REPORT OF
THE
NCAA
DIVISION I ACADEMICS/ELIGIBILITY/COMPLIANCE CABINET
ACTION
ITEM.
· Legislative
– Request for Legislative Action at the October NCAA Division I
Management Council Meeting. (See Attachment A for the full text of the
proposal forwarded to the Management Council as noncontroversial legislation.)
v
NCAA Proposal
No. 2006-59 – Eligibility and Financial Aid – Compliance
with Other NCAA and Conference Legislation.
(1)
Recommendation. The NCAA Division I Academics/Eligibility/
Compliance Cabinet recommends that the Management Council support Proposal No.
2006-59 as noncontroversial legislation and forward it to the NCAA Division I Board
of Directors for adoption. The proposal
would specify that an NCAA violation for competition while ineligible due to a
conference rule violation or a violation of NCAA financial aid legislation that
relates only to a violation of a conference rule shall be considered an
institutional violation, but shall not affect the student-athlete's eligibility.
(2)
Effective Date. Immediate.
(3) Rationale. Currently, in a case in which a student-athlete competes while ineligible due to a violation of a conference rule or receives financial aid contrary to a conference rule, the institution must request reinstatement of his or her NCAA eligibility even though no violation of NCAA legislation has occurred, other than by the fact that the violation of the conference rule occurred. In these cases, a conference office is in a better position to assess whether a violation of its own rules should affect eligibility and if so, what the appropriate conditions for reinstatement should be. Adoption of this proposal would have no effect on the calculation of a student-athlete's eligibility point toward his or her team's NCAA Division I Academic Progress Rate (APR). This proposal is being recommended as noncontroversial with an immediate effective date. The recommendation is appropriate because broader consultation and debate are unlikely to improve the proposal in any substantial way, significant disagreement or alternative points of view
(4)
Will not be generated and there does not appear to be a
significant impact on existing legislation or proposed legislation.
(5)
Budget
Impact. None.
(6)
Impact on Student-Athlete's Time. None.
INFORMATIONAL
ITEMS.
1. Legislative
– Comments on Proposals to be Initially Considered by the Management
Council in October 2006 (noncontroversial recommendations) or January 2007.
a. Proposal No. 2006-23 Amateurism –
Involvement with Professional Teams – Tryout After Enrollment –
Receipt of Expenses – Summer or Not Full Time. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-23, which would specify that a student-athlete may try out with a
professional organization in a sport during the summer or during the academic
year while not a full-time student, provided the student-athlete does not
receive more than one expense-paid visit from each professional team (or for
participation in a combine including that team) provided such a visit does not
exceed 48 hours. The cabinet
believes that Proposal No. 2006-22 better addresses the sponsor's concerns
related to providing tryout opportunities to student-athletes. In addition, the proposal does not
further the student-athlete's academic performance, does not provide meaningful
solutions to team disruption and may encourage student-athletes to drop to
part-time status during the academic year.
Finally, the cabinet noted that the NCAA Division I Student-Athlete
Reinstatement Committee supports Proposal No. 2006-22 (as modified) and opposes
Proposal No. 2006-23.
b. Proposal No. 2006-25 Amateurism –
Involvement with Professional Teams – Professional Basketball Draft
– Four-Year College Student-Athlete – Men's Basketball. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-25, which would specify that an enrolled student-athlete may enter a
professional league's draft one time during his collegiate career without
jeopardizing eligibility in the sport, provided that within 30 days after the
conclusion of the NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Championship game, the
student-athlete requests that his name be removed from the draft list and
declares his intention to resume intercollegiate athletics, the student-athlete's
declaration of intent shall be in writing to the institution's director of
athletics, and the student-athlete is not drafted. The cabinet believes that the proposal
would negatively impact the well-being of basketball student-athletes by not
providing adequate time for the student-athletes to evaluate their status and
make an informed decision about their potential professional future. Specifically, the cabinet believes that
student-athletes should be able to participate in individual workouts and a
professional sports organization's pre-draft basketball camp as opportunities to
evaluate their status. A 30-day
timeline following the NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Championship game would
not allow such activities to occur.
c. Proposal No. 2006-26 Amateurism –
Use of Agents – Agent as Advisor. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-26, which would specify that a student-athlete shall be ineligible for
participation in an intercollegiate sport if he or she has ever agreed (orally
or in writing) to use the services of an advisor (financial or otherwise) who
also serves in any agent capacity (related to marketing any individual's
athletics ability or reputation). The
cabinet believes the proposal is vague as it relates to the definition of an
advisor and that the proposal may create unintended violations. Student-athletes may be encouraged to
use advisors who are not knowledgeable about issues such as professional league
drafts, contracts and salaries. The
result could be that student-athletes will receive inaccurate advice. The cabinet noted the Student-Athlete
Reinstatement Committee's opposition to the proposal.
