NCAA Proposing New College Sub-division
Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2023 11:40 am
https://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa-proposing ... 51537.html
Of the many recent changes in college athletics, the most transformative — and revolutionary — may be on the way.
NCAA president Charlie Baker is planning to introduce this week a proposal to create a new subdivision within Division I that grants certain schools more autonomy around policy-making and permits them to compensate athletes in a new and profound way.
In a letter sent to Division I members, and obtained by Yahoo Sports, Baker outlines a groundbreaking and radical change to the NCAA Division I athletics model, describing it as a “new forward-looking framework.”
According to Baker’s proposal, schools that choose to be part of the new subdivision — they can opt in or out — are required to meet a strict minimum standard rooted in athlete investment.
Members of the new subdivision will be permitted to strike name, image and likeness (NIL) deals with their own athletes — a significant move away from the current NIL structure.
However, the most impactful benefit of this new model is a framework in which schools can directly compensate athletes through a trust fund. Schools within the new subdivision will be required to distribute to athletes thousands of dollars in additional educationally related funds without limitation.
There is no cap on the amount of funds that a program can provide an athlete.
It is perhaps the single-most revolutionary concept introduced by a sitting NCAA leader in college athletics history.
“It kick-starts a long-overdue conversation among the membership that focuses on the differences that exist between schools, conferences and divisions and how to create more permissive and flexible rules across the NCAA that put student-athletes first,” Baker writes in the letter. “Colleges and universities need to be more flexible, and the NCAA needs to be more flexible, too.”
How it will work
The proposal is a culmination of a months-long review that Baker and staff conducted — one of his top priorities after taking over for Mark Emmert in March. Several high-ranking athletic administrators were previously briefed on the model but were not provided specifics until the letter arrived.
Entry into the subdivision requires a school to invest, at minimum, $30,000 per year per athlete into what is termed an “enhanced educational trust fund” for at least half of a school’s countable athletes. Schools would determine when athletes receive the amount, which, for four-year athletes, will total at least $120,000. Schools must continue to abide by the framework of Title IX, assuring that 50 percent of the investment be directed toward women athletes.
The new subdivision will remain under the umbrella of the NCAA, and its members will continue to compete for NCAA championships with others in Division I. Under the proposal, the NCAA maintains oversight of the existing national championship model across all Division I sports, except FBS football, which continues to operate under the rubric of the College Football Playoff, Baker writes in the letter.
Schools in the new subdivision would also gain control of decision-making around scholarship limits and countable coaches, the NCAA's way of handing major conference programs the freedom to increase the limits or do away with them altogether.
The model “gives the educational institutions with the most visibility, the most financial resources and the biggest brands an opportunity to choose to operate with a different set of rules that more accurately reflect their scale and their operating model,” he writes.
Why is this needed?
Baker’s model is an anticipated step toward the long-ballyhooed separation of the NCAA’s high-revenue producing athletic departments from their lower-resourced brethren. While all schools are eligible to join the subdivision, the proposal would likely force a formal split within the Football Bowl Subdivision of the Power Five, soon-to-be Power Four, conferences: the SEC, Big Ten, ACC and Big 12.
The proposal is not meant as a final product ready for legislative approval but is more of a conversation-starter to an end product that could look vastly different. The proposal is expected to be a leading topic at a gathering of athletic administrators in Las Vegas this week as well as at the NCAA convention in mid-January. Baker himself is scheduled to speak in Las Vegas on Wednesday as part of the Sports Business Journal’s annual summit.
“The growing financial gap between the highest-resourced colleges and universities and other schools in Division I has created a new series of challenges,” Baker writes. “The challenges are competitive as well as financial and are complicated further by the intersection of name, image and likeness opportunities for student-athletes and the arrival of the Transfer Portal.”
Baker’s model addresses and identifies the continuously growing schism between the major conference schools, a gap that has further widened with new billion-dollar television deals. In many ways, the model is tethered to the evolving situation with NIL, a concept birthed from state lawmakers frustrated that athletes were missing out on the fruits of a multi-billion dollar industry.
The new subdivision provides schools a pathway to an alternative to compensation from the current NIL structure, which is built around third-party booster-led collectives distributing millions to athletes under the guise of endorsement and commercial deals. While the NCAA will still deem “pay-for-play” impermissible, the proposal gives programs more control, lifting the restrictions placed on a school’s involvement with NIL and allowing them to bring NIL within their jurisdiction.
