committees. athletes tipped the balance on governing committees in the united states and around the globe.d marathon races and then tennis tournaments recognizena a right for prize money and keep their olympic eligibility. by 1986 when the international committee expunged amateur from its bylaws, indeed, most people scarcely don't notice the change. some of you helped reck news success in the revised ted t stevens olympic and amateur pic sports act of 1998.is this example suggests a good place to start.

where ever possible, make college athletes fair and competitive. recognize the rights. uphold the rights of college athletesmp.et give them a voice and challenge universities, in turn, to make wise, straight forward decisions about the compatibility of commercialized sports with education. thank you. >> thank you very much, mr. branchtn.es the general rule around here ist that witnesses speak for five or six minutes. but i failed to make that clear. >> it says five minutes right here, but i wasn't watching. sorry. anyway, just keep it to five or six or seven minutes. and i thank you for your testimony. and it was my fault. mr. bradshaw, a former director of

athletics at temple university. we welcome you, sir. >> chairman, ladies and gentlemen of the committee, good afternoon. your invitation to me to testify today about promoting the well-being and academic success of our student athletes is much appreciated. it's an honor for me this afternoon to represent the 1600 plus institutions and 11,000 plus members of nafta where the practitioners of our enterprise representing in excess of 500,000 student athletes across all three ncaa divisions as well as the neia and junior community colleges. nafta serves for those in the field of the intercollegiate operation. it serves as a vehicle for networking the else change of information on behalf of the association. my career includes positions as a head baseball coach, director

of alumni, 36 years as a division i athletic director at three universities. my athletic career includes three years as a student athlete, one as a walk on. i trust my ankles are safe with you washington senators here today. these prove valuable to my 36 years at lasalle, depaul and temple universities retiring from this wonderful profession one year ago. during the five decades of my career, i've seen significant improvements to the academic, athletic and personal experiences of student athletes. from academic support services, elite coaching and training, athletic facilities to the much-improved equipment, safety requirements and the emergency ncaa permissive benefits, our

student athletes have never had it better. and, yet, we know we can do better. we, as educators, are committed to developing the enormous academic and personal potential that our student athletes bring to universities. >> academics. over the past 20 years, graduation rates by any metric have drastically improved for student athletes. in 2013, the graduation success rate measure for all student athletes in division 1 was 82%, including 71% for division 1 fbs football participants and 73% for men's basketball student athletes. one of the reasons are increased

ncaa requirements for continued eligibility and yurvuniversity' proactive response to measure individual teams, classroom performance each semester. health and safety. the university strives to use best practices, we can never do too much to ensure the health and safety of our student athletes, it remains as one of the highest priorities for every athletic director at every level. best practices that have become common place include hiring strengthening and conditions coaches, dietitians and nutritionists. required seminars for all student athletes to discuss drugs and alcohol, assault, date rape and gambling, as well as comprehensive regular drug test and follow up. financial security. as we all know, the real cost to attend college has risen above inflation for years, causing

many students to have massive debt upon graduation and proving too costly for others to even attend the college of their choice. this total will continue to escalate covering real costs of education combining with the annual increase of tuition, room and board, books and fees. in addition to the real value, and according to the u.s. census data, a college graduate on average earns $1 million more over a lifetime than a nongraduate. other financial benefits include universities, health insurance, ncaa catastrophic insurance, multi-year athletic grants and student assistance funds available through conference offices.

few other campus activities or clubs produce such diversity. bringing together men, women, nations, believes,denomination athletic skills. less than 1% will ever participate in professional sports. and that professional career, on average, lasts only a few years. this reality underscores the value of a college education. the student athletes under our care are the center of our universe and are the most important people to consider in our decision-making. if we always ask ourselves before allocating resources, building facilities or hiring coaches, is this decision in the best interest of our student athletes. then, i believe, that answer has helped us to arrive at the right decision.

