National Collegiate Athletic Association
NCAA News Archive - 2007
« back to 2007 | Back to NCAA News Archive Index
Few schools felt impact of page-count reduction
But some doubt limit reduces costs; others worry about loss of historic data
The NCAA News
The most recent change in media guides for Division I programs was the 2005 implementation of a page limit. In an attempt to even the playing field for institutions that do not have the resources to produce volumes that rival “War and Peace” in size, Division I voted to require all institutions to stick to a strict 208-page maximum media guide for all sports.
For most institutions, that limit was not a problem, but others had to cut more than half the pages of their guides. The College Sports Information Directors of America took no position on the issue at the time. Then-president Joe Hernandez, associate athletics director for external affairs at Ball State University, said the legislation affected so few institutions that the organization did not want to comment on it publicly, though he acknowledged a lot of internal discussion.
As a result, Hernandez said he doesn’t think the restrictions have had an impact on Division I overall.
“If you polled the Division I men’s basketball schools, 99 percent would say it didn’t affect them at all. There would be 25 or 30 that had to cut back,” Hernandez said. “There are those schools that would tell you they need the additional pages to highlight the information they need. I understand their dilemma, and that’s why as a whole our group did not take a stand on it because it only affected a small minority of our membership.”
For some sports information directors, the media guide is regarded as the front door to a program, and page counts for football jumped into the 400s and even the 500s in the 1990s. Some believe the explosion for some institutions began after a mid-1990s decision prohibited institutions from producing both a recruiting guide and a media guide. That measure was seen as a way to cut costs as well, though some said combining the two books into one larger publication ended up costing more money than it did to produce two separate guides.
Doug Dull, associate athletics director for media relations at the University of Maryland, College Park and current CoSIDA president, said cutting those larger books down to 208 pages was difficult, and sometimes the media-relations directors were not making the decisions. Some schools, he said, pulled archival information and other historical facts from their books to preserve and enhance the portion of the book designed to attract prospective student-athletes.
“There’s no value judgment there — that’s just the way schools did it. We as media-relations professionals had to serve both functions — we had to make sure we’re helping our coaches put our best foot forward in terms of recruiting and communicating with our various publics,” Dull said. “But we’re also responsible for archiving and managing statistical records that the media would need.”
Some in the sports information field said they didn’t know if the legislation truly had the impact that was intended, because some institutions devote a certain budget to the media guide, and that didn’t change after the page-count limitation.
“It didn’t restrict the amount of money, it just leveled the visual effect of the books,” said Rod Commons, assistant athletics director for media relations at Washington State University. “Some schools that have that kind of money started putting holograms on the covers or went to hard cover. One guy said, ‘We’ve got the money and we’re going to spend it no matter what.’ ”
Pete Moore, associate director of athletics communications at Syracuse University, said the media representatives who cover Division I athletics daily are the ones hurt by the limitations.
“The page reduction was really a blow to media relations. I understand the reasons for that legislation passing, but in terms of cost containment, it didn’t really help it,” he said. “I think unfortunately, the down side of that reduction is that it affected media relations more than anything else.”
Many professionals agree that the sections that suffered most with the page limitations were the history pages, even though, as Commons said, “I’ve never seen a recruit say the media guide is the reason they chose to attend a particular institution.”
Many, even at Football Championship Subdivision schools, would prefer to see the restrictions lifted or modified to require limitations on the amount of money spent on the guide. Commons said he would like the Association to return to allowing two publications — one for recruits and one for the media — but with significant restrictions.
“I believe the media are important and they should have their own (publication) and not have to work through the recruiting material to get to the stuff they care about,” Commons said. “That way, you’re addressing both needs and saying they are both important in their own way.”
As it is, the choice is left up to individual athletics departments. Judy Willson, sports information director at the University of Louisiana at Monroe, said even with the largest budgets, people have to make choices.
“Everybody has to choose how to spend their budget, and what they choose to spend it on — do they want an emphasis on the Internet or on the media guide?” she said.
