Report of the NCAA Division I Board of
Directors meeting
April 26, 2007
Section One
Actions taken on items considered only by the
Board of Directors.
1. Report of the Division I Presidential Advisory Group. [Reference BD Supplement No. 5.]
BOARD ACTION: Received a report from the Division I Presidential Advisory Group’s April 25, 2007, meeting and heard comments from the group’s chair throughout the meeting regarding pertinent points raised by the group.
2. Consideration of legislative proposals
deferred by the Board of Directors in January.
a. Proposal No. 2006-100 – Committees – Division I Presidential Advisory Group – Duties and Authority – NCAA Football Championship Subdivision Legislation. Intent: To specify that members of the Division I Presidential Advisory Group who represent NCAA football championship subdivision conferences shall have the authority to act on behalf of the football championship subdivision members of the Board of Directors on legislative issues specific to championship subdivision football.
è BOARD ACTION: Defeated the proposal. [Vote: For 4 – Curran, Fisher, McFarland, Rawlins; Against 11 – Adams, Austin, Bruininks, Geoffroy, Grube, Harrison, McPhee, Raines, Ribeau, Weber, Welty; Abstain 1 – Barker; Not present 2 – Davis, DiGiorgio.]
b. Proposal No. 2006-107 – Administrative Regulations – Contest Exemptions/ Certification – Sports Other Than Basketball and Football – Elimination of Certification Program. Intent: In sports other than basketball and football, to eliminate the event certification program.
è BOARD ACTION: Approved the proposal. (Unanimous Voice Vote.)
[Note: Events certified during the 2006-07 academic year that will be played during the 2007-08 season will be exempted from the applicable contest limitations.]
3. Update on the work of the Management Council’s Governance Subcommittee. [Reference BD Supplement No. 8.] [Addendum]
BOARD
ACTIONS:
a. Received an overview of the Governance
Subcommittee’s recommendations as the subcommittee seeks to enhance the
Board of Directors leadership role by developing a substructure which improves
the volume and level of communication received by the Board from the other
governance bodies; and
b. Commended the Governance Subcommittee on its
thorough and thoughtful review of the Division I governance structure and
offered the following suggestions as the subcommittee readies to send its
recommendations to the membership for discussion via conference spring
meetings:
·
While the
Board trusts the substructure and does not want to have to act on every
legislative proposal in the annual legislative cycle, the Board does want the
ability to examine any legislative proposal in the cycle. Accordingly,
the language in the presentation that referred to the “Legislative
Council as the final legislative authority subject to Board oversight”
needs to be clarified to reflect the fact that the Board has more than an
oversight role. Perhaps the word “ratify” more
appropriately reflects the Board’s action relative to the work of the
Legislative Council on those proposals, which the Board does not want to
specifically consider.
·
The final
recommendation needs to specifically reflect the need for the faculty voice to
be part of the new governance structure as intercollegiate athletics is part of
the overall fabric of higher education.
·
More
detail regarding the role and function of the Leadership Council may be helpful
as the membership seeks to understand how issues will be considered in the new
governance structure.
·
A review
of the cost estimates associated with the proposed new governance structure
would be helpful as the Board considers the recommendations in more detail at
its August meeting.
c. Reviewed the suggested timeline for
consideration of the Governance Subcommittee’s recommendations, which is
set forth below as follows:
•
Spring 2007
– Vet recommendations using conference spring meetings and the cabinet
meetings.
•
Summer 2007
– Necessary modifications and revisions by the Governance Subcommittee.
•
August BOD
meeting – A detailed presentation of the recommendations to the Board.
•
October 2007
– Final consideration by the Management Council, and assuming there is
evidence of membership, support the Board of Directors will be asked to use its
emergency legislative authority to adopt the package.
•
Summer 2008
– Implementation.
4. Report of the Division I Board of Directors’ Subcommittee regarding the Presidential Task Force on the Future of Division I Intercollegiate Athletics. [Reference BD Supplement No. 9.]
