{"id":6811,"date":"2020-01-24T08:32:00","date_gmt":"2020-01-24T14:32:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/?p=6811"},"modified":"2020-06-02T13:43:56","modified_gmt":"2020-06-02T18:43:56","slug":"ncaa-realignment-impact-upon-university-olympic-sports","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/ncaa-realignment-impact-upon-university-olympic-sports\/","title":{"rendered":"NCAA Realignment: Impact upon University ‘Olympic’ Sports"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Authors:<\/strong> Stephen W. Litvin, Crystal Lindner and Jillian Wilkie<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Corresponding Author:
<\/strong>Stephen W. Litvin, DBA
Professor, School of Business
College of Charleston
66 George Street
Charleston, South Carolina 29424
litvins@cofc.edu
843-953-7317<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stephen Litvin is a professor in\nthe School of Business of the College of Charleston.  Crystal Lindner and Jillian Wilkie are\nstudents at the College of Charleston and Research Assistants within the\nSchool\u2019s Office of Tourism Analysis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

NCAA\nRealignment: Impact upon University \u2018Olympic\u2019 Sports<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

ABSTRACT<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conference realignment has in recent years\nled to a \u201ccase of intercollegiate musical chairs\u201d (2, p. 254). This research\npaper looks at the issue from a new perspective.  While past research has almost exclusively\nfocused on football, this research considers the impact that affiliation change\nhas upon universities\u2019 non-football sports. \nThe findings suggest the move has been challenging for these teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Key words: <\/strong>Conference affiliation, Olympic sports, basketball, sports administration<\/p>\n\n\n\n

INTRODUCTION<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The genesis of this research paper\nwas an impromptu conversation with the head coach of one of our university\u2019s \u2018Olympic\u2019\nor secondary sports at a coffee shop near campus.  The university had just announced it was\nchanging conference affiliation, \u2018moving up\u2019 to a higher level, more\ncompetitive conference.  The coach\nindicated that she understood the logic of making the move for the sake of\nmen\u2019s basketball, the featured sport on our campus, but speculated the change would\nbe a negative for her team, which she felt did not have the resources necessary\nto compete at the higher level.  Based\nupon her concern, undoubtedly shared by coaches of many sports in similar\nsituations, the research that follows evaluates the performances of multiple non-football\nsports across the range of schools that moved-up during the realignment flurry earlier\nthis decade.  The goal of the exercise is\nto provide guideposts against which Olympic sport coaches can measure their\nteam\u2019s performance.  Equally importantly,\nthe findings should assist Athletic Directors as they evaluate their coaches\u2019\nperformances following their university\u2019s \u2018step up\u2019 to a more competitive\nathletic conference.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Background<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

