This is an annotated version of the Athletics Strategic plan. Highlights and annotations were added by Richard Hain. This is not an official document of Duke University.


UNRIVALED AMBITION:

A STRATEGIC PLAN FOR DUKE ATHLETICS


May 9, 2008

TABLE OF CONTENTS



Executive Summary 3

Priorities 6

Introduction 8

Finances and Fund Raising 16

Facilities 19

Health, Physical Education, and Recreation 24

Student-Athlete Welfare 28

Football 31

Basketball 33

Olympic Sports 34

Conclusion 38




EXECUTIVE SUMMARY



The last ten years have been arguably the most successful in the history of the Duke University Department of Athletics on many fronts: more NCAA and ACC championships than in any previous decade, continued high graduation rates and academic honors, and an unprecedented period of facility improvement and expansion. This level of success has been widely recognized. The university has, for example, finished first among NCAA Division I institutions in the National Collegiate Scouting Association Power Rankings in every year since this ranking --- based on a combination of academic and athletic achievement --- was initiated. No Division I institution more seamlessly, successfully, and consistently combines athletic and academic excellence.


There is much to be proud of, but little room for complacency. The enterprise in which we are engaged is competitive and the rewards of success in that competition are considerable. However successful we have been, we can never assume that we have reached some plateau of excellence where we can bask in the glow of our triumphs. Our competitors never rest; the landscape of college athletics is constantly changing and, far from resting on our laurels, we must remain agile and flexible enough to respond to change. We find ourselves, then, as we look forward, in the position of maintaining what has been successful while always being vigilant to ways to enhance that success. We come to the enterprise with institutional values that we will never alter or abandon yet needing to adapt to a rapidly evolving athletics universe. The balance we must strike is to continue our culture of success on the field and court, in the pool and on the mat, while clinging steadfastly to our core principle: intercollegiate athletics at Duke is an integral part of the educational process.


At the same time, we must remain faithful to our obligations to Duke's other athletes, those in the intramural program, on club sports teams, in the Physical Education classroom, and, indeed, in every form of athletic or recreational endeavor. Our design, then, is of a wide-reaching program that encompasses and promotes healthy competition, physical activity, and wellness for the entire university community, whatever the individual level of commitment or accomplishment. The plan for the continued development of this program can be broken down into seven areas, with considerable overlap among them: finances and fund-raising; facilities; Health, Physical Education, and Recreation (HPER); student-athlete welfare; football; basketball; and Olympic sports.


1. Finances and Fund-Raising. The essential factor necessary for the future success of Duke Athletics is the replacement of the outdated funding model whereby athletics is under-funded relative to its competitors. Within the proposed plan, athletics would become a university-wide institution and not an Arts and Sciences/Engineering activity with costs shared by the University as a whole. Shared facilities would be funded by both DUAA and the university; HPER projects would be funded by the university; and new DUAA initiatives would be funded from either increased revenues from football or fund-raising.


2. Facilities. Priorities for facilities projects are ongoing. Our goal in every case has been to conceptualize facilities that will meet not just the needs of one sport or team or even merely of intercollegiate athletics but as many teams and students as possible. We are thus proposing a number of facilities that would be shared with the larger university community, long overdue renovations of Wallace Wade Stadium, Jack Coombs Field, and the Murray Building, and the continuing restoration of Cameron. One of the most exciting new ideas is the plan for a performance enhancement center that would benefit all sports and eventually the entire university community.

3. HPER. We are dedicated to providing all students with the opportunities to participate in intramural and club sports as well as pursuing their own health and fitness. In order to do this we need to increase staffing and funding to accommodate the demands of the intramural program, the club sports teams, and free recreation.

In the Physical Education Department, develop new classes and new programming to respond to the changing recreational and educational needs of the university community.

In conjunction with Student Affairs, establish a formal Wellness and Fitness Program for first year students on East Campus.


4. Student-Athlete Welfare. Continue to enhance and expand the Student Development program in three areas: personal growth and development, community service, and career planning.

Maintain the excellence of the academic support program in its new facility in the Krzyzewski Center.

5. Football. Change the culture of the entire program.

Address personnel needs both on the staff and among the players.

Schedule strategically, giving the program the maximum chance to win out-of-conference games.

Build field house with an indoor practice facility.

Renovate Wallace Wade Stadium.


6. Basketball. Continue the restoration of Cameron Indoor Stadium, including a comprehensive study of creating new revenue streams in and around the facility and the men's basketball program.

Continued aggressive fund-raising to endow the program.


7. Olympic Sports. Facilities improvements and additions as outlined above.

Add scholarships as increased revenues make possible.

Without lowering admissions standards, increase flexibility in the admissions recruiting process.

Ensure that coaching salaries are competitive with our peers, especially for assistant coaches, trainers, and strength coaches.

Ensure that coaches have the administrative and operational support necessary to win.



