The existential NCAA question: ‘Why are we still trying to stick together?’

With NCAA member schools voting overwhelmingly to ratify a new, more streamlined constitution at its annual convention Thursday, it sets the stage for the most transformative period within college athletics in decades.  

The next six months are where the real hard work will occur because existential questions abound. What can be done about the ever-widening gap between college sports’ haves and have-nots, a dynamic that has reached a breaking point? Will granting each subdivision more autonomy to create policies and chart their own path forward provide the solution? Will it be enough to satisfy the wishes of Power 5 conferences, or does a potential breakaway from the traditional so-called big tent start to gain momentum? Is a fourth subdivision an inevitability? What’s the best revenue-sharing model for college athletics? Beyond staging championship events, what is the appropriate role of the NCAA? And is the relationship between big-time college athletics and a university’s educational mission on many campuses fractured beyond repair?

None of those questions have easy answers. And all are being examined against the backdrop of a fast-evolving NIL era, a dizzying transfer portal that has turned recruiting topsy-turvy, the prospect of federal intervention to re-cast the collegiate model, the threat of litigation from nearly every corner and signals from the National Labor Relations Board that athletes should be granted employee status, a designation that would dramatically alter college athletics because of collective bargaining. 

While NCAA president Mark Emmert said Thursday marked “one of those big shift moments,” this was merely the first important, consequential step. The future, even short-term, remains hazy. No one knows what the landscape will ultimately look like — or even what the collective expectation should be.

In blunt terms, one Division I conference commissioner told On3, “My biggest concern is the unknown. People never venture into something this sizable without knowing where they want to land the plane. No one has told us, the 32 commissioners, or given us any indication where they want this plane to land.”

The Division I Transformation Committee, which is co-chaired by SEC commissioner Greg Sankey and Ohio athletic director Julie Cromer, is charged with leading the direction of the restructuring. The 21-person panel includes conference commissioners, school presidents and ADs. But it does not have representation from all 32 Division I conferences. Championship access, voting power and FBS membership are just a few of the myriad issues on the table. The committee faces a daunting challenge trying to find common ground among a diverse mix of 350 Division I schools, whose athletic budgets range from a few million dollars to more than $200 million. 

Before Thursday’s vote in Indianapolis (80.42 percent voted in favor of the new constitution), several college officials publicly expressed issues with and opposition to the new constitution during the open forum with membership. Betsy Mitchell, the athletic director at Division III Cal Tech, questioned why multiple constitutions aren’t needed, given the growing disparity among the more than 1,200 member schools, asking, “Why are we still trying to stick together?”

In the end, given the vastly disparate interests of member schools, that may be the seminal question. 

“The process by which we arrived here has been highly scripted and included moments of strong-arming and arm-twisting,” Mitchell said. “We do not have one model of college sports. Those days are long over.”

The committee is expected to begin meeting next week and the new NCAA constitution is expected to take effect in August. After a momentous first step, there is no clarity on what that new landscape will look like. 

“I really believe change is going to have to come from the outside,” David Ridpath, the associate professor of sports business at Ohio University and past president of the Drake Group higher education think tank, told On3. “You just have too many entrenched silos in college athletics. I mean, Nick Saban is not going to want to give up his silo, ADs don’t want to give up their silos and conference commissioners — who now really are the most powerful people — aren’t going to want to give up anything. They need to come up with something just dramatically different.”

Among all subdivisions, so many varied interests, motivations and missions. In the end, as Mitchell astutely asked, “Why are we still trying to stick together?” It is the fundamental question. With a new constitution now ratified, membership is on the clock to find the answer.