While the shuffling of universities among athletic conferences is not a new phenomenon, the past decade has been an active period for such activity, with dozens of universities changing affiliation since 2010.  Commenting on the trend, the Associated Press (1) wrote, \u201cConference realignment\u2026 could be a category on Jeopardy! The $2,000 answer could be about the Western Athletic Conference and naming the seven schools that left and the six that are replacing them this season.\u201d  Dennie (2) commented that a \u201crealignment frenzy\u201d began with the 2009 announcement by the Big Ten Conference that it would be expanding, leading to a \u201ccase of intercollegiate musical chairs\u201d (p. 254).  Similarly, Nwosu (7) noted that realignment created \u201ca domino effect\u201d.  He explained: \u201cFor example, new member institutions joined the ACC from the Big East, new member institutions joined the Big East and the Atlantic-10 Conference from Conference-USA, new member institutions joined Conference-USA from the Mid-American Conference and the Western Athletic Conference, new member institutions joined the Western Athletic Conference from the Sun Belt Conference, and the Sun Belt Conference added membership from the second tier of the NCAA\u2019s Division-I structure\u201d (p.4).  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dissecting the reasoning behind\nthese conference moves has been extensively studied.  Weiner (13)\nsuggested that decisions to change have primarily been motivated by \u2018prestige.\u2019  His\nstudy of eleven universities that had changed conferences found eight, per\nmetrics he developed to measure the intangible, were judged as more\n\u2018prestigious\u2019 following their move.  Pincin\nand Ho\ufb00er (10) commented that while the literature discussed multiple motives\nfor schools changing conferences, the ultimate justification for making the\nmove is almost always financial; with the promise of greater football bowl\nearnings and\/or a larger share of NCAA basketball payouts trumping all other\narguments.  Nwosu (7) provided an\nextensive review of the literature which readers are referred to for an\nin-depth discussion of the topic. Including the above-mentioned justifications\nfor a change of conference affiliations, he listed the following seven\nmotivations university administrators generally cite as their reason for making\nsuch a move:  1) competitive balance; 2) revenue;\n3) exposure; 4) athletic prestige; 5) academic prestige; 6) team travel; and 7)\nalumni (fan) proximity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Regardless of motive, the\nliterature confirms that the decision to change conference affiliation is most\noften football driven (9).  In an article\nspecifically related to football, Groza (4) justified schools moving to a higher\nrated conference as follow: \u201cBetter conferences offer new programs the\nopportunity to play better in-conference opponents.  Teams that move into better conferences will,\non average, play more opponents with better on-\ufb01eld success and a richer tradition.\nThe prospect of playing stronger opponents with more tradition may appeal to\nfans and increase game day attendance\u201d (p. 522).  Groza (4) further commented: \u201cSport consumers\nmay be attracted at the prospect of their team playing in a well-known traditional\nconference.  Better conferences also\naccentuate the importance of each game.  Stronger\nconferences have larger national television contracts and have more automatic\nbids with larger post-season bowl games\u201d (p. 527).  Mathewson (5) made a similar argument: \u201cWith\nsmaller conference television contracts and perhaps smaller stadia, their only\nhope to share in the BCS payday is to join [a higher-level conference] even on\ninequitable terms.  Universities, like\nthe University of Utah, in the mid-major conferences flee those conferences for\nBCS-automatic qualifying conferences primarily for economic reasons.  Likewise, mid-major conferences like\nConference USA, the Mountain West and the Sunbelt may seek to merge or expand\nin response to raiding by the BCS automatic qualifying conferences\u201d (p. 324). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Little has been written about\nconference realignment outside of football\u2019s shadow.  Rhoades\u2019 (11) football focused research did\nnote, however, that \u201ccompetitive imbalance issues in football that ultimately\nlead to churning in college conferences would be expected to potentially have\nimpacts on competitive balance for many other sports within that conference\u201d\n(p. 2).  His research, which analyzed the\nimpact of membership churn within the Western Athletic Conference and the\nMountain West Conference, determined that \u201cwhile churning in the WAC\/MWC has\nled to more balance in football over time,\u201d the basketball teams that \u2018came\nalong for the ride\u2019 did not fare as well (11. p. 17).  Perline and Stoldt (8), in what is now a somewhat\ndated article, provided a study that specifically considered basketball\nperformance following realignment.  The\nkey question these authors explored was the impact of conference expansion on\nthe competitiveness of the expanded Big 12, having then recently morphed from\nthe Big 8 following the absorption of four Southwest Conference teams.  Perline and Stoldt\u2019s (8) finding was that the\nexpanded conference had become less competitively balanced, predominantly due\nto three of the four new members consistently residing near the bottom of their\nnew conference\u2019s basketball standings.  Good\n(3), in a non-academic article discussing college wrestling, expressed concern\nthat the mega-conferences forming as a function of football driven realignment\nwould have a negative impact on his sport.  His conclusion: \u201cAll these moves might be good\nor not so good for football, which it seems, is all anyone cares about these\ndays. But there is danger lurking in college wrestling\u2026Does anyone really think\nthat the sport of wresting is like football or basketball?\u201d (p.6).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Purpose of the Study<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The above led to the current study,\nevaluating the performance of athletic teams other than football following a\nuniversity\u2019s change of conference affiliation.  Mathewson (5), in an article highly critical\nof the motives behind conference realignment, expressed the opinion that such\nmoves, \u201cmay conflict with the educational missions of member institutions and\nthe NCAA mission to support intercollegiate athletics\u201d (p. 345).  This research paper will not question the\noverall value of realignment for the university, but rather will seek to determine,\nas noted earlier, how such a move affects those sports whose best interests may\nnot have been considered, or at least not made a significant factor, when their\ninstitution made the decision to upgrade its conference affiliation.  The conjecture is that the change to a\nhigher-level conference (see the method section below for how relative\nconference level was determined) was difficult for non-football sports,\nparticularly non-revenue generating Olympic sport teams, finding themselves\nwith the challenge of transitioning to a new higher-level, and likely better\nfunded, level of competition.  To test\nthis, we hypothesized the following:  Olympic sport teams at universities that\n\u2018move-up\u2019 to a higher-level conference are significantly less successful in their\nnew conference than they had been within their previous conference.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

