Maryland’s New Athletic Director Sees Problems as Challenge

After 12 years as athletic director at Stanford, Andy Geiger took over as Maryland’s AD this week. In an interview, Geiger addressed the issues of Atlantic Coast Conference expansion, Maryland’s $3.5 million budget deficit, academics, and coaches Joe Krivak and Gary Williams.

Question: What attracted you to Maryland?

Answer: I came here in 1986 as part of a task force that looked at the university. I liked the place then. I just had a feeling about it that made me feel good. I was asked to come back and consult in August and keep an open mind with regard to my role as a consultant -- would I consider the position?

I liked the president of the university very much. I was impressed with the search committee, which I met in groups of ones and twos. I was impressed with the problems. They are significant and I was impressed with the very real desire to overcome them and try to right the ship, so to speak.

I also had been almost 12 years at Stanford. I had done some very good things at Stanford. I also had my share of difficulties, as we all do in these kinds of positions. I felt that a change for me would be very good. And whether or not Stanford realized it, a change for them might be good.

Q: In view of your opposition to ACC expansion, do you view yourself as a traditionalist or an innovator?

A: In general I thought expansion was an escalation of intercollegiate athletics at a time when we’re discussing such things as the length of team trips, the amount of time that youngsters are involved in practice and play, the cost of this business in human and financial terms. And I thought that expansion was flying in the face of this. I thought the subjects were somewhat dichotomous.

There is no question there is an increase in cost for the conference to do these kind of things. The counter point of view is that it’s a good piece of business to open the state of Florida up economically (the ACC added Florida State last month). And from a purely business point of view, it’s a good idea.

Q: What do you see for the future of the ACC and college athletics?

A: I see things to worry about. It’s urgently important we get this reform legislation (proposals before the NCAA to cut costs and strengthen academics) through. I think we have to get significant improvement in our financial condition, from the point of view of Maryland and from several other schools, or else we’re going to see a reduction or an elimination of offerings that we have for the students on our campuses. We will not be able to afford broadly based programs.

If your fundamental belief is that athletics are educationally sound and you’re going to play games because kids learn something through the playing games, having less sports is less sound than having a broadly based program. But we’re spending so much money on things that we haven’t spent money on before.

Q: To cope with a projected $3.5 million deficit in the athletic department, Maryland has gone to a four-tiered budget system, where sports on the lowest tier receive no new scholarships. How comfortable are you with the tiered budget system?

A: I had one at Stanford. I am familiar with the tiered program. If I could do whatever I want to do, if I could be king of everything I see, we’d treat everyone the same. Hopefully, we’d be able to give everybody a scholarship and we’d compete for a national championship in everything. We can’t afford it.

I think it’s a valiant effort to try to keep activities alive at the universities that continue to have sports and to keep some vestige of the activity going. Hopefully, we can get to the place where we can re-fund something, particularly things that Maryland has had significant tradition in.

Q: Last year at Stanford, you raised $11.75 million. Do you have a specific methodology for fund-raising?

A: The best way to raise money is to get people interested and involved as volunteers, because donors will get other donors a lot faster than the hired help will and a lot more effectively than the hired help will.

Basically, I think the first duty of a state university is to serve the state that supports it. I hope to get around the state and meet people and greet them and get them excited and work with people here to be excited about it.

Q: Will you be comfortable lobbying politicians in Annapolis?

A: I would like to work in a partnership with the central administration of the university in that. I don’t want to make folks down the hill angry with me because I’m acting or doing something that crosses purposes with something that may be central to the needs of the entire university.

I expect that I will have an opportunity to meet people in Annapolis and I look forward to that.

That’s one of the things that was attractive to me. I’ve not had an experience at a state university.

Q: Where does Baltimore fit in?

A: I think it’s important to play a game in Baltimore, if the people in Baltimore would like to have us come play a football game there.

I’ve been told Baltimore residents, and particular, Maryland graduates in Baltimore, have somewhat of a feeling that this university stands facing south and not facing north.

I feel badly that we didn’t have more people come and watch Clemson and Maryland play this year. I think there were a lot of things going on that contributed to that. But the previous games in Memorial Stadium have done extremely well.

I think it’s important just going there and rallying and telling the Maryland alumni in Baltimore, in particular, that the university has not forsaken them, that we are not Washington-oriented, but state-oriented. Baltimore is a very important market.

Q: Do you believe in admissions exceptions for athletes?

A: I believe in admitting qualified young people who have a diversity of talents. I don’t like a completely quantified system. I think talent is a difficult thing to measure on some sort of sliding scale. I think admitting youngsters that can’t succeed in a university, who have no chance of succeeding academically, is exploitation of the worst kind.

But I think a great alto saxophonist is a terrific talent to have in a community. I think artists and actors and athletes and other kinds of people whose talents you aren’t able to quantify quite the way you do on an SAT score or in a grade-point average (are important to have).

We should provide some safety nets so they don’t slip through our fingers, but we don’t have kids majoring in eligibility. We should have kids major in something that’s going to lead them to a meaningful degree. Athletes ought to graduate - at the minimum - at the same rate as other students.

Q: Football Coach Joe Krivak is in the final year of his contract. How will you deal with that situation?

A: I’m a new athletic director and I think it would be wrong for me to come in and make an emotional decision or a snap judgment with regard to the football coach, and I think he thinks that way, too. We talked for some considerable time in Ann Arbor this past weekend and we agreed we’d play through the season and certainly spend meaningful time together in that process getting to know each other.

It’s fairly difficult to be coming in at a time when the season’s already under way and the football coach is near the end of his contract. But there needs to be a co-evaluation period that goes on where we get to know each other. I’d like to talk with people that have observed Maryland football over the years. I need to get a feel for how we can move the university forward in terms of our commitment to football, so that whoever is the coach, whether it’s Joe Krivak or somebody new, we’ve got a good sound basis for prosecuting our efforts in football. It’s terribly important that we establish a business plan for football.

Q: So you probably would not announce a contract extension during the season?

A: I don’t think I anticipate doing that. Something may change that would cause me to do so, but I don’t want to be absolute on things at this point - that wouldn’t be the right thing to do.

Q: What are the most important criteria you will be looking at?

A: I won’t be the only one looking, because I don’t run it that way. (But) organization. Leadership. Tactics. All of the things that go into being a coach. Staff. I think he’s recruited well the last couple years. I’m told by those that I talk with there are a couple of pretty good classes he’s been able to bring in. I’m told we went through the Len Bias tragedy and then the uproar around the program that followed, that we went through a period of a lot of people leaving the program. There was a lot of instability. Just this year we probably have a more stable situation than we’ve had and he’s got two good young classes in the program and he’s got very good senior leadership. Those are mature, positive, constructive things to look at, those are all good.

Q: Would you talk about Gary Williams? He’s the subject of another NCAA investigation. He’s admitted he watched some early practices. There are some allegations that at least one of his coaches conducted improper preseason practices. Then he had the conviction for driving while under the influence. Are you troubled by any of this?

A: Sure, of course. You’ve just recited some problems. It gives Gary pause. We’ve talked about it. My goal is for them not to be terminal problems as far as Gary’s concerned. And I certainly don’t want them to be temporarily terminal for our basketball program. I think we need to get out front of this in a hurry, and decide, not in a haste-makes-waste kind of way but a responsible way, to get from the allegation stage to the reality stage to the penalty stage to the basketball stage. And then have that be the last thing that happens for a long, long time.