BOARD
ACTIONS:
a. Received a report from a Board of
Directors subcommittee charged with developing strategies for consideration of
the recommendations included in the Report of the Presidential Task Force on
the Future of Division I Intercollegiate Athletics and learned that the
subcommittee recommended the establishment of a new subcommittee composed of
presidents, athletics administrators and faculty members to oversee and monitor
consideration of the recommended initiatives by the governance substructure.
b. Approved the establishment of an
oversight and monitoring subcommittee and appointed Board member
5. Discussion of a pilot early certification concept. [Reference BD Supplement No. 11.]
BOARD
ACTIONS:
a. Approved for the class of 2007 the ability
to deem prospective student-athletes as qualifiers via a pilot
initial-eligibility waiver if they meet one of the following two criteria:
(1) Prospective student-athlete has achieved a test
score, per Bylaw 14.3.1.3, equal to or greater than 1100 SAT or 95 ACT Sum; or
(2) Prospective
student-athlete has a preliminary certification report, which indicates the student
has achieved a minimum of 12 core courses with a core grade-point average of
3.000 or higher in Divisions I and II and a test score of at least 1000 SAT or
85 ACT Sum; and
b. Charged the NCAA Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet with proposing legislation after considering available research to establish early certification initial-eligibility criteria, which uses a prospective student-athlete’s six-semester core courses, grades and test score. [Vote: For 14 – Adams, Austin, Bruininks, Curran, Fisher, Geoffroy, Grube, Harrison, McPhee, Raines, Rawlins, Ribeau, Weber, Welty; Against 1 – Barker; Abstain 1 – McFarland; Not present 2 – Davis, DiGiorgio.]
[Note: Prospective student-athletes who do not meet either of the criteria set forth above in numbers (1) and (2) may be certified as qualifiers by meeting the initial-eligibility legislative requirements for Divisions I. Additionally, prospective student-athletes’ records will continue to be reviewed for academic irregularities and this review may result in a prospective student-athlete not being granted this waiver.]
6. Update from
the Committee on Academic Performance (CAP). [Reference BD Supplement No. 12.]
BOARD
ACTIONS:
a. Third-Year Data.
(1) Received a report from the Committee on Academic
Performance’s April 23 – 24 meeting and reviewed the third year
Academic Performance Rate data.
(2) Noted that the elimination of the small squad size
adjustment will have a dramatic impact on the number of programs that will be
subject to penalties and discussed the fact the Board must remain strongly
committed to its academic reform efforts as this reform is about academic
improvement and changing the culture, not about imposing
penalties.
b. Supplemental Fund.
(1) Discussed
a recommendation from the Committee on Academic Performance to establish the
AAP Supplemental Support Fund in an effort to support campus-based initiatives
designed to foster student-athlete academic success at limited resource
institutions;
(2) Learned that the
program will be funded through reallocating a portion of the NCAA Division I
Academic Enhancement Fund by providing that the 4.25 percent annual incremental
increase to the fund will be set aside for grant recipients in the initial year
and that all monies allocated to this fund, but not awarded, will be returned
to the Academic Enhancement Fund for distribution; and
(3) Supported a motion to establish the NCAA Division I Academic Performance Program (APP) Supplemental Support Fund as recommended by the CAP. (Unanimous Voice Vote.)
c. Application of postseason competition ban to student-athletes in individual sports. Agreed to sponsor a legislative proposal for the 2007-08 legislative cycle to eliminate the opportunity for student-athletes to compete in individual postseason competition when his or her team is subject to a postseason competition ban per the APP. (Unanimous Voice Vote.)
7. Update on the efforts of the Baseball Enhancement Working Group. [Reference BD Supplement No. 13.]
BOARD
ACTIONS:
a. Received the final report from the Baseball Academic
Enhancement Working Group, which was a 26-member group composed of presidents,
athletics administrators, faculty and coaches charged by the Board of Directors
at its April 2006 meeting with developing a proposal over the next year to
address concerns regarding academic performance in baseball and examined the
working group recommended package, which is set forth below:
(1) Fall
Term Certification. Baseball student-athletes shall be required to be
certified as academically eligible at the start of the fall term in order to be
eligible for competition during both the fall and spring terms. As a
result, baseball student-athletes will not be able to use the fall term to
“get well” academically in order to compete in the spring term.
Further, mid-year transfers (e.g., from two-year colleges) will not be eligible
to compete upon transfer.