But some doubt limit reduces costs; others worry about loss of historic data
|
The NCAA News
The most recent change in media guides for Division I programs was the 2005 implementation of a page limit. In an attempt to even the playing field for institutions that do not have the resources to produce volumes that rival “War and Peace” in size, Division I voted to require all institutions to stick to a strict 208-page maximum media guide for all sports.For most institutions, that limit was not a problem, but others had to cut more than half the pages of their guides. The College Sports Information Directors of America took no position on the issue at the time. Then-president Joe Hernandez, associate athletics director for external affairs at Ball State University, said the legislation affected so few institutions that the organization did not want to comment on it publicly, though he acknowledged a lot of internal discussion.
As a result, Hernandez said he doesn’t think the restrictions have had an impact on Division I overall.
“If you polled the Division I men’s basketball schools, 99 percent would say it didn’t affect them at all. There would be 25 or 30 that had to cut back,” Hernandez said. “There are those schools that would tell you they need the additional pages to highlight the information they need. I understand their dilemma, and that’s why as a whole our group did not take a stand on it because it only affected a small minority of our membership.”
For some sports information directors, the media guide is regarded as the front door to a program, and page counts for football jumped into the 400s and even the 500s in the 1990s. Some believe the explosion for some institutions began after a mid-1990s decision prohibited institutions from producing both a recruiting guide and a media guide. That measure was seen as a way to cut costs as well, though some said combining the two books into one larger publication ended up costing more money than it did to produce two separate guides.
Doug Dull, associate athletics director for media relations at the University of Maryland, College Park and current CoSIDA president, said cutting those larger books down to 208 pages was difficult, and sometimes the media-relations directors were not making the decisions. Some schools, he said, pulled archival information and other historical facts from their books to preserve and enhance the portion of the book designed to attract prospective student-athletes.
“There’s no value judgment there — that’s just the way schools did it. We as media-relations professionals had to serve both functions — we had to make sure we’re helping our coaches put our best foot forward in terms of recruiting and communicating with our various publics,” Dull said. “But we’re also responsible for archiving and managing statistical records that the media would need.”
Some in the sports information field said they didn’t know if the legislation truly had the impact that was intended, because some institutions devote a certain budget to the media guide, and that didn’t change after the page-count limitation.
“It didn’t restrict the amount of money, it just leveled the visual effect of the books,” said Rod Commons, assistant athletics director for media relations at Washington State University. “Some schools that have that kind of money started putting holograms on the covers or went to hard cover. One guy said, ‘We’ve got the money and we’re going to spend it no matter what.’ ”Pete Moore, associate director of athletics communications at Syracuse University, said the media representatives who cover Division I athletics daily are the ones hurt by the limitations.
“The page reduction was really a blow to media relations. I understand the reasons for that legislation passing, but in terms of cost containment, it didn’t really help it,” he said. “I think unfortunately, the down side of that reduction is that it affected media relations more than anything else.”
Many professionals agree that the sections that suffered most with the page limitations were the history pages, even though, as Commons said, “I’ve never seen a recruit say the media guide is the reason they chose to attend a particular institution.”
Many, even at Football Championship Subdivision schools, would prefer to see the restrictions lifted or modified to require limitations on the amount of money spent on the guide. Commons said he would like the Association to return to allowing two publications — one for recruits and one for the media — but with significant restrictions.
“I believe the media are important and they should have their own (publication) and not have to work through the recruiting material to get to the stuff they care about,” Commons said. “That way, you’re addressing both needs and saying they are both important in their own way.”
As it is, the choice is left up to individual athletics departments. Judy Willson, sports information director at the University of Louisiana at Monroe, said even with the largest budgets, people have to make choices.
“Everybody has to choose how to spend their budget, and what they choose to spend it on — do they want an emphasis on the Internet or on the media guide?” she said.
© 2010 The National Collegiate Athletic Association
Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy