THE COLLEGES / STEVE ELLING : CSUN Football Team Faces Squeeze Play but May Not Be Sacrificed

When Cal State Northridge first opened its doors in 1958, students held an election to select school colors and an athletic nickname.

Wise guys served up hundreds of sarcastic nominations that ranged from obscure to absurd. Printable nominees included Aeolians, Minotaurs, Sundogs, Hustlers, Phaetons, Chmultapultapecs, Outcasts and Desert Rats.

Hustlers. Outcasts. Hmm.

Certain color schemes were just as unpalatable. Try flame and emerald, yellow and lavender, pink and black or plaid and white.

Students, in a rare moment of conservative enlightenment, chose Matadors, with red and white as primary colors.

All these years later, another eyebrow-raising combination is worth a gander. How about the Sacrificial Lambs, with colors of black and blue?

With the athletic department on the budgetary ropes because of projected cuts, the Division I-AA football team has been mentioned as the first program on the chopping block.

With 70 players and the biggest budget in the department, deep-sixing football likely would provide the quickest fix.

Not so fast, bean counters.

Though school officials aren’t exactly receptive to the idea, maybe the Matadors can survive as the Door Mats. Say, for the sake of discussion, that football could become self-sufficient.

The team could cover its expenses by playing a college high roller or two, perhaps even turning a small profit while grabbing some headlines. The notion is relatively simple: Sign up to play fully funded Division I teams on the road for lucrative fees, which would help keep Northridge’s struggling program afloat.

For players, the benefits of playing established teams are roughly two-fold. First, the payouts keep them in chin straps and ankle tape. Second, it generates publicity, though not always for the right reasons.

The downside, of course, is obvious. Funny thing is, players don’t think the idea necessarily qualifies them as cannon fodder.

“The bigger they are, the better,” said tight end Travis Hall, a junior. “I’m all for it.

“Play your best against the best. There’s notoriety, you get to play in great facilities with big crowds.

“I think it’s a nice thing. You feel respected.”

That particular feeling would be a welcome change. The Northridge student body last week voted down an election referendum that would have generated $2.25 million annually for athletics. Matador athletes, particularly football players, interpreted the tally as a vote of no-confidence.

Heavy budget problems loom, which could result in the elimination of football, which annually costs $450,000, coaching salaries included.

The question for Northridge administrators, with respect to the Payday Plan, is whether the end justifies the means.

Then again, maybe it isn’t such a problem. Nobody wants to be viewed as a punching bag. Payday means Mayday.

“It’s not an option,” said Bob Hiegert, the Northridge athletic director.

Hiegert would prefer a more “equitable balance” in scheduling. This season, Northridge was beaten in road games by Boise State and Southwest Texas State, both fully funded I-AA teams. Northridge, a cost-containment program with 17 scholarships, received $30,000 for each game and was more than competitive in each.

“We’re not going to fund any program with big paydays,” Hiegert said.

Pay for play is hardly a new proposition in the NCAA, particularly for teams that don’t draw well or command much attention from television. For instance, Pacific was buried this month at Nebraska, 70-21.

According to a published report, the Tigers earned $400,000 for the game and will make a return trip to Lincoln in 1995. Pacific, in turn, this season guaranteed $22,500 to UC Davis, a Division II team.

Closer to home, Long Beach State and Cal State Fullerton, which ultimately pulled the plug on their Division I football teams, tried a similar tack.

“It didn’t work for them, and we don’t even have the same level of funding they had,” Hiegert said.

Actually, it worked for Northridge--in a manner of speaking--last year.

Northridge was the body double for Fullerton last fall. After Fullerton axed its program after the ’92 season, Northridge filled in for the Titans at San Diego State and Nevada Las Vegas.

To the surprise of many, Northridge recorded one of the biggest victories in school history by defeating UNLV, 24-18. Against San Diego State, the Matadors twice held first-half leads before losing their quarterback and the game, 34-17.

That was a huge upset and a moral victory, which wouldn’t have happened without playing larger opponents. Combined earnings for playing the two middle-of-the-road Division I teams was $95,000, Hiegert said.

Extrapolate the dollar figures over a handful of similar opponents, toss in a high-profile school to sweeten the pot, and the team might be within reach of bottom-line solvency.

Huge foe, huge fee.

Fee, fie, foe, fumble, say Northridge administrators. Sure, the bigger the giant, the bigger the payday.

But even if the worst-case budgetary scenario comes to pass and the program is facing elimination, administrators believe the trade-offs aren’t worth it.

“I don’t think it’s ethically a good idea to sacrifice players for money,” said Ron Kopita, Northridge’s dean of students. “I think I’d have a hard time accepting that.”

Hard times equal status quo for the football team. The election defeat came during homecoming week. Somehow, those halftime fireworks didn’t mean much to the players, who before the game peeled the Matador logos from their helmets.

Players said it was a way of turning their backs on voters they felt did likewise to them.

Maybe they need a new logo. How about a knapsack on a stick?