Big Conferences Gain Greater Control Over NCAA Governance

NCAA shifts Power, But Power Four Doesn’t Get Everything It Wants

The NCAA’s top governing body approved changes Tuesday designed to streamline decision-making, but fell short of granting the Power Four conferences the full voting control they sought. Under the new rules, major decisions by the Division I Board of Directors will require approval from all four major conferences – the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, and SEC – or assistance from a smaller conference to pass.

The SEC had initially pushed for a 17% voting share for each of the Power Four, ensuring they could overcome a dissenting vote within their group wiht a simple majority. However,the final legislation grants each conference a 16.1% share, effectively giving any one of them the power to block a policy it opposes.

The D-I board handles crucial areas like finances, litigation, and infractions, excluding those related to the recent $2.8 billion antitrust settlement allowing schools to pay players starting July 1. This move represents the latest effort to grant greater autonomy to the largest, football-playing schools, though it won’t directly impact the college Football Playoff or March Madness expansion plans.

In a separate decision,the board proposed adding three additional “units” – worth approximately $2 million each – to be distributed to the finalists of the men’s and women’s basketball tournaments.

The restructuring also reduces the size of the D-I board from 24 to 13 members, with Power Four representatives wielding more than four times the voting power of other members.This setup ensures that even if one Power Four conference objects, a vote can still pass with support from another member of the board.

SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey previously explained the need for increased voting power, stating, “You can’t just have someone walk away at that level among four and everything stops.”

The NCAA highlighted the elimination of approximately 32% of its Division I committees as evidence of a prosperous streamlining process. they also announced that athletes will gain 40 additional seats across 30 committees, with voting rights on nearly all of them.

While reactions from college sports leaders were provided,only Virginia Tech President Tim sands,chair of the NCAA board,represented a Power Four conference. Sands stated the new structure “reflects the association’s commitment to a modernized approach to governing ourselves moving forward.” Sun Belt Commissioner Keith Gil also applauded the changes,calling it “a good governance framework that will allow all of us to thrive.”

How might the increasing autonomy of Power Five conferences impact the competitive balance across all NCAA divisions?

The Shifting Power Dynamics in College Athletics

For decades, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) held significant sway over college sports. However, recent developments signal a dramatic shift in power, with Power Five conferences – now often referred to as the Big Ten, Big Twelve, ACC, Pac-12, and SEC – increasingly asserting control over NCAA governance. This isn’t a sudden upheaval, but a culmination of factors including revenue disparities, legal challenges, and evolving athlete rights. Understanding this transition is crucial for anyone involved in college sports, from athletes and coaches to administrators and fans.

The Roots of the Power Shift: Revenue and Legal battles

The foundation of this change lies in the financial realities of college athletics. The Power Five conferences generate substantially more revenue than their counterparts, primarily through lucrative media rights deals for football and men’s basketball. This disparity fueled a desire for greater autonomy.

Key events accelerating this trend include:

The O’Bannon v. NCAA case (2014): This landmark antitrust lawsuit challenged the NCAA’s restrictions on the use of athletes’ names, images, and likenesses (NIL), ultimately weakening the NCAA’s control.

The Alston case (2021): The Supreme Court unanimously ruled against the NCAA, finding that the association’s restrictions on education-related benefits for student-athletes violated antitrust law. This decision further eroded the NCAA’s authority and paved the way for NIL legislation.

Expansion and Conference realignment: The recent wave of conference realignment, especially the additions of USC and UCLA to the Big Ten, demonstrates the ambition of these conferences to consolidate power and revenue. This also impacts college football playoffs access and structure.

Autonomy and the Evolution of NCAA Rules

Following the O’Bannon and Alston cases, the Power Five conferences were granted a degree of autonomy within the NCAA. This allowed them to create their own rules regarding:

Scholarship limits: adjusting the number of scholarships offered in various sports.

Financial aid: Providing increased financial support to student-athletes.

Transfer rules: Modifying regulations governing athlete transfers.

NIL (Name, Image, and Likeness): Developing and implementing their own policies regarding athlete endorsements and commercial opportunities.

This autonomy has led to a divergence in rules across different divisions,creating a more complex landscape for NCAA compliance. The NCAA now functions more as an oversight body,with the Power Five conferences largely dictating the direction of major rule changes.

The Impact of NIL and the Transfer Portal

The introduction of NIL rights and the expanded transfer portal have significantly amplified the influence of the Big Conferences.

NIL collectives: These organizations, often affiliated with universities, pool funds from boosters to facilitate NIL deals for athletes. The Power Five conferences, with their larger and more affluent fan bases, have a distinct advantage in attracting and retaining talent through NIL.

Transfer Portal Dynamics: The ease with wich athletes can now transfer has created a more fluid player market. Power Five programs are better positioned to attract transfers due to their resources and competitive opportunities. This impacts recruiting strategies and team building.

The Future of NCAA Governance: A New Model?

The current trajectory suggests a continued erosion of the NCAA’s centralized authority. Several potential scenarios are emerging:

1. Further Autonomy: the Power Five conferences could seek even greater autonomy, potentially forming a separate division within the NCAA or even breaking away entirely to create a new governing body.
2. restructuring the NCAA: The NCAA could undergo a significant restructuring to better reflect the current power dynamics, granting the Power Five conferences a more prominent role in decision-making.
3. Federal Legislation: The possibility of federal legislation regulating college sports remains a topic of discussion. A uniform federal law could potentially address issues such as NIL and athlete rights, providing a more stable and consistent framework.

Case Study: The University of Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC

The move of the University of Texas and Oklahoma to the Southeastern Conference (SEC) in 2024 is a prime example of the Power Five conferences flexing their muscles. This realignment was driven by financial considerations and a desire to enhance the SEC’s national profile.It also demonstrates the willingness of these conferences to disrupt the traditional structure of college sports to achieve their goals. The impact on the *Big 12