College tennis facing threats of cuts at same time many of its alums are starring in pro ranks
Wimbledon featured a record 26 current or former college players in men's singles and nine more in the women's draw. TCU's Jack Pinnington Jones and San Diego's Oliver Tarvet, who reached the second round, played for their college teams just this spring. Ben Shelton, a 2022 NCAA singles champion at Florida, reached the quarterfinals.
All of this is occurring as the threat of elimination faces numerous tennis programs.
According to the International Tennis Association, which governs college tennis, schools dropping tennis since 2024 includes Central Arkansas (women), Eastern Illinois (men and women), Lindenwood (men), Louisiana-Monroe (women), Radford (men and women), St. Francis College (men and women), San Francisco (men and women), Seattle (men) and UTEP (women).
Former San Francisco men's player Asaf Friedler noted the Dons hadn't even finished the 2024 season when the athletic director emailed about a meeting the following day, where they learned the program would be dropped in a matter of weeks.
Friedler remembers players crying at practice later that day. He said a recruit had committed to San Francisco just a couple of days before the announcement, a sign that even coaches were caught off guard.
'We were all like in shock,' Friedler said. 'We didn't know what to say. We looked at each other and we were very confused.'
On the line
During the pandemic, nearly two dozen men's or women's tennis programs were eliminated. But the latest cuts come as colleges across the country deal with the hard choices and financial realities of the $2.8 billion House settlement. Revenue sharing tends to favor football and basketball, and there are roster caps. The calculations are different for each school.
David Mullins, CEO of the ITA, says college tennis is a great pathway to the pros.
'Our position within the tennis industry has never been better,' Mullins said. 'But on the other side, we're dealing with all these things happening with the NCAA model. Probably the challenges that we're facing from the collegiate side domestically have never been greater.'
Louisiana-Monroe athletic director John Hartwell noted schools opting into the settlement must sponsor at least 16 sports. Louisiana-Monroe had 17 sports before eliminating women's tennis.
'Probably a factor for some folks is the squad size, that probably has something to do with it,' Hartwell said. 'Facilities are a challenge, too. I think those are probably key components. But I also think a lot of these schools that have more than required 16 sports are analyzing everything cost-wise.'
Cutting tennis saved Louisiana-Monroe about $250,000. Hartwell said the scholarship funds that went to tennis now will be directed toward the school's other women's teams.
Roster size also leaves tennis vulnerable. Dropping a different sport with more team members leaves more athletes disappointed.
'When you're cutting a sport, it's not a fun position to be in,' Central Arkansas athletic director Matt Whiting said. 'You have to factor in numbers in those situations. (Tennis) certainly has a smaller roster.'
Schools that eliminate tennis programs generally allow players to remain on scholarship throughout their time at the school. Many choose to transfer, searching for a new school while adjusting to a new country. Mullins estimates about 60% of the players on Division I teams generally come from outside the U.S.
Alex Aldaz, who is from Spain and played for Eastern Illinois this year, said his team got the news after the season already had ended and many of them were already back in their home countries.
'Their faces were like they didn't know how to react,' Aldaz said. 'They were lost... sad and angry.'
Aldaz is now at Mercer. Friedler, who is from Israel, played for Tulane this past season. Many of their former teammates at their original schools weren't as fortunate.
Searching for solutions
Many college tennis programs don't have facilities on campus, forcing them to rent local courts. Whiting said Central Arkansas had a facility on campus that required an estimated $1.5 million to $2 million in repairs. Hartwell said Louisiana-Monroe's tennis facility needed about $750,000 in improvements.
Mullins said the U.S. Tennis Association has offered grants to colleges opening full-service tennis centers to foster the sport's growth in their communities. Those schools then can make money by renting out their courts when their teams aren't using them.
South Carolina is the latest school to attempt this, hiring Dainyell Fox as the Carolina Tennis Center's operations manager within the past year. Fox has started organizing tennis lessons and classes while also exploring other potential revenue options.
'Our goal isn't going to necessarily put us completely in the black, but it reduces the financial footprint of men's and women's tennis,' South Carolina deputy athletic director Judy Van Horn said.
The list of former Gamecocks includes Francisco Cerundolo, who is in the top 25 of the ATP rankings. Just as a growing number of former major-conference players succeed on the pro circuit, the struggle to survive is real for plenty of smaller programs.
'Our position is strengthened with each passing Grand Slam,' Mullins said. 'But on the other side, we have all these challenges here domestically that we're not able to control.'
