This post was last updated at 11:58 am on Friday Mar. 10, 2009.
At 11:19 a.m. President George Bridges released a letter (read it in its entirety here) to the community explaining the rationale behind the administration’s decision to cut the varsity Alpine and Nordic ski teams for the coming academic year.
While acknowledging the ski teams’ strong history at Whitman and recent national success, Bridges cites the student experience and available funding as the reasons behind the decision.
“Over many years, Whitman skiing has experienced the greatest success when competing with other teams in the Northwest Conference and in national championships of the USCSA,” Bridges wrote. “By withdrawing from NCAA sponsored competition and shifting solely to USCSA competition, I believe our students will experience more success athletically and, by virtue of limiting their travel to competitions with Northwest colleges and universities, more opportunities to participate in on-campus programs at Whitman.”
According to Bridges, the per-student cost of funding the varsity ski program, excluding staff salaries, is the highest among all varsity programs at $5,625. The second highest is the varsity basketball program at $2,600. By cutting the varsity teams, the school is expecting to see an approximate $200,000 in annual savings.
“In these economic times, we cannot justify augmenting or even sustaining the current ski budget while adequately supporting our other athletic teams, and maintaining the SSRA travel budget for competing in NCAA sanctioned sports,” wrote Bridges.
Bridges will hold an open forum with Dean Snider, Athletic Director on Wednesday, March 11 at 7 p.m. or Monday Apr. 6 at 7 p.m.in Maxey Auditorium to further discuss the choice to cut the teams.
Ski team members are encouraging students to help “save the ski team” by attending the forum.
“If you don’t want to see the organizations and programs you love disappear from this school, then make an effort to join the ski team,” wrote Varsity Alpine Ski team member Brad West in an e-mail to the student listserv.
The decision to make the varsity ski team cut, comes just two weeks after Bridges released an initial letter to the community detailing the specific cutbacks Whitman would be taking to remain financially sound. According to the letter, next year’s budget calls for a $2 million cut.
“We are trying to have the least impact on students…we’re trying to protect students and the academic core of the program as much as possible,” said Chief Financial Officer, Peter Harvey, on Feb. 18.
Yesterday, on March 9, the ski teams were called for a meeting in Memorial Hall where they met with coaches and administrators to receive the news, said various e-mails sent to the student listservs by members of the team.
Five hours before the ski teams’ learned that their teams had been cut, Dean Snider sent an e-mail to the varsity athletes listserv congratulating the Nordic team on their recent success and national title they won at last week’s U.S. Collegiate Ski & Snowboard Association national championships.
“Congratulations to members of the Nordic ski teams and coach Calisa Schouweiler on great performances,” wrote Snider on March 9.
Following the announcement of the cuts, a barrage of e-mails was sent to the varsity listserv informing varsity athletes and calling for their help.
“I just ask that the varsity athletes could in some way pull together and just support the ski team for one night,” wrote Varsity Alpine ski team member Torey Anderson.
“This budget problem could very well affect any of the other teams soon, and I think it’s a good idea for everyone involved to be more informed on what the hell is going on with our athletics program. One day we were winning national championships, and the next we were cut, so it kind of goes to show that changes this drastic can happen in the blink of an eye.”
Bridges invites the community to submit written comments to him via e-mail at [email protected].
Christine J. Feehan • Mar 19, 2009 at 6:56 am
I find all the comments about tough financial times enlightening, but what I cannot understand is how a $15 million Sports Complex renovation is justified when Whitman cannot even continue to support its varsity teams. Cut your glorious additions, renovations, and new construction. Hold onto your teams. I found Whitman, a top-tier liberal arts college in the West, to be a fabulous anomaly for the competitive ski racer. There are no other schools of equal repute in the region that offer similar ski programs. But what once set Whitman apart is now making it just another liberal arts college.
Angela Raso • Mar 17, 2009 at 5:37 pm
Bob Dobbs-
We are talking about ski RACING here, not an ski vacation. I am a nordic ski team member who is a first generation college student, on need based aid, whose parents both work blue collar jobs. I grew up working at downhill ski areas, who cater to the type of ‘skier’ you present us as being, picking up 5 year olds who think that they can ski for ski teams. I can tell you from experience that the local’s children who are there on scholarship usually stick with it longer than those whose parents just want them to ski because it has the appropriate steriotypes.