Of the many recent changes in college athletics, the most transformative — and revolutionary — may be on the way.
NCAA president Charlie Baker is planning to introduce this week a proposal to create a new subdivision within Division I that grants certain schools more autonomy around policy-making and permits them to compensate athletes in a new and profound way.
In a letter sent to Division I members, and obtained by Yahoo Sports, Baker outlines a groundbreaking and radical change to the NCAA Division I athletics model, describing it as a “new forward-looking framework.”
According to Baker’s proposal, schools that choose to be part of the new subdivision — they can opt in or out — are required to meet a strict minimum standard rooted in athlete investment.
Members of the new subdivision will be permitted to strike name, image and likeness (NIL) deals with their own athletes — a significant move away from the current NIL structure.
However, the most impactful benefit of this new model is a framework in which schools can directly compensate athletes through a trust fund. Schools within the new subdivision will be required to distribute to athletes thousands of dollars in additional educationally related funds without limitation.
There is no cap on the amount of funds that a program can provide an athlete.
It is perhaps the single-most revolutionary concept introduced by a sitting NCAA leader in college athletics history.
“It kick-starts a long-overdue conversation among the membership that focuses on the differences that exist between schools, conferences and divisions and how to create more permissive and flexible rules across the NCAA that put student-athletes first,” Baker writes in the letter. “Colleges and universities need to be more flexible, and the NCAA needs to be more flexible, too.”
How it will work
The proposal is a culmination of a months-long review that Baker and staff conducted — one of his top priorities after taking over for Mark Emmert in March. Several high-ranking athletic administrators were previously briefed on the model but were not provided specifics until the letter arrived.
Entry into the subdivision requires a school to invest, at minimum, $30,000 per year per athlete into what is termed an “enhanced educational trust fund” for at least half of a school’s countable athletes. Schools would determine when athletes receive the amount, which, for four-year athletes, will total at least $120,000. Schools must continue to abide by the framework of Title IX, assuring that 50 percent of the investment be directed toward women athletes.
The new subdivision will remain under the umbrella of the NCAA, and its members will continue to compete for NCAA championships with others in Division I. Under the proposal, the NCAA maintains oversight of the existing national championship model across all Division I sports, except FBS football, which continues to operate under the rubric of the College Football Playoff, Baker writes in the letter.
Schools in the new subdivision would also gain control of decision-making around scholarship limits and countable coaches, the NCAA's way of handing major conference programs the freedom to increase the limits or do away with them altogether.
The model “gives the educational institutions with the most visibility, the most financial resources and the biggest brands an opportunity to choose to operate with a different set of rules that more accurately reflect their scale and their operating model,” he writes.
Why is this needed?
Baker’s model is an anticipated step toward the long-ballyhooed separation of the NCAA’s high-revenue producing athletic departments from their lower-resourced brethren. While all schools are eligible to join the subdivision, the proposal would likely force a formal split within the Football Bowl Subdivision of the Power Five, soon-to-be Power Four, conferences: the SEC, Big Ten, ACC and Big 12.
The proposal is not meant as a final product ready for legislative approval but is more of a conversation-starter to an end product that could look vastly different. The proposal is expected to be a leading topic at a gathering of athletic administrators in Las Vegas this week as well as at the NCAA convention in mid-January. Baker himself is scheduled to speak in Las Vegas on Wednesday as part of the Sports Business Journal’s annual summit.
“The growing financial gap between the highest-resourced colleges and universities and other schools in Division I has created a new series of challenges,” Baker writes. “The challenges are competitive as well as financial and are complicated further by the intersection of name, image and likeness opportunities for student-athletes and the arrival of the Transfer Portal.”
Baker’s model addresses and identifies the continuously growing schism between the major conference schools, a gap that has further widened with new billion-dollar television deals. In many ways, the model is tethered to the evolving situation with NIL, a concept birthed from state lawmakers frustrated that athletes were missing out on the fruits of a multi-billion dollar industry.
The new subdivision provides schools a pathway to an alternative to compensation from the current NIL structure, which is built around third-party booster-led collectives distributing millions to athletes under the guise of endorsement and commercial deals. While the NCAA will still deem “pay-for-play” impermissible, the proposal gives programs more control, lifting the restrictions placed on a school’s involvement with NIL and allowing them to bring NIL within their jurisdiction.