In Brief
Leaders in the field are taking these steps while also contributing to the national discussions on the future direction of the system as a whole.
A major national report on the state of college athletics critically asks: “The question is not so much whether athletics in their present form should be fostered by the university, but how fully can a university that fosters professional athletics discharge its primary function?”
It is a sentiment that could be from today’s headlines, but the year was 1929. Today, the changes roiling intercollegiate athletics would astonish the authors of the famous Carnegie Report: name, image, and likeness (NIL); antitrust concerns; student-athlete wellness; program reductions; conference realignments; and diversity, equity, and inclusion, to name just a few. University athletics programs that do not rapidly adapt face dire consequences with long-term implications.
A close look at what is happening at many elite programs around the country offers reasons for optimism. Here are five actions universities are taking now to position themselves for success in this dynamic and uncertain environment while also contributing to shaping the new system that will emerge in the coming years.
Financial Strategy
A recent study by ESPN reported that Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) programs spent more than $533.6 million in "dead money" in an 11-year time span from Jan. 1, 2010, to Jan. 31, 2021. That is cash those colleges and universities owed coaches in football and basketball who were terminated without cause with time left on their agreements. Not only does this type of spending contribute to an atmosphere of scrutiny and criticism of college athletics as an institution, but it is also increasingly unsustainable.
Before the Alston decision and the dawning of the NIL era of college athletics, many university athletics programs already were struggling with a host of financial challenges, including downward pressure on ticket sales, conference realignments, and the increasing costs of doing business. The COVID-19 pandemic brought new challenges, including new cuts to state funding, reduced international enrollments, and increased on-campus costs. Leaders at colleges and universities have cut numerous athletic programs in response to the financial pressures of the pandemic.
With Alston resulting in the NCAA allowing institutions to fund additional academic and education-related benefits, the "cost" of athlete recruitment and enrollment could increase for many institutions. The Alston decision and the NIL era influenced the additional costs of compliance, academic performance payments, NIL-related educational programming, and unintended consequences impacting recruitment.