METHODS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The population of\nuniversities included in our dataset included all those that had changed their\nconference affiliation to a higher-level conference during the years 2011\nthrough 2015, an active transition period. \nAs the research was designed to look at performance for a period of\nthree years prior to a university\u2019s change of affiliation, compared with their performance\nthree years post change, the most current year for which such a comparison could\nbe made was for those schools that had changed affiliation in 2015.  A comprehensive list of Division I universities\nthat had changed conferences was found on a Wikipedia (14) page entitled \u201cNCAA\nDivision I Conference Realignment.\u201d  This\nresource served as the starting point of the data collection exercise.  Only those universities that had moved the\nmajority of their sports were selected for study.  For example: Dallas Baptist University, which\nin 2013-14 moved only their baseball team from the WAC to the MVC, was not\nconsidered for analysis. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

To determine whether a\nuniversity was \u2018moving up\u2019 to a higher-level more competitive conference,\ncomparisons between each conference\u2019s average annual men\u2019s basketball expenditures\nwere used as the barometer.  Conference\nbasketball expenses were collected from the website Midmajormadness.com (6),\nwhich complied these from NCAA reports.  Those\nuniversities that moved to a conference that on average spent more money on\ntheir basketball programs were deemed to have joined a \u2018higher ranked\u2019\nconference.  Based upon this criterion, the\nhandful of teams that did not \u2018move up\u2019 when changing conferences were excluded\nfrom analysis.  For example, Belmont\nUniversity, which changed affiliation in 2012 from the Atlantic Sun (annual average\nmen\u2019s basketball budget = $1.6 million) to the OVC (annual average men\u2019s\nbasketball budget = $1.4 million) was excluded from the dataset.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Eleven non-football sports were selected for\nreview.  These represented a balance of\nmen\u2019s and women\u2019s teams, as well as both team-sports and more individual-sports.  Sports such as lacrosse, men\u2019s volleyball, equestrian\nand wrestling, which are not offered by many schools (or whose teams may be\nmembers of specialized conference affiliations) were not considered.  The eleven sports selected for review, providing\na representative sample of a typical university\u2019s non-football sports offerings,\nwere men\u2019s and women\u2019s soccer, tennis, basketball and outdoor track & field;\nplus, women\u2019s volleyball and softball, and men\u2019s baseball. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

As noted above, a six-year time range, representing\nthe three years prior to change and an equal three-year period following the\nuniversity\u2019s change of affiliation, was the timeframe utilized to examine the\nimpact of the conference change upon a team\u2019s performance in their new\ncompetitive environment.  For sake of\nconsistency, we considered only conference performance (versus out-of-conference\nresults), capturing the number of conference wins and losses for the above listed\nsports (the one exception was track & field, for which performance was\nbased upon rank results at the conference end-of-season meet).  Statistics were collected from the individual\nuniversity\u2019s athletic websites and conference webpages; and for track &\nfield from TFRRS.org (12).  While most\nschools fielded teams in all eleven selected sports, some did not \u2013 for example,\nFresno State does not field a men\u2019s soccer team.  The other ten Fresno State sports were\nincluded in the dataset.  Also, universities\nsuch as Savannah State that had been an independent before joining the MEAC in\n2011 and thus lacked pre-change performance to compare with post-move results were\nexcluded from analysis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The above provided a dataset reflecting six\nyears of results of 483 teams from 64 universities.  Analyses of the collected data allowed hypothesis\ntesting, revealing the following interesting results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

