The Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics (www.knightcommission.org) was formed by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation in 1989 to promote reforms that support and strengthen the educational mission of college sports. Last Monday the Commission held its fall meeting to discuss the recent college sports scandals that have threatened not only the integrity of intercollegiate athletics but raised basic questions about the NCAA’s ability to prevent abuses and clean up corruption. Amy Perko has led the Knight Commission since 2005, serving as Executive Director for more than a decade before being named CEO in October 2016. During her tenure the NCAA has adopted a number of the Commission’s recommendations, the most prominent of which included requiring teams to be on track to graduate 50% of their players to be eligible for postseason championships, reducing time demands on athletes, and revising revenue distribution to include incentives for academic success. A recognized leader on college sports issues, she received the NCAA’s prestigious Silver Anniversary Award in 2012 to commemorate the 25th anniversary of her college participation as well as her civic/professional contributions. A member of the Wake Forest Sports Hall of Fame, she was a 3-time Academic All-American and a 2-time All-ACC basketball player who was honored as an ACC Legend in 2005. HoopsHD’s Jon Teitel got to chat with Ms. Perko about the Monday meeting and a variety of other timely topics.
What are the biggest changes that you have seen in college basketball from your own playing days to now? The biggest change on the men’s side is the money involved due to the media contracts, especially in regard to March Madness. While the financial incentives are certainly different on the men’s side, the women’s side has seen changes such as higher popularity, more travel with a national schedule, and more time demands based on the year-round commitment. Athletes have also become more involved with NCAA committees that have helped resolve issues such as time demands.
What are your thoughts on the Braxton Beverly situation (the allegations are that he committed to Ohio State in October of 2016, began taking summer classes in Columbus in May of 2017, then Coach Thad Matta was terminated in June of 2017, and Beverly was granted a release and signed to play at NC State, but a few days ago the NCAA declared that it was denying his waiver request, meaning that he must sit out the entire year as a transfer even though he was only enrolled in the class for a few weeks)? I will not comment on individual situations specifically. but generally the rules involved with transfers are certainly an issue that is under much scrutiny nationally. The NCAA has a task force that is putting forth proposals on transfer rules, but the Knight Commission’s approach is that athletes should be treated like other students.
NCAA President Mark Emmert told your Commission, “We cannot go into the next basketball season without seeing fundamental change in the way college basketball is operating”: what changes would you like to see implemented? The Knight Commission is reviewing a number of issues and does not have any specific recommendations right now, but some of the biggest issues are relationships with shoe companies/agents as well as the compliance/enforcement process. We are looking to expand the tools of NCAA investigations via methods such as giving them subpoena power.
Emmert said recent NCAA polling showed that nearly 80% of people believed “big universities put money ahead of their student-athletes” and nearly 70% of big schools are part of the problem rather than the solution: how many more scandals (Baylor, Louisville, Oregon, etc.) do we need to see before we agree with the majority? The overall integrity in the governance of college sports is a core principle: we need public trust in the system. College sports exists to provide educational opportunities for athletes, not to generate revenues for universities. In some cases administrators have taken their eyes off the major goal: doing what is right in the best interest of their athletes. We have promoted policies to improve graduation rates and focus on educational values rather than success on the court, but more changes still need to be made.
Emmert also criticized the NBA’s 1-and-done rule by saying, “We do not make dancers attend Tulane to become dancers”: what rule do you think would work best? The draft-eligibility rule is between the NBA and the Players Union so the NCAA has no control over that. There is a domestic minor league for basketball called the G League that is 17 years old and players who do not want to go to class can instead go there to develop. There are more opportunities now for elite young men who want to play in the NBA but do not want to go the college route. With the exception of high school baseball players, if you hire an agent then you lose your NCAA eligibility, which is an example of a rule that needs to be discussed. An 18-year old man needs some good information to decide what is in his best interests. Baseball and basketball have different systems even though both offer professional opportunities.
The juiciest topic of the offseason was the federal bribery/fraud charges brought against several assistant coaches and an Adidas official: how can we fix NCAA enforcement/compliance tools so that they can uncover bad behavior by shoe companies/agents, and what regulations would you propose to change the AAU basketball culture? From the Commission’s perspective it is too early for us to make recommendation on non-scholastic enforcement, but 1 outcome of our meeting is that the current enforcement system has consistently failed to expose the behavior set forth in the allegations, so we want to look at reforms such as subpoena power or moving to an independent enforcement process.
The NCAA recently created an independent Commission on College Basketball chaired by Dr. Condoleezza Rice: what do you think of the new Commission, and do you view it as an ally/competitor/other? We do not think they are a competitor at all. We are an independent commission that brings together thought leaders to provide public discussion on the most pressing issues facing college sports. We certainly commend President Emmert for forming the Commission on College Basketball and think it is a healthy process. We look forward to speaking with their members about our own work and how we might inform their own work moving forward.
How do you think the NCAA should modify rules regarding whether schools under investigation can make their own determinations about academic fraud, and what constitutes impermissible academic benefits for athletes? This is certainly a major issue that we discussed at our meeting and we made a formal proposal regarding the academic legitimacy of courses. We think that the NCAA should be able to consider independent assessments by accredited agencies.
Do you think that players should receive a stipend or financial benefits for the use of their name/image/likeness, or does free tuition/room/board/books suffice? We are on record as supporting the changes put in place by institutions that provide stipends up to the full costs of attendance that were not previously covered, and we encourage institutions to do more to use revenue to directly benefit athletes with medical expenses/education/career development. The Pac-12 guarantees that injuries are covered for up to 4 years after eligibility, and other conferences certainly have the resources to do that as well. Our Commission is open to considering proposals from experts regarding the name/image/likeness issues…but it is not an easy change to make.
The NCAA already requires schools to make annual disclosures on graduation rates/gender equity: what could be accomplished if they had to make similar disclosures regarding the diversity of their administrators/coaches/athletes? 1 of the focal points at our meeting last May was how universities can improve the level of diversity in athletic leadership/coaching. The NCAA has asked schools to sign a pledge to doing what they can in terms of hiring/development and we recommend that all schools publish annual diversity data. Graduation rate disclosure was a tipping point for athletic reform and is certainly an issue that can be important to recruits.
