Baseball Academic Enhancement Working Group

BACKGROUND

During its April 2006 meeting, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors agreed to table a legislative proposal to reduce the maximum number of contests from 56 to 52. The Board then instructed the baseball community to develop a proposal over the next year to address concerns regarding academic performance in baseball by reviewing such factors as the current one-time transfer exception, financial aid limits, playing and practice season limits and the overall culture of the sport. The Board indicated an intention to review the impact of any changes resulting from the baseball community’s proposal two years after the submission of a comprehensive plan in April 2007 to determine whether additional changes to baseball would be warranted to help enhance the overall level of academic performance in that sport.

The working group conducted two in-person meetings (August and October) and subcommittees within the group have conducted several telephone conferences to address the issue of academic performance in baseball. Status reports were provided to the Board and membership during the NCAA Convention as well as to head baseball coaches during the American Baseball Coaches Association convention in January. Subsequent to these presentations the working group subcommittees convened via conference call to review feedback and prioritize possible recommendations. The full working group met via conference call in early March to refine the final report and recommendations prior to submission as an informational item to the Management Council and for action to the Board of Directors in April. The following individuals comprised the Baseball Academic Enhancement Working Group:

Donald Beggs President Wichita State University

Rick Chryst Commissioner Mid-American Conference

Michael Cross Exec. Associate Athletics Director Princeton University

Chris Dawson Associate Commissioner Pacific-10 Conference

Jack Evans Faculty Athletics Representative UNC, Chapel Hill

Dennis Farrell Commissioner Big West Conference

Michael Gaski Head Coach UNC, Greensboro

Dan Guerrero Athletics Director UCLA

Walter Harrison President University of Hartford

Alan Hauser Faculty Athletics Representative Appalachian State University

Lynn Hickey Athletics Director University of Texas at San Antonio

Bruce Johnson Faculty Athletics Representative Missouri State University

Dave Keilitz Executive Director ABCA

Judy MacLeod Executive Associate Commissioner Conference USA

Paul Manieri Head Coach Louisiana State University

Joel Maturi Athletics Director University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

Pat McMahon Head Coach University of Florida

Danny Morrison Athletics Director Texas Christian University

Betsy Mosher Sr. Associate Athletics Director California State University, Fresno

Bernard Muir Athletics Director Georgetown University

Gene Smith Athletics Director Ohio State University

Lance Tatum Faculty Athletics Representative Troy University

Larry Templeton Athletics Director Mississippi State University

Kevin Weiberg Commissioner Big Twelve Conference

Tim Weiser Athletics Director Kansas State University

Ron Wellman Athletics Director Wake Forest University

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

The working group has concluded that the low APR in the sport of baseball is largely the result of baseball student-athletes with fairly strong academic backgrounds making slow progress toward a degree and tending to change schools or leave college early and often. As such, the following recommendations are designed to encourage baseball student-athletes (with the support of the full baseball community) to increase their annual credit-hour production; reduce the amount and frequency of student-athlete movement between institutions (two- and four-year); create a fair and stable financial environment for baseball student-athletes at their institution; and limit the in-season competitive time demands of baseball student-athletes on those teams that have demonstrated poor academic performance.

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.

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.

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% per baseball student-athlete and a maximum limit of 27 counters (number of baseball student-athletes receiving athletics aid). The 33% 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). Currently such minimum and maximum limits do not exist in the sport of baseball.

4. Additional Penalties. Any baseball program with a four-year average APR less than 900 shall be required to reduce its baseball playing season the following year by 10% in the number of contests and length of season (e.g., not more than 50 contests and not more than a 119-day playing and practice season). The Board should direct the Committee on Academic Performance to implement this recommendation as part of its penalties program.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Rationale and Impact

a. This recommendation addresses key findings related to credit-hour production during the spring (competition) term, summer school enrollment data and research related to fall term eligibility.

b. It is anticipated that student-athletes currently using the fall term to “get well” academically will adjust to this new requirement by either earning enough credit hours during the previous spring term or enrolling in summer school courses. In either case, the student-athlete stays on track to graduate within an appropriate time frame and does not cost the institution an APR Eligibility point for the previous term.

c. Student-athletes not certified as eligible for competition at the start of the fall term will still be eligible to practice and/or receive athletics aid (at the institution’s discretion).

d. This provision also would prohibit two-year college transfers, four-year college transfers, as well as continuing student-athletes at the same institution from being academically certified mid-year (except if the student-athlete becomes subject to a particular progress-toward-degree requirement at midyear such as the percentage of degree requirement).

b. While student-athletes may still transfer from two-year and four-year institutions mid-year, they will not be eligible for competition upon transfer. This will help minimize the impact of two-year college student-athletes that transfer to Division I programs mid-year, compete during the spring term without a serious academic commitment, and then depart the institution (usually for professional baseball), thereby creating an “0-for-2” in the institution’s APR calculation.

