March Q&A: Dan Beebe, former Big 12 Commissioner

DLR Group's Drew Berst sat down with Former Big 12 Commissioner, Dan Beebe to discuss the past, present and future of college sports.

1. Clearly my intent is not to dig into all the events that occurred during your final year+ as Commissioner, but you were heavily involved in conference realignment. What are your feelings overall on realignment, and what are your predictions for where it all leads?

My personal view is that institutions are better off being located in the regions where they get the majority of their students and where a majority of their alumni live and work. Disconnecting from that orientation is difficult and doesn’t provide for the type of geographic community and rivalries that are best for college sports. I think that regional 10 member conferences work well in that they give the opportunity for everyone to play each other every year in all sports, building familiarity, rivalries and long-time bonds. The pursuit of more market power and money has disrupted that type of a more intimate conference that existed for decades in most regions of the country, but perhaps there will be a retraction in 10 or 15 years.

2. Many pundits, analysts and others are pushing for reform in college athletics. Often people point to money as the underlying issue. Do you feel there is a need for reform? If so, define what you feel is the major underlying problem?

Reform has always been attempted and, in some cases, achieved, in the history of college sports. Money has been identified for nearly 100 years as a major problem. So, there is nothing new about the call for reform or the blame placed on the commercial aspect of college sports. I think it is necessary to continually explore reform and to strive to keep the quest for money in balance with the mission of higher education.
3. What is the solution or solutions?
I don’t think we will ever end up with THE solution, anymore than we will for other areas of importance in society at large. If we think we have found it, we will probably be in trouble. Constant attention to balancing the commercial aspect of intercollegiate athletics with the values of the educational experience is necessary to the evolution of college sports. I believe the commercial component has been overemphasized recently and that the pendulum will need to swing back the other way.

4. Should college athletes be paid?

No, but I do support the permissive legislation to allow up to $2000 to be added to the grant-in-aid.
5. Can you help an average college sports fan understand why the $2000 stipend hasn’t been approved?

In my opinion, it is because those who can’t afford it are concerned about the effect on their budgets and on recruiting.

6. I believe many people would agree that college basketball and college football, especially at the FBS or at least the BCS AQ level, are unique in their ability to generate revenue beyond all the other sports. Should these sports be handled, managed, or organized differently? If so, what would be the most effective method?

In many ways, they already are managed differently, with a lot more attention given to the operation and needs of those sports, since at the highest level they are paying for the experience of all the other student-athletes. As to whether they should be further organized differently, I must confess that I have ambivalence about that. The fact is that basketball and football student-athletes are under much more scrutiny and pressure than those in other sports, given the high visibility and public interest. This can argue for more consideration being provided to them. However, I suspect that would not be for football and men's basketball own long term good and could lead to an even heightened sense of celebrity - an experience that does not prepare them well for life after sports. It will take a lot of study and thought about the possible negative effects on the students in those sports before any more special treatment is afforded to them.

7. There have been a handful of high profile situations regarding student-athletes petitioning for an extra year of eligibility or to get a release from their scholarship for the purpose of transferring to another school. Publicly we usually only hear about the final decision made by the NCAA (more specifically, the committee) or institution and are left to make assumptions with little information. What insights can you provide that would help people understand how or why these decisions are made, and why aren’t we given more information?

Although I was not directly involved in these cases, I think that the privacy acts prevent institutions, conferences and the NCAA from divulging very much about the cases.

8. What’s next on the horizon for you?

I recently formed a partnership in misconduct risk management with Mike McCall and Mark Thompson. They have worked with more than 800 organizations for nearly 15 years in providing an independent, third party assessment of and training in employment practices in order to ensure and verify that organizations operate the best protection possible for students, employees and others associating with the organization. My partners have done this work for such organizations as school districts, fire districts, churches, and medical associations. We feel there is a strong need for such third party consultation in intercollegiate athletics to help protect those who may be vulnerable from misconduct of all kinds—sexual abuse, harassment, retaliation, etc. Our services will put the university in the best position possible to protect itself and provide the safest environment for all who associate with the athletics program, and it will provide the best atmosphere for detecting other types of misconduct; e.g., in areas of NCAA violations, ticket office operations, fundraising, etc.

9. What role should a conference office play in situations involving a high-profile scandal like Penn State or Miami?

Of course, I will say they need to encourage their institutions to engage our risk management firm for the services outlined above which would uncover such problmes at the outset and prevent them from exploding into some of the issues we have seen! Frankly, as to serious NCAA rules problems, I am of the opinion that the NCAA needs to handle the situation and not the conference office. The conference office primarily should be available for advice and consultation.

