November 2007 NCAA Executive Committee minutes

MINUTES OF THE

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

NCAA National Office November 1, 2007

Indianapolis, Indiana

Participants:

Michael Adams, University of Georgia, chair

Charles Ambrose, Pfieffer University

James Barker, Clemson University

Jacqueline Campbell, Atlantic 10 Conference

John Fry, Franklin & Marshall College

Gregory Geoffroy, Iowa State University

Bruce Grube, Georgia Southern University

Michael McFarland, College of the Holy Cross

Eddie Moore, Virginia State University

Roberta Page, Shippensburg University

Shirley Raines, University of Memphis

Edward Ray, Oregon State University

Sidney Ribeau, Bowling Green State University

Steve Weber, San Diego State University

Myles Brand, NCAA

Bernard Franklin, NCAA

Delise O'Meally, NCAA, recording secretary

Daniel Curran, University of Dayton; Valerie Cushman, Washington and Lee University; Anthony DiGiorgio, Winthrop University; and Paul Trible, Christopher Newport University, were not able to participate.

Also in attendance were: Gary Brown, director of The NCAA News; Erik Christianson, director of public and media relations; Elsa Cole, NCAA general counsel; Joni Comstock, senior vice president for championships/senior woman administrator (SWA); Dennis Cryder, senior vice president for branding and communications; Jim Isch, senior vice president for administration/chief financial officer; Tom Jernstedt, executive vice president; Kevin Lennon, vice president for membership services; Wallace Renfro, senior advisor to the NCAA president; Charlotte Westerhaus, vice president for diversity and inclusion; Bob Williams, managing di-rector of public and media relations; David Berst, Daniel Dutcher and Mike Racy, NCAA governance vice presidents; and Beth DeBauche and Leah Nilsson and Terri Steeb, NCAA governance directors.

[Note: These minutes contain only actions taken (formal votes or stated "sense of the meeting") in accordance with NCAA policy regarding minutes of all Association entities. While certain items on the Committee?s agenda were acted on at various times throughout the meeting, all final actions within a given topic are combined in these minutes for convenience of reference.]

The meeting was called to order at 2:45 p.m. by the chair, President Adams. All members were present as noted above.

1. Welcome and announcements. Adams welcomed all attendees. He specifically wel-comed Roberta Page, the Shippensburg University director of athletics, who is the new chair of the Division II Management Council.

2. Executive session. In executive session, the Executive Committee received reports on the performance of the NCAA President, and legal and business matters.

3. Approval of August 9, 2007, meeting minutes.

It was VOTED

?To approve the Executive Committee minutes of the August 9, 2007, meeting as distri-buted.?

4. NCAA President?s report.

? NCAA leadership on environmental, carbon neutral issues.

The committee received a presentation from Gloria Nevarez, senior associate athletics director/SWA at the University of Oklahoma. Ms. Nevarez outlined a series of methods by which the NCAA can more positively impact the environment during its championships competition. Specifically, she focused on reduction of waste and increased recycling efforts. Joni Comstock outlined the NCAA?s recent environmental initiative, the formation of the NCAA ?Green Team.? This group is charged with considering ways in which the NCAA na-tional office can establish practices within national office and during NCAA events that support the environment.

5. Report from the Executive Committee working group created to review issues and make recommendations related to membership growth and the status of NCAA Divisions II and III.

The Executive Committee Working Group on Membership held its third meeting October 31 and continued its discussions on membership restructuring. The group began its meeting with a historical perspective on NCAA restructuring. This information covered the initial subdividing of the Association for competitive purposes in the 1950s; through the enactment of the three division structure for legislative and competitive purposes in the early 1970s; and the further subdividing of Division I in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The group noted that past discussions may, in some instances, help to inform future decisions and is helpful information for the broader membership.

The group received updates from each of the divisions.

a. Division I. The group received an update on the recently adopted Division I membership moratorium. The Division I representatives noted that those institutions that are in the new member process are not impacted by the moratorium. Further discussion will occur regarding institutions that choose to sponsor football for the first time during this period.

b. Division II. The group also received an update on the Division II financial study that is designed to assess the value of an athletics scholarship by reviewing financial and nonfinancial benefits. The Division II financial study is tied to the Division II strategic positioning initiative and presently includes data for 16 institutions. The goal is to have data for 20 institutions by January 2008. In the near future, it is hoped that a model will be created that will allow institutions to conduct a simulation of the meaning and impart of the partial scholarship model.

c. Division III. The group was updated on the recent work of the Division III Working Group on Membership Issues related to the establishment of a new membership grouping. The report outlined a philosophical focus, legislative standards, structural considerations and communication plan for a new membership grouping.