Effective Date. August 1, 2008.

a. Implications. 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.

b. Rationale. If the recommendation is adopted by the Board in April 2007, baseball student-athletes should have ample time (over one calendar year) to adjust their academic schedules and behaviors. Conversely, an earlier effective date would limit the ability of student-athletes currently enrolled in their spring terms to make course schedule changes and force a last-minute decision about whether to play summer baseball or enroll in summer school.

Rationale and Impact

a. This recommendation addresses key findings related to the high rate of transfers (and thus, loss of APR retention points) in baseball.

b. Currently, only the Division I sports of football, men’s and women’s basketball and men’s ice hockey are prohibited from using the one-time transfer exception.

c. Support for this recommendation is contingent on the recommendations to change the current baseball financial aid structure noted later in this report.

d. It is anticipated that student-athletes would have to make more thoughtful decisions in choosing which four-year institution to initially attend. Likewise, coaches will be encouraged to make more informed recruiting decisions inasmuch as it will be less likely that four-year college student-athletes will be transferring into their institutions mid-way through their collegiate careers.

e. Baseball student-athletes will still be able to take advantage of other legislated transfer exceptions (e.g., the institution discontinues sponsoring baseball).

f. This recommendation will also address the alleged or perceived recruiting improprieties that occur when baseball student-athletes are coached in summer baseball by another institution’s coach.

Effective Date. August 1, 2008.

a. Implications. 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.

b. Rationale. Implementing the provision immediately would be unfair to baseball student-athletes currently enrolled in their spring terms who may have already made preliminary plans to transfer.

Rationale and Impact

a. Currently there is no limit on the number of student-athletes between whom the 11.7 equivalencies may be divided. The average number of baseball student-athletes receiving athletics aid among Division I baseball programs is 27, however, there are some programs that annually exceed as many as 40 baseball student-athletes receiving some portion of the 11.7 equivalencies.

b. The maximum equivalencies that may be awarded in baseball (11.7) shall remain unchanged.

c. Currently there is no limit on the minimum amount of athletic aid that a baseball student-athlete may receive. It is not uncommon for baseball teams to have a handful of student-athletes receiving only the value of textbooks as their athletics aid. A minimum financial aid equivalency of 33% ensures an appropriate balance between student-athlete well-being for those reluctant to transfer and serve a year in residence and the ability of baseball coaches to effectively and efficiently manage distribution of 11.7 equivalencies to the squad.

d. Requiring that the 33% minimum be fulfilled with athletics aid helps ensure the baseball program is truly committed to the student-athlete, thereby encouraging more responsible recruiting and making it less likely for coaches to facilitate transfers of student-athletes to whom they are so financially committed.

e. It is believed that eliminating the one-time transfer exception will help stabilize the environment of student-athlete movement in Division I baseball; however, removing the option to transfer for student-athletes receiving a small amount of athletics aid is unfair and inconsistent with NCAA student-athlete well-being principles.

f. Coaches will be less likely to employ a “run-off” strategy of squad size maintenance after having what amounts to a fall term tryout if their squad sizes are limited at the outset. Encouraging a student-athlete who is one of 27 counters to transfer during the academic year will not only cost that institution APR points, but the institution will not be able to replace that student-athlete if it was already at the 27 counter limit.

g. Per the current NCAA legislation regarding counters, once a student-athlete is deemed a counter, he remains a counter for the remainder of the year (even if he departs the institution) and may not be replaced as a counter by another student-athlete at any point during that year.

h. While student-athletes beyond the limit of 27 are not on athletics financial aid (and, thus, not counted in APR calculations) it is important to limit the overall number of student-athletes on baseball rosters. The culture of baseball has generated an environment where it is not uncommon for very talented baseball student-athletes to enroll and participate on baseball squads without being provided athletics aid. Such student-athletes often receive generous amounts of financial aid from non-athletic and/or noninstitutional sources (e.g., state funded programs for all resident students). Limiting the number of such student-athletes per squad is another protection against the likelihood of a baseball student-athlete who is receiving athletics aid to be encouraged to transfer because his competitive playing opportunity is being used by the previously described student-athlete. In sum, this helps keep the working group’s APR-specific proposals from having a detrimental impact or unintended consequence on the sport (or its APR), given the culture of college baseball.

i. Institutions would be required to determine the additional student-athletes in the 35-person roster limit not later than the day before the institution’s first contest and may not make any changes to that roster for the remainder of the season.