Effective Date. August 1, 2008. Accordingly, baseball student-athletes must be certified at the start of the fall term in 2008 to be deemed eligible for competition during the spring 2009 baseball season.
(2) Transfer Year in Residence. Student-athletes transferring to any Division I institution in the sport of baseball shall be required to serve one academic year in residence before being eligible to compete in the sport of baseball. In effect, transfer student-athletes in baseball will no longer be able to take advantage of the one-time transfer exception to be immediately eligible for competition upon transfer.
Effective Date. August 1, 2008. Beginning with the 2008-09 academic year, any student-athlete transferring to a Division I institution in the sport of baseball would be required to serve an academic year in residence before being eligible for competition.
(3) Financial
Aid. The current baseball financial aid model of 11.7 equivalencies
shall be amended to include a minimum equivalency value (percentage of a full
grant) of 33 percent per baseball student-athlete and a maximum limit of 27
counters (number of baseball student-athletes receiving athletics aid). The 33
percent minimum, however, may be satisfied only with athletics financial aid.
Additionally, institutions would be limited to a maximum of 35 total baseball
student-athletes on their roster, regardless of their source of financial aid
(if any).
Effective Date. August 1, 2008 begins two-year implementation process. Accordingly, for the 2008-09 academic year, institutions will be required to (1) provide all student-athletes initially enrolling in a four-year institution (freshmen, two-year transfers) a minimum equivalency of 33 percent in athletics aid; (2) limit the total number of student-athletes receiving athletics aid (squad size) to 30; and (3) limit the total number of student-athletes on their team (roster size) to 35. Beginning with the 2009-10 academic year, the 33 percent athletics aid criteria will remain in effect for first-time enrollees, squad sizes must be reduced to 27 and roster sizes will remain limited to 35.
(4) Additional Penalties. Any baseball program with a four-year average APR less than 900 shall be required to reduce its baseball playing season by 10 percent in the number of contests and length of season at its first available opportunity (e.g., not more than 50 contests and not more than a 119-day playing and practice season).
[Note: It is possible the Committee on
Academic Performance can address this recommendation through a policy change
rather than requiring legislation.
This matter will be directed to CAP.]
Effective Date. August 1, 2009. Accordingly, the 2009-10 academic year would be the first year an institution with an average APR below 900 may be required to reduce its number of contests and playing season length. As such, APR scores from the academic years of 2007-08, 2006-07, 2005-06 and 2004-05 would be used to trigger this additional penalty. Practically, institutions triggering this penalty would be publicly announced in spring 2009 (with the general APR public release) and be required to reduce their contests and playing season within a two year period: by either the 2010 baseball season or (if schedules are already set) not later than the 2011 baseball season.
b. Commended the Baseball Academic Enhancement Working Group and the baseball community for its work in coming together with this meaningful package aimed at improving the academic performance of baseball student-athletes and supported a motion to consider the package of recommendations at this meeting rather than waiting until a subsequent meeting. [Vote: For 13 – Adams, Austin, Barker, Curran, Fisher, Grube, Harrison, McPhee, McFarland, Raines, Rawlins, Ribeau, Weber; Against 1 – Welty; Not present 4 – Bruininks, Davis, DiGiorgio, Geoffroy.]
c. Defeated a motion to amend the financial aid element of the package to provide for a the minimum equivalency value (percentage of a full grant) per baseball student-athlete of 25 percent rather than 33 percent as originally proposed. [Vote: For 6 – Barker, Curran, Fisher, Grube, McPhee, Ribeau; Against 8 – Adams, Austin, Harrison, McFarland, Raines, Rawlins, Weber, Welty; Not present 4 – Bruininks, Davis, DiGiorgio, Geoffroy.]
d. Supported a motion to use its emergency legislative authority to adopt the complete package of recommendations as proposed by the Baseball Academic Enhancement Working Group. [Vote: For 12 – Adams, Austin, Curran, Fisher, Grube, Harrison, McFarland, McPhee, Rawlins, Ribeau, Weber, Welty; Against 2 – Barker, Raines; Not present 4 – Bruininks, Davis, DiGiorgio, Geoffroy.]