PRIORITIES


Ongoing

Restoration of Cameron

Raise endowment for scholarships


Immediate

Action items:

Develop new financial model for athletics

Agree with Admissions about reaches and stretches and more admissions officers

Augment staff for club sports and intramurals

Develop East Campus Wellness Program

Develop general facilities plan and model of athletic campus


Facilities:

Build field house

Renovate Wallace Wade restrooms, concession stands, and ticket booths

Renovate Murray Building

Upgrade Brodie weight room


ASAP

Renovate Jack Coombs Field


One-two years

Add scoreboard and TV tower to north end of Wallace Wade

Relocate Olympic sports weight room to Yoh

Construct two new turf fields for intramurals and club sports

Expand Brodie Gymnasium

Replace the grass field adjacent to Brodie with turf


Three-five years

Renovate Koskinen Stadium press box


Five years

Replace the President's Box in Wallace Wade

Build the Performance Center

Construct a recreation complex on the New Campus

400 meter track

Squash courts

Aquatics center

Recreation center


5-10 years

Endow entire program as part of next development campaign


As Funding Permits

Add scholarships for Olympic sports


INTRODUCTION


During 2007, the President and the Board of Trustees of Duke University publicly reaffirmed the centrality of athletics in the accomplishment of the mission of the institution. They did so as the Department of Athletics was completing the most successful decade in the history of the university. During that time, Duke teams and individuals won more NCAA and ACC championships than in any other decade in Duke history. For the first time, not only men's teams but also women's teams competed for and won national championships


During this period, Duke student-athletes continued to excel in the classroom, as well, leading the country in graduation rates, leading the ACC in number of students named to the ACC Honor Roll every year, and producing numerous winners of post-graduate scholarships, including two Rhodes Scholars. The stature of the department has been repeatedly affirmed by its top-twenty finishes in the Director's Cup, which compares the success of university athletic teams against the teams from all other NCAA Division I universities in the country. But perhaps the most telling measure of our success has been in the Power Rankings of the National Collegiate Scouting Association, which reflect the combination of academic and athletic excellence. Based on this metric, Duke has been the nation's top-ranked Division I institution for the last three years. The evidence is clear: no other institution more successfully combines top-quality athletics with academic excellence.


While we have been very successful, we must also recognize that there are areas in which we have failed to achieve the level of excellence that we take to be the hallmark of Duke. We need to address these as we move forward. Also, as we look to the future, we have to recognize that we cannot rest on our laurels. While the last ten years brought unprecedented success to Duke, they also brought unprecedented change to the world of college athletics. Thus, in order to maintain and improve our strong position, we must try to anticipate the challenges we will face, and to evaluate our goals in the light of our resources. We are charged with achieving excellence, but at what cost? Are there factors other than financial cost that stand in our way? What limitations and constraints?both internal and external?affect the way in which we conduct our programs? How do we satisfy the desire for our non-varsity athletes to compete in team and individual competitions? And how do we meet the health, fitness, and recreational needs of the general student body and the larger university community? Our current resources do not allow us to do all that we would like to do. Does that mean that we cut back and concentrate our resources on fewer programs or seek ways to expand our resources? How do we prioritize the competing demands of different programs? How, in short, do we reconcile "unrivaled ambition" with the realities of the complex undertaking that is Duke University?


Our Goals


1 We are committed:


Our Strengths and Weaknesses

In formulating a strategy to reach these goals we need to evaluate our strengths and weaknesses but we can only do this in the context of our competitive environment. In making our assessment, we considered elite private universities with strong athletics programs (Stanford, Northwestern, Notre Dame), elite public universities (Michigan and Berkeley), as well as the quality private and public schools in our own conference (Wake Forest, Boston College, Miami, UNC and Virginia). All of these schools share in common a focus on elite intercollegiate athletics and a strong emphasis on academics. We also included Princeton as an exemplar of the Ivy League with a strong focus on athletics.

The most visible of our strengths are the success of men's basketball, the growing visibility and success of women's basketball, and the extraordinary success of women's golf. While less visible, the success of our Olympic sports teams that have a full complement of scholarships is also outstanding, as is our club sports program. At the core of this success is the quality of coaching in all sports, the unmatched excellence of the academic support we provide to athletes, and our superb health care, training, and rehabilitation services. We also pride ourselves that we have achieved all this while running an ethical program that prepares athletes not merely to win on the court or field but in life after graduation, facilitated by the academic quality of the institution that allows us to attract athletes who fit our ideal, who perform at a high level in the classroom, and who graduate at a rate at or near the top of all Division I schools. All of this has created not merely excellent opportunities for our students but also a great fan experience for the larger Duke community and a national and international presence, a Duke ?brand,? as it were, that has helped attract great students and faculty to the university.

Our most obvious weakness has been the lack of success of our football program. We have not been competitive on the field; attendance has been abysmal. Moreover, our stadium is one of the least appealing in Division I. As a result, we have not been able to offer the quality game-day experience that would attract fans, and we have thus not been able to produce desired revenues. As a consequence, our department has become overly reliant on our basketball program for fundraising and revenue generation. The inadequacy of our facilities is not merely confined to our football stadium. We also have an immediate and pressing need for more fields for intramurals and club sports and a new baseball stadium. We clearly need to build another swimming pool (perhaps as part of Central Campus redesign) to meet the needs of our student body and the larger university community. Finally, at the core of our problem is an outdated funding model that treats athletics as part of Arts and Sciences and Engineering rather than as a university-wide institution. Under this model, it is difficult for us to plan for the future and difficult to convince donors to support new initiatives. Duke has achieved great things in athletics at a very small cost to the university, but this model, which was stretched to the breaking point in years past now is clearly broken and needs to be replaced. Without a new model for funding athletics that allows us to sustain our activities and to raise funds for the improvements that are needed, we will not be able to retain our position and defend the brand that is so important to Duke's continuing athletic and academic success.