On another note I don’t think that anyone is suggesting that we cut any other teams, just that we should carefully look at all the budgets an cut where we can. Why can’t we take the same approach with the athletic budget as with the academic budget, where 5% was cut across the board?
B • Mar 14, 2009 at 6:57 pm
so when the skiiers leave for another college and the school is out $ from those students, who will get cut next?
as well, why does Mr Bridges use the cost per student (excluding staff salaries)? From my experience basketball, football, hockey, etc staff salaries add up to quite a bit. I would think that cost per student should include staff salaries, otherwise the $ quoted is an incomplete number.
Brett T. T. Macfarlane • Mar 12, 2009 at 10:44 pm
As someone who lives in the corporate, rather than academic, world on a daily basis I see decisions and announcements wrapped in the rhetoric of tough economic times. It is an easy tool to blind from the truth or cover up questionable logic.
As a past member of the ski team, 95-00, I am very disappointed and agree with the disrespectful manner it which the decision was made. A decision in the works for over two years mind you.
But what concerns me most as an alum is why are programs of any kind being cut at all? Especially one that makes us unique and brings a halo of success to an otherwise lackluster athletics program. Is this a very loud symptom of deeper financial or administrative trouble? Is this not a strong statement that the philosophy of the school has shifted? Academics at all cost. That’s news to me.
It is very troubling and speaking with a large number of alums over the past few days there is a large component of the “Whitman community” that is looking at Whitman with great concern.
Joan McCord • Mar 12, 2009 at 7:56 pm
I am very sorry to hear about the Nordic Ski Team being cut by Whitman. My daughter is a high school skier in Minnesota and we were seriously going to consider Whitman College as a choice for her, but that won’t happen now. And as with almost all Nordic skiers who are excellent students, generally the best in any school, she has a 4.0 and is a very serious student as well as skier.
Nathan Od • Mar 12, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Dear Bob Dubbs, please show everyone that you are no longer ten years old and attach your name to your rant so I can personally refute your argument. I am the son of a commercial fisherman in Juneau Alaska and the only time I’ve ever eaten caviar is when I’ve caught it myself. I work all summer on a fishing boat so that I can pay to go to this school and be surrounded by extraordinary people, (don’t include yourself in this), while receiving a valuable education, and pursuing the activity that I love, skiing.
While skiing is expensive the way it is, the 240,000 dollar figure doesn’t make sense. The ski budget was 85,000 dollars, that means that the coaches and whatever other money the administration decided to throw into that figure together accounted for 155,000. Thats a lot, frankly I want to know where this figure is coming from. FInally, I want to have the opportunity to save the program. If we cut operating costs to 65,000, and the school would let us keep the 40,000 that it’s planning on reallocating into the budgets of other sports, then with the 10,000 dollars a year from our endowment, all we need is 15,000 dollars, which with a little help from the alumni is a very reachable goal. Finally the last thing we need is someone, anyone over 25, wiling to travel with us and act as “coach” for the program. This is not too much to ask, nor is it unachievable, I wish the administration would give us a chance.
Jack Straus • Mar 12, 2009 at 9:16 am
Bob Dobbs –
Your post is neither relevant to this discussion or an accurate depiction of how ski teams operate. Also If you are a member of the Whitman community you should have the courage to attach your real name to your comments, if not then take your personal rants about skiers elsewhere…
Empathizer • Mar 11, 2009 at 11:58 pm
“You can’t put a price on that.”
Unfortunately, the price is nearly $250,000.
Bob Dobbs • Mar 11, 2009 at 10:22 pm
This policy is blatantly unfair.
As we all know, skiing as a sport in high school is open only to the most economically disadvantaged students.
Other, more expensive sports like Basketball and Soccer clearly should be cut first. The students who had the opportunity to participate in those sports in High School and who can compete at the collegiate level obviously benefit from enormous wealth and don’t need the money.
Economically disadvantaged sports, like skiing and snowboarding need our help now more than ever if they and their participants are to be able to access fresh snow in remote alpine areas. To ski with such ordinary americans like John Kerry and George Bush.