any of your questions are most welcome. thanks again for inviting me to be with you this afternoon. >> thank you very much, mr. bradshaw. now, a professor at the university of south carolina, the director of the college sports research institute. welcome, sir. >> thank you. chairman, ranking member, distinguished committee members. thank you for the opportunity to speak for you today. my initial draft of my comments you for giving me the advice. as director of the college sports research institute, my comments today are not off-the-cuff remarks, but informed by soes logical, organizational and economic theories, as well as empirical studies. in drawing extepsively from ncaa documents, they reflect not only my work, but also that of numerous colleagues and scholars. while i'm well aware of their sociographic differences as well

as between ncaa revenue and olympic sports my testimony today will focus on how, within big time college sport, ncaa members have sought to protect their business interests at the expense of the well-being and academic success of ncaa profits. there's a general sense that increased scrutiny is likely. consequently, in 2003, the ncaa barked on a two-phase, organizational strategy which is chart of an agenda and provided an alternative to what the ncaa described as the dob ral of cynics. first, the ncaa created a collegiate model of athletics as

a better understood definition of amateurism that i slate is the principle to the way in which college athletes are viewed without imposing its advocational effort. notably, division i revenues have more than doubled since 2003. telli iningl tellingly, internal ncaa documents include protecting the collegiate model is nearly by definition the primary focus of the office of the ncaa president. concurrently, in an ert to maintain a clear line of demarcation between college and professional sport and offer support for the effectiveness of its new academic progress program, if ncaa developed academic progress for apr and graduation success rate or gsr.

several items are noteworthy. one, ftr, mandated by congress nor the ncaa's gsr is perfect or inherently a more accurate metric. they utilize different sampling and statistical analyses to examine different cohorts. in short, there are different graduation rates. the gsr consistently turns a rate 12-25 p% higher than the g. renewing eligible dropouts, in other words, transfers or athletes who leave school in good academic standing would result in a markedly higher success rate.

focuses on maintaining eligibility and resultings in athletes often cliserring or being steered to majors conducive to their practice in competition. or, in other words, work schedules. telling tellingly, several authorities recognize clustering and scheduling of easy courses as proproblems. in addition, contrary to the ncaa's posturing that they are just normal students, athletes tended respecteds to be socially isolated from the campus community.

they live in a tightly controlled parallel universe. through the steady drum beat of sophisticated and subtle institution propaganda, the ncaa has sought spontaneous consent to mythology enhancing the educational experience with "student athletes." propaganda is effective with internal reviews. there has been little progress in ensuring profit athletes of equal access to equal opportunities affords other students. in conclusion, there's clear evidence not only systematically inhibits access to a world class university education, but also

exploits profit athletes by denying them basic bargaining rights due process andstand ard forms of education. i want to thank the members for the opportunity to visit with you today. >> thank you for your excellent testimony. finally, dr. mark emerett, who is -- well, you all know who he is. >> thank you, senator. good afternoon to you and to senator -- >> is your microphone on? thank you. appreciate that. can you hear me now? >> no, there's no difference. [ laughter ] >> i've learned to project. thank you very much. good afternoon to all of you on the panel. i'm mark emertt. i've served as the president of the ncaa since october, 2010 following 30 years as a university president and administrator.

i certainly appreciate the opportunity to appear before all o of you today and discuss what i agree are very important issues. i particularly want to thank you for working with us on the time of this hearing. it eat go it's good that we're able to have here. they enjoy both world class athletic experiences and receive accesses to top-notch educations. that's why i've been working diligently with the digs one board of directors and all of the stake holders that support student athlete success and, indeed, address many of the issues that have been raised here today. during my tenure, we've enacted more than a dozen key reforms, two notable examples are raising academic standards and adding the opportunity for multiple year scholarships. as we discussed how to improve

college sportings today, it's a democratically governed led association of 1100 colleges and universities. it's important to note that university presidents themselves are the only decision makers. it is challenging, obviously, to bring together coaches, administrators, faculty mem we ares, student athletes and university presidents to achieve consensus on anything let alone college sports. and while the pace of change is not what i or any others would like, the schools are work diligently, even as we speak; to create a new decision-making practical issues. before we discuss the challenges at hand, let me be clear.