External Forces

Success in athletics arises from a fairly straightforward set of factors. Resources from gifts, tickets and other revenue permit the construction of great facilities. With resources and facilities, universities attract great coaches, who in turn recruit great athletes. Together they forge winning programs, attracting fans and resources. Of late this virtuous cycle has become more a vicious circle as a result of outside forces that have serious implications for the way in which we compete, recruit, and conduct our program.

Television and the commercialization of College Athletics. At the core of the problem is the fact that college sports have become increasing popular and increasingly lucrative over the last twenty years, partly as a result of the proliferation of cable television networks dedicated to sports broadcasting. This has led to increasing commercialization, which has brought in vastly increased revenues but also driven up the costs of doing business. This trend has resulted in heightened competition for coaches and athletes. The result of this competition has been an almost continual increase in coaches? salaries, attempts to secure top recruits at an ever younger age, and a facilities "arms race."

While it is theoretically possible to remain competitive at the Division I level without acquiescing to some level of commercialism, it is becoming increasingly difficult to do so. One of the most visible manifestations of increased commercialization is the impact of television on scheduling, particularly in football and men's and, increasingly, women's basketball. We no longer determine at what time we will play our games, because they are scheduled by TV executives. This is particularly troubling for basketball, which may be required to play weeknight games away from home at 9:00 p.m. The potential impact on academic work is obvious, as students are required to board a flight at 2:00 a.m., arriving back at their dorms at 4:00 or 5:00 a.m., and then are expected to go to class, study, and otherwise act as if it were a normal school-day. In return for large television contracts, we have surrendered control over a function that can profoundly influence the experience of our students. Similarly, the revenue from advertisers and corporate sponsors has become a very important supplement to long established revenue streams but that means that each year our amateur student-athletes take the field with a corporate logo displayed on their uniform beside ?Duke.?

Growing Coache's Salaries. A second problem has been the increasing growth of coache's salaries. Most visible in the glamour sports of football and men's basketball, it has nonetheless swept up the other sports, most notably women's basketball. Moreover, the revenue sports exert a gravitational effect on other sports as their costs rise, pulling everyone else along with them. In the case of Duke, such increases are partly a response to the demands of the marketplace but also a consequence of our success in identifying and hiring excellent coaches who are attractive to other institutions.

Facilities Arms Race. We also find ourselves involved in a facilities "arms race," in which institutions are playing a perpetual game of leap frog in response to facilities upgrades by their competitors. Successful recruiting is the engine that drives Division I programs and attractive, modern facilities are central to recruiting. When the University of North Carolina revamped its football stadium, locker room, weight room, and offices in 1992, it set in motion a tidal wave that swept across the ACC, reaching Duke in the late nineties and producing the Yoh Football Center. The facilities message is simple: more or less continuous improvement is central to the ability to attract the best coaches and athletes and thus to win. Our challenge is to manage those improvements prudently and in ways that make sense for Duke. We do not envision an enormous expansion of our major venues. In fact, we would like to preserve the uniquely cozy atmosphere of Cameron and to try to duplicate this feel in our renovations of Wallace Wade and Coombs Field. One of the hallmarks of our program and Duke generally has been our ability to compete with the best large universities while sustaining our commitment to the notion of community more typical of smaller universities and colleges.

Accelerated Recruitment. On another front, we are faced with a different order of external pressure: the tendency of recruiting to commence earlier and earlier in students? high school careers and of commitments by those recruits to take place ever earlier. It is not new that prospects now find themselves subject to pressure from other institutions to accept an offer of admission and financial aid within a few days or it will be withdrawn, but increasingly, such 'squeeze plays? take place as early as the fall of the prospect's junior year. Concomitant with this development has been the desire of many prospects to make their college decisions as early as possible. This phenomenon is growing across almost all sports and presents us with a real conflict between our desire for athletic success and our established and prudent admissions policy. The most desirable long term solution to this problem is action by the NCAA or the bodies that govern individual sports to limit the dates at which colleges can make offers to student-athletes. While we hope to take the lead in the NCAA in trying to set limits on recruiting, in the interim we have to address this issue by working more closely with the Office of Undergraduate Admissions to develop ways of making prudent decisions about athletes at an earlier time.

These are but a few examples of the way in which external forces continue to shape and reshape the environment within which we operate, illustrating the difficulties we face in sustaining championship level programs that remain true to the mission and values of the university. There are no easy answers; in fact, the answers change as the environment changes. We will have to carefully evaluate the ways in which we manage our affairs, looking for rational and efficient policies and practices to handle the challenges we face.


The Competitive Advantage of the Partnership of Athletics and Academics at Duke

The premise of our strategy for the future is that we need to sustain the partnership between excellent academics and superb athletics that gives Duke its unique character and competitive advantage. This matters for several reasons:

Many schools evaluate the success of their programs based upon national rankings, conference championships, and national titles. But, Duke needs to adopt a higher standard. Duke should aspire to be the university that consistently wins the NCSA Power Rankings, the only measure that incorporates a balanced emphasis on athletic and academic excellence. There are three components of this ranking, each a critical component of the unique partnership to which Duke aspires:


Basic Principle for Allocation of Resources

Even in a changing environment, and as we face the future with "unrivaled ambition," determined to embody the institution's pursuit of excellence, we can articulate a basic principle for the allocation of resources: we should treat all moneys as investments and seek the highest rate of return on the dollars we invest. Such a return may be actual dollars, a better academic/athletic experience for student-athletes, the increased likelihood of championships, increased visibility for the university, increased HPER resources for undergraduates, improved community relations both with other parts of the university and with the local city and county.


