REPORT OF
THE
NCAA FOOTBALL
ISSUES COMMITTEE
1. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS.
a. AFCA Report. The committee received a
report from Grant Teaff, executive director of the American Football Coaches
Association, regarding the coaches’ priorities identified during the AFCA
Convention. Grant informed the committee that the coaches would like to see the
clock rules reversed or at minimum revised to not be in effect at the end of
the 2nd quarter and at the end of the game. He also reported that
the coaches association was very pleased with the
b.
Football
APR. The committee listened
to a report regarding the Academic Progress Rate (APR) in football and its
comparison with that of baseball and basketball. The committee was also
provided with a summary of the APR historical penalty structure.
2. LEGISLATIVE ITEMS.
a. Division
I Football – Fifth Year of Eligibility
(1) Recommendation. That Division I football student-athletes who have completed at least
80 percent of the course requirements in the student’s specific degree
program by the start of their fifth year of collegiate enrollment be provided
the opportunity to participate in a fifth season of competition within five
years of initial full-time collegiate enrollment.
(2) Rationale. For the reasons noted below, football student-athletes should be
permitted to participate in up to five seasons of competition:
(a)
Research data obtained by the
NCAA and AFCA indicates that 64 percent of those student-athletes obtaining a
degree need more than four years to earn their undergraduate degree (25 percent
required 4 ½ years, 31 percent required 5 years and 8 percent required 5
years plus a summer session).
(b)
The current
progress-toward-degree requirements seem to acknowledge graduation trends by
basing the requirements on a five-year track. This proposal encourages
student-athletes on track to graduate, but who have used four seasons of
competition, to remain at the institution to complete their degree requirements
while being provided the opportunity to compete for an additional season. Currently,
in football, some student-athletes who complete four seasons of competition are
faced with the decision to depart the institution just short of graduation in
order to continue pursuing their competitive football opportunities.
(c)
Student-athletes afforded the
opportunity could earn the fifth year of eligibility based on completion of
degree requirements will encourage them to remain en
rolled
and ultimately graduate during a fifth year of enrollment, improving the football
APR.
(d)
The addition of a twelfth
regular-season game creates a need to allow coaches to fully use all members of
their squad. “Red-shirting” and medical hardships could be
eliminated if the five seasons of eligibility concept were approved. The alternative
means to address the 12-game issue, increasing scholarships in Division I
football, is unrealistic, particularly given the institutional needs to comply
with Title IX. In addition, late in the season when injuries may have
accumulated a coach would not be confronted with the difficult decision of
whether to play an injured student-athlete or another student-athlete who will
use a year of eligibility as the replacement player.
(e)
The size of Division I
football squads have diminished through the years because of a reduction in the
maximum number of grants from 95 in 1991 to the current limit of 85 and
“roster management” practices exercised by some institutions that
limit the number of walk-on students who may participate in the sport of
football.
(f)
NCAA research has found no
statistically significant difference between the academic performance of football
freshmen student-athletes who compete compared to those who red-shirt. Therefore, there should be no expected decrease
in academic performance of football student-athletes during the initial year of
collegiate enrollment if the practice of red-shirting is eliminated.
(g)
An April 2001 AFCA survey of
nearly 11,000 football student-athletes revealed that, of those surveyed, 92
percent support the concept of five seasons of eligibility; 96 percent agreed
that having all squad members available to compete will increase
student-athlete morale and maintain the interest of all squad members; and 98
percent indicated that if they had the opportunity to compete for five seasons
they would take advantage of it.
(3) Estimated
Budget Impact. There should be
no increased costs in providing the opportunity for five seasons of competition
inasmuch as there will be no increase in the maximum allowable number of
scholarships per team and expenses associated with exempted financial aid for
exhausted eligibility student-athletes would be eliminated in football.
(4) Student-Athlete
Impact. Student-athletes would
have the chance to earn an additional year in which to complete course work for
graduation while competing. While
institutions that retain several student-athletes for a fifth year of
competition would have less financial aid to recruit prospective
student-athletes, those prospects would be recruited by another institution,
ultimately with the potential for broader distribution of talented prospects
across institutions (competitive parity).
b. Contacts
with National Letter of Intent Signees.
(1) Recommendation. That, in football, institutional
coaching staff members be permitted to make two contacts with their National
Letter of Intent signees at the prospect’s educational institution during
the spring evaluation period.
Further, to specify that a staff member from the prospect’s
educational institution (e.g., coach, academic counselor, principal) must be
present for such contacts. Finally,
to specify that any visit to the educational institution that includes only
contact with a signed prospect during the spring evaluation period shall be
considered one of the institution’s two permissible spring evaluation
opportunities at that school.
(2) Rationale. Currently, football coaches may have
contact with National Letter of Intent signees at their educational institution
only during a contact period.
Coaches evaluate at educational institutions during the designated
spring evaluation period but must make arrangements to have contact with their
signees at some other location (e.g., home, restaurant). It is important for coaches to continue
to monitor the academic progress of the prospect and permitting a meeting at
the educational institution with the academic counselor and the prospect is
less bureaucratic and may assist in developing better academic evaluations of
the prospect. Because the prospect
has already signed a National Letter of Intent, there is no recruiting
advantage gained by allowing these contacts under these circumstances and
permitting contact on the prospect’s campus allows coaches to be more
efficient with their time during a busy recruiting period.
(3) Estimated Budget
Impact. Minimal. In most cases, coaches are visiting the
educational institution to evaluate other prospects.
(4) Student-Athlete
Impact. None.
c. Scholastic
Evaluations.
(1)
Recommendation. That all evaluations during the spring
evaluation period be limited to regularly scheduled high school, preparatory
school and two-year college contests/tournaments and practices and regular
scholastic activities involving prospective student-athletes that are conducted
under the supervision of a high school coach, except for activities devoted to
strength, agility or speed (e.g., combines). Evaluations at non-scholastic
events shall be prohibited.
(2)
Rationale.
This proposal is designed to place greater emphasis on the scholastic
environment in the recruitment of prospective student-athletes, while
minimizing the role of nonscholastic external influences in the recruiting
process. The recent proliferation of nonscholastic camps, clinics and combines
where organizers attempt to showcase a prospect
and attend
these events during the academic year, potentially interfering with other
academic commitments. Consistent with the NCAA
(3)
Estimated Budget Impact. Institutions may save recruiting dollars
by attending fewer nonscholastic events (e.g., camps, clinics or combines)
during the spring evaluation period.
(4)
Student-Athlete Impact. Prospective
student-athletes may be less inclined to spend money to participate in
nonscholastic events if coaches are not in attendance and should have more time
to devote toward their academic endeavors.
Committee Chair: Steve Pedersen,
Staff Liaisons: Dennis
Poppe, Baseball and Football
Damani
J. Leech, Baseball and Football
Brad
Hostetter, Membership Services