In a move that could mark the beginning of the end for big-time college sports, the Committee on Institutional Cooperation -- the academic equivalent of the Big Ten -- will meet Friday and Saturday to determine whether its member schools should decide to overhaul collegiate athletics and put an end to the "exponential growth" of their athletic programs.\nThe vote, which could forever alter Big Ten athletics, got its start in the March issue of NCAA News in which IU President Myles Brand sparked ideas of reinforcing academics on college campuses and reducing the exposure college sports programs get. \nIn his article, "Presidents Have Cause, Means to Reduce Arms," Brand said university presidents should have more control over athletics and compared intercollegiate athletics to a sports franchise. Brand named his athletic reform movement "Academics First" and lobbied that the main focus of universities should return to academics.\nBrand's controversial proposal called for limiting the number of basketball games, reducing the athletics department role in academic support and stopping subsidization of the athletics department with money from tuition and tax dollars.\n"We must make certain that academic concerns are first and foremost," Brand wrote. "To do that, we don't have to turn off the game. We just have to turn down the volume."
Brand's movement grows\nIn May, the faculty councils of all the PAC-10 universities voted to endorse the "PAC-10 Athletics Resolution" and adopt Brand's new athletic guidelines. All universities have a faculty senate or faculty council that traditionally has the power to govern university-wide programs, including athletics. \nBloomington Faculty Council President Robert Eno said the CIC meeting this week could result in a similar proposal to decrease the size of the athletics department.\n"We have two hours set aside to discuss it," Eno said. "If people are enthusiastic about it and we can get things done in two hours … (and) if someone can draft something up during free time and the next day, we could have something done. It's not entirely impossible."\nUnder the PAC-10 resolution, presidents and chancellors of each university are urged to begin discussions aimed at moderating the growth of athletics programs and budgets. The resolution also recommends following Brand's ideas.
Big Ten considers proposal\nThe next athletic conference in the chain of reform might be the Big Ten. Last week, the Bloomington Faculty Council discussed possible changes if the CIC faculty presidents endorse the resolution. The athletics committee's report to the BFC noted that "no Big Ten school has adopted a similar resolution (as the PAC-10), although several have indicated interest in considering such a resolution." \nCIC Vice President Russell W. Snyder said the CIC and Big Ten schools might decide this weekend.\n"(The CIC) does not know what their status is. They have proposed to consider adopting the proposal. They may unanimously vote in favor, they may unanimously oppose," Snyder said. "If they agree to endorse a resolution it will really carry no weight on the individual centers. They would need to go back to their own respective faculty senates."\nFor IU, that is the same faculty council that ultimately reports to the man behind the national sweep of athletic reform, Myles Brand.
Brand's column\nAmong his other proposals, Brand said academic support systems for athletes should not just be under the athletics department, but be integrated into university-wide efforts. He said this would reduce the chance of high-profile academic scandals like the one a few years ago at Minnesota.\nThe column also called for an end to over-commercialization of sporting events and conference play. Brand said that by toning down the programs, presidents can limit the times and days that basketball games are played, the number of commercial breaks during televised games, the types of advertising in the stadiums and arenas and the logos worn by players and coaches. The next step in the plan was to stop or slow athletic expenditures. \nBrand's outline was to hold athletics departments to the same standards as every other department in the university. \nUniversity spokesman James Tinney declined comment for Brand and said Brand did not want to elaborate past his comments in his NCAA News column. Bloomington Chancellor Sharon Brehm referred comment to athletics director Michael McNeely.\nPhone and e-mail messages for McNeely left with his office and with athletics media relations director Jeff Fanter were not returned by press time.
The future of IU sports\nEno said cutting budgets and reducing sports to a club level is not the route the Big Ten will take. The CIC's reform plan is to reduce the size of Big Ten athletics and bring the national focus back to academics, Eno said. \n"Many high-profile sports like football and basketball have gotten out of control, and we are hoping to be able to fix that," Eno said. \nThe overall effects of the possible athletic reform may be as simple as more university control of spending, said business professor Bill Perkins, IU's faculty representative to the Big Ten and NCAA. \n"The PAC-10 resolution is attempting to do is end or at least slow down the arms race of building facilities and paying extraordinary coaches' salaries in athletics," Perkins said. "And to be very honest, we have not been very guilty of that in fact we are probably behind other institutions in the Big Ten from a facilities standpoint and our coaches are not highly paid, so I do not think that the resolution will have a direct effect on us."\nPerkins said Brand's column was trying to present a plan to control television coverage of Big Ten and IU sports and reduce the network control of athletic schedules that disrupt student-athlete schedules. \n"The more noticeable changes would be in basketball, where now we play basketball games essentially all but two days of the week," Perkins said. "That's disruptive to a student athlete's schedule to have to do that; and it would be much better off to set aside two days a week or at a maximum three days a week in which games will be played."
Student reaction\nThe athletes in Big Ten programs will be most affected by the proposal, and some say they fear it could hurt their athletic careers.\n"Some people think that the University focuses too much on athletics, but I think that's a part of being a Big Ten university. I think that it gets the community involved in your school and brings people to the school," senior volleyball player Laurie Gardner said. \nOther athletes said an IU equivalent of the PAC-10 resolution could disrupt student athletes advising and schedule. \n"From my experience, the way that the academic portion is set up has been excellent my entire time at IU," said senior Gibran Hamdan, a member of the football and baseball teams. "It may make sense moving the academic advising into the student body advising, but so much of athletes' time is spent in the athletic facilities and we do face different challenges and if it is moved it could not work for a lot of us." \nIU Student Association President Jake Oakman, a senior, said he has strong views on the role of the academic and athletic departments.\n"I hear all the talk about 'academics first,' and I know that my opinion has always been that it is interesting how we have to reinforce that," Oakman said. "If the University feels that they have to reinforce academics first, then someone is not doing their jobs right, because that should be a no-brainer that academics comes first. For my understanding, the athletics department has been run as a separate entity from the academics side of the University, and I think that it should stay that way."
What's Next\nThis weekend's meeting could determine the fate of the athletics department. Whether CIC faculty presidents will rule on the matter is unclear, but the topic is on the table. \nIf they do endorse it, possible outcomes across the Big Ten include smaller athletics departments and closer rule by university administrators.\nAfter the CIC considers it, each university's faculty council will have the option of voting on the proposal. \nAt IU, the University's final ruling rests with President Brand.
