Opinion: The NCAA Should Review Their Scholarship Policies

The phrase, “you’re on scholarship,” is one we’ve come to hear a lot nowadays in college sports. It’s often met with joyous reactions from the recipient’s teammates.

However, there’s a lot more to this than meets the eye. When you hear the term “full-ride”, you think of a four-year scholarship for a major sport at the DI level. Although this is true, only a few sports consistently give out full-ride scholarships at the DI level, and most scholarships are not considered full-rides.  

What necessitates a full-ride? It’s a tricky question, as there’s not really a standard. 

Full-rides are not typically multi-year contracts. Most full-ride scholarships are year-by-year, and they renew if the athlete makes GPA requirements, along with consistent athletic performance and maintained health.  

These requirements are simple to meet. Obtaining a sufficient GPA is not too difficult, especially with the amount of academic support athletes get at the DI level. Athletic performances are simple — making an embarrassing error on national TV will not get your scholarship canceled. Injuries are a little bit more complex. A season-ending injury could result in a loss of scholarship, but good grades will likely nullify that. However, a career-ending injury might be handled differently. 

The NCAA needs to change their policy on scholarships, and the best time to do so is now.

I’m largely in favor of the name, image, and likeness (NIL) rights for college athletes, and how it has granted them the ability to earn money, which can help them afford school and costs of living if they are not on full scholarships. 

In 2019, the college admissions scandal shocked many. Amidst the scandal, some students received full athletic scholarships when they had little talent, if any at all. They didn’t play or practice. It was just part of a larger sham to get them into elite American universities. 

It begged the question: should there be certain requirements for athletic scholarships? Or, at least, should the current requirements be tightened? 

An infamous example of getting around the loose requirements is that of Derrick Rose, the NBA star who got into the University of Memphis on a full-ride. Rose took the SAT three times in Chicago and failed. The fourth time, he took it in Detroit. Except that he didn’t actually take it.

Rose had a friend take the exam, and the friend met the minimum requirement to get him into Memphis, where he made the national championship in his first and only season. 

Rose ultimately did not face punishment as he was already in the NBA by the time the truth was uncovered.

To sum up, parents were able to get their kids on athletic scholarships when they were obviously not DI caliber, and athletes were able to falsify test records. 

The NCAA needs to set some sort of standard for athletic performance. I personally do not have a suggestion for what that should look like. Sports have so many different positions within them. Perhaps implementing a depth chart cutline between full-ride, partial-, and no-scholarship players would help to avoid situations like what happened in 2019. 

However, now that athletes can make money, they should be held accountable for a few things. They need to meet GPA requirements; if the university is funding their education and allowing them to make money on their image, the athletes should at least be able to pass their courses to play in games for the school.

If an athlete gets injured, I believe the NCAA should try and implement a universal injury security policy that would keep the athlete on the scholarship list when out for a year or more, pending they make grades and team expectations. 

I don’t believe that cheating or bribery will ever be nonexistent in college sports. But if we can reduce that and make the punishments stronger for those who do cheat or bribe their way onto teams — why not? 

Randle is the sports editor. Follow him on Twitter at @lukerandle02.