d. Proposal No. 2006-28 – Recruiting – Recruiting-Person Days – Women's Basketball – 130 Recruiting-Person Days. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal No. 2006-28, which would increase the number of recruiting-person days in women's basketball from 85 to 130. The cabinet recommends that the sponsor modify the proposal to increase the number of recruiting-person days from 85 to 100. The cabinet would support the proposal if modified. In the event the sponsor does not support the suggested modification, the cabinet shall sponsor an alternative proposal. In its development of the current standard of 85 recruiting-person days, the Women's Basketball Coaches Association (WBCA) was fully aware that the number of recruiting-person days would be reduced. A change to increase the number of recruiting-person days in order to provide consistency with men's basketball is unnecessary. An increase to 100 recruiting-person days would assist in accommodating concerns that the current legislation does not provide enough days to allow multiple coaches to conduct home visits with prospective student-athletes; however, it maintains a reasonable limit on the number of days in which coaches could be engaged in making off-campus contacts in the fall. Further, the WBCA and Women's Basketball Issues Committee are supportive of an increase to 100 recruiting-person days with no exceptions.
e. Proposal No. 2006-30 – Recruiting
– Limitations on Number of Evaluations – Spring Evaluation Weekend
– Women's Basketball. The
cabinet unanimously supports Proposal No. 2006-30, which would specify that
evaluations at nonscholastic events may occur during the Friday, Saturday and
Sunday of the spring evaluation period.
Feedback from the (WBCA) indicates women's basketball coaches are not in
favor of increasing the number of weekends in April in which evaluations at
nonscholastic events may occur; however, the WBCA agreed that the one weekend
during April should also include Friday, given that most events begin on Friday
and prospects will be participating regardless of whether Division I coaches
are in attendance. Adding the
additional day provides greater flexibility and does not increase the number of
recruiting-person days.
f. Proposal No. 2006-31
– Recruiting – Telephone Calls to Prospects – Exception
– Football – One Telephone Call April 15 Through May 31. The cabinet unanimously supports
Proposal No. 2006-31, which, in football, would specify that an institution may
make one telephone call to a prospective student-athlete or a prospective
student-athlete's relatives or legal guardians from April 15 through May 31 of
the prospective student-athlete's junior year in high school. The proposal does not increase the number
of telephone calls that may be made to a prospective student-athlete and a
prospective student-athlete's relatives and it provides consistency with the
current spring evaluation period in football.
g. Proposal No. 2006-32 – Recruiting
– Telephone Calls and Recruiting Materials – Exceptions – Men's
Ice Hockey. The cabinet
unanimously opposes Proposal No. 2006-32, which, in men's ice hockey, would
permit an institution (1) to make one telephone call per month to a prospective
student athlete on or after June 15 of the prospective student-athlete's
sophomore year in high school through July 31 of the prospective
student-athlete's junior year in high school; (2) to make two telephone calls
per week to a prospect beginning August 1 prior to the prospective
student-athlete's senior year in high school; and (3) to provide recruiting
materials (including general correspondence related to athletics) on or after
June 15 at the conclusion of the prospective student athlete's sophomore year
in high school. The cabinet
recommends that the sponsor modify the proposal to specify that an institution
may make only one telephone call per week to a prospective student-athlete beginning
August 1 prior to the prospective student-athlete's senior year in high school. The cabinet would support the proposal
if modified. The cabinet agreed
with the sponsor's rationale regarding the earlier access to prospects via
telephone contact and recruiting correspondence; however, the concerns
expressed by the sponsor as it relates to the outside influence in men's ice
hockey occur prior to the prospect's senior year in high school. As a result, it is not necessary to make
two telephone calls per week during the prospect's senior year in high school.
h. Proposal No. 2006-33 – Recruiting
– Telephone Calls to Prospects – Time Period for Telephone Calls
– Women's Basketball – April Call to Juniors. The cabinet unanimously supports
Proposal No. 2006-33, which would specify that the one permissible telephone
call in April of a prospective student-athlete's junior year in high school may
not be made until the Thursday after the conclusion of the Women's Final Four
of Division I Women's Basketball Championship. Precluding telephone calls to juniors
until the conclusion of the Division I women's basketball championship will
encourage women's basketball coaches to remain engaged and in attendance at the
sport's championship. This proposal
also is supported by the WBCA.
i. Proposal No. 2006-34 – Recruiting
– Contacts and Evaluations – Recruiting Opportunities – Women's
Basketball – Seven Opportunities. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-34, which, in women's basketball, would increase the number of
recruiting opportunities (contacts and evaluations) from five to seven. Additional recruiting activities will
result in increased costs. An
increase in recruiting opportunities in order to provide consistency with other
sports does not warrant a change to the current rule. The NCAA Division I Women's Basketball
Issues Committee and the WBCA have expressed strong opposition to the proposal.
j. Proposal No. 2006-35 – Recruiting
– Contacts and Evaluations – Contact Restrictions at Specified
Sites – Practice or Competition Site – Contact En Route or in the
Locale of Competition. The
cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal No. 2006-35, which would permit an
institution to have on-campus contact with a prospective student-athlete in
conjunction with his or her away-from-home contest or multi-day tournament
while en route to or in the locale of the prospective student-athlete's
competition, under specified conditions.
