NCAA, schools need more financial transparency, bill says

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Athletic departments, conferences and the governing body of college sports should be more transparent financially, according to a bill co-sponsored by a pair of U.S. congressmen.

The Standardization of Collegiate Oversight of Revenues and Expenditures Act, or SCORE, was introduced Monday by representatives David Price, a North Carolina Democrat, and Republican Tom Petri of Wisconsin. The bill proposes an overhaul of financial reporting for the National Collegiate Athletic Association and its members in an effort to create more public understanding of the money behind college athletics.

“College sports are one of America’s proudest traditions, but the current system isn’t working equally well for all participants,” Price said in a release on his website. “Constructive, realistic reforms depend on a clear understanding of the financial pressures and benefits of intercollegiate athletics.”

The bipartisan bill comes at a time of unprecedented scrutiny for the Indianapolis-based NCAA and its member institutions, including a handful of lawsuits and an effort by Northwestern University football players to form the first players’ union in college sports.

In broadcast contracts, the NCAA and the five power conferences are guaranteed more than $31 billion. That doesn’t include sources of revenue such as sponsorship, merchandise sales, ticket sales and booster donations.

Public accountability

The bill mentions the NCAA, its member institutions, conferences and any entity that hosts a postseason tournament, such as the College Football Playoff, which debuts next season.

“At a time when outstanding student loan debt is over $1 trillion, it makes sense for the public to have an idea about how colleges and universities account for and use revenue from ticket sales, advertising and contracts,” Petri, a member of the House Education and the Workforce Committee, said in the release.

Last week, the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation held a hearing to evaluate the state of college athletics. NCAA President Mark Emmert said in his testimony that the differences in reporting obligations between public and private institutions were a principal roadblock to greater transparency.

“Accordingly, no consensus has been reached to provide financial data other than in aggregated formats,” Emmert said. “It’s difficult to envision an immediate resolution.”

Public data

All the data requested of individual schools is already collected annually by the NCAA, according to the release. Itemized sport-by-sport reports from public universities are available through Freedom of Information Act requests, as are coaches’ contracts and media deals. Such data from private institutions are not covered by FOIA laws.

The NCAA, a not-for-profit institution, currently publishes financial information on its website, including annual financial statements and revenue distribution plans.

The U.S. Department of Education each year publishes online a small amount of athletic financial data from both public and private institutions. The disclosures lack the detail the bill wants.

This is the third time in less than a year that a bill related to college athletics has been introduced in Congress, according to USA Today.

In August, a bipartisan bill proposed increased due process for NCAA programs accused of misconduct and making four-year scholarships mandatory in contact sports, the paper said. A November bill would have required colleges to provide athletes with benefits when a scholarship is lifted for reasons other than misconduct or academic failure.


Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. In reality, Lilly is maintaining profit by cutting costs such as Indiana/US citizen IT workers by a significant amount with their Tata Indian consulting connection, increasing Indian H1B's at Lillys Indiana locations significantly and offshoring to India high paying Indiana jobs to cut costs and increase profit at the expense of U.S. workers.

  2. I think perhaps there is legal precedence here in that the laws were intended for family farms, not pig processing plants on a huge scale. There has to be a way to squash this judges judgment and overrule her dumb judgement. Perhaps she should be required to live in one of those neighbors houses for a month next to the farm to see how she likes it. She is there to protect the people, not the corporations.

  3. http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/engineer/facts/03-111.htm Corporate farms are not farms, they are indeed factories on a huge scale. The amount of waste and unhealthy smells are environmentally unsafe. If they want to do this, they should be forced to buy a boundary around their farm at a premium price to the homeowners and landowners that have to eat, sleep, and live in a cesspool of pig smells. Imagine living in a house that smells like a restroom all the time. Does the state really believe they should take the side of these corporate farms and not protect Indiana citizens. Perhaps justifiable they should force all the management of the farms to live on the farm itself and not live probably far away from there. Would be interesting to investigate the housing locations of those working at and managing the corporate farms.

  4. downtown in the same area as O'malia's. 350 E New York. Not sure that another one could survive. I agree a Target is needed d'town. Downtown Philly even had a 3 story Kmart for its downtown residents.

  5. Indy-area residents... most of you have no idea how AMAZING Aurelio's is. South of Chicago was a cool pizza place... but it pales in comparison to the heavenly thin crust Aurelio's pizza. Their deep dish is pretty good too. My waistline is expanding just thinking about this!