Search News


Browse Archives

News

The Board Role in College Sports

April 8, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

One could make a pretty strong case that, if anything, college and university trustees already pay too much attention to the athletics programs on their campuses -- interfering inappropriately in the hiring of coaches and other decisions, for instance, or emphasizing sports to the exclusion of other, arguably more central, institutional matters. Given that, it may seem odd that the Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities has, for the third time in five years, issued a policy statement about trustees' responsibilities for athletics -- the kind of statement that the group rarely issues, acknowledges Richard A. Skinner, AGB's senior vice president for programs and research.

"Where we've seen things really become ugly," Skinner said, not naming names, "is where athletics were raised to such importance in the context of the institution, over everything else. The goal with this statement is to put in some sort of proportionality, to suggest that the board exercise its fiduciary responsibility and oversight for intercollegiate athletics in the same way that you would for other aspects of the undergraduate experience.

"We're trying to create a sense of, 'Boards, you are responsible for this, and in delegating responsibility for management to the president, that doesn't relieve you at all of the need to be skeptical,' " Skinner said. "It puts in place at least the potential for clear accountability, from boards to presidents, presidents to athletics directors, AD's to coaches, and then all the way back up."

The statement AGB released Tuesday updates and expands documents from 2004 and 2007 that sought to help boards figure out what they should and, importantly, should not do in overseeing sports programs on their campuses. The core substance of the new document has changed little from previous versions; the biggest difference is that the trustees' group has appended an "illustrative policy" that it says institutions should consider creating to delineate clearly the responsibilities of boards and college presidents regarding athletics. Such policies, the AGB statement says, should be particularly important as colleges and universities go through the National Collegiate Athletic Association's certification process, which is paying increasing attention to governance, among other issues, Skinner said.

The latter idea stems particularly from AGB's partnership with the NCAA, with which it has been working increasingly closely since 2007 in an effort to reinforce the idea -- central to the agenda of the NCAA's president, Myles Brand -- that college presidents have to exert their authority to keep sports in perspective on their campuses, and that they can do that only with support (and without excessive interference from) their bosses -- boards of trustees or regents.

"While most of what transpires in college athletics is positive, there is a growing sense among academic leaders, the news media, and the public that our society glorifies athletic accomplishment far more than academic achievement. At some colleges and universities, intercollegiate athletics programs may be detracting from the institution’s mission," the AGB statement says. "What’s more, the increasingly commercialized nature of major sports at the highest competitive levels and a widening gulf between the athletic and academic cultures at some institutions and in some communities have negatively affected the reputation and public standing of higher education as a whole."

It adds: "Restoring balance between sports and education continues to be elusive. If efforts to achieve an appropriate balance are to succeed, governing board members will need to lend consistent and public support to their chief executives and academic leaders who are at the forefront of such discussions."

The timing of the AGB statement -- coming the day after the end of college sports' highest-profile (and most lucrative) event, the Final Four, and less than a week after the University of Kentucky signed an eight-year, $31.5 million contract, the richest ever, to secure John Calipari as its men's basketball coach -- is coincidental, but indicates, depending on how skeptical you are, how much work is to be done or how futile the AGB's campaign is likely to be.

But as more and more colleges are contemplating moves into the spotlight of Division I sports, says AGB's Skinner, the time has never been better for the trustees' group and others concerned about public "cynicism" about college sports to do what they can to make sure that boards are "appropriately skeptical of the whole phenomenon," and that they have policies designed to ensure that individual trustees do not run roughshod over either fellow board members or presidents on athletics issues.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on The Board Role in College Sports

  • Old news....
  • Posted by Cato on April 8, 2009 at 8:00am EDT
  • These issues have been around forever... I'm reminded of the University of Oklahoma president described in Richard Hofstadter's Anti-Intellectualism in American Life (New York 1963) "who hoped to build a university of which teh football team could be proud."

  • Old news indeed
  • Posted by Pilgrim on April 8, 2009 at 9:00am EDT
  • Cato is exactly right. This is very old news. The first intercollegiate athletic contest held in 1852 pitted crew teams from Harvard and Yale against each other. The rowing competition was a promotional event for a new resort. Not surpringly, the event included corporate sponsorships, gambling, and a dispute over the eligibilty of one of the particpants. And the march to madness goes on...

  • Give Academics a Sporting Chance
  • Posted by Justa Prof at Midwestern University on April 8, 2009 at 9:30am EDT
  • In our large, midwestern university, sports (specifically, football) has been given a major boost by means of an $80 million fund raiser. Students are expected to pay for half of this by additional fees, while $20 million is to be given by the city. That leaves $20 million to be raised by the enthusiastic, dedicated sports fans. That's right, they come up with 25% to fund this football initiative. Seems to me that if sports is so powerful, attracting many more students and potential donors, then the sports fans should put their money where their loud mouths are and fund it entirely. 

    I suppose the thinking is that sports will attract students and big donations from soda companies. Hmmm, this means that students decide to go to a particular university based upon a winning sports team, correct? Well, I don't think we want those students, anyway. As far as donations go, any meager donations based upon a winning football team are always designated to, you got it, the sports enterprise.

    As far as forcing the students to assume the major burden of funding this venture, it is an example of taxation without representation. Students have no other option than to vote against this tax by going elsewhere. Gee, guys, do you think this is why our enrollment continues to decline relative to other institutions in our area?

  • What AGB should do.
  • Posted by Lawrence on April 8, 2009 at 11:30am EDT
  • The AGB has good intentions and is trying to be helpful. If they wanted to do something more significant, they could create an ethical code of conduct for boards that defined the board's role with athletic programs. AGB could then maintain a public listing of institutions that adopted the code of conduct. Over time, the public would get a good idea of those boards that could not conduct themself in an ethical fashion in so far as athletics is concerned.