Permitting recruiting contacts while a prospective student-athlete is
involved with competition is unnecessarily intrusive on the prospect and his or
her parents or guardians.
Prospective student-athletes and their parents or guardians may feel
pressure to take "side
trips" to institutions at times
when the prospective student-athletes should be focused on their participation in
their competitive events. In
addition, in many instances, prospects are receiving expenses to participate in
such activities. Allowing the
on-campus contact creates a recruiting advantage for institutions that
routinely host such events or are located in areas that provide more access to
prospective student-athletes in this manner. The WBCA has expressed strong opposition
to the proposal.
k. Proposal No. 2006-36 – Contacts
and Evaluations – Coaches Attendance at Events Requiring More Than Three
Games in a Day - Softball. The
cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal No. 2006-36, which would prohibit coaches
from attending an event involving prospective student-athletes in which the
original schedule would require a team to play in more than three games in a
day, other than due to significant unforeseen events (e.g., weather, power
outages). Concerns about the number
of games in which prospects participate in one day may be more appropriately
addressed through an event certification program, similar to the program
conducted by the NCAA for men's and women's basketball. Issues related to softball should be
considered in a broader context rather than by legislation designed to address
very specific, and possibly very limited, concerns. The administrative burden this
legislation would place on institutional compliance administrators would likely
outweigh its benefits to prospective student-athletes.
l. Proposal No. 2006-38 – Recruiting
– Recruiting Materials – Attachments to General Correspondence. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-38, which would specify that attachments to general correspondence may
include any materials printed on one or both sides of a single sheet of 8 1/2 x
11 inches plain white paper with black ink. It is not appropriate for institutions to
provide prospects with additional materials that are created for recruiting
purposes as attachments to general correspondence. In addition, this proposal may present
additional cost and resource challenges.
m. Proposal No. 2006-40 – Recruiting
– Recruiting Materials – Electronic Transmissions. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-40, which would specify that electronically transmitted correspondence
that may be sent to a prospective student-athlete is limited to electronic mail
and facsimiles.
Limiting the use of electronic communication to electronic mail and
facsimiles eliminates other very efficient and cost effective methods of
communicating with prospective student-athletes (e.g., text messaging, instant
messenger). Although a certain
level of intrusion exists in permitting these other forms of communication, a
better approach is to adopt reasonable restrictions that will promote
efficiency in the recruiting process and control the intrusion factor. The WBCA has expressed strong opposition
to the proposal.
n. Proposal No. 2006-42 – Recruiting
– Recruiting Materials – Other Recruiting Materials. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-42, which would permit an institution to print and provide other
recruiting information that is posted on the institution's Web site to
prospective student-athletes via regular mail as attachments to general
correspondence or during official or unofficial visits. This proposal may result in significant
increases in costs associated with producing and sending information to
prospective student-athletes. With
the increased availability and capabilities of technology, it is appropriate to
allow institutions to post additional information on their Web site, but limit
the hard-copy material that may be provided to prospective student-athletes.
o. Proposal No. 2006-43 – Recruiting
– Recruiting Materials – Video/Audio Materials – Computer
Recruiting Presentation. The
cabinet unanimously supports Proposal No. 2006-43, which would permit an
institution to produce a computer recruiting presentation to show a prospective
student-athlete during an in-home visit or official and unofficial visits. The cabinet noted that the presentation
may not include any video/audio component and may not be personalized to
include a prospective student-athlete's name, picture or likeness. In addition, such a presentation may not
be created by an entity outside the institution. Current technology permits computer
recruiting presentations to be created on institutional campuses at a minimal cost. This proposal will provide coaches the
opportunity to produce and show presentations that may be used as an efficient
tool in the recruiting process and that may provide prospective
student-athletes with an overview of all pertinent aspects of their institutions.
p. Proposal No. 2006-45 – Recruiting
– Advertisements and Promotions – Conference Sponsored
Sportsmanship Initiatives. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-45, which would permit a conference office to coordinate sportsmanship
initiatives that may involve prospective student-athletes and their educational
institutions. The cabinet
recommends that the sponsor modify the proposal to ensure a greater balance
between sportsmanship initiatives and recruiting equity. Specifically, the sponsor should
consider additional specifications (e.g., sources of funding, use of
institutional logos) in creating parameters for the sportsmanship initiatives.
