"Anthony J. Buffa" <[log in to unmask]> writes:
>I noticed today in the local rag that Mich Tech has dropped football in
>response to a required 10% across the board. Apparently across the board
>really does mean that in Michigan, whereas it does not here in CA.
>
>At any rate, I was wondering if any other programs, like hockey, might
>be in danger. I kinda doubt they'd drop hockey, but then again . . .

Tony,

The Michigan Tech Alumni e-mail list has (not surprisingly) had quite a
bit of discussion about this topic.  Basically, the decision came down to
dropping football because of the comparatively large expense vs. the
other varsity sports.  (Hockey at Tech probably has a larger budget,
but generates net revenue.... whereas I doubt the football team ever
got close to "breaking even".)  If football hadn't been cut, it would have
meant cutting at least 3 or 4 other teams... and then the university would
not have fielded the minimum number of teams to remain eligible to
compete in NCAA Division II.

The vast majority of Tech alumni seem to support the decision.  Although
the football team has had some success in recent years, Tech has never
(in my opinion) had a strong "football tradition" among the student body
and the local community.  Hockey, of course, is a different story -- and
hopefully, the university can now find a coach to replace Sertich who will
continue the upward momentum.

[All of the above is strictly my own interpretation and/or opinion.]

Garrett Lanzy (Michigan Tech '84)