The conference which commissioner not too long ago threatened to take Division III if he didn’t get his way on player compensation has found Jesus.
This is why we propose working within the NCAA to provide greater academic security and success for our student-athletes:
- We must guarantee the four-year scholarships that we offer. If a student-athlete is no longer able to compete, for whatever reason, there should be zero impact on our commitment as universities to deliver an undergraduate education. We want our students to graduate.
- If a student-athlete leaves for a pro career before graduating, the guarantee of a scholarship remains firm. Whether a professional career materializes, and regardless of its length, we will honor a student’s scholarship when his or her playing days are over. Again, we want students to graduate.
- We must review our rules and provide improved, consistent medical insurance for student-athletes. We have an obligation to protect their health and well-being in return for the physical demands placed upon them.
- We must do whatever it takes to ensure that student-athlete scholarships cover the full cost of a college education, as defined by the federal government. That definition is intended to cover what it actually costs to attend college.
Now some might call this response to the presidents’ declaration needed perspective.
Others might call it a deserved victory lap for a group that finally got those in charge to pay some attention.
But in any event, it’s a different tune than we’re used to hearing the suits sing. And all it took was looking like crap for a few days in a California courtroom.
Which makes this gold, Jerry:
The best solutions rest not with the courts, but with us – presidents of the very universities that promote and respect the values of intercollegiate competition. Writing on behalf of all presidents of the Big Ten Conference, we must address the conflicts that have led us to a moment where the conversation about college sports is about compensation rather than academics.
Gee, whose fault is that?