The cabinet supports efforts to promote sportsmanship; however, the proposal,
as written, may cause unintended consequences related to recruiting equity.
q. Proposal No. 2006-46 – Recruiting
– Official Visit Requirements and Written Offers of Athletically Related
Financial Aid – Registration with NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse
and Institutional Request List. The cabinet opposes Proposal No. 2006-46,
which would specify that an institution shall not provide
an official visit to a high school or preparatory school prospective
student-athlete until he or she registers with the clearinghouse and is
placed on the institutional request list. Further, the proposal would specify that
an institution shall not provide a high school or preparatory school
prospective student-athlete a written offer of athletically related financial
aid until he or she has registered with the clearinghouse and the institution
places the prospective student-athlete on the institutional request list with
the clearinghouse. The cabinet recommends that the sponsor
modify the proposal to specify, in addition to the requirements of the current
proposal, that an institution shall not provide an
official visit or a written offer of athletically related financial aid to a
high school or preparatory school prospective student-athlete until the clearinghouse
has received an official
high school transcript or transcripts from the schools the prospect has
attended that include(s) the prospect's complete academic record through his or
her sixth semester (or equivalent) of enrollment. The cabinet would support the proposal
if modified. In the event the
sponsor does not support the suggested modification, the cabinet shall sponsor
an alternative proposal. The
cabinet supports the principles contained in the current proposal, but believes
that the receipt of the official high school transcript or transcripts should
be an added element. Early academic
evaluation is vital to the NCAA initial-eligibility process. The registration and institutional
request list submission will start the process at the clearinghouse, but these
steps do not provide for an academic analysis, which is a vital step in determining
a prospect's preliminary initial-eligibility status and readiness for
collegiate academic work. [Vote
count to oppose
r. Proposal No. 2006-47 – Recruiting
– Official Visit - Length of Official Visit – Exception for
Extenuating Circumstances. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-47, which would establish an exception to the 48- hour official visit
for reasons beyond the control of the prospective student-athlete and the
institution and specify that in such instances, the institution shall submit a
report to the conference office noting details of the circumstances. Institutions may apply the standard of
determining whether circumstances are beyond the control of the prospective
student-athlete and the institution differently in similar situations. Additional costs of permitting the
prospect to remain in the locale of the institution beyond the 48-hour period
must be considered. Legislation may
not be necessary for such limited instances. Current processes allow for the review
of such situations when circumstances warrant.
s. Proposal No. 2006-49 – Recruiting
– Tryouts – Nonscholastic-Based Basketball – Noncoaching
Staff Members with Basketball-Specific Duties. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-49, which would permit a noncoaching institutional staff member with
basketball-specific duties to participate in nonscholastic-based basketball
coaching activities with teams that are of the opposite gender than the team
the staff member is associated with at the institution. Involvement in nonscholastic basketball
activities may become the expectation for individuals employed in noncoaching
basketball-specific positions. The
cabinet noted that the NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Issues Committee
opposes the proposal.
t. Proposal No. 2006-50 – Recruiting
– Tryout Exceptions – State, Regional, National or International
Training Programs – Women's Soccer. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-50, which, in women's soccer, would prohibit coaches from
participating in any state, regional or international training programs that
include prospective student-athletes.
This proposal would eliminate both quality coaching and career development
opportunities for current coaches and quality coaching for prospective
student-athletes. Eliminating this
opportunity may also adversely affect Olympic development programs.
u. Proposal No. 2006-51 – Recruiting
– Sports Camps and Clinics – Institution's Sport's Camps and
Clinics – Location – Football. The cabinet unanimously supports Proposal
No. 2006-51, which would specify that an institution's football camp or clinic
shall be conducted on the institution's campus, within the state in which the
institution is located or, if outside the state, within a 50-mile radius of the
institution's campus. The cabinet
agrees with the sponsor's rationale statement and notes that institutional
camps and clinics should be for instructional purposes only and should not be
used as recruiting tools.
v. Proposal No. 2006-52 –
Administrative Regulations – Recruiting Calendars – Men's
Basketball – March Contact Period. The cabinet unanimously
supports Proposal No. 2006-52, in men's basketball, which would establish a
contact period March 16 through 22.
The cabinet agrees with the sponsor's rationale statement and notes that
the proposal does not increase the number of recruiting-person days. The cabinet noted that the Men's
Basketball Issues Committee supports the proposal.
w. Proposal No. 2006-53 –
Administrative Regulations – Recruiting Calendars – Men's
Basketball – Championship Dead Period. The cabinet unanimously supports
Proposal No. 2006-53, which, in men's basketball, would specify that the dead
period surrounding the Division I Men's Basketball Championship shall be from
Thursday prior to the championship game until
x. Proposal No. 2006-54 –
Administrative Regulations – Recruiting Calendars – Women's
Basketball – July Quiet Period.
The cabinet unanimously opposes
Proposal No. 2006-54, which, in women's basketball, would modify the
recruiting calendar to designate July 16 through July 21 as a quiet period (as
opposed to a dead period). This
proposal would lengthen the recruiting process during July, given that official
and unofficial visits would be permitted during the quiet period. Prospects and coaches alike would no
longer have a break from recruiting activities in July. The WBCA opposes the proposal.
y. Proposal No. 2006-57 –
Administrative Regulations – Recruiting Calendars – Women's Soccer. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal No. 2006-57, which would establish
a recruiting calendar in women's soccer, as specified. The cabinet recommends that the sponsor
modify the proposal to create a dead period during the NCAA Division I Women's Soccer
Championship. The cabinet would
support the proposal if modified. The
cabinet supports the creation of a recruiting calendar; however, coaches should
be encouraged to attend the championship rather than engage in recruiting
activities during that time period.
