NCAA DIVISION III PRESIDENTS COUNCIL/MANAGEMENT COUNCIL
The status reports provide an update on the work of the subgroups of the NCAA Division III Presidents Council/Management Council Joint Subcommittee on the Future of Division III. Each subgroup met twice via conference call. The Oversight Group met via conference call March 26 and again July 10 to review the progress of each subgroup. Oversight Group recommendations and feedback (in bold) are submitted to the Councils for input and will be forwarded to the subgroups for review during September/October conference calls.
Status Reports
·
Championships (Suzanne Coffey, oversight group
representative).
1. Possible championship models. Model 1 – one division/one national championship. Model 2 – two subdivisions and two national championships. Model 3 – two subdivisions in the preliminary rounds, playing to one national champion. Model 4 (regional championships) – one division playing to four regional champions in each sport.
2. Cost to include staffing. Specific cost to be determined. Model 1 – costs remain status quo. Model 2 – likely most expensive with addition of game/staff expense and committee structure for additional national championship. Model 3 – additional expenses likely for one additional game and staff. Model 4 – possibly least expensive due to decrease in games and staff.
3. Length of postseason play. Model 4 maybe the shortest with elimination of national championship, followed by Models 3, 2 and 1.
4. Impact on conferences, including conference championships and postseason opportunities. Models 1 and 4 have no impact. Models 2 and 3 have potential impact.
5. Access – overall ratios between sports and subdivisions (including conferences and independents). Access ratios would remain consistent with current access ratios for all four models.
6. Access – overall competitive quality.
7. Institutional self-selection – for all sports, not sport-by-sport.
8. Sport committee structures – must be addressed.
· Eligibility and Recruiting (Leon Lunder, oversight group representative).
1. Redefine eligibility limits to include practice or competition. A student athlete would be limited to four seasons of eligibility. Practice or competition during a season would count as one of four available seasons.
2. 10-Semester/15-Quarter rule – retain 10-semester/15-quarter eligibility clock, but focus on the undergraduate experience. Do not permit graduate eligibility.
3. Eight-semester/12-quarter clock participation based on seasons of participation (practice or competition). Foster academic success and completion of degree in a reasonable time. Other discussion has included a four-year, running clock based on initial enrollment. Oversight Group concern related to changed majors and study abroad.
4. Final semester of eligibility—Consider steps to prevent enrollment in less than a full-time program of studies merely to extend eligibility. Athletics should not inhibit degree completion. Oversight Group recommends removal of issue if eligibility limits to “participation” are redefined to include practice and competition. Also consider establishing a maximum number of courses or credit hours beyond which a student would use a semester or quarter of eligibility (e.g., one course).
5. Off-campus recruitment – Establish a principle that athletics recruitment should comply with established policies and procedures applicable to the admissions process. Retain current legislation to prohibit in-person, off-campus recruitment and contacts with student-athletes until completion of junior year in high school.
6. Transfer contact rule – Consider steps to strengthen it to preclude unsolicited contact and subsequent transfer and enrollment. Address through enforcement and eligibility-restoration process.
7. Initial and continuing eligibility – Continue to minimize infringements on institutional autonomy.
8. Special admission “slots” for student-athletes - Consider impact of such policies and possible limits.
· Financial Aid (Susan Bassett, oversight group representative).
1. Model 1 – Status quo. No consideration of athletics in award packaging, buttressed by proposed audit. Primary focus.
2. Model 2 – Permit consideration of athletics in granting of aid up to need ("preferential packaging"). Limited focus.
3.
Model 3—Permit consideration of athletics in granting of
aid (merit or other) but not greater than an agreed upon amount or
percentage based on institutional cost of attendance. Limited focus. Oversight group recommends elimination
of this model; it is not consistent with the Division III philosophy.
4. Re-examine provisions of NCAA Bylaw 15.01.5 (athletics funds or endowments established prior to January 1, 1979).
·
Membership (Marcia Kierscht, oversight group representative).
1. Sports sponsorship requirements. Consider an increase beyond 5 and 5, based on division-wide average of almost 16 total.
2. Multidivision classification. Discuss further limits to this opportunity.
3. Coaching limits. Consider establishing limits on number of permissible coaches per sport, based on reasonable full-time equivalent ratio of participants to coaches in each sport. Oversight Group recommends caution with issue and does not support use of criteria based on full-time or part-time status, or compensation.
4. Travel and Squad size limits. Consider travel and varsity squad size limits, based in part on championships squad size limits and Division III participation statistics and data.
5. Subdivision. Respond as necessary to subdivision proposals from the other subgroups. Identify possible “division dominant” legislation that would remain applicable to the division as a whole (two-thirds majority to change) and other proposals that could apply only to the members of a subdivision.
6.
Acknowledge that any subdivision discussions must address
issues related to institutional self-selection and conference
affiliation.
·
Playing and Practice Seasons (Connee Zotos,
oversight group representative).
1.
Modify and make more consistent length of playing
seasons based on a student’s overall percentage of time engaged in
athletics.
2.
Consider specific start and end dates, which may be
all-inclusive (i.e., preseason conditioning through end of championship).
3.
Consider reasonable contest limits.
4.
Nontraditional segment – consider further limitation
(e.g., fewer contests or practice only) or elimination.
5.
Haverford Model – All-inclusive start and end dates,
with elimination of nontraditional segment.