Reason #2: "USA Track and Field's Plea to Utah"

The second reason why the University of Utah should bring men's track and field/cross country back has to do with how disappointed USA Track and Field (USATF) was back in 2005 when Utah announced its decision to discontinue the program. USATF was not happy with the U for dropping the program. In fact, it seemed as though they were downright disgusted. But we’ll get to that part later. First, let’s analyze the details of why the program was cut.

In May of 2005 – After what I would assume would be meetings with the rest of the athletic board at the University of Utah – Athletic Director Chris Hill made the announcement that “The University of Utah has discontinued its men's track and field and cross country programs in a move designed to redirect funds to help strengthen other sports.”

Hill explained his reasoning further:

We have never been able to fund men's cross country and track at a level that would allow us to have realistic team goals. The reality is that we believe a reallocation of resources will strengthen our other programs that we believe have more potential for success. Some of our programs are not fully-funded and this will give us a chance to get closer to that goal.

This announcement came from the hill during a time in which it was very exciting to be a Ute. The Utes had just capped of an undefeated season with a Fiesta Bowl win under coach Urban Meyer. Alex Smith had literally, just a few days prior to this announcement, been selected with the number one overall pick by the San Francisco 49’ers in the NFL draft. Urban Meyer was leaving to go coach at Florida and Kyle Whittingham was taking over as the new Head Coach of the football team. 

So when Chris Hill said that they were looking to “redirect funds to help strengthen other sports”, what he meant was to help strengthen football. Let’s face it, the Mountain West Conference was just not capable of providing the type of funding that Utah would need in order maintain their strong recruiting presence and keep moving forward as a program.

The move freed up five scholarships, as well as travel, equipment and coaching dollars for other sports.

These 5 additional scholarships undoubtedly went to football. What is the key to maintaining a strong national power for a football team? Position depth. How do you get depth on your team? More scholarships.

Now, we can’t blame Chris Hill for his decision. Economically, it made sense. He had a great football team that was making the Athletic Department a lot of money. At the time, Utah Football was a great product that was worth sacrificing for to support. And it worked. They recruited well, and 3 years later, they went undefeated again and won the Sugar Bowl against Alabama. He had to make the sacrifice in order to free up the money that was necessary to accomplish that historical achievement because we weren't getting any help from the Mountain West Conference.

But now, things are different. Utah has PAC-12 money. We’ll go into more of a financial analysis in a later post, but just know that there is a HUGE difference between Mountain West money and PAC-12 money. Utah had to make a sacrifice somewhere in order to make themselves a household name with football recruits around the nation.

So…what did USA Track & Field think about Hill’s decision? They weren’t too happy about it. They even issued a full press release in response. Less than a month after Utah announced its decision to discontinue the men’s track program, USA Track & Field called on Hill to stop and think about it:

June 7, 2005 - USA Track & Field (USATF) and America's track/cross country coaches association, the USTFCCCA, on Tuesday jointly called for University of Utah to reconsider its decision to discontinue men's track and field and cross country. USATF stated that 'Utah's reasoning is at odds with the vibrant state of track and cross country, in Utah and across America. Not only are these sports less burdensome financially than most college sports, their overall NCAA participation continues to grow, especially among minorities.'

They even made another point, that I’ll most likely be talking about in the future, when they stated, “Utah's decision will leave it as the ONLY NCAA Division I university in the state not sponsoring men's track and cross country, as Brigham Young, Southern Utah, Utah State, Utah Valley and Weber State all field teams.”

Considering that their fellow institutions in Utah continue to field men's track and cross country, they are bucking a trend and failing where others seem to have succeeded with relative ease.

USA Track & Field went on to point out that Track/Cross Country is the highest participatory sport among high school girls and boys in the state of Utah. Sam Seemes, CEO of the USTFCCCA pointed out that what Utah is doing is putting themselves at odds with current state and national growth patterns that are being observed among Track/Cross Country athletes.

But USA Track & Field didn’t stop there. They further stated that this decision was a complete rejection of the great Olympic heritage that the state of Utah made for itself during the winter Olympics of 2002.

The University of Utah was a great host to the athletes of the world in 2002 and benefited significantly from the Olympics' presence on their campus," said Craig Masback, CEO of USA Track & Field. "I am surprised to see that they are turning their backs on the marquee sport of the Olympic movement.

What else did Utah effectively do when it eliminated its men’s Track/Cross Country program? According to USA Track & Field, they took away opportunities for minorities in the state of Utah and across the nation to go to college.

The University of Utah's decision is even more portentous for the minority community. Black, non-Hispanic males comprise 21 percent of all male NCAA track and field athletes, according to an NCAA study. Only football and basketball have higher participation among black athletes, and cross country is fourth at 9.2 percent. Volleyball is the next-highest with just 6.4 percent black male participation….'USA Track & Field is disturbed that some NCAA institutions have cut a sport that traditionally provides opportunities for black male athletes, and replaced those opportunities with programs which seem to attract largely white athletes,' Masback said.

Ok. So let’s recap what Utah did when it discontinued the men’s program:

1.    Ignored the fact that Track/Cross Country is one of the most popular sports in the state of Utah.

2.    Made itself the ONLY Division I school in the state to not field a team.

3.    Essentially rejected its Olympic heritage.

4.    Eliminated opportunities for minority student athletes.

Let’s take a moment to think about what USA Track & Field is. This is the organization that oversees ALL track and field/cross country programs in the United States. That includes all high school, college, professional, and Olympic teams. For USA Track & Field to directly and personally express their disappointment for Utah’s decision to cut it men’s program says something. 

Check out the full USA Track & Field press release on Utah's elimination of men's Track/Cross Country here.

Share on Google Plus

About Unknown

"I'm a graduate of the University of Utah and self proclaimed 'biggest track fan in the state of Utah.' Since Utah is an Olympic proud state, it seems odd that Utah doesn't fully support the marquee sport of the Olympics. Let's do something about it!"