8. Report
of the
BOARD ACTION: Received a report from the chair of the Executive Committee Subcommittee on Gender and Diversity Issues regarding that group’s April 25, 2007, meeting and heard that the subcommittee was supportive of the revised recommendations of the Management Council’s Governance Subcommittee relative to gender and ethnic diversity requirements in the proposed new Division I governance structure and learned that the subcommittee would like to continue to be a part of the conversation regarding the proposed new structure.
9. Appointment
of chairs.
a. Board of Directors.
·
Appointed
b. Presidential Advisory Group.
·
Based on
the recommendation of the Division I Presidential Advisory Group, appointed
c. Executive Committee.
·
Appointed
the following members to the NCAA Executive Committee effective after the April
meeting: (Unanimous Voice
Vote.)
o
o
o
Greg Geoffroy,
o
o
Ed Ray,
d. Executive
Committee Subcommittee on Gender and Diversity Issues.
·
Appointed
10. Future meeting dates.
a. August
9, 2007, National Office,
b. November
1, 2007, National Office,
c. January
14, 2008, in conjunction with the NCAA Convention in
d. April
25, 2008, National Office,
e. August
7, 2008, National Office,
f. October
30, 2008, National Office,
Section
Two
Action taken on items considered by the
Management Council
and, if necessary, the Board of
Directors
on April
16-17 and April 26, 2007
(See Attachment A for a record of the roll-call votes taken at the meeting.)
1. Opening remarks.
2. Minutes of the January 5 & 7, 2007, Division I Management Council meeting. [Reference MC Supplement No. 1.]
MC ACTION: Approved the minutes as
distributed. (Unanimous Voice
Vote.)
3. Division
I Administrative Committee report on interim actions.
[Reference MC Supplement
No. 2.]
MC
ACTION: Received a report
of interim actions taken by the Administrative Committee on behalf of the full
Management Council and approved the Administrative Committee’s actions.
4. Minutes of January 8, 2007, Board of Directors meeting. [Reference MC Supplement No. 3.]
MC ACTION: Received
a report of the meeting.
BOARD
ACTION: Approved the minutes as
distributed. (Unanimous Voice
Vote.)
5. Report of January 8, 2007, Executive Committee meeting. [Reference MC Supplement No. 4.]
MC ACTION: Received a report of the meeting.
BOARD ACTION: Received a report on the January 8, 2007, NCAA Executive Committee meeting, which highlighted a number of the ongoing initiatives from that committee including the Life-Work Balance Task Force, the pilot program on international membership and the efforts of the new Executive Committee membership working group.
6. NCAA
president's report.
MC ACTION: Received a report from the NCAA president in which he shared his reflections on how athletics has historically helped to serve as a catalyst for social change and observed that recent events involving student-athletes could possibly serve to enhance the national dialogue regarding issues of gender and race.
BOARD ACTIONS:
a. Received a report from the NCAA president regarding conversations being lead by the NCAA and NBA to evaluate whether parties with interests in youth basketball would consider developing a new, national, youth basketball initiative focused on education that could attract youth as well as offer a training program for coaches and officials; and learned that while there is no guarantee of success, attempting to develop recommendations that will be a priority over the next six to 12 months.
b. Heard from the chair of the Division I Committee on Infractions regarding the recommendations in the Duff Report relative to the relationship between the Committee on Infractions and the Infractions Appeals Committee; and
c. Agreed that a series of recommendations should be developed for the Board to evaluate the accountability within the governance structure of the Committee on Infractions and Infractions Appeals committee. (Unanimous Voice Vote.)
7. Litigation
update.
BD/MC ACTION: Received
a report from the NCAA general counsel regarding current cases involving the
Association.
8. Governmental relations report. [Reference BD Supplement No. 4.]
BD/MC ACTION: Received a report and took no
action.
9. Cabinet
reports.
a. Report of February 7-8, 2007, Championships/Competition Cabinet meeting. [Reference MC Supplement No. 7.]
MC
ACTIONS:
(1) Received a report of the Championships/Competition Cabinet’s February 7–8, 2007, meeting and was informed that after receiving a 95 percent response rate on the male practice player survey, a cabinet subcommittee has been named to examine the results with the goal of developing a recommendation regarding the use of male practice players for the full cabinet’s consideration possibly as early as the June cabinet meeting; and
(2) Considered a request to use its emergency or noncontroversial legislative authority to adopt the following proposals:
[Note:
See Attachment B for the full text of the
following legislative proposals.]
