Looking back to last May, we saw a very different AU Athletics Department compared to today.
A man named George led us, Women's Basketball was training for next season under Shann Hart's control and Swimming and Diving head coach Mark Davin was wrapping up his recruiting year by finalizing the last few scholarships for his team. Now, a year later, George and Hart "resigned," and Davin lost his ability to grant scholarships to athletes for swimming.
The changes made by the AU administration fell under great scrutiny and, as an athlete, I wonder if they are trying to make a valiant step forward, as AU claims, a step back, or a continuation of the same middle-of-the-road performance put forward by an underachieving department.
The Women's Basketball team has improved steadily over the past three years under Hart. In 2001-02, the team was eliminated in the first round of the PL tournament. In 2002-03, the Eagles were beaten in the second round, and this year they lost in the championship game. Hart was honored for the second-place finish and "resigned" a few weeks later.
With such progress at hand, it doesn't make sense why any coach or administrator would give up after getting so close to the gold and risk never getting that close again for a long time.
Former Athletic Director Tom George "resigned" after bringing nearly 10 PL titles to AU in a year and a half. George left at an inopportune time for both AU and himself professionally. Why would an AD leave when the teams seemed to be doing so well? It seems to the average person that AU or George had a sudden change of heart that didn't benefit anyone.
These staff changes hurt sports programs at AU because they waste time and money. Every time AU looks for a new administrator or coach, it costs a significant amount. This is money that could be used to get blue chip recruits or improve travel plans for teams, so they do not have to stay at roach motels and eat at run-down local diners. The current employees in Athletics also waste their time in finding their new co-workers.
Earlier in the year, Davin saw all his scholarships cut from the Swimming and Diving program. Of course, Men's Basketball head coach Jeff Jones isn't looking for scholarships because the administration takes advantage of low-grossing sports.
When I informed my uncle, Sam Montgomery, who graduated from AU in 1970 and swam here in 1969 and 70, about the swim team losing its ability to offer athletic scholarships.
"They've been doing that kind of stuff since I went there, and I'm not surprised," my uncle said.
His cold words of unamazement took me off guard, but they put my own experiences at AU into perspective.
In my three years here, it has been rumored that AU has been planning to bring Men's Baseball and Lacrosse teams to AU. To do this has a cost, like cutting another men's sport. This might be done for budgetary and Title IX compliance reasons.
The sport that looked like it would be cut to fulfill this need was wrestling, a low-grossing sport that in general has a past worth forgetting at AU. During the 1999-00 season, then head coach Jim Akerly was fired for assaulting an AU wrestler while on a team trip to Las Vegas.
Rob Puzio, who replaced Akerly, was head coach of the wrestling for a little over two years, until the team was rumored to be cut during a late April press conference hosted by AU President Benjamin Ladner and Vice President of Development Al Checcio. Instead, divine intervention from a few millionaire alumni and Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert kept wrestling at AU.
With the hopes of cutting wrestling officially dashed, it seems as if AU looked to alternative means of getting baseball and lacrosse here. The move to cut swimming scholarships has been seen by many to be the first domino in a chain of what will culminate with the cutting of the program.
So, what good reason is there to bring new sports to AU? Maybe this is just the result of a high turnover rate in the athletics department. The rotations of new administrators to improve the program has done nothing but take away from keeping programs strong.
AU athletics has had a lack of significant leadership in general in its current history. The only employees in athletics to outdate fifth-year senior wrestler Jared Hyman are two coaches, Barry Goldberg and Matt Centrowitz. How are we supposed to build a stable, healthy athletic department when the average administrator's life span is three years?
Every time an employee changes, so does the agenda for athletics. Hence, the change from phasing out wrestling to dwindling down swimming. If they simply focus on finding coaches and administrators who want to stay at AU for a long time and stay the course, teams would stabilize and become more successful.
By not changing the agenda, it takes the everyday pressures (fear of losing their jobs) off coaches and allows them to develop their teams. AU would not only continue to win PL titles, but it would eventually be able to compete with real Division I schools.
So what do I recommend? Find a single course with guidelines and stay true to it for as long as possible. AU has the resources and a strong enough pool of students that it can someday turn into some form of powerhouse in smaller sports. If AU just invests in a single agenda, it can really happen.