A dead period in conjunction with the championship provides for equity for
those institutions participating in the championship in relation to all other
institutions.
z. Proposal No. 2006-58 –
Administrative Regulations – Recruiting Calendars – Cross Country
and Track and Field. The
cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-58, which would establish a recruiting calendar in cross country and
track and field, as specified. The
cabinet recommends that the sponsor modify the proposal to create a dead period
during the NCAA Division I Cross Country and Track and Field Championships. The cabinet would support the proposal
if modified. The cabinet supports
the creation of a recruiting calendar; however, coaches should be encouraged to
attend the championships rather than engage in recruiting activities during
that time period. A dead period in
conjunction with the championship provides for equity for those institutions
participating in the championship in relation to all other institutions.
aa. Proposal No. 2006-60 – Eligibility – General Eligibility
Requirements – Change in Eligibility Status – Eligibility for
Postseason Competition Between Terms. The cabinet supports Proposal No. 2006-60, which would require that in order for any
student-athlete to be eligible to compete in postseason competition occurring
between regular terms, an institution shall certify that he or she has satisfactorily
completed six-semester hours or six- quarter hours of academic credit during
the preceding regular academic term.
This proposal brings consistency to the current eligibility requirement
for postseason competition between terms by ensuring the continued academic
progress of all student-athletes, regardless of their years of eligibility
remaining. In addition, this
proposal enhances the integrity and spirit of the progress-toward-degree
requirements for postseason competition.
The cabinet noted that the current legislation, which applies to
student-athletes in their final season of competition, includes accommodations
to provide sufficient time to process the eligibility certifications. [Vote count to support 20-15-0].
bb. Proposal No. 2006-62 – Eligibility – Season of
Competition – Tennis and Swimming and Diving – Exception –
Mandatory Military Service.
The cabinet opposes Proposal No. 2006-62, which would specify
that in tennis and swimming and diving, a student-athlete's participation in
organized events while serving a mandatory military obligation, is exempt from
the application of the legislation governing the use of seasons of competition
prior to initial, full-time enrollment in a collegiate institution and
residency on enrollment. This proposal
would allow student-athletes to potentially exempt several years of athletics
participation while serving mandatory military obligations. Such a possibility presents a potential
competitive disadvantage for those student-athletes who participate in
intercollegiate athletics without a similar benefit of the athletics experience.
[Vote count to oppose
cc.
Proposal No. 2006-63
– Eligibility – Criteria for Determining Season of Eligibility
– Tennis and Swimming and Diving – Participation in Elite Events. The cabinet unanimously supports Proposal No. 2006-63, which would
permit a student-athlete's participation in the sports of tennis and swimming
and diving at the Olympic Games, Pan American Games, World Championships, World
Cup and World University Games to be exempt from application of the legislation
governing seasons of competition and residency in those sports. Participation in the Olympic Games, Pan
American Games, World Championships, World Cup or World University Games is a
unique and enriching experience for student-athletes. Charging student-athletes with seasons
of competition and requiring them to fulfill an academic year in residence for
participation in such elite events is inappropriate. This change is consistent with the
treatment of elite events as it relates to the use of a season of competition
for enrolled student-athletes.
dd. Proposal No. 2006-64 – Eligibility – Seasons of
Competition – Hardship Waiver – Maximum Number of Contests or Dates
of Competition. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-64, which would increase the maximum permissible number of contests or
dates of competition in which a student-athlete may participate in a season and
remain eligible for a hardship waiver to four scheduled or completed contests
or dates of competition or 40 percent of the institution's scheduled or
completed contests or dates of competition. Based on data regarding the number of
season-ending injuries in several sports during the 2005-06 academic year and
the timing of the injuries, the cabinet believes that the current legislation is appropriate. The cabinet noted that the
Student-Athlete Reinstatement Committee opposes the proposal.
ee. Proposal No. 2006-66 – Eligibility
–
ff. Proposal No. 2006-67 – Eligibility
– Four-Year College Transfers – Discontinued/Nonsponsored Sport
Exception – Cancelled or Suspended Sport. The cabinet
unanimously opposes Proposal No. 2006-67, which would permit a transfer
student-athlete to qualify for the discontinued/nonsponsored sport exception
when an institution has publicly announced that it has cancelled the
student-athlete's sport for at least an entire playing and practice season or
has suspended the sport for an indefinite time period. Although the proposal supports
student-athlete well-being, the potential negative impact on an institution
that cancels only one season would be too severe. The NCAA Division I Management Council Administrative Review
Subcommittee waiver process is available to institutions for situations
contemplated by the proposal.