This principle enables us to develop rules for setting specific priorities.


Having articulated our goals, identified constraining factors and the influence of outside forces, and developed a principle for prioritizing our efforts, we need to describe in particular how all of these factors will be accounted for or expressed in actual planning. This process can be organized into seven inter-related areas: a financial plan, a comprehensive facilities plan, a plan to rescue HPER from its long-standing role as the neglected step-child of both Trinity College and the Department of Athletics, a plan to improve the experience of our student-athletes, a plan to strengthen the football program, a plan to maintain and enhance the basketball programs, and a plan which addresses the needs of the non-revenue sports.



FINANCES AND FUND-RAISING

The current financial reality of the Duke Department of Athletics is quite simple. Our expenses exceed our income, and have for several years. To cover that difference we have consumed our reserves, which are now depleted. The university subsidy, which was designed to cover the difference between expenses and revenue by paying for a certain number of athletic scholarships per year, no longer fills that gap. As a result, the department will run a substantial deficit in FY2008, which needs to be covered from University funds.


This deficit is in part the product of collective increases in salaries for the men's and women's basketball and football coaching staffs. Since FY 2002, those salaries have risen, in total, by more than $X million a year, as approved by the President and the Trustees. Each time those increases were approved, it was promised that the deficit would be covered out of central funds. Unfortunately, the reallocation of funds has never occurred, and time has run out.


The University Subsidy. The 40-year road to this position is marked by a series of adjustments to the level of subvention provided by the university, culminating in the development of a formula whereby the amount of subvention would be tied to a fixed number of scholarships, originally 186 but reduced twice--first to 169 and then, in 1997-98, to 146--producing the current subsidy of $X. However, as a consequence of the 1997-98 gender equity plan, the department now awards the full time equivalent of approximately 245 scholarships, at a total cost of approximately $X.

Other costs that have risen precipitously while the subsidy has remained relatively fixed are the considerable maintenance and operation costs of our expanded facilities, the growth of the athletic staff over the last decade, the dramatic increase in summer athletic aid, and the cost of support services for student-athletes (strength and conditioning, academic support, rehabilitation and health care):

1997-98 2007-08

M&O $X $X

Department FTE's 90 147.5

Summer School $X $X

Support Services $X $X

Clearly, university support of the Department of Athletics has not taken into account the cost of the changing landscape of intercollegiate athletics. To continue to sponsor the broad-based, highly successful program that we currently enjoy, we need to provide an annual institutional subvention of approximately $X per year, or double the current number. This would bring us into line with Boston College, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Rice, and Wake Forest (other academically solid private research universities which compete in BCS Division intercollegiate athletics) and we believe below several members of the Ivy League, at least two of which spend more than $X million per year.

In the short term, this increase will need to come from general university funds. It now comes entirely from charges to Arts and Sciences and Engineering, on the decades- old assumption that athletics is an undergraduate activity. We need to recognize it for the community good that it is, and pay for part of it from planned reallocation of earnings on the short term investment pool. If that reallocation does not provide enough (it has many other planned beneficiaries already), the unrestricted funds (essentially from the SIP pool) will be needed.

Providing $X of central funding permanently is highly undesirable. The preferred solution is to fund all scholarships by endowment. At Duke, that would require an endowment of at least $X million. Such an endowment can only be raised if athletics is a major focus of the next capital campaign, and if the institution provides significant matching funds to motivate donors. An investment of $X would be prudent and far-sighted, if it generates enough response to eliminate a $X annual obligation.


Athletic Development. In addition to university support, we need to concentrate on our own fundraising efforts, principally through the Athletics Development Office. The importance and complexity of Athletics fundraising has increased over the years due to our commitment to success in 26 sports, our need for new and improved facilities to attract and retain the best student-athletes and coaches, the cost of new technology in training, conditioning, and sports medicine, our larger investment in coaching salaries, our commitment to women's athletics and to compliance with Title IX, and the cost of a peerless Duke education. Our success in meeting the goals of this plan will be largely dependent upon increasing revenue. As, we set out to do so, there are some especially important issues to consider:

  1. We currently are dangerously dependent upon the Iron Dukes (our annual fund) which provides 26% of our revenue. We know that much of our success in raising this money is tied to the success of the Men's Basketball program.

  2. Contributions to the Iron Dukes, particularly those of five thousand dollars and above, are funds that could be directed to endowment and/or facilities which would secure the future for the athletic program. Instead, we must raise a substantial amount annually just to pay the scholarship bill.

  3. Our donor base is getting older. We must continue to design programs for young alumni and friends.

  4. Our donors want to be assured that the university recognizes how important athletics has been in establishing the Duke brand. The best evidence of this is a significant increase in the university's financial support.

  5. Our goal is to increase the endowment to a minimum of $X million in order to cover the annual costs of operations. At that point, we will be able to raise money principally for the enhancement of facilities and programs: the margin of excellence.

  6. If athletics is truly an important focus for the campus, our donors with large giving capacity will be encouraged by the university leadership to include athletics as a significant part of their giving.


