The month of March was a rough one for the NCAA. Weight room issues, food issues, court branding issues, using the term “March Madness” issues, apologies for all those issues—the hits just keep on coming. And there was that small matter of oral arguments in front of the Supreme Court. Yeesh.

Mark Emmert is not in charge of the NCAA. Oh sure, he is on the frontlines, taking the slings and arrows from coaches, players, athletic directors, fans, sportswriters..I could go on and on. And he is paid handsomely to do just that. But he is the wrong person to look at for substantive change right now.

So, just who should we look towards to create the kind of structural, systemic change necessary in college sports? The answer to that question requires a look at the current governance structure of the NCAA.

Take a gander at this NCAA produced chart titled “How the NCAA works.” The Board of Governors (BOG) is the oversight body to whom Emmert reports. Under the NCAA Constitution, the core responsibilities of the Board of Governors include:

• Acts on behalf of the Association by adopting and implementing policies to resolve core issues and other Association-wide matters.

• Provides final approval and oversight of the Association-wide budget.

• Recruits, appoints, supports and evaluates the NCAA president.

• Provides strategic planning for the Association as a whole.

• Initiates and settles litigation.

• Convenes the NCAA Convention each year

While the NCAA President attends the BOG meetings and “plays an active role in the governance system as an ex officio member of the Board of Governors, the president gets one vote on the committee and only for the purpose of breaking a tie.”

Is it any wonder no one person is permitted to make a decision? This is an example of shared governance gone amuck.

Sixteen college presidents run the NCAA as members of the BOG. There are also independent members (including former Duke men’s basketball player Grant Hill) and athletics directors who add their perspectives as well.

The NCAA is a membership organization, and members do like to know their voices can be heard within the structure. Since it appears there are no looming solutions to any of the major challenges coming from the NCAA, here are a few.

I spoke with Gabe Feldman, co-founder and co-director of the Center for Sport at Tulane University, a top sports law expert and a consultant to the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics. Feldman and the Commission suggest radical change is needed:

As Feldman told me, “the university presidents still have to figure out the best way for them to govern college athletics, that is fair to college athletes, and that can continue to sustain what people love about college sports”. That makes sense, but the challenge goes much deeper than that. Today, University presidents are running campuses as large as 55,000 students with massive numbers of stakeholders. The internal politics are fierce, and it’s human nature to want to leverage your school’s or conference’s best interests if you are sitting at the table.

The governance work done on behalf of the membership is all-volunteer, often squeezed in alongside the demands of a president’s full-time job. Is this anyway to run an organization with a billion dollar annual budget? And, is it realistic considering the 21st century demands made on college presidents?

The NCAA once turned to the athletics directors to run the governance structures, but that model too, is outdated.

In this recent survey conducted by the AP, ADs demonstrate an inability to do anything other than recite time worn tropes. Example: When asked if athletes should receive some kind of compensation, 94% of ADs said if that happened, it would result in the loss of opportunities for women’s sports. "Sharing revenue with student-athletes is not feasible. That only works if universities are then absolved of Title IX requirements. Football revenue supports women's golf, women's tennis, women's softball, women's volleyball, women's soccer, women's track and field on this campus”, wrote ESPN.

I suppose few of today’s sitting ADs would remember the infamous Tower Amendment from 1974, which was the first of many attempts to limit the influence of Title IX on athletic departments. Spoiler alert: it failed, as did every subsequent attempt in the last 50 years.

Those who follow college sports are exhausted by this argument, because it does not take into consideration any needed spending reductions in football. The fact that similar arguments are repeated anytime the organization is asked to change or adapt shows one thing—some of the people deep inside the enterprise can’t or won’t see the bigger picture.

An oversight commission would remind the BOG of their responsibility to the tenets the NCAA proclaims to hold dear-athlete safety, health and wellness; social and racial justice issues; academic enhancements as well as strengthening the opportunities for athletes to graduate career ready, just to name a few.

Ask almost anyone inside higher education, and the last thing you should want is to ask the Federal Government to fix your operation. Congress and the Supreme Court are lurking on the NCAA’s doorstep waiting to impose change. Even in the oral arguments this week, it was clear a few of the Justices understood the NCAA has lost its way when it comes to protecting the rights of athletes.

Most college presidents know that change is coming. The question of the day is—do you wait for it to be imposed on you or do it yourself? I know my answer. What’s yours?