What Games May Come
Administration, Athletics Department Say Money is Why NCAA Football Might Not Happen at Mason
Asst. News Editor Dane Styler

Each of the three previous parts of this series, looking back over the last 15 years of football history at George Mason University, began with an anecdote illustrating the political attitude toward the current club football program and even the future prospect of a NCAA team. Though other stories could be told, there will not be one here.

The purpose of this final installment is to reflect, and to attempt to pinpoint the true reason why there is not NCAA football at Mason.

It seems that every time the issue of developing a program has come up, money has been the explanation.

“It’s a song and dance routine they have used for years,” said Hector Alcalde of D.C.’s Alcalde & Fay, who served on the Board of Visitors in 1992, when he and others like Georgetown football coach Joe Pascale first proposed the program to the rest of the Board. It was tabled at the time, but that year saw the beginnings of the club program, with Pascale as its coach.

Alcalde puts it best when he voices the question that many others have asked.
“Why not Mason?” asked Alcalde in a recent phone interview with Broadside.

“There’s no reason why we shouldn’t have football except for the cost,” Athletics Director Thomas O’Connor said.

The estimated annual cost for a NCAA football program at Mason has risen in the past ten years, from $4.4 million in 1998 to a $5.86 million estimated annual cost in 2004 if Mason was to sponsor a NCAA football program, according to studies released by the athletics department. The latest report shot that number to over $11 million by 2010 if Mason was to compete in the Colonial Athletic Association.

Any of these costs, however, are significantly higher than the annual budgets of other schools operating in the CAA. James Madison budgets at $4.2 million annually and William & Mary at $3.4 million. All other CAA football participants operate below the $4 million marker.

All these studies of costs do not and cannot easily take into account other, less direct, monetary benefits that are often associated with having a college football program, such as the statistically supported increase in university donations from alumni which usually occurs.

Regardless of the actual cost, Senior Vice President Maurice Scherrens, who has been involved, or at least familiar, with every study to date, believes that NCAA football at Mason would need outside support to fund the program.

“Somebody has to step up big,” Scherrens said.

Pascale says he already has a number of supporters lined up who want to create endowments for player scholarships, endowments for the coaching staff, and even endowments for the football program. He pointed out that other club teams are permitted to have scholarships. When asked about the need to abide by equity standards, he said he could get scholarships for women’s sports too.

He states that issues with the university’s private foundation and the athletics department have impeded him from finalizing the first of these endowments. Broadside requested from the athletics department records pertaining to correspondence between the department and Pascale but the request was not fulfilled.

However, the continuing concern over money for an NCAA football program is prevalent throughout the faculty as well as the administration.

“NCAA football will arrive at George Mason University eventually,” Dean Jack Censer of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences said. “There is a push in that direction . . . But I’m really worried about the costs, worried about the students’ expectations and how tough, financially, it will be.”

Professor James Bennett, a chair on the Faculty Senate, said football does not fit with university needs.

“We are having financial problems without the burden of football. I think that the costs far outweigh the benefits,” Bennett said.

This statement is similar to what University President Alan Merten said in 1998 in a letter to the Board, stating in the letter that football at that time was inconsistent with the needs of Mason and that he did not support it. More than nine years later, Merten has taken a policy of not commenting on the subject of football, according to his office.
Scherrens believes it would be a matter of proving the outside community support to Merten.

“Show him the money,” Scherrens said.

Both Scherrens and O’Connor say the reason the projected costs are so high is because of a desire to be consistent with the university’s mission of being a first class institution. Scherrens says that reputation has to be “reflective in all [the university’s] programs.”

O’Connor goes a little further in his explanation.

“It should be first class–the same way everything else is done at this university,” O’Connor said.“That’s my philosophy. You gotta do it right. If you don’t do it right you miss the whole point… There would be an expectation to be successful–to be the best program in the CAA.”

O’Connor said it is the goal and expectation of the athletics department that their fully funded and supported NCAA programs be the top teams in the league.

Last year, Mason’s men’s soccer team ranked 11 in the CAA. Women’s soccer ranked 6, women’s basketball ranked 12. Men’s basketball finished 18-15 last season, good for the number five spot in the CAA.

So will we, sometime in the future, see NCAA football at Mason?

To know that, the questions that first must be asked of students, the administration and the community, is whether or not Mason has deep enough pockets and just what expectations Mason has for the game.