10. Many of our readers may not know that you spent the early part of your career in the NCAA Enforcement Department. Can you paint a picture of what it’s like to be an investigator?

I think that investigating NCAA violations is the most challenging enforcement work there is, at least as I understand how enforcement works in areas of the law. Without subpoena power to compel people to talk, and without other tools available to other agencies (such as wiretapping, paying informants, etc.), it is very difficult to prove that violations occurred. In addition, many of the actions that may be violations of NCAA rules can be viewed as altruistic when not considered in the context of recruiting; therefore, people aren’t as interested in cooperating. The job is fascinating, however, in trying to figure out the truth and in the challenge of getting people to assist.

11. Be honest, occasionally @danbeebe (Fake Dan Beebe) really does say exactly what you want to say, right? Also, please settle a bet, is it actually you?

He or she is very funny, when not too crude, but he or she doesn’t always say what I would say. I have had a few people ask if it is actually me…

 

University of Oregon - PK Park

The history of athletics at the University of Oregon spans more than a century. In 1877, Oregon competed in its first intercollegiate competition—a baseball game played on a dirt field against Monmouth College. Since then, the University’s state-of-the-art athletic facilities have set the pace for peers in collegiate sports to follow.

In 2010, the Ducks opened a new baseball stadium, dubbed PK Park in honor of former Athletic Director and program donor Pat Kilkenny. After a nearly 30 year absence from the diamond, Oregon reinstated its baseball program and it has come to life in PK Park. Oregon finished the season ranked 27th in the country and an impressive second in the Pac-10, averaging 2,361 fans per game in attendance. More than 68,489 fans cheered on the Ducks to 20 victories in 2010 in the all-new PK Park.

DLR Group’s design energizes more than the newly-resurrected baseball team; it elevates the experience for fans to celebrate Ducks’ success in multiple sports. The new ballpark sits adjacent to the famed Autzen Stadium (football), providing enhanced opportunities for fan activities. A festival area surrounding PK Park allows fans to be in the middle of all pre-game fun and festivities prior to a game at either stadium.

Rise Above

While optimal for the University, the ballpark’s location proved challenging during design. Designers wanted to give PK Park, a relatively small facility compared to the football stadium, its own presence on campus. DLR Group’s solution maximizes the vertical presence of the ballpark to coexist with Autzen Stadium. A steeper-than-normal seating bowl gives fans the feeling of being right on top of the action. A separate press/suite level located above the concourse enhances the ballpark’s stature. The elevated suites give fans a unique perspective of the playing field and surrounding landscape. DLR Group also introduced vertical banner elements along concourses to add to the energetic game-day atmosphere.

Wow, What A View

Fans won’t miss a minute of action at PK Park. A single, open concourse provides direct views to the playing field from anywhere in the ballpark. The ballpark features 3,000 fixed seats, eight upper level suites and a picnic plaza. A party plaza named Fowl Territory plays off the Ducks’ mascot and identifies the plaza’s location within the ballpark. Fowl Territory is at field level and allows fans to interact with players as they take the field. Total capacity is currently at 4,000, with future plans for 16 additional suites and an expanded seating bowl. A canopy, which complements the canopy at Autzen Stadium, covers a majority of fixed seating and protects fans from the seasonal Oregon rain. Glue-lam beams and wood planking indigenous to the area make the connection to the ballpark’s home in the Pacific Northwest. The University also opted for synthetic turf to keep the field playable during rain events.

Environmentally Friendly

PK Park’s sustainable features include designated bicycle parking, Energy Star-compliant roofing, high efficiency irrigation technology and low-emitting materials. The ballpark is designed to meet State of Oregon Energy-Efficient Design guidelines (SEED) and the University of Oregon Sustainable Development plan. Construction crews also utilized local and recycled materials while recycling construction waste.

Phased Approach

The University developed a Master Plan to complete the ballpark in phases and also plan for future growth. Construction spanned two phases, allowing the Ducks to take the field in 2009. Phase one consisted of a new field completed in time for opening day, Feb. 27, 2009. Temporary concessions and seating allowed fans to cheer on the Ducks, and temporary locker room met athlete and team needs. The surrounding stadium was constructed in phase two, including permanent seating and suites, locker rooms, a clubhouse, team amenities, and a press box. To expedite construction and eliminate the need for costly supporting structure, the seating bowl and main concourse were poured directly onto earth fill. Interior building elements, such as locker rooms (event level) and restrooms (main level), were stacked as much as possible to centralize utilities, and major circulation was centralized to efficiently access all three levels of the facility. The new PK Park embodies the excitement and ambition of the Oregon Ducks’ baseball program and continues the tradition of the University’s top-rated athletic facilities.