To think that these poor, unfortunate students who just came to Whitman because they love to Ski should be forced to choose between a new Bentley and plane tickets to Colorado every weekend is abominable. We all know, in our hearts, that skiing is much more essential to the college experience than classes or academics.
Clearly, the solution to this problem is to cut the amount of financial aid Whitman is able to offer (studies show 100% of financial aid goes to rich students) and donate it to the needy members of the Ski Team.
I could only imagine how it must feel to come back, fresh from the slopes, take off your $75 goggles, light a Monte Cristo with your last hundred dollar bill, and then hear the shocking news that Whitman had cut funding to your sport without even allowing you the time to fundraise.
Whitman’s skiiers are clearly the schools most academically dedicated students. While most students at Whitman learn how to tweak the system to get good grades because of their wealthy backgrounds, owing to their destitute financial situation our skiiers have had to fight tooth-and-claw for every A.
God bless you, Whitman Skiiers, for your bravery in enduring this hardship. I know your name-brand caviar probably tastes more bitter than the good stuff, but if you soldier on, I’m sure that you can overcome this heinously unfair action on the part of the Whitman administration.
Annoyed • Mar 11, 2009 at 8:17 pm
I’m not sure if this is true but I’ve heard that on some teams, individuals get to have the whole hotel room to themselves while individuals in other sports teams have to share a room between three or more people. If this is true, I want to know why those teams can’t cut down on their travel expenses. If you’re on a team, sharing one hotel room with two beds among four people shouldn’t be that terrible. I mean, you’re a team. Anyway, the point of this is that even if that isn’t true, why should one team get fully cut from varsity when most of the teams probably spend more money than they need to? Why can’t everyone experience budget cuts fairly instead of singling out one team?
Alex • Mar 11, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Skiing seems to be a major factor when prospies consider attending Whitman. I have heard many ski team members say that they would have gone somewhere else, but decided on Whitman because of the balance between excellent academics and an excellent ski team. Want to talk about economics? Think of all the prospective students that will no longer take an interest in Whitman because of the lack of a varsity team. Think of all of the current students who will transfer to other schools. That is a loss of money. Sure, you can get new students, but the ski team is a quality bunch of students. Whitman needs to respect them and what they bring to the campus and the athletic department. You can’t put a price on that.
Sophia • Mar 11, 2009 at 11:53 am
When talking numbers, it make economic sense to cut the varsity ski program in light of the current recession (depression?). This logic is not what troubles me; I am disturbed by the blatant disrespect and disregard for the members of the ski team and their coaches.
Yeah, things are bad. That doesn’t mean you can treat people that have been devoted to the excellence of this institution like shit. That’s exactly what the administration did. In the wake of an epic week skiing in Colorado, with no warning, coaches lost their jobs and students were told that Whitman could not support the sport for which they had specifically been recruited. Not only was this news devastatingly hurtful, but the ski team was left without options or hope.
Let’s be honest, skiers are in a super shitty situation because of the administration’s neglect. It’s going to be a huge pain in the ass for skiers to try to transfer after the deadline. Not to mention face leaving the friends and the Whitman community. I know I don’t want to see them go. But what’s the alternative? The College did not even give them the chance to raise funds from alums, families, or even an old-school bake sale. Maybe if the administration had told the coaches that the ski team was in danger, they could have dedicated themselves to finding creative solutions and compromise. I bet the people faced with unemployment would try pretty freakin hard to find feasible alternatives to being fired.
Anyway, the economy sucks. We know. That doesn’t mean Whitman can lose its compassion for the students it supposedly cares about. This whole thing could have gone down WAY different, with transparency and discussions … Obama style. But it didn’t; and that sucks. Times are rough, why make them suckier? Spread the love.
