REPORT OF THE
NCAA DIVISION III STUDENT-ATHLETE REINSTATEMENT COMMITTEE
1.
ACTION ITEMS.
a. Eligibility
Ramifications — Restitution for Receipt of Improper Benefits (NCAA Bylaw
16.01.2).
(1) Recommendation. Amend all restitution bylaws to increase
the limitation for value of benefits that do not affect the eligibility of the
student-athlete conditioned on the student-athlete repaying the value of the
benefit to a charity of his or her choice received from $50 or less to $100 or
less.
(2) Rationale. Currently the restitution limit within
NCAA Division III is $50. Given the
small number of cases that fall between $50 and $100, the Student-Athlete
Reinstatement (SAR) committee
believes an increase to $100 will assist in lessoning the bureaucracy by decreasing
the number of situations where reinstatement is required. This increase in dollar limitation will
bring consistency among the Association regarding receipt of impermissible
benefits that can be addressed through restitution.
(3) Budget
Impact. None.
b. Amateurism
— Involvement with Professional Teams — Draft List —
Exception. (NCAA Bylaw _12.2.4.2)
(1) Recommendation. Sponsor legislation to permit, in the
sport of basketball, a student-athlete in his or her final year of eligibility
to be drafted during the basketball season by an international organization
without forfeiting his or her eligibility in the sport of basketball.
(2) Rationale. The committee noted that given
the timing of the international-basketball draft (during the collegiate basketball
season), enrolled student-athletes are unnecessarily precluded from
participating in the international basketball draft during their final year of
eligibility. The committee believes
allowing this limited exception would not compromise the intent of amateur
principles. The committee notes
that existing legislation regarding agents and benefits would still apply and
preclude involvement with agents and the professional team beyond being
drafted.
(3) Budget
Impact. None.
c. Definition
— Professional Athletics Team [Bylaw 12.02.4 (a) (10).].
(1) Recommendation. Adopt noncontroversial legislation to
amend the language of the definition of a professional team, which indicates
“other reasonable expenses incidental to participation” to
“other reasonable expenses.”
(2) Rationale. The committee believes that the intent
of the change in the definition of a professional team was to provide clarity
to the membership and ensure that teams who provided players money in excess of
actual and necessary expenses are considered professional under NCAA
legislation. This past year, a
couple cases involved receipt of reasonable expenses (e.g., laundry money) from
an Espoir (amateur) team that was not directly tied to practice or
competition. As a result, an interpretation
was given causing these teams to be considered professional. However, the intent of the new
definition was to not have teams like those competing at the Espoir level
trigger the definition of a professional team. The change in language will allow
interpretive flexibility so the teams that are not truly paying their players
will no longer trigger the definition of a professional team.
(3) Budget
Impact. None.
d. Policies
and Procedures.
(1) Recommendation. Approve proposed editorial amendments to the committee’s policies and procedures. Amendments include replacing language identifying director of SAR to SAR lead administrator and a provision to clearly indicate that committee materials and appeal proceedings are confidential (Attachment A).
(2) Rationale. The recommended changes reflect the current practice of the
committee and are editorial in nature. The language regarding lead administrator will accurately reflect administration of SAR within membership services. The confidentiality clause will assist in protecting not only student-athlete’s privacy but also all participants involved in the appeal.
(3) Budget Impact. None.
e. Newly Adopted Season of Participation Legislation.
·
Recommendation.
The committee requested guidance from the NCAA Division III Management
Council regarding application of the new season-of-participation standards as
they apply to hardship waivers and season-of-competition waivers. Specifically, the committee is looking
for guidance from Management Council as to whether the committee should have
any latitude in deciding waiver requests involving participation that occurs as
a result of a lack of knowledge of the rule, especially during the upcoming
academic year (2004-05).
2. INFORMATIONAL
ITEMS.
a. Review of Case Where the New Philosophy Resulted in a Different Outcome. During an April teleconference and at its June in-person meeting, the committee reviewed and approved all cases that as a result of the new philosophical approach a different decision was rendered. In addition, the committee discussed over arching themes throughout the past year as a result of the new philosophy. The committee provided guidance to the staff regarding what factors should be considered in the analysis. Per reinstatement practices, if the committee disagrees with a decision rendered by the staff, the case is archived and no longer considered case precedent.
b. Update
of Extension of the 10-Semester/15-Quarter Period of Eligibility and Season of
Competition Waiver Requests involving Military Service. The committee received an update
regarding application of the Management Council directive regarding extensions
of the 10-semester/15-quarter period of eligibility and season-competition
waivers for student-athletes called to active duty during enrollment. It was noted that less than five
requests have been processed (and granted) by the NCAA reinstatement staff to
date.
c. Development of Contemporaneous Medical Documentation Standards Document. The committee supported the continued development of a one-page document outlining existing documentation standards used by the NCAA national office for medical documentation associated with hardship and extension waiver requests. The one-page document will be distributed to conference offices and serve as a resource for conferences when processing hardship waivers.
d. Letter
to Chief Executive Officer Following Misinformation. The committee supported development of a
letter sent to chief executive officer (CEO) when relief is provided to a
student-athlete based on misinformation provided by institutional
personnel. The committee supported
use of a uniform letter for all three divisions and inclusion of this within
the SAR Policies and Procedures.
e. Reinforce Campus Educational Efforts. The committee supported continued outreach efforts directed at campus and conference office personnel regarding reinstatement issues and attendance at NCAA Regional Compliance Seminars.
(1) The committee recommended that the NCAA Division III Student-Athlete Advisory Committee consider undertaking significant educational efforts toward student-athletes regarding the loss of redshirt season resulting from seasons of participation as opposed to seasons of competition.
(2) The committee recommended that the SAR staff work with the NCAA Division III governance and membership services staffs to use existing communication tools and outreach efforts to provide education to coaches associations, conference commissioners and campus administrators regarding the loss of redshirt season resulting from seasons of participation as opposed to seasons of competition.
f. Strategic Plan. The committee supported the staff’s continued efforts to enhance educational efforts directed at campus personnel and student-athletes regarding NCAA legislation through strategic plan initiatives and incorporation of these efforts within the Division III strategic plan.
g. Date of Default on Repayment Plans. The committee amended its repayment plan policy allowing institutions to declare a student-athlete in default regarding a repayment plan prior to expiration of the plan. This policy would allow an institution the opportunity to begin the institution’s four-year ban on entering into further repayment plans at an earlier date than the scheduled date for the final payment.
h. Patterns within Flexible Decisions. The committee discussed situations within Bylaws 12 (amateurism), 14 (eligibility), 15 (financial aid), 16 (extra benefits) and Bylaw 30 (extensions) where patterns may or may not have been established within a particular bylaw as a result of the flexible approach.
i. Withholding from NCAA Championships. The committee discussed giving the staff limited authority, in consultation with the chair, to suspend a reinstatement condition if the next contests are the NCAA championship. The committee noted that the general practice is for a student-athlete to be withheld from the next contest, even if it is an NCAA championship. The ability to suspend the condition should only be used in limited circumstances when the student-athlete is innocently involved and withholding from the championship does not seem inappropriate. The committee will continue discussion on this at the December meeting and finalize the language for its policies and procedures.
Committee Chair: Kim Allen,
Staff Liaisons: Kelly Groddy, Student-Athlete
Reinstatement
Jennifer Strawley, Student-Athlete Reinstatement