February Q&A: Bill Hancock, BCS Executive Director

DLR Group's Drew Berst sat down with BCS Executive Director Bill Hancock to discuss the past, present and future of college football.

1. In your opinion, what’s most misunderstood about the BCS?
When the BCS and its predecessors began 20 years ago, they were greeted with high praise from fans and media. That’s because finally there would be an opportunity for the top two teams to meet in a bowl game. Now, of course, many fans want more. I suppose that’s human nature. But if “more” diminishes the great college football regular season, or detracts from the bowl tradition and experience for the students, I won’t be comfortable.


2. The Pac-12 and Big Ten just announced a scheduling partnership. Should the public view this as the first step towards a broad super conference that could potentially broaden the reach/scope of the BCS – or, to put it another way is this the first step toward a professional-like model where there are 65 teams in divisions under one entity instead of individual conferences?
Not at all. There is a common misconception that fewer, larger conferences will result in some sort of NFL-style post-season tournament. That’s just incorrect, because the same college presidents who do not support a tournament now will continue not to support it, no matter how many teams are in their conferences.


3. There is discussion that the BCS will only handle the #1 vs. #2 matchup (Championship Game) in the future and automatic qualifying will be eliminated. Help me understand the advantages if that happens.
First of all, the commissioners are in the midst of a quadrennial review of the BCS format. It happens every four years because the BCS contracts have been in four-year terms; the current one will expire after two more seasons. You have read in the papers that there is sentiment for change, and I would not disagree—but the extent of any change is yet to be determined. With all the variations, I suspect 50 or 60 options will be on the table. There is no leader in the clubhouse. Having said all that, some of the conferences that have not earned annual automatic qualification for their champions have proposed that the automatic berths be discontinued. And some folks believe that could be accomplished returning to a system where each bowl negotiates agreements individually with conferences. We shall see.


4. What would you like to see the BCS do differently in the future?
We have learned that mid-week games after January 1 may not be in the best interests of fans. You know, school has started back home, people have gone back to work—the holidays are over. I hope we can explore new dates for the games in the future.


5. Why are certain votes/ballots kept private and what does the BCS do to avoid conflicts of interest in voting?
The final votes of all 174 people who rank teams in the Harris poll and the coaches poll are made public. With such a large sample size, we believe any conflicts are mitigated.


6. There’s been a considerable amount of public outcry about the state of college athletics in the wake of a few major scandals in 2011. How do you feel about the state of college athletics at the moment?
Hey, 99.9999 percent of the people in college athletics are doing it right. Yes, I worry about that .0001 percent; I want this enterprise to be perfect. But it is unfair to taint many good people because of the actions of a very few. I realize good news does not sell newspapers or draw people to talk shows or chat rooms. But, goodness gracious, college athletics is strong and healthy. We need to celebrate that.


7. What are the biggest challenges for the BCS going forward?
You know, the BCS event has brought many good things to college football. It has made the game more of a national sport than ever before. It has provided that #1 vs. #2 matchup that fans wanted. I think our group’s biggest challenge going forward is to continue to help the game grow.


8. What are the biggest opportunities for the BCS going forward?
Between now and next fall, the commissioners have the opportunity to make decisions that will benefit college football for many years to come. I’m excited about that opportunity.


9. I did read that Mark Shurtleff, the Utah Attorney General, plans to file an anti-trust lawsuit against the BCS in the next 30 days or so. Can you provide any insight into what the potential implications of that legal action might be?
Consumers are better off because of the BCS—there’s more football to be watched, and there’s also a meeting of the top two teams in a bowl game, which seldom happened before. I don’t know about you, but I feel strongly that the government has more important things on its plate than managing how college football is played.


10. What do you like most about your job?
I love the logistics of managing the bowl games, and then watching the student-athletes and fans enjoy themselves. We are creating memories that will last a lifetime! Before every game, I walk the concourse, talking to fans and just soaking in the moment. I’m a lucky man.


11. What’s the most difficult aspect of your job?
There’s no such thing as a perfect job. And there’s no such thing as a bad job in these times. I suppose my biggest challenge is dealing with folks who do not want to listen.


12. What’s something most people don’t know about you?
People don't know that I dreamed of majoring in piano when I went to college. I hoped to be the next Van Cliburn. But at college, I quickly discovered that I didn’t have enough talent, sort of like a football player who excelled in Class A high school ball, but found that he couldn’t compete at the NCAA level. Anyway, music is still a big part of my life; I’m the worst member of our church choir! I love classical music, particularly all the masters—Chopin, Bach, Beethoven and Mozart. I sense that my three grandchildren also love music; that’s a great feeling.

.