The Future. Planning has already begun on the next major campus-wide campaign. The Athletic Department expects to play a major role in this campaign. While there are many discussions yet to take place relative to goals and objectives for our part in the campaign, we can forecast our needs based upon what we currently know to be our priorities. We would anticipate that Athletics? total goal for the campaign would be something on the order of $X: $X for the Iron Dukes, $X for capital projects, and $X for endowment.

As part of the campaign, we propose that the university make a ?challenge grant? of $X which would be a 1:1 match for all contributions to Athletics Department programs and/or scholarship endowment. A matching program such as this would provide a tangible incentive to our donors to partner with the university in building our endowment so that our costs are covered in perpetuity and annual support can be directed to those items that provide the margin of excellence. Increasing the subvention level to $X (with annual inflationary increases) and approving a challenge grant of $X million to increase endowment sends a powerful message both internally and externally about Duke's position on the importance of athletics.



FACILITIES


Health, Physical Education, and Recreation

One of our most important needs is an augmentation of the facilities for HPER. Our club sports program and our popular intramural program are hampered by the need for more space and particularly the need for more playing fields. We are so constrained that many of our club teams can only practice two days a week and we have had to limit the number of intramural teams which can participate to 2005 levels. Almost half of Duke undergraduates participated in varsity sports in high school and many want to continue to compete in team and individual competitions. We believe that it is very important to provide these opportunities to all students, undergraduate and graduate alike, as well as to the faculty and staff. We are also convinced that many of the facilities that are needed at Duke can be shared, multi-use facilities that will benefit not only intercollegiate athletics but also club sports and intramurals. They all need more field space.


The best location for many of the new facilities would be in the new campus expansion and development project. We propose a recreation complex there that would include the turf fields surrounded by a 400-meter track, a weight facility, squash courts, an aquatic center, and a recreation center. It is particularly important to evaluate access to this center. One of the most frequent complaints about the Wilson Center is that for non-students, there is inadequate parking, making access a legitimate problem, especially during the work-week.

Basketball

The scoreboard and the sound system in Cameron Indoor Stadium need to be replaced and the continuous process of improving the appearance of the concourse needs to continue. The creation of a basketball Hall of Fame and the feasibility of the construction of suites in Cameron need to be studied.


Football

Although much has been done to improve the football infrastructure (e.g., construction of the Yoh Football Center, installation of an artificial turf practice field), Wallace Wade Stadium is in dire need of a number of enhancements. Concession stands are outmoded, the public restrooms are small, grimy, run-down, and poorly ventilated, the President's Box is the worst in the ACC. The most important lure for fans is, of course, a winning program, but the fact that parts of the Wallace Wade experience are downright unpleasant is hardly conducive to increasing attendance and revenue. Moreover, like all other facilities, the stadium plays an important role in recruiting and it also serves as the venue for the university's graduation. Several initiatives need to be undertaken.


Baseball

Jack Coombs Field is the worst baseball facility in the ACC and far inferior to stadiums at institutions against which we recruit academically motivated prospects: Rice, Tulane, Stanford, Baylor, and Vanderbilt. In its current state it does not meet the necessary NCAA criteria for hosting post season play due to limited seating capacity, poor lighting, inadequate concessions and restrooms, and the lack of a press box. It is a serious detriment to recruiting, player development, student-athlete experience, fan experience, and community outreach. Features of the new stadium will include:


Olympic Sports

Now 23 years old, the Murray Building was originally constructed to house the football offices and locker room, and the training and weight rooms for the entire department. Notwithstanding that the construction of Yoh and Krzyzewski Centers has added two weight rooms and two training rooms, the Murray weight and training rooms need to be expanded. Since Murray was built in 1984, we have added women's cross-country/track (40 participants), women's lacrosse (30), women's soccer (25), and women's rowing (50). The addition of 145 student-athletes made it difficult to operate an effective program out of one weight and training facility; their addition also required supplementing the weight and training staffs. Not only did the service areas of the building become over-crowded, there was also a shortage of office space for the new staff. The construction of the Yoh and Krzyzewski Centers alleviated, but did not solve, this problem.


One of the goals of our strategic planning process is to develop a comprehensive plan for future facilities. The first steps outlined here involve determining the facilities that we will need as we move forward. The second step will involve consulting with the university architect about where these facilities should be sited on campus and how they should related both to our existing facilities and to each other. We anticipate that this process will take place next year and will end with the production of a comprehensive facilities plan and an actual architectural model that we can use in the process of explaining to potential donors what kinds of project they could fund. In this plan we also obviously need to consider the role of Athletics as one of the principal entry points to the university and the need to provide adequate parking for our athletes, staff, and fans.



HEALTH, PHYSICAL EDUCATION, AND RECREATION (HPER)

Although Physical Education (PE) has not been a curricular requirement at Duke for many years, PE still assumes an important role in students? lives. Just as the interest in intercollegiate athletics has grown dramatically, so, too, has general interest in health and fitness. A walk through the exercise machine area or the weight room of the Wilson Recreation Center at any time after noon on any given day reveals crowds of students, staff members, and faculty exercising or lifting weights. This importance is also manifest in overflow registration in all the Department's courses, in the robust number of club teams, and in the more than 4500 participants in the intramural program. In fact, the demands of the recreational program vastly exceed our capacity to meet them.

