Accessibility in NCAA recruitment: Using sport as an equalizer in college admissions

We're working on getting our paper published... read what we have so far in our draft here: 

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Institutional Barriers and Privilege in Collegiate Athletics

College sports in the United States are often portrayed as settings where anyone with talent and dedication can succeed, a level playing field where effort is rewarded through education and opportunity for professional success (Hextrum, 2022; NCAA, 2018). However, this system is built on a foundation of power, privilege, and a long history of exclusion (Harris, 1993; Hextrum, 2022; Mills, 2003; Rothstein, 2017; Skiba, 2012; Wilder, 2013). The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) is the governing body that regulates college sports in the United States. With over 1,100 member schools across the three divisions (Division I, III, and III), the NCAA plays a critical role in shaping college sports, influencing everything from recruitment and scholarship to student-athlete wellbeing (Carter, 2006; NCAA, 2024c; NCAA, 2024d; NCAA, 2024e). Yet, instead of leveling the playing field, this system has reinforced barriers for those from underprivileged backgrounds. For many, the promise of college athletics as an equalizer remains out of reach, with NCAA policies and practices historically and contemporarily benefiting athletes from affluent communities (Cheslock, 2008; Eckstein, 2017; Harrison, 2013; Hattery, 2012; Hextrum, 2018b; Hextrum, 2019; NCAA, 2024c; NCAA, 2024d; NCAA, 2024e; Tompsett & Knoester, 2022).

Colleges and universities in the United States have historically played a role in advancing the ideals and structures of a predominantly White society (Hextrum, 2022; Skiba, 2012; Wilder, 2013). For example, Harvard and Yale's early students, faculty, presidents, and trustees were slaveholders and traders. In addition, the faculty at collegiate institutions were instrumental in developing racial 'science' theories that promoted and justified the idea of White racial superiority (Skiba, 2012). This knowledge led to national policy and laws that restricted college admissions for racial and ethnic minorities and prevented these groups from participating in collegiate sports until the mid-20th century (Guinier, 2015; Harris; Hextrum, 2022; Martin, 2010; Mills; Rothstein, 2017; Skiba, 2012; Thelin, 2011). When the NCAA was founded in 1906, no Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU's) were invited to participate (Carter, 2006). When colleges began to desegregate in the 1960s and 1970s, the NCAA implemented a rule named the "gentleman's amateur" in order to continue excluding racial and ethnic minorities from participating in collegiate sports (Carter, 2006; Hextrum, 2022; McClintock, 1995; Pope, 1996; Stefkovich & Leas, 1994).

The Gentleman's amateur was an athlete with the wealth, prestige, and status to participate in sports for pleasure and not profit (Martin, 2010; Pope, 1996). This excluded athletes who could not afford to play sports without profiting, including the "degenerate classes" of ethnic minorities and individuals from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds (McClintock, 1995, p.47). When teams from the Northern U.S. started accepting Black athletes onto their collegiate teams, they played by an "unspoken" gentleman's rule to only play White players against Southern teams because "the prestige of a Southern school suffers in some way if its sons compete in games with [Black athletes]" (Miller & Wiggins, 2003, p. 145). As sports like basketball and football became more popular and colleges continued desegregating, teams started recruiting from more diverse populations (Hextrum, 2022). Even though sports were desegregated, they became associated with Whiteness, which reinforced the majority White rosters we see in most sports today (King & Springwood, 2001; Lapchick, 2018; Leonardo, 2009; Leonard, 2017; Love & Hughey, 2015; NCAA, 2024b; Sabo & Veliz, 2008).

