While it is a new concept in the college sports arena, arbitration has long been associated with the professional sports world and with resolving contractual disputes generally. With the establishment of the College Sports Commission (CSC) a new arbitration process has been implemented to resolve disputes over issues such as third party NIL deals or violations of the revenue sharing cap that has been created. This is a very different process from the traditional NCAA infractions process, which relied on investigations, reviews, and limited judicial-style protections.

CCHA’s Todd Shumaker, with the sports and higher education practice group, and Steve David, a former Indiana Supreme Court Justice and member of the firm’s alternative dispute resolution group, chatted on the growing role of arbitration in college sports and how it differs from the current NCAA infractions process. Importantly, arbitration offers advantages in a membership-based regulatory system like the NCAA that include:

• Neutral decision making - Arbitrators provide independent reviews, helping ensure decisions are not driven solely by membership-based politics or internal biases.
• Clarity – Arbitration sets defined rules and procedures. For example, discovery in arbitration is used to help facilitate the exchange of information necessary to have a fair hearing, not for broad exploration of potential allegations. The arbitrators make sure both parties have sufficient information to present their case without allowing discovery to become a tool to delay or harass.
• Efficiency – Arbitration is designed to resolve disputes quickly – 45 days under CSC rules – which is an important factor in college athletics where seasons of eligibility may be affected and timely penalties are important.
• Finality - Arbitration decisions provide closure without prolonged appeals, allowing institutions and individuals to present their case, then move forward without prolonged delays in resolution.

Notably, while the NCAA process looks to prior decisions persuasively, creating a perception or sense of fairness, predictability and balance for schools and individuals facing allegations, the arbitration process tends to favor confidentiality in decision making. The extent to which decisions in prior CSC arbitrations can be used persuasively for future cases in the process remains to be seen.

As college athletics continues to evolve the importance of timely, structured, credible dispute resolution only becomes more important. Effective arbitration requires experienced professionals, institutional commitment to fairness and a shared belief that the integrity of the process matters.