___
AP tennis: https://apnews.com/hub/tennis
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
a minute ago
- Forbes
NCAA Basketball Tournaments Will Remain At 68 Teams In 2026
After recently contemplating expanding the NCAA men's and women's basketball tournament fields starting in 2026, the events will continue to have 68 teams next year. However, Dave Gavitt, the NCAA's senior vice president of basketball, said in a statement on Monday that the organization's tournament committees will continue having conversations about increasing the events to 72 or 76 teams beginning in 2027. The men's tournament has had 68 teams since 2011 when the NCAA introduced the 'First Four' games where eight teams play each other on a Tuesday in March. The winners are slotted into the 64-team bracket, which begins two days later. The tournament previously had 65 teams since 2001. The women's tournament, meanwhile, had 64 teams from 1994 through 2021. It has featured 68 teams the past four seasons. Gavitt's announcement on Monday occurred less than a month after he said on July 10 that it was 'still viable' that the tournament could expand to 72 or 76 teams next year. He added at the time that the NCAA Division 1 men's basketball committee met that week in Savannah, Ga., while the women's basketball committee gathered in Philadelphia. While both groups discussed expansion, Gavitt said 'no decision or recommendation was made.' Charlie Baker, the NCAA's president and former Massachusetts governor, told reporters at a Big 12 Conference meeting in May that the NCAA was having 'good conversations' with CBS Sports and Turner Sports, which televise the men's tournament, and ESPN, which airs the women's tournament. Baker, though, said that there is 'a lot of logistical work' that goes into expanding the tournament. As it currently stands, the postseason champions of each of the 31 Division 1 men's and women's conferences earn a berth in the NCAA tournament, while the other 37 slots are chosen by a selection committee. Most of the at-large berths come from the so-called Power Four conferences of the Big 12, Big Ten Conference, Atlantic Coast Conference and Southeastern Conference, as well as the Big East Conference. For instance, only four men's teams (New Mexico, San Diego State, Utah State and Saint Mary's) and three women's teams (Richmond, Columbia and Princeton) outside of those five leagues received at-large berths in this year's tournament. None of those six teams made it past the second round. While the expansion could lead to more teams outside of the power conferences getting tournament bids, the committee could also continue to reward teams from the major leagues that finish in the middle or near the lower half of their conference standings. Those details will be ironed out over the coming months and years, but the fields will remain at 68 teams, at least for one more year. The 2026 NCAA men's tournament begins on March 17 and concludes with the national title game on April 6 in Indianapolis, while the women's tournament starts on March 18 and ends with the championship on April 5 in Phoenix. Florida is the reigning men's national champion, overcoming a 12-point second half deficit and defeating Houston, 65-63, in the national title game. The Gators return a few players, including forwards Alex Condon (10.6 points and 7.5 rebounds in 24.9 minutes per game last season) and Thomas Haugh (9.8 points and 6.1 rebounds in 24.4 minutes per game), and add several newcomers, including transfer guards Xaivian Lee (Princeton) and Boogie Fland (Arkansas). Lee averaged 16.9 points, 6.1 rebounds and 5.5 assists per game as a junior last season, while Fland averaged 13.5 points and 5.1 assists per game as a freshman last season even though he missed about two months after undergoing surgery on his right thumb. Meanwhile, the University of Connecticut won the women's national title in April, defeating South Carolina, 82-59, in the final. The Huskies return three starters in forward Sarah Strong (16.4 points and 8.9 rebounds per game last season), guard Azzi Fudd (13.6 points per game) and center Jana El Alfy (5.0 points and 5.1 rebounds per game). They also signed transfers Kayleigh Heckel, a guard who averaged 6.1 points per game as a USC freshman last season, and forward Serah Williams, an incoming senior who averaged 19.2 points and 9.8 rebounds per game last season at Wisconsin. Williams was a first team All-Big Ten selection the past two seasons.