Effective Date. August 1, 2008 begins two-year implementation process.

a. Implications. 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% 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% 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.

b. Rationale. About half of all Division I baseball programs have squad sizes above 27 (median is 28). Requiring institutions to meet the squad size limit of 27 any earlier may only exacerbate current retention issues in baseball by encouraging programs to employ a “run-off” strategy to meet the limitation rather than relying on natural attrition through graduation and professional baseball departures.

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% 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).

Rationale and Impact

a. Currently, institutions may participate in a maximum of 56 regular season contests.

b. Limiting the number of contests for all baseball programs unfairly and unnecessarily penalizes those institutions that have appropriate academic performance levels.

c. After two years of data, there were 57 baseball programs with an average APR below 900 (without the squad size adjustment). Of these 57 baseball programs, 47 participated in more than 50 contests during the 2005 baseball season.

d. In considering when institutions would be required to implement the playing season penalty, the working group noted that institutions receive official notification of their APR scores and penalty reports approximately eight weeks after the start of the academic year. However, it was also noted that some institutions schedule baseball contests as much as 18 months out. Therefore, while institutions subject to these additional penalties will be expected to fulfill the playing season penalty the following academic year, it may not be until the subsequent year when the institution is able to fulfill the maximum contest penalty – its first available opportunity.

e. For consistency and efficiency in the overall management of the academic reform initiative, these penalties should be administered by the Committee on Academic Performance (CAP). Likewise, CAP would be responsible for considering any waiver requests submitted by institutions related to this penalty.

Effective Date. August 1, 2009.

a. Implications. 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, 2006-05 and 2005-04 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. Rationale. This schedule provides ample notice to institutions that may be near or below the threshold currently and provides the CAP with the opportunity to fully work through any issues they foresee with administering this additional penalty.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

The working group believes it critically important that these recommendations be advanced as a package. The proposals were developed as a result of extensive discussion and, ultimately, compromise by various members of the baseball community. Further, as in the case of the transfer-related proposal, the working group’s support of one proposal is reliant upon the support of another proposal (financial aid).

The working group completed its work while recognizing that several initiatives that have recently been implemented should positively impact the sport’s APR. First, it appears that the Academic Performance Program is having an impact on the culture of Division I baseball. Specifically, waivers of contemporaneous penalties have spelled out significant changes in a program’s recruiting approach and expectations on time demands placed on student-athletes. Further, schools that have traditionally signed a high number of baseball prospective student-athletes have changed their approach and are signing much smaller recruiting classes. Finally, with the upcoming implementation of historical penalties, the working group believes that athletics administrators and presidents will not allow the trend of academic underperformance in baseball to continue and subject the institution to potentially embarrassing penalties.

From a legislative standpoint, Proposal No. 2005-171 is set to become effective for all four-year college transfers in the fall 2007. This new rule requires a transfer student-athlete to have been academically eligible at their previous institution in order to receive athletically related financial aid during their first academic year at the new institution. This measure will put pressure on baseball student-athletes who desire to transfer at the end of the spring term to appropriately complete their coursework before enrolling at the new institution. Secondly, legislation now requires an institution to award athletically related financial aid for a full academic year and in equal amounts for each term of the year. This will prevent an institution from providing a small portion of the agreed upon athletic grant in the fall as incentive for the prospect to perform well in fall baseball. In many cases, coaches recover the rest of the money after effectively trying out the prospect and encouraging them to seek other opportunities. Finally, recent increases to the progress-toward-degree rules, particularly the increased percentage of degree requirements, will mandate more credit hour production.

