After Texas Tech University abruptly fired its popular but controversial head football coach last week—following accusations that he mistreated an injured player—university fund raisers and alumni-relations officials have been working to control potential damage from angry supporters. While university officials say it is too soon to know how Mike Leach’s dismissal will affect donations, at least a modest effect on giving, particularly to athletics, is expected.
The circumstances surrounding the coach’s firing are unique to Texas Tech, but worries over the loss of donations after the sudden removal of a popular, successful coach—for whatever reason—are universal concerns. Fund-raising consultants and college administrators who have experienced the fallout over a coach’s dismissal say the key is to respond quickly and share as much information as possible, while communicating that the institution remains competitive and is moving ahead. If the situation is handled well, they say, a college can recover and see little effect on long-term fund raising.
Bill Dean, executive vice president of the Texas Tech Alumni Association, hopes a quick response to outraged fans will mitigate any long-term damage to the association’s fund-raising efforts. This week, Mr. Dean answered more than 335 angry e-mail messages from alumni asking why the university would fire a successful coach. Many of those who wrote said they will cut off their contributions.
The firestorm around Mr. Leach started last week, just before Texas Tech went to the Alamo Bowl. He was accused of punishing a player who had a concussion by confining him to a dark shed. The coach was suspended, and two days later, the university fired him for insubordination, saying he had refused to comply with an investigation. Mr. Leach shot back, saying that the story of why he was fired was fabricated and suggesting that he was dismissed partly because of lingering animosity over contentious contract negotiations.
Awaiting the Details
Because Mr. Leach is suing the university, Mr. Dean couldn’t give any more information to alumni about why Texas Tech fired the coach. Instead, he asked alumni to cool down and wait until more facts are known. He told them that pulling support from the alumni association doesn’t hurt those who fired Mr. Leach or the athletics department, but rather the students for whom the association raises scholarship money.
Mr. Dean, a Texas Tech graduate who has led the alumni group for 31 years, says he’s never seen an explosion of anger toward the university this potent.
“I think it’s going to hurt us in the short run,” he said. “My hope is in the long run, we’ll survive.”
The alumni association, which is independent from the university, raises more than $2-million each year for scholarships and faculty support, but none of that money goes toward athletics.
Among the university’s major donors, reaction has been more reserved, said Kelly Overley, vice chancellor for institutional advancement. Two big donors contacted her this week, and Ms. Overley said she asked Kent Hance, the university’s chancellor, to call them both personally to assuage their concerns.
Ms. Overley expects that alumni will understand the university’s position that there was cause for Mr. Leach’s dismissal, even if university administrators are not allowed to discuss the details. And major donors, who are deeply invested in the university, are less likely to act out of emotion and suddenly pull their financial support than someone who gives a small amount, she said. “I don’t think it’s going to hurt us that much, but maybe I’m naïve,” Ms. Overley said. “I think we have a good product out there. We’re not just a football coach.”
Even so, many fans would argue that Mr. Leach helped make the West Texas institution a national name. In his 10-year career at Texas Tech, he led the Red Raiders to 10 bowl appearances and won several national coaching awards. Last fall, Texas Monthly published a profile of Mr. Leach, calling him “one of the greatest offensive minds in the history of the game.”
Having a winning football team engendered great pride among alumni, Ms. Overley said, but Texas Tech’s fund raising didn’t depend on it. Texas Tech, which is competing to become the state’s next Tier 1 research university, has raised $500-million toward a $1-billion campaign not yet publicly announced. It was also able to raise $25-million in a few months to renovate the football stadium.
“If you’re a donor to athletics, you’re a donor to student-athletes,” Ms. Overley said, “not just one coach.”
Donald M. Fellows, chief executive of fund-raising consultants Marts & Lundy, predicted that Texas Tech will see a modest negative effect in annual giving, particularly to athletics, for the next two or three years. Mr. Leach’s firing won’t likely have a significant effect in the longer term, he said, as long as the university hires a coach who wins games and the university continues to show progress in all areas, including communicating clearly about the actions it is taking regarding the dismissal of the coach and selection of his replacement.
“There will still be people who are unhappy, but they’re more likely to get over it if there’s transparency,” he said.
Another University’s Recovery
The University of Cincinnati has survived a firestorm over the dismissal of a winning basketball coach and recovered much of its lost support. In 2005, then-president Nancy L. Zimpher fired Bob Huggins after many of his players failed to graduate and had problems with the law, and he was arrested on a charge of drunken driving. Alumni and fans were upset, and Ms. Zimpher received more than 700 e-mail messages about it, said Greg Hand, associate vice president for public relations. People did withhold donations, but fund raising at the university went back up, Mr. Hand said. In the 2005 fiscal year, when the scandal first started, the university raised $88.8-million. The next year, when Mr. Huggins was fired, Cincinnati’s donations dropped to $84-million, then $79-million in 2007. In 2008, they rose to $196-million.
Community support also dipped immediately after the firing—the university conducts a twice-yearly survey asking if people believe the university is worthy of their support and provides a good education—but rose again after a short while.
Soon after Mr. Huggins was fired, the university coordinated its communication efforts around a message: “We’re still competitive in all these other areas, and we’re moving forward,” Mr. Hand said.
He and his colleagues focused their messages on how the university was doing well in research and enrolling higher-quality students. The athletics department focused its message on how the university was moving into the Big East Conference.
The key to recovery, Mr. Hand said, was realizing that some people weren’t going to be won back. They were fans of one coach, not the institution. “Once you recognize that some number are unrecoverable, then you can move forward and work with the other groups.”
Four years later, basketball ticket sales remain down, but the university is working on building them back up.
“For a lot of people, athletics is really their emotional connection to the institution,” Mr. Hand said. “When they have an emotional reaction, they’re going to feel it for a long time.”