The NCAA sponsors 45 sports throughout three divisions, most of which are associated with White, suburban areas and many of which have a small youth population (Cheslock, 2008; Eckstein, 2017; Harrison, 2013; Hattery, 2012; NCAA, 2024b). Even when the NCAA shifted regulations to allow coaches to recruit off their campuses by offering special admissions and scholarships, White athletes received and still receive most of those benefits (Hextrum, 2022). The Name, Image, Likeness (NIL) policy effectively ended the rule of amateurism in 2021, giving athletes a chance to profit from their sport through sponsorship (NCAA, 2021; Pogroszewski & Kari, 2024). Most of this profit goes toward football and basketball athletes (Economou & Gamble, 2024). While this seems like a step in the right direction, HBCU's are struggling to keep up with recruiting offers, and athletes who come from lower SES backgrounds face anxiety and stress navigating the system without adequate support. Athletes are also more likely to be from White and upper-middle-class backgrounds in the first place, so they oversaturate the NIL market (Economou & Gamble, 2024; Hextrum, 2018b; Hextrum, 2019; Hextrum & Kim, 2023; NCAA, 2024b; Pogroszewski & Kari, 2024; Tepen, 2021; Tompsett & Knoester, 2022).

Despite these recent changes, access to recruitment and NIL benefits remains uneven, with current NCAA regulations favoring athletes who already possess socioeconomic advantages. The NCAA does not have specific rules governing how coaches select athletes; it does not regulate the criteria coaches use to assess athletic merit, nor does it require athletic departments to establish uniform or transparent standards for evaluating prospective student-athletes (Hextrum, 2018b; Hextrum, 2022). Coaches typically utilize tournaments, camps, and visits to assess "fit" in potential athletes; however, NCAA regulations make these avenues inaccessible to athletes from lower SES backgrounds (Eckstein, 2017; Hextrum, 2018a; Hextrum, 2018b; Hextrum, 2019; Hextrum, 2022; Paule-Koba, 2024). Coaches are not permitted to provide financial aid or price reductions for camp and tournament fees or put on free or low-cost events (Hextrum, 2022; NCAA, 2024c; NCAA, 2024d; NCAA, 2024e). Perspective athletes are also only permitted one "official" visit, where the college provides up to a certain amount of financial assistance, covering travel, food, and other costs. Athletes are allowed unlimited "unofficial" visits, where they must pay their own expenses (NCAA, 2024c; NCAA, 2024d; NCAA, 2024e). This means that athletes who can afford to travel for more unofficial visits will be seen by the coaching staff more times and are more likely to make the team (Hextrum, 2018a; Hextrum, 2018b; Hextrum, 2019; Paule-Koba, 2024).

These advantages are exacerbated at the Division I and II levels, particularly with coach-athlete contact regulations (Hextrum, 2018b; Hextrum, 2019). The NCAA allows Division III college coaches to reach out to athletes once they reach high school, while Division I and II college coaches cannot communicate with athletes until the summer before their junior year (NCAA, 2024c; NCAA, 2024d; NCAA, 2024e). There is no rule related to when coaches can contact recruiting agents, or someone who can speak on behalf of the athlete. These agents are often high school coaches, club coaches, and parents who have knowledge of the recruitment process or connections with college coaches (Hextrum 2019; Hextrum 2022). Athletes with access to these resources are exposed to coaches sooner. Coaches are even permitted to extend verbal recruitment offers to recruits over a month before they are allowed to communicate with the athletes (NCAA, 2024c; NCAA, 2024d; NCAA, 2024e). These disparities in NCAA recruitment regulations, including financial assistance, visits, and communication timelines, give more opportunities to athletes with greater socioeconomic resources.

The history of college sports as a place that uplifts athletes with privileged backgrounds is still prevalent today. The idea that college athletics is a meritocratic environment where any athlete can succeed on talent and hard work alone is much more complex. Regulations and policies have been historically shaped to exclude those of racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic minorities. Current procedures continue to perpetuate advantages for those with greater financial resources, despite skill or dedication. Socioeconomic status is the strongest predictor of whether an athlete will play a college sport out of every category. If these disadvantages aren't addressed, sport as a pathway of opportunity will remain out of reach (Tompsett & Knoester, 2024).

References