gg. Proposal No. 2006-68 – Eligibility
–
hh. Proposal
No. 2006-70 – Financial Aid – Eligibility of Student-Athletes for
Institutional Financial Aid – NCAA Degree Completion Award. The cabinet supports Proposal No. 2006-70,
which would permit institutions to provide athletically related financial aid
to a student-athlete who is selected for an NCAA Degree Completion Award. Ninety-five percent of the
student-athletes who receive the NCAA Degree Completion Award graduate. While some institutions may be able to
more easily afford to supplement the program than others, the benefits to
student-athletes outweigh any concerns about equity. An average, 200 student-athletes apply
for a degree completion award each year and the selection process is very
competitive. [Vote count to
support:
ii. Proposal No. 2006-72 – Financial
Aid – Midyear Graduate Replacement – Women's Gymnastics and Women's
Tennis. The cabinet unanimously opposes Proposal
No. 2006-72, which, in the sports of women's gymnastics and women's tennis,
would permit institutions to provide the athletics aid of a counter who
graduates at midyear with eligibility remaining and who does not return to the
institution for the following academic term, to another student-athlete without
making the second student-athlete a counter for the remainder of the academic
year. The circumstances
contemplated by the proposal likely occur on a limited basis. Such circumstances may be reviewed on a
case-by-case basis by the Administrative Review Subcommittee waiver process.
jj. Proposal No. 2006-75 – Awards, Benefits and Expenses – Training-Table Meals – Cost to Student-Athlete Not Receiving Board Scholarship. The cabinet unanimously supports Proposal No. 2006-72, which would specify that a student-athlete who does not receive institutional athletically related financial aid covering the full cost of board, including a walk-on or partial scholarship recipient, may purchase one training-table meal per day at the same rate that the institution deducts from the board allowance of student-athletes who receive athletically related financial aid covering board costs. This proposal promotes equity between scholarship and nonscholarship student-athletes. Student-athletes who do not receive board as part of their scholarships should only be required to pay the same amount for a training-table meal as is deducted from the board allowance for scholarship student-athletes. The opportunity to pay a lesser amount than the full cost of the meal is a benefit incidental to participation in athletics.
2. Other
Legislative Informational Items. (See Attachment B for the full text of the
revised proposals.)
a. Modification
of Proposal No. 2006-22
Amateurism – Involvement with Professional Teams – Tryout After
Enrollment – Receipt of Expenses – Anytime. The cabinet unanimously agreed to
modify Proposal No. 2006-22 to specify that subsequent to initial full-time collegiate
enrollment, an individual may try out with a professional athletics team in a
sport and receive not more than one expense paid tryout from each professional
team (or for participation in a combine including that team), provided: (1) The
individual does not miss class; (2) Any payment or compensation in connection
with the tryout may not exceed actual and necessary expenses; and (3) Expenses
may only be provided for a period of 48 hours. Further, the 48-hour period shall begin
at the time the individual arrives at the tryout location. At the completion of the 48-hour period,
the individual must depart the location of the tryout immediately in order for the
professional team or organization to provide return transportation expenses. A tryout may extend beyond 48 hours if
the individual self-finances additional expenses, including return
transportation, and if the individual does not miss class. A self-financed tryout may be for any
length of time, provided the student-athlete does not miss class. By stipulating that no classes may be
missed due to tryout activities, concerns regarding the effect of tryouts on team
APR will be addressed. Without the
missed class time provision, student-athletes could engage in numerous tryouts
that would result in substantial time away from campus. In addition, the modification to the
proposal permits an individual to try out with a professional team (or
participate in a combine including that team) and receive not more than actual
and necessary expenses on one occasion prior to collegiate enrollment and on
one occasion after initial collegiate enrollment. The cabinet noted the support of the
Student-Athlete Reinstatement Committee for these modifications.
b. Modification
of Proposal No. 2006-41
– Recruiting – Recruiting Materials – Computer Mediated
Communication – Time Periods. The cabinet unanimously agreed to
modify Proposal No. 2006-41 to specify that the time periods during which
computer mediated communication may be sent to prospects apply to the time of
the location in which the prospect resides, as opposed to the actual location
of the prospect. The requirement to
ascertain the prospect's exact location at any given time in order to remain in
compliance with the rule would be overly burdensome. Coaching staff members will be more
likely to comply with the rule by knowing the time of the location where the
prospect resides, rather than being required to keep up with the prospect's
travels.
c. Modification
of Proposal No. 2006-59 – Eligibility
and Financial Aid – Compliance with Other NCAA and Conference Legislation. The cabinet unanimously agreed to modify
Proposal No. 2006-59 to specify that an NCAA violation for competition while
ineligible due to a conference rule violation or a violation of NCAA financial
aid legislation that relates only to a violation of a conference rule shall be
considered an institutional violation, but shall not affect the student-athlete's
eligibility. By expanding the
proposal to include financial aid violations that relate only to violations of
conference rules, the proposal enables the conference office to appropriately
handle ramifications for violations of its legislation without requiring an
institution to go through the reinstatement process.
