{"id":7122,"date":"2009-09-18T10:37:02","date_gmt":"2009-09-18T15:37:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/law.marquette.edu\/facultyblog\/?p=7122"},"modified":"2020-02-15T21:56:46","modified_gmt":"2020-02-16T03:56:46","slug":"myles-brand-and-the-illusion-of-reform","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/law.marquette.edu\/facultyblog\/2009\/09\/myles-brand-and-the-illusion-of-reform\/","title":{"rendered":"Myles Brand and the Illusion of Reform"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"MylesAlthough NCAA president Myles Brand has just passed away, it is not too early to comment on his legacy in the world of big-time college sports.\u00a0 When he was appointed to his position in 2002, those who believed that the NCAA was in need of serious reform were delighted.\u00a0 Brand was then president of the Indiana University and had previously been president of the University of Oregon and provost at Ohio State.<\/p>\n

Not only was Brand the first college president to appointed to head the NCAA, he also possessed impeccable academic credentials.\u00a0 He held a Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of Rochester, and had previously been a faculty member at the Universities of Pittsburgh, Illinois-Chicago, and Arizona.\u00a0 Although he was a fan of sports, he had never been an athlete or a coach of any consequence.\u00a0 (He played freshman basketball and lacrosse at small college RPI but apparently wasn\u2019t good enough for the varsity.)\u00a0 Moreover, he had proved his ability to stand up to the goliath that is college sports when as president of Indiana University he fired highly successful basketball coach Bobby Knight for repeatedly boorish behavior.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, Brand turned out to be a disappointment for those who hoped that he might usher in an era of real reform in college athletics.<\/p>\n

He leaves the NCAA pretty much as he found it, an economic powerhouse characterized by sharp distinctions between rich and poor, with the rich reaping the benefits of ever-increasing television revenue and exploiting the skills of young athletes, only a few of whom are able to continue their careers at the professional level.\u00a0 When he assumed office the schools with the strongest commitments to men\u2019s football and basketball were engaged in a seemingly endless \u201carms race\u201d characterized by larger and larger stadiums and arenas, and by high profile coaches paid more and more money each year.\u00a0 At the time of his death, the arms race continued unabated.<\/p>\n

Media outlets have responded to Brand\u2019s death by emphasizing his commitment to reform.\u00a0 According to the Indianapolis Star<\/em>, \u201cBrand elevated academics [and] put athletics in perspective.\u201d \u00a0\u00a0Sports Business Daily<\/em> reported he left a \u201clegacy focused on academic reform in the NCAA,\u201d while the Associated Press praised the fact that he “worked to change the perception that wins supersede academics and earned accolades for his efforts.\u201d\u00a0 Kind words, but words that should acknowledge that if these were his goals he largely failed in such efforts.<\/p>\n

When one asks what Brand actually accomplished as director of the NCAA, it is difficult to point to any truly significant reform.\u00a0 While it is true that he continued the process of tightening academic standards for athletes and placing greater emphasis on graduation for athletes, it would be disingenuous to claim that during his years at the helm student athletes were held to the same academic standards as ordinary students, for it is clear that they were not.<\/p>\n

While there is no consensus among academic reformers as to what NCAA rule changes are necessary, a reform-minded director might have pushed for:<\/p>\n