RESULTS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The findings emphatically support the\nstated hypothesis.  Teams from\nuniversities moving to a higher-level conference performed at a significantly\nlower level following their move. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

On average, the teams [track &\nfield is discussed below] had strong conference results prior to the move,\nwinning an average of 55.1% of their conference games\/matches during the\nthree-year pre-move period.  Following\ntheir university\u2019s move, these results fell significantly, yielding an overall\nlosing record, with teams winning on average just 49.1% of the time (T=-4.332;\np=0.000).  The two track & field\nteams similarly fared worse versus their new competition, placing on average\n4.6th<\/sup> place in their original conference\u2019s end-of-season meet;\nfalling to 6.4th<\/sup> place versus their new more competitive peers\n(T=4.887; p=0.000).]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Extracting men\u2019s basketball from\nthe above composite results reveals the same trend.  For the three years prior to the conference\nchange, the universities\u2019 men\u2019s basketball teams won an average of 56.8% of\ntheir conference games.  Following the\nmove, this fell a full ten percent to a win rate of just 46.7% (T=-5.059;\np=0.000).  Basketball fans used too\ncheering their team to victory had to be disappointed with their losing record\nin the new conference. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Figure<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Figure-1 reflects the year-by-year results.\n It is clear from the graph that the change\nto a more competitive conference had been difficult for all teams, and\nconsiderably more so for men\u2019s basketball, which struggled with the new higher\nlevel of competition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As an additional test, we looked at\nwomen\u2019s versus men\u2019s sports. This was purely for interest sake, as we had no\nbasis to assume one gender would have been more affected by a conference change\nthan had the other.  In fact, no\nstatistical differences were noted. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

DISCUSSION <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Considerable previous research has\nlooked at the impact of conference churn, i.e. the impact of losing and gaining\nmembers upon the conference\u2019s competitive success and balance.  Few of these, however, consider the impact of\nthe move on the school making the transition, and as best as can be determined,\nthis is the first research that has considered the impact upon the university\u2019s\nOlympic sports.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thinking back to the conversation\nwith the coach who was concerned that her team would have a difficult time\ncompeting with the higher level of competition\u2026These results suggest she had\nevery reason to be worried.  When a\nuniversity changes conference affiliation, teams such as hers do in fact fare significantly\nless well, at least for the first three years following the change.  This study found that teams from universities\nmoving up had, on average, strong winning conference records before the\ntransition.  Following the move, this was\nno longer the case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No evidence either supporting or\ndiscrediting the benefits a university or its athletic teams may enjoy as a result\nof changing conference affiliation emanates from the current study.  However, as noted earlier, a good deal of\nliterature has tackled this issue. What this research has done, however, is show\nthe impact such a move is likely to have upon the school\u2019s Olympic (i.e.\nnon-football) sports. Athletes, coaches, administrators and fans, accustomed to\nwinning records, should understand that such results are unlikely to continue\nduring at least the first three years competing in their new conference.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

CONCLUSION<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Changing conferences is a major\nmove; done with the hope that the new affiliation will elevate the school\u2019s institutional\nand athletic prestige\u2026and finances.  But\nsuch a move should be made with the understanding of the impact this will have\nacross the campus\u2019 athletic landscape. Schools making the decision to move\nshould have a plan to provide the additional financial support needed for their\nteams to compete in their new competitive environment.  While the university\u2019s motivation for change\nis likely based upon football (sometimes basketball), it should not be\noverlooked that the ramifications of \u2018moving-up\u2019 will impact the entire\nathletic department.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As a final comment, the\ncontributions of the Olympic sport athletes and their coaches, such as the one\nwhose concerns motivated this study, should be recognized.  They deserve every fair chance to be\nsuccessful, even as their efforts are generally spent far from the limelight.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