college sports, in my opinion, works extremely well for the vast majority of our 460,000 student athletes. . let me describe the most important changes. first, student athletes, in my opinion, should be given a scholarship for life. so they may complete a bachelor's degree, ef enif their education is delayed for any reason unrelated to a lack of academic progress or serious misconduct. scholarships should cover the full attendance, not just room and board, books and supplies. ncaa schools must always lead in the area of health and safety. the ncaa along with a variety of medical experts released rece

recently new guidelines that address if diagnosis, management and provengs of sports-related concussions. fourth, the ncaa must work assertively with all of our universities on sexual assault prevention and support for victims. this is a national crisis and we can all do better. fifth, while all student athletes today are covered by insurance for injuries and the ncaa covers catastrophic injuries, any gaps in coverage must be closed. six, the academics of student athletes must remain our main priority. finally, all changes that are made, these and others, must maintain a support for title nine and cannot come into cost of student athletes of women's

and non-revenue generating sports. the ncaa provides countless opportunities to men and women including many from row income families who would not otherwise attend college. some 82,000 colleagues-and at the risk of correcting mr. bradshaw, it is now $2.7 million to student who is make that a reality. further ncaa revenues are reinvested in our mission. those revenues allowed us to provide $700 million in all three division, a hundred million of which was used to cover expenses for division i

student athletes. it allowed us to cover the $14 million insurance premium for our student athletes. college sports are serving student athletes very, very well for the most part. yes, there are changes to both policy and a culture that are needed. and they require frank conversations like the one we're having here and serious action. i'm kmited to work with you and i want to thank you for appearing today and i look forward to taking your questions and working with you in the future. >> thank you very much. i will start. according to your web site,

student athlete health, safety and well being are main priorities. yet, a court paper after a family sued from their son dying in a pre-season football practice. the ncaa asserted that, "the ncaa denies it has a legal duty to protect student athletes requests. i find that extraordinary. now, i know what your answer is going to be, and that's going to upset me. but the question is how do you reconcile your web site with your prior legal arguments which you declare is different that the ncaa doesn't have a duty to protect student athletes. you either do or you don't. >> i will quibble about the language. i think that was, at the very least, a terrible choice of words created by legal counsel to make a legal argument. i am not a lawyer.

i'm not going to defend or deny what a lawyer wrote in a lawsuit. i will une kwif cably state that we make sure we do everything we can to support and protect student athletes. >> what i perceive is a web of all parties. you suggested that there are a number of universities. what i want to see is i have a panel of subpoenaed university presidents from land grant, publicly funded universities. and i think it will come to that. you say that was bad language by a lawyer who got confused or was late or didn't have a good night's rest or whatever it was. and so you sort of slosh over that.

earlier, you said that there are a number of universities that enumerated changes. but you've also said frequently in answers to questions in other forum, that you don't have the authori authority to do anything. my cynical self says universities like things exactly the way they are because they're making a ton of money, more money than they ever have been before, not all, but some. there's about 120 that make most of it. 120 universities. that i don't know how change is possible. how do you make the case for saying that you can be a par tis pant in this process of bringing

about change when you say that they don't have to listen to anything you say? >> i can tell you, senator, what is going on now. they will put all of the subjects that we're describing and discussing here today in the hands of the 65 universities that have the largest revenue. the schools that are within the five major -- i'm sorry, can i interrupt? why would you pick the 65 schools that make the most money? to me, they would be the ones who would be least likely to make any changes at all. >> because, quite the contrary, they're the ones that precisely want to make changes. often changes have price tags associated with them. they want to make those changes and are often blocked by doing so from stinstitutions that hav less revenue. if you within the to cover a

scholarship model that has full cost of attendance, something that a division one board on my first year of the job twice passed. it was overridden by the membership of the 350 schools in division i predominantly with the support of the 65 mayor schools saying this is something we really need and they were blocked from doing so by the other institutions. so those schools are the interests of whose points i just enumerated. i was impacted by a letter signed from all the presidents of the pac-12 and the big ten. we need the authority to make those kinds of changes. >> you will no, is this the 65 largest communities? >> those are the 65 schools that are members of the five largest revenue conferences, if sec, the

big 12, the big 10, the pac-12 and the acc. >> would you agree with me that college sports has long forgotten the word amateurism? and i'm talking particularly about the 120 major -- but you know, there's a lot more than that. that it's just a business? and the more money you can make, i mean, west virginia university signed on to the big 12, this guarantees one thing and one thing only, and that means that most of the people of west virginia who are not high-income or even moderate income, cannot go to any games out in the southwest. but western university sure makes a ton of money from it.

