We're Still Paying And They're Still Playing, But That's Not Such A Bad Thing

Last year I wrote an editorial, which turned the heads of the usual suspects in terms of whose heads you would expect to turn if someone said something bad about Longwood-only problem was, I did not believe that I had. The issue was the fact that a whopping 48 percent of Longwood's student Comprehensive Fees from tuition goes to athletics; now with overwhelming budget cuts sweeping through yet again, it seems this issue has struck another chord-only this time it is with professors.

In order to serve the purpose of the institution it has been proposed that any tuition increases for the 2011 school year be made cost-neutral by reducing the athletic component of the Comprehensive Fee. This means the student tuition would stay at least approximately the same or see only a modest increase with the money that would be needed coming out of what would normally go to athletics.

So we benefit new non-athlete students and make things harder for students on campus, athlete or not. Student athletes are at an obvious disadvantage with a cut to athletics, but everyone else is too. If athletics slows down or loses part of its image then the whole school will suffer. Like many have said, Longwood moving to Division I was a good boost for the school's image and taking away from that will hurt us.

While nothing of the sort was proposed at the Academic Affairs Committee about it, it was suggested lowering that part of the fee could force the University to scale back our Division I program. Apparently this was discussed as a possible side effect of the loss of funding. Okay. While last year I expressed my distress at the fact so much of my money went to athletics I really do not want that to happen. I would rather pay more money and stay at D-I.

The whole point in going D-I was to associate Longwood with the other fourteen D-I schools in Virginia, which hold similar educational philosophies, standards of admission, and intercollegiate athletics goals. In addition the school wanted to bring in more diverse student-athletes, and raise the public profile and visibility of the University.

Longwood has succeeded at this and more since becoming D-I and the focus of the program has been in line with the core mission of this University since day one (although some might not think so). It was explained best to me as making sure student athletes get the life lessons they need on the field, in the classroom, and in life. It's not about one aspect of Longwood, academics or athletics, being more important than another, because it's all part of making the student be the best they can be-a citizen leader.

Coming from a sports fan, our teams have come a ridiculously long way since this whole transition began. Both of our soccer teams won their respective conference championships last season (that's right I said conference, our fall teams are actually in one, and they dominated last year), and I don't think I really need to point out the better competition we have been up against. Our field hockey team hosted their conference tournament and beat Stanford for example, and our women's golf team has ranked in the top 15, for the past two years on the National Golf Coaches Association (NGCA) All-Scholarship GPA Award.

Coming from an admissions standpoint, we can argue about the importance of academics all day (and it is extremely important), but athletics is a big part of a schools image and you cannot deny Longwood has become a bigger school since our switch. Think about this, Longwood is the third oldest public school in the Commonwealth of Virginia just behind William &Mary and the University of Virginia, but when I was in high school I didn't know Longwood existed until I chanced across it on a college visit trip.

Fast-forward to now, I go home and people not only know the school but they mention, "Hey, I saw your boys play Kentucky!" The point being D-I helped Longwood's name get out there. Taking that away seems ridiculous.

From a fiscal standpoint, think about the fact that students have paid this 48 percent of their student fees to athletics for however many years they've been here (four for me, a few more for some of my friends). That is a lot of my money that has gone to improving our teams. At this point I have invested so much money into the teams I want and expect them to be great.

Again, the idea of scaling the athletics department back to Division III was not proposed at the ACC meeting, but no matter what anyone says it is still possible now that the proposal to balance the Comprehensive Fee by taking away from the athletic department passed 13-1 with one abstention.

The problem I have as a student is that I agree with both sides of this issue. I fully agree academics should be the focus at any educational institution because that is why we are all here. At the same time however I do not want to scale back athletics because academia is only one aspect of what makes a school what it is-athletics is just as important to the image of a University. Seeing as how neither option of scaling back academics or scaling back athletics works for me there must be another way.

Well, the issue boils down to money that we don't have and need to keep Longwood running smoothly. The money in question revolves around tuition dollars specifically. It turns out around the year 2000-2001 the Commonwealth of Virginia's General Assembly promised state schools they would cover 67 percent of all In-state tuition, and apparently they only cover 63 percent as of 2009 according to The State Council of Higher Education for Virginia (SCHEV). This four percent could easily boost funding for academics that seems to be lacking.

As a side note there is no regulation of school Comprehensive Fees by the Commonwealth of Virginia, which may be a factor in why ours is the second highest in Virginia. Of course, if we had the full 67 percent of school tuition funding then maybe it wouldn't have to be so high.