The budget concerns that characterize varsity athletics extend to the physical education, club sport, and intramural programs, as well. While varsity athletes make up a tenth of the undergraduate student body, they are by no means the only athletes at Duke, and the needs of club, intramural, and recreational athletes are no less important for their lesser visibility. Surely, part of the educational mission of the university requires the engagement of the whole person and the development of healthy life styles.

Central to both intercollegiate athletics and club/intramural/recreational athletics are facilities. A preponderance of athletic spaces?fields, pools, gyms?are shared by all of Duke's athletes. Card Gym, used as a dry-land training facility by the men's and women's diving teams in the morning, becomes an intramural gym at night and a haven for the Duke Badminton Club on weekends. The combatives room in the Wilson Center accommodates the wrestling team, various martial arts clubs, and a variety of PE courses. The track at Wallace Wade Stadium and the running trail around the golf course not only serve varsity teams and members of the Duke community, but the larger Durham community, as well. The list of such shared facilities is long and includes the turf fields on East and West Campuses, grass fields on West Campus, pools on both campuses, the Intramural Building, the outdoor tennis courts on West Campus, the Duke Golf Course, and the rowing facility at Lake Michie.

We believe that one of the keys to success for both intercollegiate and club/intramural/recreation activity at Duke is to continue to think in terms of shared facilities. We can prudently build and sustain the kinds of facilities we believe are necessary to Duke only if we are able to make each of our serve multiple purposes.


Club Sports, Intramurals, and Recreation

Club Sports provide students the opportunity to compete against students from other universities. The lessons and friendships that these students gain from being members of these clubs is an important part of their Duke experience. Specific planning for the future of the club and intramural programs revolves around facility and personnel needs. The growth in interest in fitness and such competition has not been matched by growth in our capacity to meet their needs.

Currently, Duke has three field turf fields, three grass fields, one indoor soccer field, nine basketball courts, two swimming pools, and three multi-purpose rooms to accommodate 850 club participants and 4,500 intramural players. We have no baseball/softball fields, and only one lighted tennis court. At present, Club teams are limited to two practices per week. In addition, there are no indoor facilities for outdoor clubs to use during the colder months.

The Intramural Program offers flag football, soccer, volleyball, basketball, indoor soccer, dodge ball, softball, and kickball. Because of limited space, football, soccer, indoor soccer, softball, and basketball are turning teams away; intramurals are capped at 2005 levels.

It is clear that these programs are currently operating at their maximum capacities in terms of facilities and personnel to operate them effectively. Their growth in the last five years has drastically altered the quality of the programming we can offer. Two key items must be addressed:


HPER

The mission of the Department of Health, Physical Education and Recreation is to provide a strong physical activity program that serves the entire university community through the courses we teach, the recreation programs we offer in club sports and intramurals, and personal training services. There are three essential components of our program:

The current Chair of the HPER Department will step down at the end of 2008-09. This will give us time to conduct a national search for an experienced HPER professional who can sustain our efforts to upgrade the entire program.

Facilities

To accomplish these goals, we need to maintain our existing facilities (particularly, the Wilson Center and Brodie Gymnasium) and fields as well as developing a schedule for the replacement of aging equipment. We also need to add at least three turf playing fields, including a covered field as envisioned in the proposed field house, a new 50 meter swimming pool (to fully accommodate the demand for general swimming, to expand PE course offerings, and possibly to institute a lesson program for the local community), and several squash courts. In addition, the grass field immediately adjacent to Brodie should be widened, converted to turf, and made accessible only through the gym to increase security. Brodie Gym itself needs to be expanded to make room for two additional basketball courts and the Brodie weight room needs to be upgraded. Finally, we should study the possibility of establishing an exercise facility near the professional schools that also incorporates a Student Health satellite office, much like the one in the Murray Building.

These improvements can be classified as immediate, short-term projects, and long-term projects:

Immediate: Field house, turf fields, Brodie weight room

Short-term: Expansion of Brodie, replacement of Brodie grass field, Professional School satellite exercise/Student Health facility

Long-term: Recreation complex on new campus

In enhancing our facilities and in rethinking our programming for the future, we also need to be sensitive to concerns that arise from the increasing diversity of our students and the ever-increasing imperative to satisfy the recreation and exercise needs of women. The Women's Initiative research of 2002-2003 told us that eating and body image issues are significant among our undergraduate female population, and ever-increasing among undergraduate men.  Our programs should encourage students to exercise for health and stress relief, not to meet an unrealistic ideal of physical perfection.  Women report particular sensitivity to facilities; they may experience intimidation in certain traditionally male-dominated environments (such as the weight room) if care is not taken to make them comfortable and knowledgeable.  And as we attract more students of diverse faiths, we will also need to consider religious expectations of modesty.  Providing some women-only hours in the weight room and pool, for example, would attract Muslim women.  Facilities and programming work synergistically; we need enough facilities to provide welcoming environments for women, and classes to help them take advantage of the space and to attract students not currently taking advantage of recreational opportunities.


STUDENT-ATHLETE WELFARE

Student Development

In 2000, the NCAA mandated that all member institutions sponsor life skills programs aimed at helping student-athlete's development in their personal lives. The NCAA allows considerable leeway in the design of such programs, recognizing that different institutions have vastly different needs. At Duke, we have attempted to tailor our program in ways that are most helpful to Duke student-athletes. Until recently, the personnel who attended to this range of student-life issues were housed in a number of offices throughout the department. In 2006, however, we hired the first full-time Director of Student-Athlete Development and brought all of our education and support programs under one roof. In 2007, we also hired a full-time assistant who primarily coordinates community service.