APPLICATION IN SPORT<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To those coaches whose schools\nmove-up, it is hoped that this study provides some solace and \u2018cover\u2019 if their team\u2019s\nnew conference results fall below their previous standards.  To athletic administrators, these findings\nstrongly suggest the need for patience with their coaches.  The elevated level of competition can be\nexpected to create a challenging situation and teams simply cannot be expected\nto perform at the same level as before the affiliation change.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are numerous opportunities to\nextend this study, adding to the limited academic research related to\nintercollegiate Olympic sports.  For\nexample, future research could focus on the move from Division II to Division\nI, or solely on the move from FBS to FCS. \nLikely, the issues discussed herein also apply at the high school level,\nwhere schools change classification and leagues often.  Further, we tested three years of post-change\nresults.  A follow-up study encompassing\na longer timeframe may be of value.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

None
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

REFERENCES<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. Associated Press (2013). Realignment takes center court. October 27. Retrieved at: https:\/\/www.ncaa.com\/news\/basketball-men\/article\/2013-10-27\/realignment-takes-center-court.<\/li>
  2. Dennie, C. (2011). Conference realignment: From backyard brawls to cash cows. Mississippi Sports Law Review<\/em>, 1<\/em>, 249.<\/li>
  3. Good, R. (2013), Is this college realignment going to be good for wrestling? Amateur Wrestling News<\/em> 2\/12\/2013, 58<\/em>(7), 6. <\/li>
  4. Groza, M.D. (2010). NCAA conference realignment and football game day attendance. Managerial and Decision Economics<\/em>, 31<\/em>(8), 517-529.<\/li>
  5. Mathewson, A.D. (2011). The Bowl Championship Series, Conference Realignment and the Major College Football Oligopoly: Revolution Not Reform. Mississippi Sports Law Review<\/em>, 1<\/em>, 321-357.<\/li>
  6. Mid-Major Madness (2018). \u201cHow much does your school spend on its men\u2019s basketball program?  We\u2019ve got numbers.\u201d  Retrieved at: https:\/\/www.midmajormadness.com.<\/li>
  7. Nwosu, G.O. (2015). Examining Factors Influencing NCAA Division-I Conference Realignment. University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Doctoral Dissertation. Retrieved at: https:\/\/digitalscholarship.unlv.edu\/<\/a>.<\/li>
  8. Perline, M.M. & Stoldt, G.C. (2007). Competitive balance and the Big 12. The SMART Journal<\/em>, 4<\/em>(1), 47-58.<\/li>
  9. Perline, M.M., Stoldt, G.C. & Vermillion, M.C. (2013). Competitive balance in conference USA football: The effects of membership churning. The Sports Journal<\/em>. Retrieved at: https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/tag\/sports_tourism\/.<\/li>
  10. Pincin, J. & Hoffer, A. (2013). NCAA athletic departments: An empirical investigation of the effects of revenue and conference changes, retrieved at: https:\/\/mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de\/49807\/1\/MPRA_paper_49807,pdf.<\/li>
  11. Rhoades, T.A. (2004). Competitive balance and conference realignment in the NCAA: The case of the Western Athletic and Mountain West Conferences. In 74th annual meeting of Southern Economic Association<\/em>.<\/li>
  12. TFRRS [Track & Field Results Reporting System] (2019). \u201cMeet Results.\u201d Retrieved at: https:\/\/www.tfrrs.org\/results_search.html.<\/li>
  13. Weiner, B. (2011). The 2010 NCAA division I conference realignment: Analyzing the maximizing-satisficing paradox using institutional data. In annual American Educational Research Association (AERA) conference, New Orleans, LA<\/em>.<\/li>
  14. Wikipedia (2019). \u201cNCAA Division I Conference Realignment.\u201d Retrieved at: https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/ncaa_division_I_conference_realignment.<\/li><\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Authors: Stephen W. Litvin, Crystal Lindner and Jillian Wilkie Corresponding […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_options":[]},"categories":[295,291],"tags":[46,1548,1547,1549],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p4btio-1LR","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":3862,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/big-12-football-competitive-balance-before-and-after-realignment\/","url_meta":{"origin":6811,"position":0},"title":"Big 12 Football: Competitive Balance Before and After Realignment","date":"July 8, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Authors: Jeffrey S. Noble*, Martin M. Perline, G. Clayton Stoldt Institutional Affiliation of Authors: Wichita State University *Corresponding Author: Jeff Noble, Ed.D Department of Sport Management Wichita State University 1845 Fairmount Wichita, Kansas 67260-0127 Email: jeffrey.noble@wichita.edu Phone: (316)978-5442 Abstract Conference realignment among athletic programs that compete