D3 Runner Banned For Accepting Donation To Help Pay For College

Mohammed Bati didn’t take money to buy shoes, sign autographs, or promote a brand.

He took it so he wouldn’t have to drop out of college.

That distinction hasn’t mattered to the NCAA.

Earlier this week, Bati, a Division III runner at Augsburg University and the NCAA DIII cross country national runner-up, announced that he has been ruled ineligible for the entire indoor and outdoor track seasons after accepting roughly $6,000 from members of his community to help cover tuition costs.

The money allowed him to finish the semester. It also ended his final year of NCAA competition.

In a post shared on Strava, Bati explained that he had been struggling financially last semester while working overnight shifts at a hospital. Faced with the possibility of leaving school, people around him stepped in to help. The support, he wrote, was not business or payment, but community support that allowed him to stay enrolled.

Under NCAA rules, it was still a violation.

A non-traditional path to the top of Division III

Bati’s rise through college running didn’t follow the usual script.

He ran high school track in Minnesota and was competitive, but not highly recruited, roughly a 9:20 3200-meter runner. He did not arrive at college with scholarship offers or financial backing. At the Division III level, athletic scholarships are prohibited. Athletes pay their own way.

At Augsburg, Bati studied nursing while working close to full-time hours, often overnight, to afford tuition. Over time, his running improved dramatically.

This fall, he finished second at the NCAA Division III Cross Country Championships. Earlier this month, he ran 2:12 at the California International Marathon, one of the fastest marathon performances ever by a Division III athlete, and earned him a spot in the 2028 Olympic Trials.

That progress came alongside financial strain, not instead of it.

When money became tight last semester, Bati relied on people in his life. The funds came from friends, teachers, and community members, many with no connection to Augsburg or its athletic program. The money went toward staying enrolled in school.

That context did not alter the NCAA’s ruling.

Why this wasn’t NIL

One detail is essential to understanding the case. Division III athletes are allowed to earn money through Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) opportunities.

Since the NCAA updated its NIL policy, athletes at all levels can engage in endorsements, sponsored social media posts, paid appearances, and other agreements tied to the commercial use of their name or image. These deals are typically modest at the Division III level and often involve local businesses or community partnerships.

What Division III athletes cannot do is receive outside financial assistance that functions as tuition support or extra-athletic benefit unless it fits within approved financial aid structures or legitimate NIL agreements.

Bati’s situation did not.

The $6,000 he received was not tied to promotion, branding, appearances, or any exchange of value related to his athletic identity. It was not compensation. It was not an endorsement. It was not NIL.

It was more like emergency support.

Once the NCAA determined that the funds did not qualify as NIL, they were classified as an impermissible benefit. Under current Division III rules, that classification doesn’t really offer much room for flexibility.

Two divisions, two standards

The ruling has drawn sharp criticism when placed alongside modern Division I athletics.

At the Division I level, athletes can earn NIL income worth hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars. In addition, the NCAA has begun implementing revenue-sharing models that allow schools to directly share athletic department revenue with athletes. Division III schools are not permitted to participate in revenue sharing.

Division I athletes can accept money from collectives, sponsors, and third parties, often while on full athletic scholarship. Division III athletes, by contrast, pay tuition and rely on a combination of need-based aid, merit scholarships, grants, loans, and jobs to remain enrolled.

The NCAA is no longer enforcing a single model of amateurism. It is enforcing two different systems depending on division.

Bati’s case sits squarely in the space between them.

What Division III is meant to protect

Defenders of the ruling argue that Division III rules exist to preserve fairness and prevent a pay-to-play environment. Allowing outside financial support, they say, would undermine the division’s core principles.

But Bati’s case tests the limits of that argument.

The money he received did not create a competitive advantage. It did not improve training conditions or reduce his need to work. It allowed him to remain a student and continue balancing school, employment, and athletics, a reality for many Division III athletes.

Division III already operates within a complicated financial ecosystem. Athletes receive academic scholarships, qualify for need-based grants, and work significant hours. Coaches routinely help athletes navigate financial aid offices, even if the aid itself cannot be tied to athletics.

What they cannot do is accept help that exists outside those institutional channels, even when it comes from personal relationships rather than athletic leverage.

A season lost

The NCAA could have pursued conditional reinstatement or repayment. Instead, it issued a penalty that removes Bati from competition for the entirety of his final indoor and outdoor seasons.

For a senior who had already run his last cross-country race, the punishment is devastating.

Bati has said he will continue training. Given his recent performances, it is possible this ruling accelerates his move beyond college running. But that outcome does not resolve the broader question his case raises.

The decision sends a clear message to Division III athletes nationwide. Community support, even when unrelated to performance, can become a liability if it does not fit neatly into NCAA definitions.

In Bati’s case, the rules were applied exactly as written. The context was not.