Forbes
a minute ago
- Forbes
Reducing Merger Uncertainty Could Help The American Economy
The second Trump Administration is signaling a move away from the Biden policy of actively discouraging mergers. This change in direction could benefit the American economy. But some merger uncertainty remains, rooted in the new Administration's decision to retain 2023 Biden merger guidelines. Targeted revisions to those guidelines – or, at the very least, public pronouncements designed to clear up confusion about current antitrust assessment of proposed mergers – might prove helpful in spurring beneficial mergers that could strengthen the U.S. economy. Bipartisan Mergers and Acquisitions Guidelines A bipartisan consensus on federal antitrust review of mergers existed from the 1980s until the Biden Administration. Merger guidelines issued by the federal antitrust enforcers, the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, cemented this consensus. DOJ-FTC merger guidelines, first issued in 1982 and revised in 1984, 1992, 1997, and 2010 to reflect new economic learning, were key to this consensus approach. (DOJ guidelines issued in 1968 used a simplistic approach that was abandoned in later guidelines.) Guidelines issued by the Biden Administration in December 2023 significantly departed from that consensus. The pre-Biden guidelines, drawing on economic analysis applied by agency economists, provided key information for the private sector on how the DOJ and the FTC would assess potential mergers in applying Section 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act. Section 7 prohibits mergers whose effects 'may be substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly." The guidelines viewed this language as aimed at preventing transactions that would enhance market power. The 2010 guidelines echoed prior versions in stating that the DOJ and the FTC 'seek to identify and challenge competitively harmful mergers while avoiding unnecessary interference with mergers that are either competitively beneficial or neutral.' This statement reflected an understanding that M&A activity substantially benefits the economy, and should not be interfered with except in cases of likely competitive harm – a point underscored in enforcement agency speeches over the years. 2023 Merger Guidelines The Biden Administration rejected 4 decades of bipartisan understanding in adopting an inherently skeptical approach toward mergers. From the start, '[t]he Biden-era agencies . . . undertook long merger reviews, burdened merging parties with expensive yet questionable 'second requests' [for additional information on proposed mergers], and bragged about deal proposals that never left the boardroom'. Speeches by DOJ and FTC leaders embodied an anti-merger philosophy that 'created a chilling effect' for merger transactions. This merger skepticism permeates the 2023 merger guidelines, which mark a dramatic departure from the general approach of predecessor guidelines dating back to 1982. The new guidelines center describe 6 different theories of anticompetitive harm that could generate a merger challenge, unlike earlier guidelines, that provided a single integrated approach for analyzing mergers. University of Chicago Professor Dennis Carlton, one of the most distinguished antitrust economists, emphasized that the new guidelines reduce practical economic guidance for the private sector and appear to be hostile to mergers and efficiencies. Notably: In addition, the 2023 guidelines: The last point is particularly significant, as retired DOJ antitrust economist Alexander Raskovich points out: 'Perhaps the most substantial proposed expansion of flexibility in the 2023 Merger Guidelines is the shift in language from a likelihood of competitive harm standard in previous merger guidelines to a risk of illegality standard, with a focus on circumstances where mergers '[c]an [v]iolate the [l]aw,' but with little explication of how high a risk of illegality would trigger an agency challenge. Put succinctly, the standard has become 'could,' not 'would.'' Taken together, compared to the pre-Biden era, these changes ushered in a tougher approach to merger enforcement and an increase in business uncertainty about merger risks – factors that could have discouraged beneficial merger activity. Trump Administration and the 2023 Guidelines The Trump Administration states that it is dedicated to rejecting the Biden anti-merger perspective and providing more 'fairness and predictability' to merger review. Retention of the 2023 Guidelines in their entirety could complicate that task, however, due to the inherent risks they pose for business planners. Trump antitrust enforcers are resource-constrained and drafting new guidelines is a time-consuming task. Targeted tweaks to guidelines language, however, designed to reduce unwarranted business risk without making major substantive changes, might be feasible. Simple tweaks could, for example: If the FTC and the DOJ prefer not to make any guidelines revisions at this time, agency leaders could instead issue major speeches on how the guidelines will be applied. The speeches could underscore the Administration's desire to reduce business uncertainty, citing factors such as the 'tweaks' highlighted above (plus any other factors that could reduce business risk). The Administration may want to keep in mind that while merger guidelines are not legally binding, they may have a significant influence on boardroom decisions. Clarification of merger policy could provide major dividends for the American economy.
Bloomberg
a minute ago
- Bloomberg
India Slams Trump's Threat of Higher Tariffs Over Russian Oil
Good morning. Trump threatens even higher tariffs on India over Russian oil. Hong Kong's listing market is set to stay hot for longer. And American Eagle gains meme stock status with its biggest jump since 2000. Listen to the day's top stories. Donald Trump warned India that he would 'substantially' raise tariffs on the country due to its purchases of Russian oil, a move New Delhi slammed as 'unjustified and unreasonable' in an escalating fight between the two major economies. The president's warning comes ahead of an Aug. 8 deadline for Moscow to reach a truce with Kyiv, with the administration threatening so-called secondary sanctions on countries that purchase Russian energy.
