How do Extra Points readers feel about the NCAA Constitutional Convention?
Good morning, and thanks for your continued support of Extra Points.
Last week, the NCAA released the results of their Constitutional Convention survey. They asked administrators of all different types of schools about the sorts of things they felt were important about particular reforms.
By and large, membership supported ideas that might streamline decision-making, and some members might support even more dramatic changes, like moving high level college football outside the scope of the NCAA entirely. But others expressed preference for more incremental changes. Many D-II and D-III leaders, for example, are apprehensive about radical change. College presidents, in a stunning upset, would prefer to retain their control over college athletics. The response data doesn't indicate as much of an appetite to completely blow up the national office or the concept of amateurism, such as it is exists today.
Last month, I shared a survey among Extra Points readership, asking similar questions. I wanted to know what my readers thought about amateurism, about what the NCAA should actually be in charge of, and what should be left to other parties. I wanted to know what our readers thought College Sports 3.0 should look like.
Was this a representative sample? No. Are the finding statistically significant? Probably not. But hey, you are members of this community, and I thought it would be of interest to see how other members of this community feel about where the NCAA ought to go from here.
Here's the gist of the survey results:
Subscribe to Premium Membership to read the rest.
Become a paying subscriber of Premium Membership to get access to this post and other subscriber-only content.
Already a paying subscriber? Sign In