3. Nonlegislative.
a. NCAA
Division I Amateurism Fact-Finding Committee – Appeals. The cabinet unanimously approved the delegation
of its authority to review appeals of determinations of facts made by the
Amateurism Fact-Finding Committee to the NCAA Division I
Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet Subcommittee on Agents and
Amateurism. This action is similar
to the delegation of authority the cabinet has made to other subject matter
expert subcommittees of the cabinet (e.g., initial-eligibility). It is important that issues relating to
the facts of a prospective student-athlete's amateur status be reviewed by a
subcommittee with amateurism expertise.
b. Amateurism
Fact-Finding Policies and Procedures.
The
cabinet unanimously approved the
Division I Amateurism Fact-Finding Policies and Procedures. Formal policies and procedures are
necessary to ensure consistency, efficiency and timeliness in the processing of
requests for determination of facts related to the certification of a
prospective student-athlete's amateur status. The policies and procedures will serve
as a resource for the NCAA staff, members of the Amateurism Fact-Finding
Committee, the Subcommittee on Agents and Amateurism and institutions regarding
procedural issues that arise while processing requests for determination of
facts.
c. Test-Score
Time Limitation Waivers for Student-Athletes Enrolled for More than One Year. The cabinet unanimously approved a revision to the initial-eligibility
waiver policies and procedures to prohibit institutions from filing
initial-eligibility waivers for student-athletes who have taken the SAT or ACT
more than one year after initial, full-time collegiate enrollment. Exceptions to this policy may be
extended to international student-athletes with no prior knowledge of NCAA
rules and students with disabilities who may be permitted to take an ACT or SAT
test under nonstandard testing conditions when not previously provided that
opportunity. NCAA legislation
prohibits the use of the ACT or SAT taken after initial, full-time collegiate
enrollment; however, such scores are sometimes reviewed through the
initial-eligibility waiver process, in most cases, for international
student-athletes or students with disabilities who have not had the previous
opportunity to take a nonstandard test.
Some waivers are filed for student-athletes who have taken the test two
to three years after enrollment to comply with institutional or conference
rules regarding nonqualifiers. The
cabinet agreed it is not appropriate to permit the use of a test taken after
initial, full-time collegiate enrollment except for the conditions noted
above.
d. Use of Misadvisement as a Mitigating
Circumstance in Initial-Eligibility Waivers. The cabinet unanimously approved revisions to the
initial-eligibility waiver policies and procedures to clarify the content and
format requirements for institutional misadvisement prevention plans that are
filed with initial-eligibility waiver applications. Specifically, the following requirements
have been added to the policies and procedures:
(1) The
plan must be placed on institutional letterhead;
(2) The
plan must be signed by two of the following: the president/chancellor or faculty
athletics representative, and director of athletics or senior woman
administrator;
(3) The
plan must be applicable to all sports and all prospective student-athletes;
(4) The
plan is specific to the institution, not to the personnel who are currently or
previously employed; and
(5) If there is a change in institutional policies, the institution must notify the NCAA staff of such changes.
The intent of
requiring an institution to submit a plan to prevent future misadvisement is to
ensure the institution develops a thoughtful, comprehensive plan to prevent
similar circumstances from happening in the future.
e. Prospective
Student-Athlete Review Policies and Procedures. The cabinet unanimously approved the Prospective
Student-Athlete Review Policies and Procedures. The adoption of the policies and
procedures helps ensure consistency, efficiency and timeliness in the
processing of prospective student-athlete review cases. Additionally, it serves as a resource for
the NCAA staff, members of the review group and member institutions regarding
procedural issues that arise while processing prospective student-athlete
review cases.
f. International
Student-Athlete Certification of Eligibility Form. The cabinet received a report from the Subcommittee on Agents and Amateurism regarding its
discussion of the current legislative requirement for institutions to gather
information regarding an international student-athlete's athletics background
on a standardized form to assist in determining the amateur status of each
international student-athlete. With
the upcoming NCAA certification process for amateur status for the 2007-08
academic year and thereafter, the requirement for institutions to gather this
information should no longer exist.
The subcommittee agreed to further discuss at the February or June 2007
meeting to determine whether the form should continue to be a legislative
requirement for the first year of the amateurism certification process or if it
should only be used as a tool.
g. Receipt of Expenses from Golf Associations. The cabinet received a report from the Subcommittee on Agents
and Amateurism related to information received from the United States Golf
Association (USGA) regarding recent changes to its own legislation to allow
individuals to accept expenses as long as the expenses are approved and paid
through the player's state or regional golf association. The staff is currently working with the
USGA in an ongoing effort to specifically identify the pertinent issues and how
NCAA amateurism regulations apply.