is that right? is that fair? is that progressive? >> if i may, senator, there's two questions that are being asked there. the first is do i believe that the 20 or so dominant schools, the fbs school, perhaps to whom you're referring, have abandoned the con september of amateurism? and i would say that no, they have not. i certainly agree with you that the top-line revenue, the expenditures that are going on right now in college athletics have moved up very sharply two decades. they have invested in those in their athletic program to not turn a profit. indeed, last year, about 23 had positive cash flow. everyone else in the country put

resources in college sportings instead of taking them out. in terms of the changes that occurred, i agree with you. i was disappointed in the changes that the con frepss saugt to make progress in. nay created some significant travel challenges not just for the fans, but also for the student athletes. when you have to go across the country for a football game is one thing. that only occurs occasionfully. but when you're a volleyball team, student athletes are traveling a great deal. so i was yiet disappointed in not all, but many changes that occurred.

>> you've taken the initiative to address needed changes. i wonder if you can discuss what you hope to accomplish with that initiative? >> thank you, senator. within a month, we'll see, i hope, the board pass a completely new decision-making structure because of the challenges of the past 24 months of making divisions around a very aggressive reform agenda. the leadership of the 65 leading universities have said we simply have to find a better way to define progress. so there is a very keen interest to provide greater support for student athletes. we passed twice over the past 36 months, a proposal to allow universities to give student athletes as a bare minimum, an additional $2,000 in their scholarship to cover all the mislane yougs expenses.

the past changes that allowed and didn't require multi-year scholarships to student athletes. the universities were literally forbidden by ncaa rules about providing multi-year scholarships. we were able to get a change in the rules to allow them and i think we're well on our way to mandating that they be, in fact, multiple year commitments so that student athletes don't have to worry about whether or not they're going to finish their degree on time. i think that is extremely likely to happen. as i mentioned, also, there's a very strong interest in the same group of leading universities to cover the costs of fully the costs of insurance programs.

and i think finally we've got to address this issue of time. the demands are, in my eyes, the demands being placed on young men and women for what's required simply to be competitive these days is far too great a time demand. we need to find ways that young men and women can take advantave of internships of all the things that we know for life.

mr. bradshaw, as a member institution of taking care of the well-being of student athletes. i'm told that your practice while at temple to conduct exit interviews. you had some examples of those interviews in the way that temple addressed the needs of student athletes. >> as many of you know, student athletes right-hand turn the most shy people in the world. they let you know when you're

hungry and when they need things. the exit interviews were invaluable. we have questionnaires that we sent the seniors a month before we left and then we went over those questionnaires with the student athletes to talk about every facet of their experience at the university. thafgs hoepful.

>> things wiere able to be pickd over. >> we were able to get that football coach when 97% of the students were there. >> there's a lot of flexibility. >> we should. it's a institutional control.

>> we all should. in concert with all of those people, sometimes you need funds to do the things that you need to do and you need support from the board and the president. so it's very important. that all of us work together to do that because we're out recruiting other student athletes. and e's a brand. we call athletics the front porch. it might not be the most important thing, but it's the most visible messenger of the brand of the university. >> thank you. mr. chairman, thank you. >> thank you, senator fin. senator coats? >> thank you for being willing to testify here. i know you didn't have to do this. and i think it's been very constructive to hear the reforms that you have initiated and those that you hope to initiate. and it sounds like there's some real positive things that are

happening relative to the issues that you have acknowledged are challenges for the ncaa and challenges for the universities and challenges for our committee. mr. chairman, i want to thank you for following through in your commitment to me and others. you're going to have a good solid, non-theatrical investigation and committee process here. because i think we're all in the same page in terms of how can we best preserve the student athlete and how do we address the problems with student revenue and so forth. i think this is a constructive effort that we're undertaking here and i thank you for pulling all of that together. here's what i'm hearing. and i'm leading to a question here. but i'm hearing from our

witnesses that there are many posztive things happening and many positive results coming from being a student athlete. students that are available to other athletes not able to get a college experience in the education process, the lest of reforms, the full and actual cost of college attendance, health and safety, addressing the sexual assault issue, which goes across all aspects of athletics but also college experience.

it's not issued to just one. it's remarkable in terms of title 9. many of those also would not have, perhaps, had a chance without scholarship help and support. the vast majority of schools that, whether the gigs ii or division iii or not in the top 65, that offer all of these opportunities. it's something we want to preserve. it's something we want to improve. i think we have a president of the ncaa informant. he's been willing to take significant steps forward. obviously, it goes to this question of the 65. i was encouraged by yur response to the chairman's question, relative to their interest in addressing these issues.

