Given the monopoly that exists in the world of testing, I would be on the side of abolishing it as a requirement.
...
Sorry, rant over.
Pushing back on a monopoly is no small feat. They're usually quite well armed for political battles and require a protracted battle to reign in.
From what I understand, schools want cheap ways of selecting students --effective is nice if it's still cheap. A test that they don't pay for, plus a quick glance at GPA, is a very simple and inexpensive way to sort applicants, and as a bonus, the liability is minimal. Think it's unfair? Not our problem say the colleges; talk to the test makers and high schools....
A part of me wonders why admission isn't simply left up to the institution. Why start a clearinghouse for athletes in the first place when the institution has the most skin in the game for selecting applicants? I'll go ahead and try to answer that --there's a ton of money to be had, and colleges will go great lengths to get it. IMO that ship has already sailed --there's no way a clearinghouse is going to stop the endless scandals and sleaziness that go on within the elite level of collegiate, revenue sports. Seems like more of a CYA to pretend they have standards, in much the same way executives hire consultants so they have someone to point at if things don't go well.
IMO conferences that split revenue evenly get rid of many "race to the bottom" issues, e.g. balancing the selection of athletes non-academic skills with the potential for harm to the institutions non-athletes. And in this era, doesn't everyone know that athletes are brought in at least in part, if not primarily, to further that pursuit? Football and basketball players make a huge commitment to their sport. Why not let the conferences figure that out? They're generally peers that have a lot in common, and a willingness to give up some power for an overall improvement on an issue. If you minimize or equalize the monetary incentives, then I think it follows that you have a much better shot at resolving issues of fairness.
The NCAA is far from that --a dinosaur really. I have zero faith that they'll improve anything --actually the opposite. Given the NCAAs long history of putting their own interests above the athletes, I'm skeptical of them wading into something like this. I'm more inclined to believe they fundamentally misunderstand or deny the problems and incentives that they themselves bring in, and have little interest in remedying those problems.
Now we've both ranted
Apologies