College athletics finally raised the green curtain of Oz this past weekend after the university presidents of Power 5 football-driven conferences passed legislation that will benefit their interests while creating the illusion of giving student athletes a place at the grown ups’ table.
The rich and powerful agreed on a package of autonomous legislation at the annual NCAA Convention in suburban Washington, D.C. that was highlighted by a full cost of attendance measure that will supplement student-athletes’ scholarships.
Other approved measures establish a concussion safety protocol and a discretionary student-athlete assistance fund, allow for student-athletes to borrow against potential future earnings to purchase loss-of-value insurance, and prevent schools from removing scholarships based on athletic performance.
Federally determined stipends — estimated to be between $2,000 and $4,000 annually– will cover transportation and miscellaneous expenses in addition to tuition, room, board and books. The legislation passed by a 79-1 vote from a panel comprised of 15 student-athletes and representatives from the 65 schools from the ACC, Big 10, Big 12, SEC and Pac-12 and Notre Dame. Boston College cast the lone dissenting vote, according to NCAA tabulations.
“It’s one afternoon, but it’s really been the last two years that a lot of this has been vetted and discussed,” ACC commissioner John Swofford said. “Full cost of attendance was critical. It had to pass. It was a part of modernizing the collegiate model.”
Most Power 5 administrators promoted this as a big day for student -athletes. The benefits seem to be financially significant but the money student athletes will receive is still table scraps when compared to the millions bigger universities pour into contracts for high-priced football and basketball coaches and luxury sports palaces they build.
There is a undercurrent among smaller conferences that this is the first step toward creating a line of demarcation between the Power 5 and the rest of the 350 schools in Division I. In the big picture, higher education in America has become a business competition and cost of attendance is another way for Power 5 schools to keep the masses away from a huge revenue stream from new cable TV deals that include a multi-billion dollar package for the new college football playoff. Eventually, in a worse case scenario, it could even lead to four 16 team conferences that will only play each other and eliminate the competition all together.
The NCAA is a fractured events management organization that has taken its share of PR hits over Penn State and its subsequent restoration of Joe Paterno’s 111 forfeited wins and fought its share of lawsuits during a turbulent year. Its power has been challenged by a move by Northwestern football players to unionize and a loss in U.S. District Court over the ability of student-athletes to earn money for use of their names, images and likenesses.
The initial response by the NCAA to these suits, other than fighting them in court, has been to loosen some of its restrictions. In addition to cost of attendance, the Power 5 voted to allow colleges to provide four years scholarships and prevent schools from removing scholarships based on athletic performance. It voted in a discretionary student-athlete assistance fund, allow for student-athletes to borrow against potential future earnings to purchase loss-of-value insurance and has implemented concussion protocol. These higher costs will affect not only the 85 male athletes on football scholarships and the 13 on basketball scholarships, but, because of Title IX, will likely mean that 98 female athletes will also receive these richer scholarships.
The Group of Five– the American, Conference USA, the MAC, the Sun Belt and the Mountain West– and other non-football playing Division I conferences can opt to enact the proposals that were passed as early as next fall. However, with only a handful of college earning a surplus, these addition costs will make it more difficult for the vast majority of colleges — who can’t afford the financial burden– to compete effectively on the playing field. That will likely create an even larger competitive imbalance between schools in the power conferences and those in second tier leagues. In a way it is the Power 5 telling smaller schools, “You can beat us, but you can’t join us because the game is no longer decided on the playing field.”
The NCAA used to pass legislation through a vote of all its member schools. It, for example, put a ceiling on the value of athletic scholarships in 1975 as a cost cutting measure. for athletic budgets that were swimming in red ink. In recent years there has been growing sentiment to bring the stipend back to the table.
In 2011, the Division I board quickly passed a rule giving schools flexibility to provide up to $2,000 in additional scholarship money, but enough members opposed the option to kill the rule. Opponents claimed the allowance would widen the gap between the haves and have-nots and possibly violate Title IX laws.
It’s easy to see who is in control now.
The NCAA had no choice but to concede power to the wealthiest conferences in a last ditch attempt to secure the longevity of an industry that has evolved over the past 100 years or risk the threat of the Power 5 seceding from the organization. Smaller schools voted for the move because they were scared of losing their Division I status.
The Power 5 now has the ability to make its own rules and no longer needs the support of schools in the other 27 Division I conferences to pass legislation.
“That sort of equity is largely a mirage,” Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby said in a two-hour discussion in New York City, sponsored by the conference, on the state of intercollegiate athletics. “There’s always been some separation. This may contribute to some additional separation, although the rules and any changes that might be made are intended to be permissive. But they’re also intended to take into account that those 65 schools are largely the face of what most people know as college athletics.”
While the Power 5 conferences, which just received $50 million apiece from the first ever College Football playoff, can afford to cover the full cost of attendance in all sports, smaller conferences will have to decide which sports they can afford to fully support in this manner.
Boston College AD Bill Bates has been very vocal about his feelings that a $250,000 education at a quality school is enough compensate for scholarship athletes.
“Boston College is concerned with continuing to pass legislation to increase expenses when the vast majority of schools are already institutionally subsidized,” the Jesuit university said in a release. “The consequences’s could ultimately hurt student-athletes if and when programs are cut.
“The legislation also further segregates the student-athlete from the general student population by increasing aid without need-ased consideration. Legislation already exists for student-athletes in need through Pell grants and student assistance fund.
”We have concerns that the federal financial aid formula is sufficiently ambiguous that adjustments for recruiting advantage will take place.”
BC’s idealistic stand could hurt the Eagles down the line in recruiting. Let’s hope this was not just a business decision and there is still some moral fiber left among the school’s Board of Trustees.
Since there is no hard cap on cost of attendance and it will vary from school to school within a conference, it could create a recruiting advantage for some programs as perspective student-athletes in revenue sports look to see where they can get the best deal.
“There is a risk the gap will grow; I think we ought to be candid about that,” Rice president David W. Leebron said.
“We’re in a world of radically different resources.”