now, it's one thing to say that that they're willing to do i. it's another thing to do it. we wish you success, but we understand you're the proposal. you're the initiator, but they're the decision-makers. so i hope, mr. chairman, over some period of time here, hopefully, relatively soon, we can get a positive result from that effort. i think that's really where these major issues fall. doctor, can you give us one more shot at the ability to address what i think goes to the root of the problem but also to the root of the solution. that is the top 65, which are the revenue generators. we toent want to put them in a

situation that gives so many young opportunities to par tas pate and get a college education at the same time. >> yes, mr. chairman and senator coats. i think you're skk two of the most important questions. and, first, recognition a hundred or so years agoo when the ncaa was created, it was, created with some impetus from the white house and congress because of all of the challenges in college sports. at that time, it was determined to be self-governed. providing oversight to make college sports work effectively for young men and women. and we're at a point now whether we're going to see yet again if that works.

i know their interests and their considerations and concerns that that provides them with the confidence that they want to move forward on the agendas that i prescribed, plus more, in the coming weeks and months. nou i think this is a useful cattle prod and everyone is paying attention to what universities are going to do to address these very real and significant issues. i think all of those things combined give me some very positive belief that we're going to wind up in the right place in a matter of months. now, if we're not, then we have another conversation that we can have, i'm sure. i have no doubt, sir, that you and your successors will make sure that we have that conversation. i have no concerns about this body or any other body holding universities acountable for things they need to do and should be doing.

>> mr. chairman, i wanted to note for the record that senator coats out in the hallway found out he just had his tenth grandchild. so just for the record. >> and i heard he cried. very sexy. >> oh, i didn't tell her that. >> i had to leave. >> we love that. a guy who cries over his grandchildren is very cool. >> it's another form of cartel. >> senator howard? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i hope this doesn't get you in trouble, also, calling on me next. but i have ale things for the rord. first, i'd like to submit an opening statement. and, second, also, for the record, as a usc aline ualum wh with pat heydan, i'm pretty sure that we watch the trojans beat

notre dame on nbc, not espn. there's some points that you brought up that i think are -- what you say you're trying to achieve i think are more weaknesses today than they are strengths. if you have to talk about students having scholarships for life, today, you don't have them. and i think that's a weakness. if you have to talk about men and women and having full and actual coverage of their costs while they're in college, it's a weakness because it's something you don't have today. if you're talking about leading in the area of safety, you're not guilty doing it today. if the ncaa is talking about taking the lead in sexual assault, then they're not doing it today. if you talk about gaps in insurance coverage, it means it's not happening today. we can go on and on.

i'll share with you something i agree, maybe the stars are aligning on this one, but i agree with them. we do have jurisdiction over the ncaa. if tomorrow, there was a bill and from the united states senate that would disband the ncaa, give me all the facts on that? . . >> we've to kuszed on the thick e things that aren't happening. but the reality is an enormous amount of very, very good things are happening that we haven't talked about.

so when we focus on the issues of college sports, the vast majority of them, as many of you have noted, the vast majority of issues focus on men's basketball and football as it's played in the top handful of institutions. if you look at bcs football or men's basketball, you are looking at less than 5% of all intercollegiate athletics. for that other 95%, there are very few of those challenges that are occurring. indeed, it is serving, so let's -- i'm not very good at math in my head, but if it's 95 pnt of95% of 460,000 students, let's just say it's 450 students or 425 students who this is working very well. they are graduating at a higher rate than the rest of the student body on their cam putss, they're graduating at a higher

rate than the rest of the united states. if you look at men's and women's basketball, the graduation rates have been steadily growing each and every year. if you look at african american men, the african american men on any given campus have a 9% higher probability of graduating if they're an athlete than if they're not an athlete. the fact is they make very good students. yes, there are issues that need to be addressed. we believe, and i just learned

that he's working on a study that i think will be very useful, we believe that there's good reason to see that they're more successful in life overall. one of the things that we need to work on together is that you don't throw the baby out with the bath water here. it provides extraordinary opportunities. i focused my comments on the things that i'd leek to see fixed. you just elaborated that no schools are gefing four-year commitments. university of india that has just committed to do that. a handful of others are looking at it right 2340u.