The working group has spent significant time discussing tough issues related to the academic performance of baseball student-athletes and believes it has developed a comprehensive package of recommendations that will positively impact the sport’s APR. Further, the positive momentum for change in baseball caused by the current system of penalties associated with the APR and recent legislative changes cannot be underestimated. While there are cultural challenges with the sport of baseball related to the professional aspirations of the student-athletes, the impact of a unique professional draft system and the sheer number of professional roster spots for professional baseball, the working group does believe that positive change to the culture of the sport is occurring and will continue to occur with the recommendations from this group. The recommendations are designed to address the issues of baseball student-athlete movement, the current slow progress toward a degree, the impact of two-year college transfers, and the time demands of baseball student-athletes on teams that have historically underperformed. These recommendations were driven by data provided by the NCAA research staff through the Academic Performance Program and the GOALS study of current student-athletes.

Finally, while the working group takes very seriously the immediate need for improvement of the academic performance of baseball student-athletes, the proposals should be implemented in a time frame that provides institutions and student-athletes with a realistic and fair opportunity to adjust their behaviors.

KEY RESEARCH FINDINGS

1. High School. While the two-year average APR for baseball (931) is similar to that of football and basketball (929 and 927, respectively), baseball student-athletes enter college with significantly higher academic profiles (Core GPA and SAT) than football and basketball student-athletes.

2. Credit-Hour Earning. Relative to other sports, including basketball and football, baseball student-athletes appear to underperform in terms of the number of credit-hours earned per year. Except for skiing, baseball has the largest differential between in-season and out-of-season credit hour earnings of any other men’s sport. This credit-hour underperformance occurs despite a relatively high average GPA among baseball student-athletes.

3. Summer School. A considerably smaller proportion of baseball student-athletes enroll in summer school, as compared to basketball, football and other sports [2005: baseball – 17%; basketball – 49%.; football – 45%; other sports – 29%]. The working group noted that this appears to be a result of (1) participation in summer baseball leagues driven by professional aspirations; (2) less access to summer school financial aid than football and basketball; and (3) the ability to use the fall term to “get well” academically.

4. Fall Term Eligibility. Nearly three times as many baseball student-athletes return to the same institution ineligible to compete in the fall term as basketball and football-student-athletes. As such, it appears baseball student-athletes are underperforming, in terms of credit-hours earned, in the spring term, typically not enrolling in summer school, and then using the fall term to “get well” academically for spring term competition. While such student-athletes ultimately are deemed eligible, they lose an APR eligibility point in the process and, over time, further delay their progress towards a degree.

5. Student-Athlete Movement. Baseball, a sport where student-athletes are able to use the one-time transfer exception, has the largest proportion of freshman student-athletes departing their institution (e.g., transfers, pro departures, etc.) by their senior year (50%). More specifically, baseball (and basketball) has approximately twice the proportion of transfers than football and men’s other sports [27%in baseball and basketball versus 13% in football and 12% in all other men’s sports].

6. Two-Year College Transfer Volume. Baseball (and basketball) has two to three times the proportion of two-year college transfers as football and other men’s sports [18.5% in baseball; 17.4% in basketball; 7.9% in football; 3.6% in other men’s sports].

7. Two-Year College Transfer Performance. Compared to four-year college transfers and non-transfers in the sport of baseball, two-year college transfers lose nearly twice as many eligibility points and retention points in the APR and between two and three times the proportion of zero-for-twos. The average number of credit hours earned does not compare favorably with most sports (only better than football and wrestling). This occurs despite two-year college transfers having among the highest high school academic profiles and having much higher four-year college GPAs that their counterparts in other sports.

8. Student-Athlete Input. Through a NCAA survey of a representative sample of 549 student-athletes, baseball student-athletes reported a higher average number of days away from campus than other student-athletes; reported higher professional aspirations (except basketball); a higher percentage reported athletics as their primary reason for attending their current college, compared to other sports; and view graduation from college as less important than student-athlete in other sports.

9. Number of Contests, Squad Size, Financial Aid. While there does not appear to be a broad, meaningful relationship between number of contests and APR; squad size and the APR; or equivalencies awarded per team and the APR, the working group recognizes that these variables may still be at play in terms of their impact on student-athlete movement and credit-hour earnings for particular institutions.

10. Professional Aspirations. Operating as a subtext to most, if not all, of the aforementioned issues and findings are the professional aspirations of baseball student-athletes. For example, in a given year, over 600 Division I baseball student-athletes are drafted or signed as free agents by Major League Baseball (MLB) clubs. This culture, possibly unique to baseball because of the MLB amateur draft, appears to impact the college-choice decisions of high school students, the academic performance of enrolled student-athletes, and the transfer decisions of student-athletes.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association

March 26, 2007 DJL/BAH:kg