In Charlie Baker’s short time as the NCAA’s president, he has seen massive waves of change. From shifting NIL strategies to seemingly endless bouts in court, the NCAA is nearly unrecognizable from what it was only a decade ago.
Most notably, the notion of amateurism is essentially dead to some in college sports. The House vs. NCAA case has only emphasized this point, challenging the organization’s restrictions on how college athletes can earn money through NIL.
On Tuesday, On3’s Andy Staples and the Associated Press’ Ralph Russo weighed in on how Baker has handled his tumultuous first year at the helm of the NCAA and predicted what the future holds.
“He’s in a position that will always be viewed with skepticism,” Russo said. “Though, he has taken over for a guy who was viewed with the ultimate skepticism and probably had worn his welcome. But, I do think it is significant that he has been an active participant and then a catalyst in the conversation about moving things in the direction of professionalism.”
It may not benefit the NCAA to hold its ground. If the NCAA chooses to take the case to trial next January, it could owe $4.2 billionto thousands of athletes in retroactive NIL pay and broadcast revenue, likely bringing the organization to the brink of extinction.
If Baker and Co. decide to settle instead, they could save billions of dollars and, most importantly, their organization. Despite the obvious reasons behind a potential settlement, Staples believes the concept is a sign of how far the NCAA has come in recent years.
The NCAA is being forced to embrace change
“Charlie Baker was here on Monday and talked about potential settlement,” Staples said. “I cannot believe I’m hearing the NCAA president say that. And, I realize given everything that’s happened in the last few years, if you just dropped in this, this makes perfect sense. But, if you’ve been following this for 20 years, the idea that they’re just gonna cave on this is still — wow.”
Change has not been a gradual drip for the NCAA. It has been an overwhelming flood. Now, the organization is attempting to keep its head above water. Russo believes the rapid increase in change can be traced back to the Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling in Alston v. NCAA, which allowed athletes to make money off NIL.
“At that point, it became very clear that, ‘Oh, none of this is going to stand,'” Russo said. “Even before the Supreme Court ruling, it was becoming fairly obvious that things were going to change, but the Supreme Court ruling sped everything up.”
The post Breaking down change in NCAA’s approach to amateurism under Charlie Baker appeared first on On3.
