Quite simply, the entire face of college sports has changed since January 1990.
What has happened at the last three NCAA Conventions, including the one completed this week, will have more far-reaching impact than the 45-second clock in basketball or narrowing the goalposts in football.
At stake has been the survival of intercollegiate athletics, a scandal-torn, conflicting and contradictory entity that often flies in the face of higher education. Failing to act would have doomed college sports as the public has come to know it.
Action, though, was taken. Unprecedented, sweeping and dramatic measures have been enacted. Some might call it reform, others might label it a revolution. And still others, the critics, will say the NCAA hasn`t gone far enough at fixing a system that might be beyond repair.
Yet, for better or worse, history now has a chance to record a new era of college sports, thanks in part to the last three years, which might have been the most important ever in the 86-year history of the NCAA.
”They could very well have been,” said NCAA Executive Director Dick Schultz.
”Because of the last three years, the next 10 years is pretty well set,” said University of Mississippi Chancellor Gerald Turner, head of the powerful NCAA Presidents Commission. ”This has been a watershed period for us.”
It has been a remarkable storm of change. At the 1990 convention, modest reforms were passed, but that wasn`t the big story. Rather, it was the way the presidents, too often watching this game on the sidelines, took control of the event, much to the shock of coaches and athletic directors.
With the presidents definitely in charge, they passed a reform agenda at the 1991 convention that included cost-cutting for the runaway budgets of athletic programs.
Then, this year, in a slam dunk of a performance, the NCAA enacted its toughest academic legislation since Proposition 48 was approved in 1983. Beginning in 1995, incoming recruits will need a 2.5 grade-point average, up from 2.0, to be eligible as freshmen. The intent is to have students better prepared for college, which only seems logical.
Before the 1990 convention, such sweeping reform didn`t seem possible. Even Schultz, who has been the catalyst, is surprised at the new picture.
”You look at the changes in the last three years, and who would have thought it would happen?” he said. ”You hoped it would happen, but I certainly wouldn`t have predicted the overwhelming support we`ve gotten.”
The goal is to place less emphasis on athletics and more on academics, hardly a novel notion. University presidents want graduation rates to be the most important statistics they read in the newspaper.
Whether that happens remains to be seen. Turner, though, asks reforms be given a chance.
”What you`ll see now are refinements and reviews to see how these changes work,” Turner said. ”We`ve made changes that will benefit the student-athlete. We want to make sure the basic direction continues.”
Yet there`s one final piece of the puzzle, Schultz says. He maintains it goes to the heart of the reform package.
Next year, the NCAA is expected to vote on legislation calling for a certification of athletic departments, much like what takes place for entire universities and their programs.
The exact plan hasn`t been formalized. Basically, outside panels would evaluate the athletic department. The auditors would look at finances and graduation rates. Admission policies for athletes would be judged to see if they are consistent with that of the whole university, and a brush with the NCAA enforcement division would be more than a black mark.
If a school is found deliquent, it could lose its certification. The embarrassment factor probably would be enough of a penalty, although sanctions would be forthcoming.
”This fills in a void and brings everything together,” Schultz said.
”It would be about institutional control. It brings in the issue of university integrity.”
That`s the key point, according to Michigan State University President John DiBiaggio. Integrity can`t be legislated, but with certification it can be evaluated.
”All the reforms won`t work unless we have a genuine certification process,” DiBiaggio said. ”All that stuff we passed won`t mean a thing if there`s not institutional integrity. To me, the most serious violation isn`t the cheating-which is serious-but it`s the kids not taking genuine courses and not getting their degrees. We have to make our athletic program policies consistent with that of the entire university.
”Establishing a certification program won`t be easy, but it`s much better than anything we`ve got now.”
Anything is better than what was in place before 1990, when the reform movement was mere rhetoric. Because of phase-in periods, it will take a few years for the impact of some of the reforms to take place.
If Schultz and Turner had their wish, college sports would fast-forward to 1999, when the impact of the changes, especially in academics, really will be felt. They believe the public might have a different view of college sports by then.
Perception still remains a huge problem for the NCAA. Despite the reforms, the NCAA`s image remains as bad as ever, a point Schultz made to the delegates Tuesday.
”Our perception lags behind the evolving reality,” Turner said. ”If we stay at it, we can modify those perceptions. I think we`ve laid the groundwork for re-establishing credibility with the public.”
The public might have its doubts, but the presidents don`t. With most of the major reforms in place, the big battle seems to be won for now. But Turner says the battle to redefine and reshape college sports never will end. ”It`s not a matter of won or loss, it`s a matter of plugging away,”
Turner said. ”It`s a continuous process. The presidents are committed. We`re in for the long haul.”