The working group reviewed two models for a new membership grouping. One would create a subdivision within Division III. The other option would create a fourth division. Both models focused on a new grouping that would emphasize a broader-based, more comprehensive athletics and educational experience. Both models also would retain the prohibition on athletics aid in any new and existing membership grouping. The new grouping would emphasize increased minimum sports sponsorship. Other potential membership standards include limits on playing and practice seasons and recruiting; regular reporting on the academic profiles and performance of student-athletes; and opportunities for the exercise of greater presidential leadership. The group supported the presentation of both of these models to the membership during the 2008 NCAA Convention and will solicit more direct feedback from the Division III membership through a survey instrument.

From a timeline perspective, the working group noted that the membership would have the opportunity to scrutinize the membership models during an Association-wide forum at the 2008 Convention and may continue such discussions during division-specific sessions. The timeline for a membership vote on the models continues to be January 2009, with the likelihood of a two-year implementation period if the legislation is adopted.

6. Litigation update. The Committee received a report from the NCAA general counsel regarding litigation and settlement actions.

7. Report from the NCAA Executive Committee Subcommittee on Gender and Diversity Issues. The Committee received a report on the subcommittee?s work. The subcommittee received updates from the NCAA Committee on Women?s Athletics and the NCAA Minority Opportunities and Interests Committee, as well as an update on the recommendations from the NCAA Diversity Leadership Strategic Planning Committee. The subcommittee also reviewed data related to the Academic Performance Rate and the Graduation Success Rate by ethnicity and sport. Significant increases among African-American student-athletes, especially in the sports of football and men?s and women?s basketball, were noted, and it issued a formal statement of support and endorsement of these data.

8. NCAA Division I Board of Directors and Divisions II and III Presidents Councils reports.

a. Division I Board of Directors. The Committee received an update on the actions of the Division I Board of Directors. These included:

(1) Proposal No. 2007-110. Agreed to sponsor Proposal No. 2007-110, which would specify that institutional financial aid, based on any degree on athletics ability, may be decreased or cancelled during the period of its award because of an injury, illness or medical condition. Before the proposal is considered, the Board asked the substructure for more specifications regarding the definition of the phrase ?medical condition.?

(2) New Division I structure. Used its emergency legislative authority to adopt the Division I Governance Subcommittee?s recommendations re-garding a new Division I governance structure. The new structure is scheduled to be in place by September 2008. This new structure does not change the role, composition or meeting time of the Board.

(3) Football reclassification. Agreed to adopt legislation to specify that in a four-year period, beginning August 9, 2007, no institution shall be per-mitted to seek classification or reclassification in the Football Championship Subdivision.

(4) Men?s Basketball Committee. Approved a recommendation from the Men?s Basketball Committee to add a single unit to be awarded to the winner of the opening round game, beginning with the game in 2008.

(5) Override request. Determined to take no further action with regard to the override request on Proposal No. 2007-9, as amended; therefore, the over-ride request will be considered by the Division I membership at the 2008 Convention. The Board discussed the need to make it clear to the mem-bership that this package is about academic reform.

(6) Committee on Academic Performance. Agreed to amend the Occasion Two-Historical Penalty structure to include a reduction to the length of the playing season and number of contests for any baseball team subject to such penalties. Specifically, a team that demonstrates significant im-provement shall be subject to a five percent reduction in the length of season and number of contests, and a team that does not demonstrate improvement shall be subject to a 10 percent reduction in length of season and in the number of contests.

b. Division II Presidents Council. The Committee received an update on the actions of the Division II Presidents Council. These included:

(1) Division II Strategic Positioning Initiative. Acknowledged that an out-come of the Division II Presidents and Chancellors Summit held this past June to was to align all Division II policies, programs and budget initia-tives with the division?s strategic positioning platform. Several examples of alignment that have occurred over that last few months include:

(a) Content and programming at the Division II Leadership Academy hosted in Dallas.

(b) Discussions on the faculty role with strategic positioning at the third annual Division II Faculty Athletic Representative Fellows Institute.

