ELItorial: Club athletes should just play, not pay

By Carl Bialik

Eighteen thousand dollars and change. That amount is the paltry sum of money that Yale's 38 club teams will be sharing this year to help cover their travel, meal, and tournament expenses. That is also far less than $50,000, the average salary of Yale's 29 varsity head coaches--let alone the $1.4 million in operating expenses (not including a coach's salary) spent on varsity teams last year.

This inequity is staggering. Many of the club teams are nationally competitive and must pay every expense (with the important exception of coaches' salaries) of a varsity team. While some teams have established alumni networks to support them, other, newer teams, having achieved success before their alumni could catch up, have declined invitations to national competition because of a lack of funds, according to Director of Club Sports Tom Migdalski.

This history of lost opportunity was largely ended last year when the Council of Masters gave $5,000 to the club sports program to help pay for 10 teams' trips to national tournaments. However, Migdalski has not heard confirmation that the Council of Masters will renew such funding this year, and he does not anticipate an alternate donor to pick up the financial slack if the Council does not come through.

That donor, not just this year but every year, should be Yale Athletics. The athletic department has insisted that its budget is tight, and that it cannot afford to increase club funding. Indeed, Associate Director of Athletics Larry Matthews said that the athletic department does not have the funds to match last year's Council of Master's gift. But the impact of that gift shows how far club teams can stretch a small amount of money. Just by doubling its share of club sports funding, Yale Athletics could significantly cut into club athletes' burden--both in time spent fundraising and in out-of-pocket expenses. The club rugby team charges members $125 in annual dues.

Migdalski agreed that more money from any source would always be welcome, but asserted, "We're not trying to fully fund the teams; we're trying to have teams match what we give them, and, in some cases, more than match it." He added, "Part of the beauty of club sports is that students have more of a learning experience than varsity sports. They have to learn fundraising, schedule matches and practices, and coach themselves--things that varsity athletes just don't have to worry about."

This is a convincing point--but notice that in Migdalski's list of things that club team members learn, fundraising doesn't quite fit with the rest. Fundraising, unlike training, coaching, and arranging matches and practices, is not fundamental to athletics. Varsity athletes, by and large, do not raise funds. If they do, it's not with the same urgency--for fundraising can determine the survival of a club team.

The Ivy League champion sailing team must frequently travel to regattas around the region to stay competitive with its varsity opponents, but it only received $900 from club sports program last year. The women's ultimate team received approximately $400 last year in regular club funding; the Council of Masters fund allowed them to travel to Blaine, Minn., for national competition, where they finished No. 4 among teams like Carleton and Cornell--teams which each receive approximately $3,000 annually.

The club sports program's nominal mission to give club athletes the opportunity to learn to raise money seems like a convenient excuse to cover the real problem--the athletic department's inadequate funding for club sports. It seems absurd that the department would argue that participation in club teams should come with the obligation to raise funds, while playing on the lacrosse, squash, field hockey, or women's volleyball teams should not. This argument especially falls flat when one considers that the men's club volleyball, wrestling, and water polo teams once had varsity status, but lost it as Yale cut men's varsity programs to increase its percentage of female athletes in order to comply with Title IX. To say that members of these teams gained the benefit of learning how to raise money is a cruel joke.

Clearly, conferring varsity status on all club teams is not the solution. In addition, not all club teams require more money. According to Migdalski, some teams don't even use all the money his office provides, and others barely make an effort to fundraise. Besides, there is true merit in the notion of club sports. Many club captains agree that they love the autonomy of their student-run teams. Even club teams like men's rugby and sailing, which have paid for a coach through alumni contributions, enjoy their independence from the athletic department and the accompanying responsibility of arranging their own matches and practices.

With a relatively small additional expenditure, Yale could elevate club sports to a status of greater financial security and finally drop the rationalization that club athletes benefit by learning to fundraise. Migdalski asserts that Yale is in the middle of the Ivy pack when it comes to supporting club teams. The poor funding at other schools should not keep Yale from at least paying the entire club sports program as much as it gives to one varsity coach each year. That doesn't seem like too much to ask.

Back to Sports...