Future efforts of the Student Development program will target three areas: personal development, community service, and career planning.

Career Planning

We will continue to expand our alumni career network, initiate a career development series with the Career Center, and continue the CD resume program.

The existing relationship with the Career Center will be enhanced through referrals, co-facilitating workshops around student-athletes? schedules, and communicating campus events to student-athletes. Nurturing this relationship has resulted in the continuation of already established programming for athletes as well as plans for the following projects:


Academic Support

Our Academic Support program has recently moved into its new home in the Center for Athletic Excellence. This will allow us to expand some of our academic support services to all of our students and enable us to attract and retain the best student-athletes:


FOOTBALL

While the plan to produce a consistently winning football program involves a certain level of financial investment, what is most needed has nothing to do with bricks and mortar or with increasing staff size and salaries but with attitude and focus, with a daily commitment to excellence on the part of players, coaches, and staff. That said, we need to focus our attention on four areas: culture, personnel, scheduling, and facilities.

Culture of the Program.

The immediate task facing the new coaching staff is to change the entire culture of the program. No team can be successful without a winning attitude. In every area which touches the player's daily lives, they need to perceive a heightened level of attention to detail, of intensity, of determination to do things right. This is true for strength and conditioning, medical care and rehabilitation, academic support, coaching, and practice. The intensity level of the entire program needs to increase.


Personnel Needs


Scheduling

We need to ensure that our non-conference schedule?which we control?puts us in a position to be bowl-eligible every year. To this end, we need to play a FCS (formerly 1-AA) opponent every year, preferably early in the season. We need to avoid "money games" for the foreseeable future. We can and should continue to play institutions that are like us?Vanderbilt, Stanford, Northwestern, the service academies?but we should also look beyond these traditional games to others that offer the opportunity for success.


Facilities

While the facilities needs of the football program are detailed in the facilities section of this report, we need a field house with a covered practice field that will be shared by HPER and Olympic sports, we need to upgrade Wallace Wade Stadium in several ways over the next five to ten years to improve the fan experience, and we need to address the appearance of the practice area to improve team morale and cohesion.



BASKETBALL

Over the course of the last decade, the men's and women's basketball programs at Duke have been among the most successful in the nation. Our basketball student-athletes not only win on the court, they graduate, they perform extensive community service, and they are highly visible ambassadors for the university. The image of Duke that they project has been invaluable in creating pride among alumni and fans and positive feelings internationally about the university as a whole. Men's basketball, in particular, has also been a crucial factor in providing revenue to help support the efforts of all 600 of Duke's student-athletes. Clearly, it is incumbent upon us to ensure that both of these programs continue to operate at the highest level. To do so, we need to constantly evaluate the state of the programs, the facilities, and personnel needs.

Restoring Cameron Indoor Stadium. Cameron Indoor Stadium has repeatedly been identified as one of the best athletic arenas in the world; the experience of attending a game in Cameron is internationally famous. The natural tendency is to assume that Cameron needs no further attention or improvement. And with the completion of the new Krzyzewski Center, one might also assume that the needs of the basketball programs are answered for the foreseeable future. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, a number of needs should be addressed over the next five years, ranging from maintenance to major projects.

Program Endowment. We need to continue to actively and aggressively pursue the goal of endowing, not only scholarships, but the entire men's and women's basketball programs. On the men's side, the Legacy Fund has made great strides in this direction. Attainment of this goal should be a major focus in the next five years.



OLYMPIC SPORTS

Olympic Sports at Duke have traditionally included all sports other than Men's and Women's Basketball and Football. Within this group there are sports that offer the maximum number of scholarships allowed by the NCAA (Baseball, Field Hockey, Men's and Women's Golf, Men's and Women's Tennis, Men's and Women's Lacrosse, Men's and Women's Soccer, and Women's Volleyball), sports that offer a significant number of scholarships, but not the NCAA maximum (Women's Track/Cross Country and Women's Rowing), those that offer limited athletic financial aid (Women's Swimming and Diving and Women's Fencing), and those that offer none (Men's Fencing, Men's Track and Cross Country, Men's Swimming and Diving, and Wrestling).

In nearly every Olympic sport that has its full complement of scholarships we have been very successful. Men's Soccer and Women's Golf have both won national championships. Men's Lacrosse played in the national championship game twice in the last three years and is currently ranked among the top teams in the country. Women's Lacrosse has been to the final four four times in its short history and is also currently ranked among the top teams in the country. Women's Cross Country finished second in the NCAA championships in 2006 and has produced a number of all-Americans over the years. Women's Soccer, Women's Field Hockey, Men's Tennis, and Women's Tennis have also regularly been ranked in the top 10 in the country. Men's Golf and Women's Volleyball have been top twenty programs. We feel confident that with improvement in our facilities and the addition of support staff we will not only be able to maintain these sports at their current level but also see a significant increase in their success.

For the Olympic sports in which we do not offer scholarships or offer fewer than the full complement of scholarships the first step toward excellence is to offer more scholarships. In the short run this will not be easy. If we maintain our current array of scholarship sports and if there is no infusion of university funds for this purpose, the addition of new scholarships will only be possible as a result of increased fund raising, and/or the generation of increased revenue by the football program. In addition, there are other factors that impact our ability to augment scholarships. First, any increase in scholarships must be approved by the Board of Trustees. Second, any consideration of alterations in scholarship allotment by sport must account for compliance with Title IX. And finally, the Office of Undergraduate Admissions would have to agree to offer the prospects extra consideration.