(d) Sponsorship of legislation for the 2008 NCAA Convention to align the division?s philosophy statement with the platform.

(2) Division II Academic Success Rate. Acknowledged the Division II Aca-demic Success Rate (ASR) for the 2000 Freshman Cohort, which will be announced the week of November 5. The ASR is a supplemental gradua-tion rate that includes not only scholarship student-athletes, but also transfers and student-athletes not on an athletics scholarship. By including these two additional groups of student-athletes, the division doubles the number of student-athletes in the cohort; thus making the ASR a much more accurate assessment of graduation in Division II. The ASR for the 2000 cohort is 69 percent, compared to the federal rate for Division II student-athletes of 55 percent. Both rates demonstrate that Division II student-athletes consistently graduate at a rate that is more than 10 per-centage points higher than the general Division II student body.

(3) Division II values study and simulation model. Endorsed the idea of fur-ther research related to the Division II values study and simulation model that helps schools understand the financial and non-financial benefits from partial athletics scholarships. The Presidents Council directed NCAA staff to proceed with the plan, as outlined to the Council by representatives from the consulting firm of Hardwick-Day.

(4) Priorities for 2008. Endorsed 10 priorities for the division for 2008, to in-clude:

(a) The Division II Championships Festivals;

(b) Game environment issue;

(d) Campus and conference life skills resource;

(e) Public and media awareness of Division II's attributes;

(f) Continued promotion of the CSTV and Community Engagement Initiatives;

(g) Web-based educational programming on Division II initiatives;

(h) Division II partial athletics scholarship simulation model;

(i) Aligning all Division II policies, programs and initiatives with the Strategic Positioning Platform; and

(j) Promotion of Division II compliance tools and resources.

c. Division III Presidents Council. The Committee received an update on the ac-tions of the Division III Presidents Council. These included:

(1) 2008 Convention. Approved legislative groupings and voting order for the Division III business session. The Council took positions on membership-sponsored proposals. Key membership sponsored proposals include:

(a) Awards and benefits ? academic and other support services ? similar services. The Presidents Council opposed a proposal that would permit an institution to finance academic and other support services for student-athletes provided similar services are provided or available to students in general. In its opposition, the Council noted that, consistent with its position on integration of student-athletics into all aspects of campus life, student-athletes should not be provided with separate academic or other support programming.

(b) Playing and practice seasons ? general playing season regulations ? make-up contests during conference post season events. The Presidents Council opposed a proposal that would permit an insti-tution to make up a conference postseason contest that has been suspended or canceled due to weather or other unforeseen cir-cumstances, provided the contest is necessary to determine the conference champion or automatic qualifier to the NCAA championship. In its opposition, the Council noted that current legislation already allows institutions and conferences to adjust their schedules in anticipation of cancelled or delayed contests. It also noted there is a waiver process available for truly unique circumstances, and issued a directive to the Administrative Review Subcommittee to exercise common sense flexibility in such cases.

(c) Legislative process ? legislation ? amendment proposed by membership ? cosponsorship deadline. The Presidents Council opposed a proposal that would extend from July 15 to September 1 the deadline for conferences or institutions to garner cosponsorship for Convention proposals. In its opposition, the Council noted that the current cosponsorship requirements, in place only one year, did provide an opportunity for proper cosponsorship, as evidenced by the amount of proposals properly sponsored for the 2008 Convention.

(2) Membership structure issues. Received a report from the Division III Working Group on Membership Issues. It recommended, and the Executive Committee Working Group on Membership Issues has re-viewed, a membership model that would create a new NCAA division, philosophically distinguished from the current Division III as follows:

(a) Student-athletes would be encouraged to pursue a more broad-based educational experience and participate in a full range of available co-curricular and extra-curricular activities. As a result, the athletics experience in each sport should be more limited in scope and duration.

(b) Institutions shall be held more accountable to philosophical priori-ties through a series of reporting or review processes, including financial aid, academic performance, special admissions, diversity, gender equity and sport equity.

(c) Presidents would be expected to exercise greater authority and re-sponsibility for athletics programs, in consultation with appropriate campus constituencies, to ensure full integration of the athletics program within the institution?s educational mission.

(d) Legislative standards for a new membership grouping will be re-viewed further at the 2008 Convention. Those discussions, and the results of a February 2008 membership survey, will guide the ulti-mate legislative package developed for consideration at the 2009 Convention.