IBJNews

NCAA grants more power to five biggest conferences

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The NCAA Board of Directors overwhelmingly approved a package of historic reforms Thursday that will give the nation's five biggest conferences, including the Big Ten, the ability to unilaterally change some of the basic rules governing college sports.

If the 16-2 decision stands, there will be striking differences between the 65 largest schools and the more than 280 others in Division I beginning as early as Oct. 1, though few expect change to come that quickly.

"I am immensely proud of the work done by the membership," NCAA President Mark Emmert said Thursday in Indianapolis. "The new governance model represents a compromise on all sides that will better serve our members and, most importantly, our student-athletes. These changes will help all our schools better support the young people who come to college to play sports while earning a degree."

Representatives from the five richest leagues — the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC — will hold nearly twice as much voting power (37.5 percent) as any other group on a newly created council, where most legislation will be approved or rejected. The five other Football Bowl Subdivision leagues would account for 18.5 percent while the second-tier Football Championship Subdivision and non-football playing schools would split up another 37.5 percent of the vote. Athletes and faculty will account for the rest.

Commissioners and school leaders from the power conferences have until Oct. 1 to create a wish list of issues they want to handle on their own.

Any items that make the wish list would have to be approved by at least three of the five power-conference reps and at least 12 of the 20 presidents or chancellors on an expanded board of directors. Then, one representative from each of the 65 schools in the power-five leagues and three student-athletes from each conference would vote on each item. Passage would require 60 percent of the 80 votes and a simple majority of support from schools in at least three of the five conferences or a simple majority of all votes (41) and a simple majority from schools in four of the five leagues.

Proponents believe all the checks and balances will work.

"It does provide degrees of autonomy for the five high-resource conferences," said Nathan Hatch, board chairman and Wake Forest president. "This is not complete autonomy, we're still part of Division I, but I think it allows us to provide more benefits to student-athletes."

The legislation still could be overridden in the next 60 days.

If 75 schools sign the override measure, the board must take a second look at the plan. If 125 schools join the movement, the changes would be suspended until the board schedules a vote to reconsider.

The No. 1 goal for the big conferences will be expanding scholarships to include more money toward the full cost-of-attendance -- funding that goes beyond tuition, room and board, books and fees. Legislation to give athletes an additional $2,000 to cover college expenses was approved by the board in October 2011 but was overridden two months later by the smaller schools, spurring the big leagues' vocal lobbying effort to be granted more autonomy.

What else could make the wish list? The big conferences also want to invest more in athlete health care and continuing education, and want to ensure athletes retain scholarships for four years.

Big 12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby recently complained that cheating pays in college sports. It is unlikely the board would allow the five biggest conferences to set their own policing parameters for rules violations.

Critics worry that the impact will create an even greater split between wealthy leagues and everyone else..

"I think it's going to be great for those five conferences and that's about it," said Gerald Gurney, president of The Drake Group, an NCAA watchdog. "I don't think it's going to be a good step for non-revenue sports or for Title IX. We are going to get into a new phase of competition, and there will be no holds barred."

Some leagues agree with the overall concept of the changes but have other concerns.

A group of compliance officers and faculty representatives wrote to board Chairman Nathan Hatch in hopes of getting greater representation in the decision-making process. Big East and Ivy League officials expressed concerns over giving the five non-power, FBS-playing leagues permanent seats on the board, meaning almost two-thirds of the schools that do not play in the FBS will only hold seven seats on the board.

Conference USA Commissioner Britton Banowsky also told the NCAA his league strongly opposed any changes in transfer rules that would permit athletes to transfer "from our institutions to high resource conference institutions without restrictions unless it is the result of shared governance discussions and provides for shared voting privileges for all Division I conferences/institutions."

Banowsky also chairs the NCAA's infractions committee. The board agreed and deemed transfer rule changes are off limits.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. It is nice and all that the developer grew up here and lives here, but do you think a company that builds and rehabs cottage-style homes has the chops to develop $150 Million of office, retail, and residential? I'm guessing they will quickly be over their skis and begging the city for even more help... This project should occur organically and be developed by those that can handle the size and scope of something like this as several other posters have mentioned.

  2. It amazes me how people with apparently zero knowledge of free markets or capitalism feel the need to read and post on a business journal website. Perhaps the Daily Worker would suit your interests better. It's definitely more sympathetic to your pro government theft views. It's too bad the Star is so awful as I'm sure you would find a much better home there.

  3. In other cities, expensive new construction projects are announced by real estate developers. In Carmel, they are announced by the local mayor. I am so, so glad I don't live in Carmel's taxbase--did you see that Carmel, a small Midwest suburb, has $500 million in debt?? That's unreal! The mayor thinks he's playing with Lego sets and Monopoly money here! Let these projects develop organically without government/taxpayer backing! Also, from a design standpoint, the whole town of Carmel looks comical. Grand, French-style buildings and promenades, sitting next to tire yards. Who do you guys think you are? Just my POV as a recent transplant to Indy.

  4. GeorgeP, you mention "necessities". Where in the announcement did it say anything about basic essentials like groceries? None of the plans and "vision" have basic essentials listed and nothing has been built. Traffic WILL be a nightmare. There is no east/west road capacity. GeorgeP, you also post on www.carmelchatter.com and your posts have repeatedly been proven wrong. You seem to have a fair amount of inside knowledge. Do you work on the third floor of Carmel City Hal?

  5. I don't know about the commuter buses...but it's a huge joke to see these IndyGo buses with just one or two passengers. Absolutely a disgusting waste of TAXPAYER money. Get some cojones and stop funding them. These (all of them) council members work for you. FIRE THEM!

ADVERTISEMENT