The URI Basketball Story
by Paul Giacobbe
An I-Team story last week about the compensation paid to URI basketball coach Jim Baron generated as many emails and phone calls as I’ve received in the recent past. Viewers who called and wrote complained that the story was somewhere between unfair and a “hatchet job.”
The story related details of the URI coach’s compensation package in the context of what state leaders tell us is a looming fiscal crisis requiring the layoff of a considerable number of state workers and a cut in services. The story noted that Baron’s compensation package is in excess of $600,000 and raised the question of whether a Division I basketball program was a luxury in difficult fiscal times. The URI athletic director was given the opportunity to respond to that issue, and his remarks were included in the I-Team story.
Viewers who complained, and who universally identified themselves as URI basketball fans, students, alumni or employees, unanimously agreed that the program is worth the money, for a variety of reasons I’ll list later, and that the story was biased, and failed to accurately or completely explain the relationship between the university’s funding and the taxpayer’s pocket.
NBC10 pays me to be the “Viewers’ Voice,” and this posting will give voice to the complaints and opinions of those who called and wrote. But I don’t, for the most part, agree with them. It seems clear that college sports fans in general, and perhaps URI fans in particular, are rabidly dedicated and single minded in matters involving their teams. They fail to realize, I suspect, that most people (taxpayers) are more concerned about their daily struggles than they are about the sports teams at URI, PC, Brown or Bryant.
While some viewers said the details of Baron’s salary are “common knowledge,” I follow the news pretty closely and while I knew he made a lot of money I didn’t know, for example, that he gets 20 percent of the gate on all home games and all of the net proceeds from one away game. I thought it was interesting that in the past six years URI has funded $100,000 in travel for him to make recruiting trips to places like Paris, Germany, Latvia and Belgrade; that he gets bonuses for good team performance, a $5000 car allowance and an alumni financed $7000 a year membership at Quidnesset Country Club.
Although I believe the story fairly raised a legitimate issue, and provided information for viewers, those who wrote didn’t agree. This is a pretty complete summary, by category, of their issues with the I-Team story:
The story and the promos for the story, inaccurately said Baron has a losing URI and lifetime record. I-Team reporter Jim Taricani said that the URI website with Baron’s history (http://gorhody.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/baron_jim00.html) lists the coach’s record at 293 wins and 297 losses lifetime, and his URI coaching record at 87 wins and 95 losses through the 2006-2007 season, and that was the source for the material used in the report. According to viewers, if 2007-2008 games are included, Baron has a record both at URI and lifetime over the .500 mark. Those viewers who objected have a valid argument: The story should have attributed the figures used in the report to the URI website, or made clear that this season’s games were not included.
The I-Team story was a product of the station’s relationship with Providence College and an attempt to discredit this year’s URI successes. Brett, who identified himself as a URI student, wrote: “It is a shame that you are trying to ruin it for (URI) because your Friars are having a sub-par season.”
Assistant News Director Chris Lanni says “WJAR has forged relationships with hundreds of local organizations including PC and URI.” He says the I-Team and the sports department are separate entities and that the sports department was unaware of the URI story and played no role in its conception or development.
The story failed to adequately disclose that taxpayers pay only a portion (about 18%) of the URI budget. The story didn’t make completely clear how much of the compensation and perks came directly from taxpayers. Reporter Taricani responds that all of Baron’s base salary of $286,000 comes from tax dollars, and that his take from gate receipts, in effect, takes money away from the University.
Bruce from Warwick, a 1978 URI grad says the story failed to mention that money from the basketball program supports other non-revenue sports, but that doesn’t seem to be true. URI Director of Athletics Thorr Bjorn, quoted in the I-Team story, says that the program doesn’t support itself, “but it certainly generates external revenue and it certainly generates positive exposure.”
The story failed to also explore the taxpayer funding of renovations to the Dunkin’ Donuts Center which, viewers said, principally benefited Providence College, a private school.
Lanni says that after reviewing the viewer complaints he thinks they may have a point, and the news department will look into funding for the Dunkin’ Donuts center and its use by PC and the Providence Bruins. But, he says, that’s a different issue than Baron’s compensation and the costs of a Division I basketball program.
Anyone who works for government – even if only a portion of their pay comes from taxpayers – is subject to scrutiny, and that’s especially true when they’re the highest paid state employee. There were flaws in the story, but it raised an important question, whether that small (but vocal) portion of taxpayers who are URI fans agree or not: When funds are so scarce that workers are being laid off, and state services cut, can a government afford the luxury of a Division I sports program?
NBC10 provides the space for this blog, but the opinions here are mine alone—Paul Giacobbe
