The NCAA has set down a ruling that shuts down satellite camps, effective immediately, by requiring FBS programs “to conduct all of their clinics at school facilities or facilities regularly used for practice or competition.” The ruling is seen as being a victory for the SEC and ACC, which wanted to protect their recruiting turf from outside school interference. The vote to prohibit the camps passed by a margin of 10-5, with the majority of the “Power 5” conferences voting in favor of the ban and the majority of the “Group of 5” conferences voting against the ban.
According to a Sports Illustrated article, however, the ban will result in serious unintended consequences. While it will prevent powerhouse schools from working camps in other schools’ recruiting territory, it will also prevent smaller Group of 5 schools from attending camps at the larger schools in their region. Even some Power 5 coaches such as Ole Miss’ Hugh Freeze and Ohio State’s Urban Meyer have expressed their dissatisfaction with this result. Essentially, the ban will have the effect of limiting the options that a recruit has for schools to observe their talents, as they will have to attend a much larger number of camps run by individual schools rather than a camp attended by a group of schools other than the “host” school. As Washington State coach Mike Leach pointed out, “I don’t know if there was a genuine determination to further oppress low-income families, but that’s essentially the effect that this rule on satellite camps has.”
Coaches are not the only ones unhappy with the results of this ban. Many NCAA athletes (and committed recruits) have expressed their negative feelings about it as well, pointing out that many kids simply do not have the money to travel to the colleges which were using satellite camps, taking away their chance to be recognized by those coaches. Indeed, a number pointed out that satellite camps were the means by which they themselves wound up at the school they ended up at.
It will be very interesting to see how this ban plays out, especially given the seemingly huge push-back already being displayed. Some potential solutions include (1) a complete reversal of the ban; (2) a new rule that FBS coaches can only work camps at other FBS schools (with a potential further regulation limiting coaches to working a certain number of off-campus camps); (3) the Power 5 schools banning their coaches from working camps off campus but allowing their schools to host staffs of Group of 5 schools; or (4) an antitrust suit against the NCAA and all leagues that voted for the ban, brought by Group of 5 assistants, alleging that those entities colluded to take away an opportunity for them to earn money by working the camps that otherwise would have been paid to them.
Whether any of these potential solutions will be adopted, or whether they would have the desired effect, remains to be seen. One thing that is certain, however, is that if left unchanged, the NCAA’s new ban on satellite camps will have unintended and harmful consequences for both players and many coaches around the country.