  • AGB Policy Statement a Paper Tiger
  • Posted by Frank G. Splitt , Member at The Drake Group on April 9, 2009 at 12:00pm EDT
  • Doug Lederman states what has been obvious for many years (if not decades) in his Inside Higher Ed report, "The Board Role in College Sport," http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/04/08/agb, to wit: Members of college and university governing boards interfere inappropriately "in the hiring of coaches and other decisions, emphasizing sports to the exclusion of other, arguably more central, institutional matters."

    The Association of Governing Boards (AGB) repeated attempts to improve the operation of governing boards in areas related to collegiate athletics are akin to painting brighter stripes on a paper tiger. Clarifying the role of a governing board— re: its fiduciary responsibility and oversight for intercollegiate athletics and to outline a mechanism for a clear two-way, chain of accountability involving board members, presidents, athletics directors, and coaches—looks good on paper but has little chance of success in practice.

    Just like the NCAA, governing boards have conflicting interests and are wholly incapable of reforming themselves without help. Illusions of reform or non-workable reform efforts are the modus operandi—particularly important as colleges and universities go through the NCAA's certification process to give the appearance that college presidents are exerting their authority to keep sports in perspective on their campuses, and that they not only have the support of their governing board, but no interference as well. The NCAA has an amazing ability to co-opt organizations like the AGB.

    The AGB statement says: "Restoring balance between sports and education continues to be elusive. If efforts to achieve an appropriate balance are to succeed, governing board members will need to lend consistent and public support to their chief executives and academic leaders who are at the forefront of such discussions."

    Balance will continue to be elusive no matter what the AGB says so long as the NCAA continues to promote sports as a moneymaking business along with its more aggressive commercial approach to professional collegiate athletics—making commercialization a priority for the NCAA and schools as they exploit the labor of academically challenged athletes from poor families and the penchant for wealthy boosters to influence collegiate athletics.

    There is much work is to be done. As the AGB's Richard Skinner has said: "the time has never been better for the trustees' group and others concerned about public "cynicism" about college sports to do what they can to make sure that boards are "appropriately skeptical of the whole phenomenon...." Nevertheless,. wealthy booster members of governing boards will continue to run roughshod over either fellow board members and/or presidents on athletics issues and the AGB's campaign will prove futile unless and until there is government intervention, see The Drake Group's "Open Letter to the President and His Administration," http://thedrakegroup.org/Obama.pdf .

  • I Never Disagree With Frank G. Splitt
  • Posted by Frizbane Manley on April 9, 2009 at 5:00pm EDT
  • Since I never disagree with Professor Splitt, I must have misunderstood his statement …

    “Just like the NCAA, governing boards have conflicting interests …”

    I will set up my response by claiming his statement is much like saying “the AARP’s governing board has conflicting interests.” Let’s face it, AARP is an insurance company with a clever strategy for optimizing its business objectives. Its conservative initiatives in support of us old folks – I mean besides selling insurance -- are merely to provide cover for its central mission, making money in the insurance business.

    Now watch out while I copy-and-paste …

    Let’s face it, the NCAA is an entertainment company with a clever strategy for optimizing its business objectives. Its conservative initiatives in support of us sports nuts – I mean besides selling entertainment (for very big bucks I might add) -- are merely to provide cover for its central mission, making money in the entertainment business.

    And by the way, I am a very big fan of intercollegiate athletics. I just believe they should be internally funded, should have very small funding caps, should ban athletic scholarships, should have rather serious geographic constraints, and should come in a very significant second to intramural programs (both in terms of funding and emphasis).

    Frankly, small-college intercollegiate programs are more fun, and are perhaps even more meaningful to the participating athletes, than the absurd semi-professional programs housed at our “major” universities today.

    Just for the Hell of it, get out your map of the U.S., make twelve copies, on each one plot the locations of the universities belonging to each of the twelve “most prestigious” athletic conferences, and calculate the pollution to our environment (tons of carbon dioxide expended) by transporting just the football and basketball teams for a single season. I’m not really worried about the environment (at the moment); I’d just like to impress you with the stupidity of our devotion to big time athletics. Here’s a start …

    http://statsheet.com/cfb/conferences/acc/map

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Athletic_Conference

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_East_Conference

    And just to add a little more perspective … let’s see, winter term exams at the University of Michigan end on April 30. The University’s baseball team, however, will play 58 regular season games this year, the last one being almost a month after the Computer Science majors have gone home for the summer. Michigan usually makes it to the NAAA “World” Series, and, if they happened to make it to the final game this year, that would be in Omaha, Nebraska on June 24, two months after all of those French Literature majors started working at their summer jobs at their hometown Taco Bells. Makes sense to me. How about you, Professor Splitt?

    http://www.cwsomaha.com/schedule/game-schedule.html

    As for me … I’m headed in to the Verizon Center in DC tonight for the semi-finals of the Frozen Four. Go Bemidji State!

  • More on the AGB's Paper Tiger
  • Posted by Frank G. Splitt , Member at The Drake Group on April 14, 2009 at 7:00am EDT

  • An extension of my above comment on the AGB Policy Statement has been titled:
    "Cleaning up the Mess in College Sports: Demands More than Policy Statements," and posted at http://www.thedrakegroup.org/Splitt_Cleaning.pdf.
    The time has never been better for the AGB and the Knight Commission to endorse The Drake Group's call for transparency, accountability, and oversight of the NCAA and the athletic programs at its member schools.