(1) Proposal
No. 2007-3 – Executive Regulations – Financial Administration of
Championships – Transportation and Per Diem Expenses –
Determination by Championships/Competition Cabinet. Intent: To
specify that transportation expenses and per diem allowances for the official
traveling parties of competing institutions in Division I and National
Collegiate team championships and individual-team championships shall be
determined and provided in accordance with policies and procedures established
by the NCAA Division I Championships/Competition Cabinet. [Source: NCAA Division I Championships/Competition
Cabinet (Awards/Travel Policies/Bylaw 16 Subcommittee).]
MC ACTION:
Designated the proposal as noncontroversial (Unanimous Voice Vote); approved
and agreed to request that the Board use its authority to adopt the proposal as
noncontroversial legislation. (Unanimous
Voice Vote – Effective Date:
Immediate.)
è BD
ACTION: Adopted the proposal as noncontroversial legislation. (Unanimous Voice Vote
– Effective Date: Immediate.)
(2) Proposal
No. 2007-2 – Executive regulations—Definitions and Applications
– Misconduct. Intent:
To specify that misconduct in an NCAA
championship is any act of dishonesty, unsportsmanlike conduct, unprofessional
behavior or breach of law, occurring from the time the championship field is
announced through the end of the championship, that discredits the event or
intercollegiate athletics. [Source:
NCAA Division I Championships/Competition Cabinet (Men's Basketball Issues
Committee and Women's Basketball Issues Committee).]
MC
ACTIONS:
(a) Defeated
a motion to forward the proposal to the Board of Directors for consideration as
noncontroversial legislation. (Vote:
For 5, Against 44, Not Present 2; See Vote No. 1, Attachment
A.)
(b) Defeated
a motion to forward the proposal to the Board of Directors for consideration as
emergency legislation. (Vote:
For 2, Against 47, Not Present 2; See Vote No. 2, Attachment
A.)
(c) Proposal No. 2007-2 will be placed in the regular 2007-08 legislative cycle for consider by the Division I membership.
(3) Proposal
No 2007-1 – Playing and Practice Seasons – Softball – First
Contest Date -- Championship Segment. Intent: In
softball, to specify that the first contest date in the championship segment is
the Thursday that is 14 weeks before the Thursday immediately preceding the
start of the NCAA Division I Softball Championship. [Source: NCAA Division I
Championships/Competition Cabinet (Playing and Practice Seasons Subcommittee).]
MC ACTION: Designated the proposal as noncontroversial (Unanimous Voice Vote); approved and agreed to request that the Board use its authority to adopt the proposal as noncontroversial legislation. (Unanimous Voice Vote – Effective Date: August 1, 2007.)
è BD
ACTION: Adopted the proposal as noncontroversial legislation. (Unanimous Voice Vote
– Effective Date: August
1, 2007)
(4) Proposal
No. 2006-121 - Playing and Practice Seasons – Women's Soccer –
First Contest or Date of Competition.
Intent: To specify that in years in which
the date of the first permissible contest in men's soccer results in 12 weeks
between that date and the start of the NCAA Division I Men's Soccer
Championship, the date for the first permissible contest in women's soccer
shall be the Friday prior to the 12th weekend prior to the start of the NCAA
Division I Women's Soccer Championship, except that an alumni contest may be
played the previous weekend.
[Source: NCAA Division I Championships/Competition Cabinet (Playing and
Practice Seasons Subcommittee).]
MC
ACTIONS:
(a) Defeated a motion by the
cabinet to forward the proposal to the Board of Directors for consideration as
emergency legislation. (Vote:
For 23.5, Against 24.5, Not Present 3; See Vote No. 3, Attachment
A.)
(b) Proposal No. 2006-121 will be placed in the regular 2007-08 legislative cycle for consideration by the Division I membership.
b. Report of the February 15-17, 2007, Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet meeting. [Reference MC Supplement No. 8.]
[Note:
See Attachment B for the full text of the
following legislative proposals.]
