Intercollegiate athletics has changed dramatically in the past 25 years. The combination of increased athletics revenues and extensive NCAA rules implementation has created a need for much larger administrative staffs at our colleges and universities.

In the past, the positions of athletics director and associate athletics director often were filled by former coaches, but now those positions have become a career path in themselves. Most institutions also have recently added compliance directors, a senior woman administrator, marketing personnel and a variety of assistant athletics directors to their athletics departments. The administrative staffs at most schools in fact rival a small corporation.

The job of athletics director now requires a person with a strong business and fund-raising background. Coaching is no longer a prerequisite for athletics administration. Many athletics administrative staffs are void of coaching experience. This creates an inherent lack of understanding between coaches and athletics administrators.

The influx of administrative information to be disseminated and acted upon has grown increasingly more burdensome in recent years. Our penchant in college athletics to continually legislate what was once common sense necessitates administrators spending a good deal of time ensuring coaches are doing the "right thing." That often means that staff meetings are cluttered with administrators presenting information to the coaches, which makes coaches feel even more alienated from their athletics administrators.

At Navy, we decided to create a framework for improved communication and an avenue for proposals to move forward through the chain of command. We incorporated our coaches and brought together our 29 sports teams. The effort led to a "Coaches Physical Mission Organization."

Simply put, we formed a coaches association.

The group meets monthly during the school year and the meetings are open to all head and assistant coaches (though each sport has only one vote). The meetings address issues that pertain specifically to coaches and often produce proposals or recommendations that are forwarded to the administrative staff. The meetings allow coaches to launch immediately into issues without a layer of administrative information. (Coaches still can access the administrative information through separate monthly meetings for coaches and administrators.)

Our organization's president is voted to a two-year term. We also name a vice-president, who becomes president after that two-year period, though the organization has the right to continue the current president's tenure for additional terms as voted by coaching members. The president briefs the athletics department during its monthly meetings on any issues and proposals concerning the coaches.

The coaches meetings are free from the conflict of trying to assuage both administrative and coaching concerns at the same time. Additionally, coaches are able to be more open without the fear of an administrator viewing them in a negative light. Occasionally, we have an athletics administrator attend the meetings to shed light on an issue on the monthly agenda.

We were fortunate at Navy in that we enjoyed the athletics director's support for this meeting concept from the start. Without the AD's support, coaches organizations cannot be effective. In turn, athletics administrators receive information from coaches in an organized and efficient manner.

Coaches have been guilty in the past of speaking glibly on issues without being willing to work toward a solution. We must be organized if we expect to have an effect. This organization prompts coaches to discuss issues and make formal proposals rather than just spout off.

Coaches and athletics administrators can work together in a productive manner using the coaches organization as the vehicle.

John Officer is an associate professor and the head tennis coach at the U.S. Naval Academy.