at the Division I\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Research"","img":{"alt_text":"BIG 12 CONFERENCE FOOTBALL WINNING PERCENTAGES","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/Table-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":443,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/the-effects-of-conference-realignment-on-national-success-and-competitive-balance-the-case-of-conference-usa-mens-basketball\/","url_meta":{"origin":6811,"position":1},"title":"The Effects of Conference Realignment on National Success and Competitive Balance: The Case of Conference USA Men\u2019s Basketball","date":"January 3, 2012","format":false,"excerpt":"Martin M. Perline, G. Clayton Stoldt, Mark C. Vermillion ### Abstract Collegiate athletic conferences serve multiple functions, including providing regular opportunities for members to compete in a relatively equitable environment and contributing to the financial well being of member institutions. Many conferences have undergone realignment in recent years, and the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Contemporary Sports Issues"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":489,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/competitive-balance-in-conference-usa-football-the-effects-of-membership-churning\/","url_meta":{"origin":6811,"position":2},"title":"Competitive Balance in Conference USA Football: The Effects of Membership Churning","date":"March 19, 2013","format":false,"excerpt":"Martin M. Perline, G. Clayton Stoldt, Mark C. Vermillion The Effects of Membership Churning ABSTRACT Conference USA a major college athletic conference that experienced a number of membership changes in 2005.\u00a0 The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of those changes on competitive balance in the sport\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Contemporary Sports Issues"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":6801,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/diversifying-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-in-american-college-athletics-the-case-for-adaptive-and-other-non-traditional-sports\/","url_meta":{"origin":6811,"position":3},"title":"Diversifying Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in American College Athletics: The Case for Adaptive (And Other Non-Traditional) Sports","date":"January 10, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Authors: Kevin T. McGinniss, Ed.D. (Southern Connecticut State University), Demetri Goutos, B.A., M.B.A. (Yale University), and Yetsa A. Tuakli-Wosornu, M.D., M.P.H. (Yale University). Corresponding author: Kevin T. McGinniss, EdD Southern Connecticut State University 501 Crescent Street, New Haven, CT USA 06515 Campus Site: Office Building 1, 108GPhone: 203-392-8837Email: mcginnissk1@southernct.edu Kevin\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Commentary"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":388,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/the-place-and-role-of-olympism-in-higher-education\/","url_meta":{"origin":6811,"position":4},"title":"The Place and Role of Olympism in Higher Education","date":"August 5, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"Anton\u00edn Rychteck\u00fd, Charles University, Czech Olympic Academy, Prague, Czech Republic ### Introduction Interpreting the place and role of Olympism in higher education is a necessary and pertinent issue. The close relationship between the Olympic Movement and universities dates back as far as 1894. The fact that the IOC was established\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Contemporary Sports Issues"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":394,"url":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/article\/international-olympic-academy-masters-degree-program-specifications\/","url_meta":{"origin":6811,"position":5},"title":"International Olympic Academy Master’s Degree Program Specifications","date":"September 9, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"Introducing an Olympic Movement innovation, in collaboration with the Department of Sports Organization and Management of the University of Peloponnese (UOP), Sparta, the International Olympic Academy (IOA) now offers a Master's Degree Scholarship Program for the Academic year of 2010-2011. The course title is, \"Olympic Studies, Olympic Education, Organization and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Sports Facilities"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6811"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6811"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6811\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7289,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6811\/revisions\/7289"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6811"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6811"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thesportjournal.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6811"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}