The subcommittee agreed to further discuss the issue at the February
2007 meeting.
h. Amateurism
Issues in Tennis. The cabinet
received a report from the Subcommittee on Agents and Amateurism regarding an
update from the Intercollegiate Tennis Association and NCAA meetings that
occurred in July. David Benjamin,
executive director of the Intercollegiate Tennis Association, made a
presentation regarding amateurism issues in tennis. The subcommittee agreed to gather
information and feedback on these concepts and further discuss the issues at
the February 2007 cabinet meeting for possible legislative recommendations.
i. Review of Promotional and
Endorsement Issues Involving Student-Athletes. The cabinet
received a report regarding the creation of a study group to further examine
issues surrounding the use of student-athletes' likenesses for institutional,
charitable, educational and nonprofit promotions. Experts familiar with the current trends
used for marketing and sponsorship will join the members of the Subcommittee on
Agents and Amateurism on the study group. They are charged with making
recommendations to the Division I Board of Directors within the next year.
j. Use of
Institutional and Personal Web Sites in the Recruiting Process. The cabinet received a report
from the Subcommittee on Recruiting regarding its discussion about the use of
institutional Web sites and the use of institutional staff members' personal
Web sites in the recruiting process. The subcommittee requested that the staff
gather specific examples of institutional Web sites that may contain
prospect-specific links and tracking mechanisms. Further, the subcommittee requested that
the staff create a document summarizing current legislation that impacts the
development and use of institutional and personal Web sites.
k. Review
of Legislative Proposals that Intend to Amend New Legislation. The cabinet received a report from the Division
I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet Subcommittee on Recruiting related
to its review of legislative proposals.
The subcommittee expressed concern regarding the submission of proposals
to change legislation adopted within one or two years. The subcommittee agreed to continue to
monitor the submission of such proposals and will consider whether ample
opportunity has been afforded in order for the legislation to have its intended
affect.
l. Core-Curriculum Time Limitation. The cabinet received a report from the NCAA
Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet Subcommittee on
Initial-Eligibility Issues regarding its discussion of the core-curriculum time
limitation and graduation. The
subcommittee requests that the NCAA Division I Legislative Review and
Interpretations Committee issue an interpretation relative to NCAA Division I
Bylaw 14.3.1.2.1 (core-curriculum time limitation) to stipulate that high
school graduation consists of all graduation requirements, both academic and
nonacademic (e.g., community service, senior project). Each high school is responsible for
defining what is required for graduation for its students.
m. Research for Use in Initial-Eligibility Waiver Decisions. The cabinet received a report from the
Subcommittee on Initial-Eligibility Issues regarding research related to
initial-eligibility waiver approvals.
The report included a test-score/high school grade-point-average grid
that predicts first year collegiate grade-point-average achievement. The information will be one of many
variables that will be used in the initial-eligibility waiver decision-making
process.
n. Nontraditional Coursework and High School
Transcripts. The cabinet
received a report from the Subcommittee on Initial-Eligibility Issues regarding
its discussion of the placement of nontraditional coursework on high school
transcripts in situations in which prospective student-athletes separate
themselves from their traditional schools and attend nontraditional schools for
a full term or more. The subcommittee
provided input to be shared with the High School Review Group regarding the
issue. The recommendations include
working with curriculum experts and involving the secondary school community,
including state departments of education, in discussions of these
nontraditional programs.
o. College Courses on High School Transcripts. The cabinet received a report from the
Subcommittee on Initial-Eligibility Issues regarding its discussion of
situations in which a prospective student-athlete completes college courses and
achieves specific letter grades, but the high school translates the grades to a
"P" or “passing” on its transcript. Bylaw 14.3.1.2.7 stipulates that the
high school's lowest passing grade be assigned to pass-fail courses. However, in the best interest of the
prospective student-athlete, the subcommittee agreed that the clearinghouse may
assign the letter grade from the college transcript to the prospect's record,
since it can be demonstrated that the prospect achieved that grade.
p. Application
of Bylaw 14.5.4.1 (
q. Application
of Bylaw 14.4.3.1-(b) Fulfillment of Credit-Hour Requirements to
Student-Athletes Enrolled Part-Time in One or More Terms. The cabinet received
a report from the Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet Subcommittee on Continuing Eligibility regarding
the application of Bylaw 14.4.3.1-(b) (18/27-hour rule) to student-athletes
enrolled part time for a term or consecutive terms during the academic
year. The subcommittee requests
that the Division I Legislative Review and Interpretations Committee issue an
interpretation stating that credits earned while enrolled as a part-time
student may not be used for purposes of satisfying Bylaw 14.4.3.1-(b).
r. Proposal No. 2006-82 – Playing and Practice Seasons – General Playing Season Regulations – No Missed Class Time or Final Exam Time During Nonchampionship Segment – Field Hockey, Women's Lacrosse, Soccer and Volleyball. The cabinet received a report from the Subcommittee on Continuing Eligibility regarding its review of Propo