending in the NCAA, it comes from these documents.

However, Kathleen "Rocky" LaRose, UA's Senior Associate Athletic Director in charge of Sports Operations, said she feels these reports may not be reliable enough to formulate opinions about how universities conduct their business.

"The EADA report is a good start, but it's not flawless," LaRose said. "There was an incident a couple of years ago where a number of schools were sued based on information from the EADA that turned out later to not be accurate.

"So much of it based on how each school interprets the directions, and people just didn't understand how they were supposed to fill it out. Once you really got into it, you discovered that the information just wasn't accurate."

While it may seem strange that such a vital part of the operation of an NCAA athletic department could be so difficult, officials at the UA contend each school keeps their books differently, causing disparities in how each school will appear once the reports are compiled.

One source of these differences, Perrin explained, can come from how schools report coaches' incomes.

"Arizona is shown as one of the highest-paying institutions in terms of coaching salaries," Perrin said. "Most schools have a foundation that they pay a large portion of those salaries from, so it's not reported in the EADA report. We don't do that."

Livengood said these numbers should not be used to compare programs because of the inherent differences in the way that each school reports their expenditures. He also said he does not think there is a problem with the fact that the schools have these differences, as long as publications like the Journal don't try and equate them.

A more practical measure

Even though the EADA reports have been said to be insufficient gauges of how well a school treats their female athletes, the need to monitor such things still exists.

LaRose proposes that how well schools comply with Title IX - the NCAA rule that mandates equality for women in college athletics - is a good indicator of how high of a priority women's athletics are.

One of the advantages of looking at Title IX compliance, according to LaRose, is that it strives to ensure that women athletes are given access to the same benefits as men's sports, and are equipped with the requisite funding to succeed.

"A good example is comparing a football player to a cross-country runner," LaRose said. "It takes about $1000 to $1200 to outfit a football player because they have so much equipment. A cross-country runner needs a tank-top and a pair of shoes. So if we're buying the best football equipment for a football player, then we have to buy the best pair of shoes for the runner. But obviously, it's going to cost a lot less to outfit the cross-country runner."

LaRose's example points out another important factor in comparing spending on women's and men's athletics - the costs of running the teams can vary by both sport and gender.

Basketball is an example of the disparity between the costs of men's teams versus their female counterparts. The market dictates that men's coaches be paid more, and the men's team must subscribe to expensive recruiting services that are not required to field a competitve team.

ERIC M. JUKELEVICS

A Senior Associate Athletic Director John Perrin explains how the Arizona athletic departmentÍs budget is compiled each year last Friday, as assistant athletic director Kathleen LaRose looks on.

The bottom line

It would seem that the best judges of how well the athletic department funds women's sports would be the coaches of those teams. So far, their reviews are glowing.

"(The athletic department) has been very good to our program," said UA head women's golf coach Greg Allen. "They've been very supportive of us. They love our team, and they back us in whatever we do. There hasn't been a situation where they've said yes or no. I think the world of both Jim and Rocky and they're one of the reasons I came to Arizona a year ago."

Joan Bonvicini, UA women's basketball head coach, also said that the athletic department has been supportive.

"I think we are given every opportunity to be successful," Bonvicini said. "I think we are given the financial resources to do what we need to. They want us to be good, and they make sure we're taken care of."

Based on these assertions, the athletic department apparently has succeeded in their mission to fund teams to the level necessary to compete in the NCAA and Pac-10.

"Our philosophy is to fund all of our programs at a level that allows them to compete nationally," Perrin said. "I think our Sears Cup ranking helps to validate the fact that we do spend a lot of money on our (women's) sports. You can't do what we do if you don't fund your sports."

LaRose also said it was important that the atmosphere was conducive to success.

"The one great thing about Arizona is that none of us look at this as a men- versus-women thing," LaRose said. "Everything that we do is co-educational. If a woman breaks her ankle, she gets the same service a man does.