Concerned • Mar 11, 2009 at 10:38 am
I think we can all agree that this was a decision that nobody wanted to see happen. Whether or not it was handled correctly is certainly debatable. Obviously, the skiiers and much of the athletic community will be upset to see our program be cut. However, I think we really need to look at this from the point of an athletic director. The fact of the matter, is that the skiing team cost by far more to run than any other athletic team. After re-allocating $40,000 to support travel for other teams, the athletics department will save approximately $200,000. This means that the skiing program cost nearly a quarter of a million dollars to run. As an athletic director, you want programs that compete in the Northwest Conference for conference championships and teams that follow with the mission of Division III athletics with the possibility of competing in the NCAA tournament. While the recent success of the ski team is certainly admirable, I think there is a lot of confusion here. The Whitman ski team did not compete at the NCAA tournament, but rather at the USCSA championships. Many if not most of the teams competing at these championships are club teams, not teams officially sanctioned by their respective colleges, and thus do not have nearly the funding provided for the Whitman ski team. Obviously this is a hard time for a lot of people, but when it comes down to it, cuts had to be made. While the ski team maybe should have been allowed to look for alternate funding, this may have only delayed the process and prolonged the pain.
Bailey Arend • Mar 11, 2009 at 9:49 am
Obviously a student athlete is a student. Do not make the mistake of confusing “balance” between Academics and Sport with “slackers.” Last year, we had 7 Academic All-Americans, and the nordic men had the highest GPA of any men’s team on campus. Our Varsity Altheletes overall had a higher average GPA than the average Whitman student. We are all here for a good education and a liberal arts institution should embrace education of all kinds (including physical). We do not want to see ANY programs cut, academic, athletic or otherwise. What we want is student input in the process. We want strong programs to be supported. We want the athletic department to actually pursue excellence (their stated mission) by supporting their most successful teams. At the very least we want the chance to cut our budget before they cut our program. How are we to save money if we aren’t told we need to? Why aren’t other teams being told to save? Why are we the first to go?
Warren mcDermott • Mar 10, 2009 at 10:15 pm
For eight years I have balanced academics with cross country skiing. I could have gone to other schools with better academic ratings, better financial aid, and closer to home. I chose Whitman college because it seemed to understand that school is about balance. I have put 1750 hours of training into the last three years at Whitman, represented the school on a national level, and continued to succeed in academics. Now Whitman is telling me that my sacrifice and years of balancing competition and school was really all just something un-important and secondary. What are we supposed to do? Are we supposed to trash the last eight odd years of devoted training and stick here at Whitman until we graduate? Are we supposed to transfer and leave behind the lives that we have made here at Whitman. Either way Whitman has screwed us skiers. Thats the point. Either decision compromises years of building. Its the way Whitman has handled this that is so appalling. We skiers deserve, at the very least, time to transfer, time for fundraising to support this “club” that GB writes about, organize this “club” team, give warning to the two coaches that just lost their jobs, and give incoming freshmen a heads up about the situation.
I am, more than anything, just sad.
Cutting the ski team is just the beginning.
Whitman athletics as a community has just gotten the shaft.
-Warren
Emily Hanscam • Mar 10, 2009 at 6:40 pm
As a nordic skier, I completely agree with Nathen, and rather then echo his sentiments, I will briefly elaborate on what Alison and Andrew had to say. Not once did the administrators say to us that they were cutting the ski team because it detracted from academics, if this were the clear case, then I would also be forced to put academics above the sport I love. However, I am under the impression (I may be misinformed) that the budget cuts to skiing were necessary because we are the most expensive off all the sports. They did not warn us, to give us time to fundraise (there is even no time for next year, so skiing as a club sport is unrealistic) which could have gone quite a way to help with the deficit. My opinion, is that while I see the problem with the budget (as for being gone all the time, the Debate team is gone more often then we are), I think that we should have been given the chance to try and save our program, rather then have it gone in an instant.
Alisa Larson-Xu • Mar 10, 2009 at 5:02 pm
I agree with Andrew Spittle–this should in no way affect the academic departments of Whitman. It’s not hard to figure out that something needs to be cut, we get it, but the reasons and methods to cut the ski team seam vague and disrespectful to the athletic community. As a student-athlete, I had no idea until the cuts were made until someone posted it on the listserve…is this the way Whitman works? I think this is a good opportunity to internally review the expenses of the athletic department. What expenses are necessary for each team, and what can be cut. I can say that I don’t need two warm up shirts to play soccer, can that money to buy those shirts be donated to the ski team? If we are serious in fighting to keep a program, every team must be selfless in the process because money will not suddenly reappear to keep the team and we sure aren’t going to receive much support elsewhere.
Andrew Spittle • Mar 10, 2009 at 4:44 pm
In response to what Nathan said: while I think what you said is valid it nonetheless still misses the point.
