"“If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.” ...

SM500 Weekly Submission Example:

Article on Leagues/Governing Bodies Link: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/24551634/new-ncaa-governance- would-include-celebratory-kickoff-event Title: New NCAA governance would include ‘celebratory kick off event’

Summary: Over the past few months, the NCAA and its member conferences have had frequent conversations about restructuring, redesigning and reshaping the NCAA’s governance structure. In late April 2014, NCAA member schools were presented with a proposal that provided a draft outline of what that new structure may look like. According to the proposal, the NCAA would like to “move toward competency-based representation on NCAA governing bodies,” which would essentially lead to the institution of quotas; therefore, if approved by the membership, there would be minimum numerical requirements for governing body members, and these requirements would be based on certain criteria including ethnicity and gender, among other things. Additionally, the proposal also suggests that while there will continue to be a twenty-seven (27) total conferences, the “Big Five” conferences will essentially have their own set of rules and regulations. As proposed, these five (5) conferences, the Big 12, Big Ten, SEC, ACC, and Pac-12 will have greater levels of autonomy and authority to govern their athletic programs. For example, these conferences may be able to provide student-athletes with greater financial assistance, by providing full-ride scholarships as well as additional sums of money for students; these extra sums would range between $1,000 and $6,000 per student-athlete. While the above-mentioned recommendations seem to be relatively straight-forward, there are other matters that need to be more fully developed before implementation can occur. For example, there is some question as to how the Board of Directors should be comprised. At present, the Board has twenty-two (22) members, with ten (10) positions currently held by 10 CEOs representing the FBS conferences. If those ten (10) current positions remain, member schools are curious about how the other twelve (12) Board of Directors members will be selected if there is a move to the Big Five model. Additionally, some of the proposed conferences that would come together to form the “Big Five” are concerned that they will not have full autonomy. Further, some conferences excluded from the “Big Five” designation have questions about whether they will be able to avail themselves of the rules established for the “Big Five”. While it is clear that many questions still remain, it is highly likely that the NCAA will see great legislative reform and that a “celebratory kickoff event” during the 2015 NCAA Convention may be the beginning of a new governance era for the NCAA. Ethical Dilemma: The NCAA’s proposal for reforming its governance structure raises a number of ethical dilemmas. For starters, the idea of separating out the “Big Five” conferences and allowing them to operate autonomously seems unfair to the other conferences that don’t have as much talent and as much money as the schools in the “Big Five”. This means that players in other conferences will still be living below the poverty line, will still be struggling to pay their bills and will have very little spending money since full scholarships do not provide student-athletes with supplemental funds; further, a large number of student-athletes will continue to be disadvantaged because they were not recruited by a school in one of the “Big Five” conferences, which means they will likely be unable to receive the

additional $1,000 to $6,000. Additionally, with the institution of quotas, the most qualified people may not serve on NCAA governing bodies. While it is great to increase diversity, quotas can sometimes backfire because the most qualified individuals are prevented from getting an opportunity to participate. Finally, an ethical dilemma will certainly present itself if the conferences excluded from the “Big Five” designation are prevented from abiding by the same rules instituted specifically for the “Big Five” conferences. In the event the other conferences are prohibited from instituting these rules, it will be clear that the NCAA considers them to be lesser conferences and since the NCAA is supposed to treat and govern all colleges and universities equally, this type of favoritism and discrimination would raise great issues. Stakeholders: The stakeholders in this matter are all of the colleges and universities that comprise the NCAA membership, all student-athletes, NCAA employees, NCAA Board of Directors members, all athletic department personnel at the colleges and universities, high school athletes seeking to play collegiate sports, and student-athletes who will be enrolled in a college or university when the new governance structure is implemented.

Thoughts on Solution/Conclusion: While I believe that the NCAA governance structure is extremely flawed and needs a complete overhaul, I do not believe that creating a new category solely containing the “Big Five” conferences is a good idea. If the NCAA is truly about amateurism and protecting the student-athlete, it should make legislative changes that provide greater benefits to the individuals instead of the schools and conferences. However, under this proposed model, it seems rather obvious that these changes are designed to protect the cash flow of the conferences and its members as well as the NCAA. Further, this proposed governance restructuring is sure to negatively impact athletic programs at smaller Division I schools and HBCUs because they just don’t have the money to compete; more specifically, these schools will likely lose very talented players because they cannot pay the students the additional $1,000-$6,000 dollars that other schools can. Overall, I don’t believe this is the best solution for changing a very large problem that has arisen due to the commercialization of collegiate athletics.