MC
ACTIONS:
(1) Received an update from staff on the cabinet’s February 15 – 17, 2007, meeting and learned about a financial aid workshop that was hosted by the cabinet’s Subcommittee on Financial Aid immediately prior to the cabinet meeting. This workshop, which included members from the financial aid community along with representatives from athletics, was designed to enhance the level of communication and understanding regarding financial aid issues and to help identify future agenda items for consideration by the governance structure;
(2) Considered a request to consider two legislative proposals as noncontroversial and took the following action.
(a) Proposal No. 2007-4 – Amateurism – Promotional Activities – Institutional, Charitable, Educational or Nonprofit Promotions – De Minimis Violations – Written Approval. Intent: To specify that a violation of the promotional activities legislation in which the only condition of the legislation not satisfied is the failure to obtain written approval from the director of athletics (or his or her designee who may not be a coaching staff member) shall not affect the student-athlete's eligibility, provided the approval would have been granted if requested. [Source: NCAA Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet (Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement).]
MC ACTION: Designated the proposal as noncontroversial (Unanimous Voice Vote); approved and agreed to request that the Board use its authority to adopt the proposal as noncontroversial legislation. (Unanimous Voice Vote – Effective Date: Immediate.)
è BD
ACTION: Adopted the proposal as noncontroversial legislation. (Unanimous Voice Vote
– Effective Date: Immediate)
(b) Proposal
No. 2007-5 – Recruiting – Administrative Regulations –
Recruiting Calendars – Women's Volleyball – Evaluation Period in
Conjunction with Championship. Intent: In women's
volleyball, to specify that evaluations may occur at one event conducted on the
Sunday immediately following the NCAA Division I Women's Volleyball
Championship, provided the event occurs within a 100-mile radius of the site of
the championship. [Source: NCAA Division I Academics/
Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet (Subcommittee on Recruiting).]
MC ACTION: Designated the proposal as noncontroversial (Unanimous Voice Vote); approved and agreed to request that the Board use its authority to adopt the proposal as noncontroversial legislation. (Unanimous Voice Vote – Effective Date: Immediate.)
è BD
ACTION: Adopted the proposal as noncontroversial legislation. (Unanimous Voice Vote
– Effective Date: Immediate
(3) Received an update regarding a staff initiative whereby sports associations/ organizations are being invited on a sport-by-sport basis to identify amateurism issues unique to that sport relative to the Association’s principles of amateurism and learned that the cabinet’s Subcommittee on Agents and Amateurism had sought feedback from the Management Council regarding whether the time was right for a broad review of the principles of amateurism or whether the Council was comfortable with a sport-by-sport examination; and
(4) Supported a motion, which provides “that the Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet should be encouraged to evaluate and address the unique amateurism issues on a ‘by sport’ basis, it being understood that the Association’s fundamental principles of amateurism be respected.” (Unanimous Voice Vote.)
(5) Discussion regarding meals issue. [Reference MC Supplement No. 9.] [Addendum]
MC
ACTIONS:
(a) Received a report on the work of a joint A/E/C and C/C Cabinets group that was charged by the Management Council in October 2006 with examining issues associated with the provision of meals to student-athletes incidental to participation, and discussed the two models identified by the group for modifying the current meals incidental to participation legislation.
(b) Defeated
a motion to consider as noncontroversial legislation a proposal, which would
allow institutions as another option in addition to the current legislation
regarding meals incidental to participation the ability to provide
student-athletes with meals at home and away games at their discretion
beginning with the evening before competition and continuing to the end of
competition and release by the appropriate institutional authority. (Vote:
For 18.5, Against 21, Not Present 11.5; See Vote No. 44, Attachment
A.)
(c) Agreed to sponsor into the 2007-08 annual legislative cycle a proposal, which would allow institutions as another option to the current legislation regarding meals incidental to participation the ability to provide student-athletes meals at home and away games at their discretion beginning with the evening before competition and continuing to the end of competition and release by the appropriate institutional authority. In agreeing to sponsor this legislation, the Management Council made it clear that this proposal, while providing another permissible approach for the provision of meals, would not allow for institutions to apply a combined approach whereby they could provide both cash in lieu of meals and meals at their discretion during the time period from the evening before the competition through release. (Vote: