Three Percent and a Whole Lot of Heart: A Division III Lifetimer’s Call for Equity

For more than thirty years, I have had the privilege of working in Division III athletics. I have recruited the student who also plays in the orchestra. I have watched captains rush from practice to lab. I have seen seniors choose internships over spring break trips because their futures matter just as much as their final season.

And I have also watched those same student-athletes receive a consistently lesser athletics experience than their Division I and II peers — not because they are less committed, not because they work less hard, and certainly not because they matter less — but because they are funded less.

Division III is the largest division in the NCAA. It sponsors the most schools and serves more than 200,000 student-athletes. It is also the division that most closely reflects the NCAA’s stated mission: education through athletics, broad participation, competitive equity, and the development of the whole person. Our athletes do not receive athletic scholarships. They choose their schools for academics first. They compete for the love of the game and the experience of being part of something bigger than themselves.

Yet Division III receives just over three percent of the NCAA’s overall revenue distribution. The overwhelming majority of national revenue flows elsewhere. Most of what Division III does receive is consumed by the cost of operating championships, leaving relatively modest resources for leadership programming, mental health initiatives, professional development, and student-athlete enhancement.

I have been a constant advocate for raising the percentage of NCAA funding allocated to Division III. Not because I believe in entitlement — but because I believe in equity and mission alignment. When the largest division, and arguably the division most aligned with the NCAA’s educational model, receives such a small fraction of support, something is out of balance.

The quiet reality is that some Division III professionals hesitate to speak openly about this imbalance. There is an underlying fear that pushing too hard could jeopardize even the limited funding we currently receive. When resources are scarce, self-preservation can silence advocacy. But silence does not serve our student-athletes.

This is not about diminishing Division I or Division II. Each division has its own model and its own challenges. This is about recognizing that every NCAA athlete — whether competing in front of 80,000 fans or 200 parents on a windy afternoon — deserves consistent investment in their experience.

Our Division III athletes train year-round. They sacrifice time. They lead on campus. They graduate at high rates. They embody the term “student-athlete” in its purest form. They should not feel like second-class members of the association they represent so faithfully.

It is time for the NCAA to care consistently for all athletes at all levels. Not in rhetoric, but in resources. Not occasionally, but systematically.

If we truly believe in the mission, then we must fund the mission.