Charlie Baker tells NPR why the NCAA agreed to the $2.8 billion settlement

A multi-billion dollar industry, fueled by people who don’t see a cent of that money, is about to change.

For years, many have argued that universities exploit student-athletes. But last week, a $2.8 billion deal between the NCAA and five major conferences cleared the way for schools to directly pay athletes who play.

This follows a change in the system whereby athletes could start earning money through their own name, image and likeness.

All things Considered host Juana Summers spoke about this seismic shift with the person now in charge of overseeing college sports, NCAA President Charlie Baker.

This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Interview Highlights

Juana Summers: I want to start with the recent announcement of the $2.8 billion settlement that the NCAA and major sports conferences agreed to last week. Although this still needs to be approved by a judge, on the surface it appears to be a historic change for college sports. Why settle?

Charlie Baker: I think the status quo has created over the years, perhaps even decades, a lack of stability and predictability for almost everyone involved in college sports, at least at the highest level.

And I think for us to find a way to break out of that status quo and create what I would describe as some predictability – particularly for Division I and for schools – and also a better way, in our opinion, to support student-athletes by establishing this This is a sort of legal framework that can be monitored and enforced, it essentially gives the NCAA and its members 10 years to repay damages. And also, to some extent, it binds us all together over this 10-year period to work together and follow through.

Are : At first glance, $2.8 billion seems like a lot of money. But if the suit had gone to trial, the potential award could have been much higher than that amount. How much of it was about staying on the sidelines, avoiding financial ruin, and staying solvent?

Baker: Well, I think from my perspective — remember, I’ve only been here about a year — trying to find what I would describe as a positive, proactive approach to addressing this issue associated with student compensation- athletes just seemed to me to be a better way to go. And fortunately, after a series of conversations and discussions with the so-called Power Five conferences and some of their leaders and the plaintiffs – you know, these people have been trading back and forth in the courtroom for a long time – I’m glad that we can find a way to create a settlement and bring that settlement as a proposal to the court. And I hope the court accepts it.

Are : This appears to be a major blow to the NCAA’s long-standing model of a college athlete being an amateur. Given the settlement, given that student-athletes now have much more financial autonomy when it comes to their name, image and likeness, some people might argue that amateurism is now dead in college sports. Do you think this is fair?

Baker: No, I understand that it’s a loaded term for many people. But as someone who has been playing college sports for a very long time, there will still be a lot of young people playing college sports in schools and on campuses and learning all the lessons that one learns playing college sports. And some will do it because of athletic scholarships, others will do it purely for the love of the game.

I think the most important thing I should say about this is you have 500,000 student-athletes, 19,000 teams, 1,100 schools. The schools that were part of that settlement discussion were all the D1 schools, and the schools that were named, the so-called five conferences that were named, represent about 68 or 70 schools. While it’s certainly a big deal, I think college sports is going to continue to be very varied in terms of how it operates, how it’s organized and everything else.

Are : There was another directive that accompanied the regulation, which outlined this new revenue sharing model for student-athletes. And that raised a lot of questions, but the one I want to ask you is about female athletes, whether they will be paid fairly and how that can happen. Can you talk a little about it?

Baker: Everyone assumes there’s an element of Title IX to all of this, and I assume that’s what you’re talking about. And that’s always been something that’s been decided at the campus or conference level. I certainly think everyone expects that to be part of how people implement this in the future. And one of the benefits of that is that it will probably take five or six months for the settlement to go before the judge. And in fact, the next step, which I think you’re referring to, won’t begin until fiscal year 2025-2026. So there’s a lot of time for people to work out some of the details on this, and obviously making sure that Title IX things are addressed is part of that.

Are : I would like to address the issue of prop betting in college sports. And we’re talking about these kinds of side bets here that aren’t necessarily about the outcome of the game itself, but about a whole range of things, from the color of Gatorade to who might score a touchdown. And I know you and the NCAA have urged states to ban prop betting on college sports, saying it increases stress on college athletes. Tell us why this is important.

Baker: You know, my problem is that it puts student-athletes in a position where people are betting on their performance as individuals, not on their performance as members of a team. And I can just tell you that the amount of messages these kids are getting through social media, whether it’s through direct messages or just content directed at them on traditional social media, is horrible. And we hired a company to track a lot of the public posting that happens at our championships to players, coaches and officials, and then we notify the platforms if we see anything particularly scandalous. And if something is really scandalous, we inform the authorities. And I can just tell you that what people will say to a student-athlete who doesn’t keep his or her promises, no matter who they are, is horrible. There is simply no other word for it.

Are : When your predecessor, Mark Emmert, announced he was leaving the position, Sports Illustrated described the job of NCAA president as “bordering on the impossible.” You have been here for a little over a year now. What do you think?

Baker: I sort of came to this position with an intrinsic appreciation for the complexity associated with making decisions in a large, complicated organization with many viewpoints like this.

I hope we continue to be able to build a history of supporting student-athletes and ensure that there is a future opportunity here for kids across all three divisions. I’m only a year in, but someone definitely said to me the other day, “Am I having a good time?” And I said, “Sometimes!” »

But I think the bottom line for me is that if you come from government and politics and health care, which are the areas I’ve worked in before, you’re kind of used to the idea that many people have points of view. and they will probably yell at you a lot. So I’m reasonably comfortable with that.