Echoing a familiar message, the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics recently called on NCAA institutions to "restore balance" between academic and athletics spending. The watchdog panel's report, which was released on Thursday, outlines recommendations it hopes will lead to more fiscal responsibility, including basing an athletic program's championship eligibility on graduation rates and creating a fund that would distribute NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament and BCS Bowl dollars based on how well universities balance academics with athletics.
•••
Made up of members of academic, athletic, and journalism communities, the 22-member Commission recently undertook an 18-month study that surveyed 97 Football Bowl Subdivision schools and their 11 conferences. It found that athletics spending between 2005 and 2008 increased at a rate that's an average of four to 11 times greater than their spending on academics.
During that time, median athletic spending on sports at the schools grew by 38 percent, compared to just a 20-percent increase in academic spending. On average, schools spend about $84,000 per athlete, versus $13,000 per non-athlete student.
"This report is particularly timely given the commercially driven agendas of conference realignments that have dominated the news in just the past week," said William E. (Brit) Kirwan, co-chairman of the Knight Commission and chancellor of the University System of Maryland. "There is every reason to believe that the direction the major programs are headed in will lead to further escalation in athletics spending and even greater imbalances in the fiscal priority for athletics over academics.
"The NCAA ... frequently speaks about the importance of academics as an integral part of intercollegiate athletics," he added. "We're just saying, let's live by that principle. Let's make certain that a significant fraction of [sports] revenue is dedicated to rewarding high academic performance"
Based on their findings, the Commission issued the following recommendations:
• Schools not on pace to graduate at least 50 percent of their athletes should be removed from championship eligibility.
• Consideration of a reduction in scholarships, including reducing the current FBS maximum of 85 by eight or 10.
• Creation of an Academic-Athletics Balance Fund, which would reallocate payouts from the NCAA basketball tournament and appearances in bowl games. According to USA Today, the proposal calls for half the money distributed by the NCAA to schools in its national basketball tournament (amounting to about $83.5 million this year) and at least 20 percent of the annual revenue distributed from Bowl Championship Series contracts be distributed through the balance fund to schools that have at least 50 percent of their athletes on track to graduate and "that demonstrate an appropriate balance between institutional investments in athletics and education," under criteria developed by the NCAA Board of Directors.
• Recommendation that eligibility for postseason championships should be determined at the start of each academic year. Eligibility criteria would be based on academic progress rates that include a minimum 50-percent graduation rate.
• Suggestion that Division I reduce the length of its athletic seasons, following the example set by Division II earlier this year.
• Again called on the NCAA to help prevent the use of athletes' identities to promote commercial entities and products.
NCAA Interim President Jim Isch issued a statement supporting the principles of the Commission's report immediately following its release. However, he noted a need for debate on certain recommendations. Most notably, he took issue with the recommendation for an immediate postseason penalty for teams with a graduation rate equivalent to less than 50-percent.
"As simple as it sounds, we don't think establishing a specific postseason penalty trigger of 925 for all teams is fair--especially to those team that are improving," Isch said. "Our current penalty structure that accounts for improvements is fair and has the desired effect--an emphasis on academic success."
Citing the recent success of having greater transparency on the academic side of athletics, the Commission hopes the NCAA Board of Directors will lead the charge in having schools make their athletic program financial records more available to the public.
"Academic reform in intercollegiate athletics began in earnest when graduation rates were first shared publicly," Kirwan said. "We believe the same will be true for financial reform when there is far greater transparency on athletic expenditures. These big-time sports budgets are beginning to have a significant impact on college students, and financial data ought to be transparent and readily available to students, parents, trustees and taxpayers who have a stake in the spending."
R.J. Anderson is the Online Editor at Athletic Management.