NCAA's Scholarship Push Runs into Resistance from Schools

The NCAA continues to work hard to better the life of student athletes, but the universities have objected to the multi-year scholarship plan. 

According to USA Today, the NCAA's proposal of dumping the one-year renewable scholarship for a multi-year plan was denied by more than 75 schools.

Christian Dennie, a former compliance officer at Missouri and Oklahoma, spoke on how the schools are in the wrong here. 

"The NCAA and presidents step up with this legislation and then the universities want to vote it down. They say, 'We don't have enough money,' and then the coach gets a $2 million raise. It's really a resource allocation issue."

The NCAA will meet next month in Indianapolis at the annual NCAA convention to discuss this matter as well as whether or not athletes should be given stipends for living costs not covered by the scholarships. 

A few weeks ago, nearly 125 universities rejected the reform of giving a $2,000 stipend to student athletes.

According to the paper, the NCAA only has a few options here.

"

The Division I Board of Directors has three options: scrap the two reform measures and operate under previous NCAA rules; modify the rule or create a new proposal that would go back to the schools for another 60-day comment period; or allow members to vote on the override, which needs a five-eighths majority of the roughly 350 Division I members to pass.

"

Changing everything altogether could create major problems, as some student athletes would be allowed stipends and multi-year scholarships over others.

The NCAA wishes to treat those bringing them tons of money (the players) better, and offering up a multi-year scholarship is a great idea.

It ensures that student athletes would have a free-ride at college for a certain amount of years. If you've ever had to take out a loan for college you know how valuable a free-ride truly is.

David Berst, the NCAA's vice president of governance for Division I, told the paper that the objection was mostly about how the change would take place. 

"The overriding concern had to do with the time to prepare and plan (for a change) rather than objecting to the concept. I'm anticipating the rule will still be in effect (after the next board meeting)."

Dennie was able to get a list of some schools that rejected the plan. The most notable college football school that objected the proposal was Boise State. 

The Broncos claimed the plan would be a recruiting disaster" that would spark a "culture of brokering."

"

There is never a guarantee that the incoming student-athlete will be a good fit for the program and the institution, the school wrote in its override request. If it is a poor fit, the program is put in a difficult situation to continue to keep a student-athlete on scholarship.

"

They have a point because the wealthier schools would most likely triumph over schools with smaller budgets, and there are times that a recruit just doesn't pan out.

However, student-athletes deserve more than what they're getting, which is why the NCAA keeps trying to better the situation at hand. 

These are major movements in the college sports world, and it's only a matter of time before some change does occur. Of course, nobody knows when it will be or exactly what is changed. 

Expect more to come from this in the coming future because the NCAA has to shake things up.