>> it was. >> when did that change? >> that's one of the things that i think will occur in the coming monthings. >> schools did offer four-year scholarships until the ncaa prohiblted it. >> they did. and i have no idea why that was put in the rules. i have my own neeotion,notions, don't ef even know what e why t occurred. '74? 1974? >> no reason as to why? >> none of us was in the room. >> in recruiting, it's not a very good idea to give multi-year scholarships. >> historical record on that was that it was driven by the coaches at the biggest universities, precisely the 65 biggest schools because they wanted more control over their athletes. they were driven to wib e win. you have a better chance of winning if you control the athlete and what time he gets up

and how much time he spends in the weight room and so on and so forth. if you can yank their scholarship, then you have more control over them. >> but you can't do that anymore, right? >> yes, you can. the ncaa, in 1973, at the behest of the big school athletic departments and coaches, put in a rule that you could not offer more than a one-year scholarship. in other words, guaranteeing the coaches that control over the athletes. and that zsurvived for 40 years. now, they're trying to repeal to have the option. >> it has, in fact, been repealed. one of the first things that i've insisted on. >> but it lasted for 40 years at the behest of the same 65 schools that are now proposing to do these reforms that you're talking about. and i think they're good. but it's because they can afford them and because the gap between the level of money involved and the needs of these athletes has gotten so obscene that they want to do it on their own. >> senator, allow me. this is such an important point.

it has not changed. a student athlete, right now, who, for the reasons of a coach at any time, can revoke that scholarship so any time, can revoke that scholarship so that student is no longer able to stay at the university. dr. emmerit, that's are you right now, right? >> it's variable. >> starting last year, schools were provided the option. in other words this prohibition was repealed so that a school today can offer a multiyear scholarship, and many do. as i jest mentioned, the university of southern california, and indiana, for example, have recently announced that that is precisely what they are going to do is offer full four-year scholarships. many schools have been doing so since the prohibition was lifted. i don't know the extent to which it -- >> but it's not uniform. >> it is most certainly not uniform. >> it's not even the majority of schools. >> senator booker, your turn will come. >> do we need to remind him he is junior on this committee?

i think somehow he forgot about it. >> i'm calling on senator mccaskill. >> thank you, i would like to sbefr the roll call of the institutions who voted to reestablish the one-year rule. afc testify voted in in 2011, that you could have the option of getting a four-year scholarship. the very next meeting, there is an attempt to overrule that decision. they needed a two thirds vote to overrule the decision to go back to the one-year requirement. i think it will be very interesting for the members of this committee to look at the institutions that voted to go back to a one-year requirement in to 2012. they need 62 1/2.. they got 62.12. to go back to the one-year. and i think you'll be surprised. it's counter intuitive.

some of the institutions that voted to go back to the one year, like harvard, voted to back to one year. yale was strong, they abstained. we had institutions like texas all wanted to go back to one year, but then there were smaller schools that wanted to go back to one year. one missouri school did, but the university of missouri did not. i was willing to offer this into the record and i was nervous when i got this, because i was afraid my university might have voted to go back to one year, but it's very telling that in 2012 -- now, i guess my question, dr. emmert, why wasn't this made public at the time? i think most of the universities would be embarrassed if they were publicly called out that they were unwilling to give a four-year scholarship to an athlete. why did it take a request from

congress for this roll call for this to ever reach the light of day? i would ask for this list to be made part of the public record. >> so ordered. >> well, the data were made available to all of the membership -- >> i'm talking about to the public. why didn't you put it on the website? >> i'm not debating the fact. i don't simply know whether it was not put on the website. the debate was very public. it was obviously very disputed case. it's a very interesting debate. i was quite stunned by some of the argumentation. one of the things i didn't mention about change that i anticipate in the coming weeks, mr. branch pointed out something that's part of the olympic movement, tradition now, in the united states that student athletes have to have, olympic athletes have to have a substantial vote in voice in all of the liberations of the olympic bodies. i certainly advocate for a model much like that, and indeed the proposal that's going to be voted on in -- later in august will include full representation

