Today's random style thread: Athletic or athletics director?

Talking here in the office, and a couple of us grew up with "athletic director."

One of our best guys always writes "athletics director." And I'm seeing it that way more and more.

Any reason, or thoughts on either?

 

Been at four shops, and the style is split 50-50. I like "athletics," because the AD is the director of all athletics.

 

We had a debate about that and decided in a specific case to look up how the school listed it.

Director of athletics.

 

The actual title for many of these folks is "Director of Athletics," which probably explains the trend toward "athletics director."

 

Right, obviously, you wouldn't say 'director of athletic.'

But before the name, it reads a bit different.

One of those things we still worry about that maybe in 20 years, nobody will care about.

 

My rationale for "athletics director" is that it can't be misinterpreted for a physically fit director.

 

Isn't it always how the school itself lists it? Athletics director for the school I cover.

 

If you did that and you covered five schools, you might have to write a story that included an athletic director, an athletics director, a director of athletics, a director of sports and a sports director. Consistency is the key here.

 

Agreed. We don't uppercase any of them anyway, so it doesn't have to be the official title (vice president/athletics), just correct in terms of what the job is.

 

For my job it wouldn't happen, but I'd agree with your rationale in that case. I've always preferred athletics director for that reason. The guy in charge is in charge of all the athletics at the program, right?

 

Exactly.

 

I write athletic. People don't say athletics director. Do you say "the athletics department"? It's all preference, but I like athletic director.