With these considerations in mind, we plan to add scholarships as university funding, athletic fund-raising, and football revenue permit. The timing of adding scholarships is heavily dependent upon finances, but also, by its very nature needs to be spread out over at least a four year period. No coach would choose to award all of his or her athletic financial to a single recruiting class. Decisions concerning which programs will receive aid and when they will receive it will be based on the judgment of the likelihood of competitive success at the time. We do believe that with scholarship support and some improvement in facilities these programs, we could very quickly become nationally competitive

Facilities

The future success and improvement of our Olympic sports will depend in part on an improvement in essential facilities. The first and foremost of these is the renovation of Jack Coombs Field. We will also at some point need to upgrade the press box in Koskinen. Many of the facilities projects described elsewhere in this plan will, of course, have a direct impact on the Olympic Sports. Others will create a ?domino effect? that will benefit our entire program. For example, the construction of the field house will not only benefit intramurals, club sports, and football but the Olympic sports as well. Moreover, the benefits of this new facility will extend beyond its direct impact. Its construction will free up the speed and agility room in the Yoh Center, which can then be converted into a weight room for the Olympic Sports. At 10,000 square feet, it will more than triple the size of the Murray weight room. In turn, removing the weight room from Murray will allow the entire second floor to be converted to a training room/rehabilitation center for the Olympic Sports. Similarly, the construction of a New Aquatics Center to meet the needs of the Duke community will also have a positive impact on Men's and Women's swimming.

A consistent element that Olympic Sport coaches identify as a way to improve their programs has been better exploitation of resources which improve athletic performance. The most frequently cited services that would help to do this have been strength and conditioning, training and rehabilitation, nutrition education, sports psychology, and a training table. All of these services are currently available, but not always in a coordinated, efficient manner and not always to all programs. The answer to this need, we believe, lies in the creation of a Performance Enhancement Center. Although at first the Performance Center would involve better coordination of those services we already offer, eventually we plan for it to inhabit its own facility under the supervision of a full-time director, and to provide an organized, cutting edge approach to helping our students maximize their potential as athletes. We also envision the inclusion of an eating facility that would serve as a training table for athletes as well as a restaurant for the entire campus. We are convinced that such an eating facility would facilitate the interaction of student athletes, other students, faculty, and staff members.

A proposal for a complementary research-based Academic-Athletic Collaboration Initiative and Center for Performance Research is currently being submitted by a multi-disciplinary group of faculty to the Provost Common Fund for initial funding. The goal of the center would be to encourage and increase research efforts exploring the interface of athletics and academic scholarship at Duke, and to publicize collaborative research opportunities to Duke's academic community, facilitate and fund academic-athletic research projects, and publicize the results of such research. The center would foster interdisciplinary research into the physical and mental attributes of athletes (both on and off the sports venue), social dynamics and team building modalities and the degree to which these influence the academic side of athletes' development, and the business and economic aspects of collegiate athletics. The presence of elite athletics at Duke provides unique opportunities for this type of research.



Admissions

The current system governing admissions has been in place for at least 15 years and has served us well, but in light of the dramatic changes in the landscape of college athletics, it is time to re-evaluate our procedures. We are not suggesting changes that in any way would affect the academic potential of our student-athletes; rather, we would like to consider measures that would give us greater certainty about likely success of the student-athletes we bring to Duke and increased flexibility in the admissions process.


Personnel

CONCLUSION


The 1938 football squad--perhaps the greatest athletic team in Duke history?finished the regular season undefeated, untied, and unscored upon. In many ways, that team could not have been more different than the football teams of today. They were all white; the linemen averaged 190 pounds; they came to Duke from a relatively limited geographical area. They represented a young, regional university and an athletic department that was entirely composed of a limited number of men's sports. Much has changed in the intervening years, but it is surprising to reflect on how much has not. For all the differences between that team and today's, they would also have much in common. The student-athletes of today still believe in and aspire to many of the values and goals of Wallace Wade's greatest teams: excellence, hard work, perseverance, teamwork, sportsmanship, and the importance of academic as well as athletic achievement. As a department, we still strive to provide an experience which is competitive, exciting, and fun, but which is also an integral component of the educational mission of the university. However much the public face of Duke Athletics has changed, the fundamental faith in the value of athletic participation in an educational setting abides. Our challenge in developing this plan has been to adapt to change while maintaining our belief in, and adherence to, the immutable principles that reside at the core of the important enterprise in which we are engaged.



If we could bring Wallace Wade's great team back to Duke today, they would find much that is familiar and, if they could be diverted from their momentary wonder at the Yoh Center, they would in all probability agree with Miles Brand, the President of the NCAA, who recently said "there is long-term consistency in the principles underlying college sports, even as universities and the external environment change and evolve." Of course, as they did so, they would be standing, not on the grass on which they played so well, but on a monofilament polyethylene blend fiber tufted into a polypropylene backing with an infill of silica sand and cryogenic rubber. Our mission and guiding principles will never change but, as we embark upon the second century of Duke Athletics, our task is to remain steadfastly faithful to that mission and those principles while the very ground beneath our feet continues to evolve and change.