Commission grapples with high cost of college athletics
By Roy Ockert Jr.
Sept. 16, 2014
Even the reform-minded Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics doesn’t seem to know what to do about the march toward professionalism in major college sports programs. The commission met last week and, according to a commission news release, vowed to “intensify its efforts to promote changes that better align athletic programs with institutions’ educational missions.”
But no consensus or recommendations came out of the meeting, except a renewed assertion urging colleges and universities to protect the health and safety of their student athletes.
“We’re in a period of great instability in intercollegiate athletics,” said commission co-chairman William E. Kirwan, chancellor of the University of Maryland System. “There are just lots of forces pulling the NCAA and intercollegiate athletics in different directions, and a moment of instability can lead to either very positive change or to taking intercollegiate athletics off the cliff. …”
Among those forces are these recent developments:
• Last spring the National Labor Relations Board gave clearance to Northwestern University football players to unionize as they seek more benefits for student athletes.
• In July Big 12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby charged that the enforcement wing of the NCAA is broken and that “cheating pays.” Two days later the head of the association’s enforcement division offered a tepid defense while acknowledging the impossible mission of policing more than 1,200 schools.
• In August a federal judge ruled that some National Collegiate Athletic Association rules violate federal antitrust laws by prohibiting athletes from being paid. She issued an injunction against the NCAA, clearing the way for college football and basketball players to sell the rights to their names and likenesses.
• Also in August the NCAA Board of Directors voted to grant the five richest football conferences increased autonomy, clearing the way for them to make changes such as adding money to athletic scholarships, further widening the gap between their member institutions and all others.
Any one of those developments could cause a major change in intercollegiate athletics. The NCAA is appealing the Northwestern and antitrust cases, and the NCAA membership could override its board’s decision in the “Power 5” case. However, the latter might result in the Power 5 conference members breaking away from the NCAA.
All this is playing out at a time when the great majority of colleges and universities are struggling to make revenue ends meet in their athletic programs. The NCAA reported in August that 2013 expenses exceeded revenue at all but 20 schools in Division I, down by three schools from the previous year. Even that’s a little misleading because most of those schools provide some sort of subsidy, such as student fees, to athletics.
The average loss among the highest-resource conferences in the Football Bowl Subdivision, including those that want more autonomy, was $2.3 million, but it was much higher ($17.6 million) for other conferences in the FBS.
By the way, all the information in the NCAA report comes from the member institutions.
The NCAA reported that since 2004 median generated revenues have increased at all FBS schools by 83.2 percent and at Football Championship Subdivision schools by 82.5 percent. However, over the same period expenses at FBS schools have climbed by 114.6 percent and by 88.4 percent at FCS schools. Those without football also have a growing deficit.
That means 208 institutions are showing red, and even some of the other 20 are barely staying in the black.
The Knight Commission reported in March that from 2005-12 for all of Division I athletic spending grew at a faster rate than academic spending on a per capita basis. One of the reasons was the growth of coaches’ salaries, with the top five conferences registering a 70 percent increase in median salaries.
What can be done to avert an economic disaster? Neither the NCAA nor the Knight Commission has found an answer.
But Dan Beebe, a former Big 12 commissioner, offered one idea last week, saying it was something he proposed in the late 1990s but was ignored.
Under Beebe’s plan, as described in a Chronicle of Higher Education story, athletes in non-revenue sports would no longer receive scholarships but could sign endorsement deals. Teams in those sports would play region-based schedules and in some cases would not have to hire full-time sports. Recruiting would be limited, and financial aid would be need-based.
That’s basically the Ivy League model for what Beebe called “participatory sports.” These would be more like club sports, Beebe argued, and by saving money schools might even be able to sponsor more sports.
Each school would then have 100 or so scholarships to offer men and women who compete in what Beebe called the “spectator sports — i.e., football and basketball, which generally bring in the most revenue.
One athletic director said in an interview that he could support Beebe’s idea, saying he favored a “pro model.” Lawrence R. Cunningham, athletic director of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said more and more university athletics officials think the institutions should provide “elite athletes with the option of taking cash for their services or using the money toward education.”
Such a model isn’t going to fly with the schools at the top and really wouldn’t alter the trend toward professionalism of college athletics. In fact, considering the issues involving unions, autonomy and antitrust rules, that process could speed up.
Roy Ockert is editor emeritus of The Jonesboro Sun. He may be reached by e-mail at royo@suddenlink.net.