The purpose of this paper was to gather information from college athletic directors from Division I-A and Division III institutions concerning the factors that they deem the most and least important in evaluating their institution's head football coach for job retention. The study identified 10 factors that are instrumental in evaluating head football coaches. Athletic directors prioritized these 10 factors in order of importance when evaluating their head football coach.Surveys were sent to 106 Division I-A athletic directors and 106 Division III athletic directors. Of the 151 surveys returned, 47 from Division I-A athletic directors and 67 from Division III athletic directors were deemed usable.The surveys revealed that Division I-A athletic directors primarily evaluate their head football coaches by win/loss percentage and compliance with NCAA rules. Of the ten factors selected for this study, public relations and organizational skills were considered the least important factors in their evaluation process. For Division III athletic directors, the primary factors of evaluation for their head football coaches were knowledge of the sport, loyalty to the institution, and serving as a role model for student-athletes. The least important factors were win/loss percentage and public relations.These findings suggest that the philosophy of athletics for each of these two levels is quite different. Head football coaches at the Division I-A level are expected to win games to maintain their jobs while Division III coaches do not experience the same pressure to win. Differences in the evaluation factors are illustrated for each level of collegiate athletics and understanding these differences may better guide aspiring young coaches who are pursuing a career in college football coaching. / School of Physical Education

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Indianapolis created a whole new city identity using sports development and sports tourism as the primary drivers of change in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Since then, other cities have adopted the philosophy of using sport as a catalyst to improve the economic conditions of the city. This same philosophy has seemingly trickled down to small cities across the United States in the form of youth travel sport complex development. The size of the youth travel sport segment has reportedly reached $7 billion by the National Association of Sports Commissions, resulting in the rapid development of youth sports complexes in small cities and towns. The size and scope of these facilities entering the segment range from 50 acres to as many as 400 contiguous acres costing millions of dollars. Additionally, the perceived economic impact accompanying the development of such facilities are often overinflated due to the diversity of methods used in market analyses, feasibility studies, economic impact analyses, cost-benefit analyses, and Turco’s triple-bottom-line analysis. A more systematic process is needed to assign key performance indicators and identify the critical components that will assist in the decision to enter the segment and at what capacity. This study is designed to identify the necessary critical components to reach the desired economic impacts associated with youth sport complex development. Qualitative constant comparative method of data analysis was utilized in identifying commonly identified critical components (CICC) believed to contribute to the success and sustainability of a youth sports complex.