of students as voting members alongside the presidents and athletic directors on all of the legislative bodies, but we currently have student athlete advisory committees that we turn to -- >> doctor, that's all great. >> if i might, ma'am, the student athlete advisory committee advised against putting in multiyear scholarships, because they happen to agree with coaches that it was a good incentive for their colleagues to remain engaged. so some universities voted to overturn this because their very own student athlete advisory committee said, no, no, don't give multiyear scholarships, we like one-year scholarships. my point is limply, ma'am, it was quite counter intuitive at many levels. >> fair enough, i would like to talk to the students, because i think they probably felt

pressure. i have a hard time imagining any student -- >> i was quis surprised. in one of the responses to one of the letters i sent you, you indicated that you provide an online title ix legal and best practices material and video classes. my question is, in that material, do you make the recommendation to your institutions that they not be allowed to handle the adjudication of title ix complaints involving sexual assault against student athletes? >> i don't know the answer to that. >> well, we've done a survey. the results came out today. i was shocked to find out that 30% of the division i, ii, and iii schools allow their athletic departments to handle the allegations against their athletes. now, we have a big problem with victims being willing to come forward. i assume you've read the long cover story about the investigation that did not occur

with mr. winston at florida state. >> i have. >> that there was no investigation of that allegation. we will never know whether he was guilty or not, because nobody ever investigated because of who he was. if you're a victim and know your alleged will be handled by the department other student on campus handled in a different system, why in the world would you think the process was going to be fair? >> i read your data this morning, and i was both it sounds like equally surprised and dismayed by that fact. i think the concern you're raising is spot on. i think it creates, first of all, conflicts of interest. i think it creates the kind of enormous apprehension that you are describing right now on the part of a victim as somebody who has spent most of his life on campus and in several jobs, had responsibilities to campus safety whenever i was a president, i had to deal with victims and family members of

victims, and people who had suffered egregious harms. i think this is something that needs to be addressed. >> well, i think that my sen and about whether or not things are made public. i feel for you, because part of me think that is you're captured by those you are supposed to regulate, but then you're supposed to regulate those you are captured by. i could tell whether you're in charge or whether you're a a minion to them. the notion that you will say i'll go after this -- i'm -- you know, i don't sense that you feel like you have any control over the situation, and if you have no control, if you're merely a monetary pass-through, why should you even exist? >> well, i think the -- the reality is that while the issue we are talking about here i don't have a vote on, and i don't get to set those policies, i can certainly set the tone on it, and i can certainly be someone who voices a very loud opinion and says this is not right, this is inappropriate, these are the conflicts that exist when you have a policy and a practice like this on on your campus.

i don't sense you feel you have any control over the situation and if you're merely a monetary path through, why should you even exist? >> well, i think the -- the reality is that while the issue we are talking about here i don't have a vote on, and i don't get to set those policies, i can certainly set the tone on it, and i can certainly be someone who voices a very loud opinion and says this is not right, this is inappropriate, these are the conflicts that exist when you have a policy and a practice like this on on your campus. when i first took the job, the very first summit i held in indianapolis was a summit on sexual violence, a summit that led to the creation of a working group of experts, not college athletic folks, but of experts from across the country to create a working group and a think tank. we'll be issues the results of

their work this summer, i'm now, thanks to your work, going to go make sure this is addressed in that handbook and talk to leadership next august about the fact this is really inappropriate and we need to find ways that athletic departments are not responsible for adjudication of these issues because of all the obvious concerns you raised. >> thank you. i'm over my time. i'll try to come back. i hope somebody else covers the questions about young people from families that can't afford to even travel to see their children play in the games. >> yes. >> because meanwhile, the universities are making millions off their children, but their parents can't even get a stipend to attend the game to watch their child play. there is something wrong with that scenario.

and it's going on college campuses across this country every single week. >> i agree with you. thank you. i want to start with -- which is the coach for the for the coach who has epilepsy. as you know, had a number of seizures, and the university of minnesota president said we're not going to get rid of him. we're keeping him on. our record has been rocky, the gophers, they kept the coach on. he had to coach from a box, he couldn't coach on the field because of his condition. during the entire season he coached from a box, and i was there when we beat nebraska with him in a box. it was a great moment. it was a great story, but it does make me think, as i hear all of this, that that kind of compassion, what was so captivating about the story is it kind of defied what had been become of so many of these big