Over 50 university presidents have met behind closed doors in Indianapolis under NCAA auspices to deal with intercollegiate athletic (ICA) issues, without press, athletic directors, coaches, or others present. That is good. Indeed, I proposed something very similar in my 2004 book Going Broke By Degree. Some presidents of athletic powerhouses were there (e.g., Penn State and Ohio State), as well as some from less potent athletic powers (e.g., University of California at Riverside).
Reading the press reports, there was some good news and some bad news. The good news is that the university presidents are getting angry and determined to change things with respect to academic standards. I found particularly encouraging the idea floated by NCAA president Mark Emmert (former head of the University of Washington) of banning teams with low-performing academic performance from participating in such lucrative events as March Madness in basketball. The getting rid of penny-ante rules and the strengthening uniformity of enforcement (with very high penalties) is a good idea.
I have long marveled at how the NCAA rigorously enforces payment limits of any kind to athletes, while coaches get multimillion dollar salaries. Matt Denhart and I once argued that for a few very talented athletes, the financial exploitation is quite severe. Arguments can be made to pay athletes salaries. Of course, the presidents are against that, but at least they propose allowing an athlete to receive the full cost of college, via expanding scholarship aid.
But to the bad news—and it is very bad. There seems to have been no major effort made (or at least announced) to reduce the accelerating costs of ICA, costs rising fast at even Division II and III schools. Wannabe athletic powers like my school (Ohio University) lose millions—with honest accounting, tens of millions—annually on ICA, imposing a pretty significant financial burden on schools (the costs subsidies sometimes exceed $1,000 per student annually). I suspect few presidents of these schools were present. The athletic-powerhouse presidents at the meeting do not face those economic pressures so much, I suspect, so they were apparently less vigorous in pursuing financial reform.
There are all sorts of reforms with both positive academic and financial implications, such as dramatically reducing team sizes (e.g., from 85 to 60 in football), season length, practice time, maximum travel distances for most games, red-shirting, and freshman participation. Put athletic departments under general university administration, not in separate empires of their own. Put limits on coaches’ pay and the number of assistants, weight trainers, PR specialists, etc. Outlaw athletes-only dorms and eating facilities in order to integrate athletes more into the campus. Don’t let athletes sleep in motels the night before home games. Make athletes more like students and less like privileged jocks. Require capital costs of athletics to be considered as part of expenditures (somehow, the NCAA thinks stadiums are given to universities by God). Reconfigure the formula for TV revenues so the financial incentives for winning are reduced. Require athletics to pay overhead fees (a “tax” if you will) to university administrations for the costs associated with overseeing programs, covering capital costs, etc. Require full public disclosure of every dime spent on ICA, broadly defined. The list goes on and on.
As a couple of former Big Ten presidents have told me privately, this is not going to happen. University presidents don’t want huge fights with their alumni and associated Bubba fellow travelers, with trustees, legislators, governors, and above all, with coaches and athletic directors. They want change, but peaceful change. As one former president said, real, meaningful, meaty reform will only come when public indignation over ICA reaches such a point that it is politically popular to crack down. In short, a mega-scandal of herculean proportions.
Nonetheless, this may turn out to be a step–a baby step to be sure—toward rationalizing a growing academic and financial scandal.