You write that “While this is their prerogative, it is difficult to stomach for the 21 athletes that were recruited to this college in order to be student athletes, especially since the decision comes after the transfer deadline.” The key there is that even you acknowledge that you came here to be a *student* athlete.
No matter how important athletics are academics will (or at least should) be the top priority for any college. The actions taken by President Bridges and the rest of the college simply reflect their desire to do whatever they can to respond to the budget difficulties while maintaining the ability for Whitman to work toward its ultimate purpose: academics.
It may be difficult to stomach for members of the ski team and for members of other varsity sports, but I would much rather see athletic teams eliminated than see academic departments downsized or eliminated.
Nathan Ord • Mar 10, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Let me put this into context, the day after arriving home from some of the best races of their lives, Whitman’s ski team was told that they were no longer going to be a varsity sport. Both the nordic and alpine coaches, one of which, Tom Olson has been coaching and teaching weightlifting here for 19 years, were informed that as of July 1st they were no longer wanted at Whitman. On another note, the alpine team was already planning on converting to USCSA next year, a fact that may have been discovered if the administration had conferred with the coaches. What George Bridges also doesn’t say is that with a club budget, ski racing will not survive. Simply to train at Bluewood requires a coach, and any sort of racing requires significantly more planning and traveling than nearly all other sports. By firing our coaches, and demoting us to a club sport, Whitman has sent a message that they do not want ski racing as part of their athletic program. While this is their prerogative, it is difficult to stomach for the 21 athletes that were recruited to this college in order to be student athletes, especially since the decision comes after the transfer deadline. While those who have made this decision have said that they are ready to help any student who wishes to transfer to find a school that serves their needs, they didn’t respect the same students enough to consult with them and probe alternative options. This decision has come flying out of the blue, with no consultation with the affected party. I know that I, as well as most of the other skiing athletes have come to Whitman in a large part because of the ski team. Now that this program has been cut with no warning, myself and many others are wondering why we should continue to fund this administration.
Stefan Wheat • Mar 10, 2009 at 3:52 pm
First of all I want to point out that I understand why Whitman needs to cut back the budget and how the ski team, considering its expenses and seeming disconnection from the school, is a logical choice. That said, I by no means condone the choice. The fact of the matter is that problem with this decision has very little to do with economics, especially when you speak with the people that are directly effected by it. What is so offensive to the people of the ski team and their supporters is the way in which this decision was passed down. As a freshmen student at Whitman, I know a few of the skiers that are also freshmen and who chose Whitman under the clear assumption that they would be able to pursue the sport that they love. This assumption was a valid one considering the fact that while they were informed that the program “was under review,” they were later told that the issue had been dropped and that they were good to go. Now these students, some of whom I am proud to call friends and who undoubtedly contribute a great deal to the Whitman community have been deprived of their dream. No–it has been ripped out from under their feet. Now that skiing has been removed as a varsity sport (yes they say it can still exist as a club, but I think we all know that this won’t last) what are the choices of the people who devoted their lives to a pursuit of excellence in nordic and alpine skiing? Do they transfer? This is their dilemma: they love skiing, but they have already developed a lasting connection with the people and the environment of Whitman. I think the choice we are giving them is cruel and contradictory to the values that Whitman attempts to cultivate. Anyways, just thought I would throw in my two cents.
Gabriela Salvidea • Mar 10, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Those complaining about this cut are troublingly out of touch with current events. This quote from a David Brooks column I just read I think puts things in perspective:
“Instead, they’re going to focus obsessively on restoring equilibrium first, and they’re going to understand that there is a sharp distinction between crisis policy-making and noncrisis policy-making. In times like these, you’d do things you would never do normally. When it’s over, we can go back to our regularly scheduled debates.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/10/opinion/10brooks.html?em
Heidi Brigham • Mar 10, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Whitman is in a financial bind, as is anyone reeling from investment losses. When considering programs scheduled for cuts, ask youself “How does this program contribute to the mission of Whitman College?” It helps. Personally, I think that cutting an expensive non-academic program in order to maintain Whitman’s academic core is a positive move. Thanks for the forum.
Kim Sommers • Mar 10, 2009 at 11:27 am
What do you think about the decision to cut the ski teams? Share your thoughts here.