Communication #4 –
Virtual Focus Group (VFG) Participants:
This is our fourth formal
communication and request for dialogue and input to the Virtual Focus Groups
(VFGs). This communication follows
the January meetings of the Division III Management and Presidents Councils as
well as the Division III Forum that took place at the 2005 NCAA Convention.
A. Future of
Division III--Phase II Convention Discussion. During the Convention, the Division III
membership had an opportunity to review and discuss in more detail various
issues related to the future of Division III. In particular, the Forum on
January 9 included an overview of the current process, results of the Future of
Division III – Phase II Survey, and roundtable discussion sessions
regarding the management of membership growth and championships issues; sports
sponsorship and program equity; and issues related to academic success and
cultural integration.
We are grateful for the role
that many of you played in shaping the forum questions and for your
participation during the discussions.
Your leadership on the VFGs remains crucial to successfully addressing
the future of our division.
As expected, the forum
comments represent a wide range of view points and recommendations. The Division III Championships and
Membership Committees reviewed that information during their January
meetings. The Future of Division
III-Phase II Oversight Group reviewed the membership feedback, as well as the
committees’ comments during a February 15 conference call.
Based upon this collective
review process, the Oversight Group has identified 3 additional questions
for VFG discussion and feedback:
Question #1 -
Alternative Season-Ending Opportunities. Allowing conferences the
opportunity to opt out of NCAA championships and compete in an alternative
season-ending opportunity funded by entities other than the NCAA would help the
division manage the anticipated growth.
Below are two format options.
The first option incorporates a season-ending opportunity into the existing
playing and practice season limits; these contests would have to be included in
the 18 or 19 week playing season for the sport. The second option incorporates the
season-ending opportunity in the true post-season, where, just like NCAA
championships, the contests would not have to be included in the 18 or 19 week
playing season. The second option
would require legislative changes.
Is either option a
viable concept? Do you believe your
institution and/or conference would be interested in this alternative? Which of the two options do you believe
would be of greater benefit to the membership?
Option 1 –
Alternative Limited Season-Ending Student-Athlete Experience (Not Post-Season)
· Entire conference commitment - Sport-by-sport basis
· Multiple year declaration (minimum 3-4 years)
· September 15th declaration deadline (one
year in advance)
· Limited season-ending experience (2 weekends)
· Must be included as part of declared playing season.
· Dates of competition will count towards countable
limits
· Competition must conclude prior to the NCAA
championship in that sport.
· No NCAA funding
Notes:
· Institutions that exercise this option do not count
towards access ratio used to determine bracket sizes.
· All contest results continue to count as primary
criteria (where applicable) regardless of declaration.
Option 2 –
Exempted Post Season
· Requires legislative changes to Bylaws 31.2.1.1 and
17.1.7.g
· Entire conference commitment - Sport-by-Sport basis
· Multiple year declaration (minimum 3-4 years)
· September 15th declaration deadline (one
year in advance)
· No NCAA Funding
Notes:
· Institutions that exercise this option do not count
towards access ratio used to determine bracket sizes.
· All contest results continue to count as primary
criteria (where applicable) regardless of declaration.
Question #2
– Sports Sponsorship. Current legislation requires all institutions to
sponsor 5 sports for men; 5 sports for women including 3 team sports for each
gender. Average undergraduate enrollment
at Division III institutions is 2,338, and average sports sponsorship is 16.7,
resulting in an overall average of one team for every 140 students. The smallest Division III enrollment is
250, and the largest is 20,000.
Based on the Division
III philosophy of maximizing the number and variety of athletics opportunities
for students, would it be appropriate to establish a sports sponsorship
requirement with a link to undergraduate enrollment? If so, what institutional
enrollment-to-sports sponsored ratio should be used? How many sports should those
institutions with less than 500 students be required to sponsor? How many for 10,000 students? If this method is used, how many
different tiers of enrollment figures should be used for sports-sponsorship
purposes?
Question #3 - Conference Alignment. Current legislation requires a two-year
waiting period for automatic qualification eligibility in certain circumstances
(i.e., a new institution joins the conference in order for the conference to
reach the minimum of seven institutions sponsoring a particular sport).
Do you believe the
membership should have the opportunity to realign within a designated period of
time without being subject to the two-year waiting period? If so, should this option be open to
both multi-sport and single-sport conferences? How would this benefit the overall
membership?
Again, we encourage each VFG
member to solicit feedback regarding these questions. We ask you to solicit input on campus,
but also from colleagues within each conference (or group of independents).
The Oversight Group will review
your comments and forward them directly to the Management and Presidents
Councils for consideration during their April meetings. In order to benefit most from you
feedback, please submit your comments to the listserv by March 18.
B.
Summary
of Actions/Recommendations and NCAA News articles from the January 2005
meetings of the Management and Presidents Councils.
You can find the summary of
actions from the recent council meetings at the following Web address:
http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/governance/division_III/management_council/index.html
To view the NCAA News
articles regarding the January Management Council/Presidents Council meeting,
follow this link:
Please forward any questions
regarding PC and MC actions to Dan Dutcher (ddutcher@ncaa.org) or Bridget Belgiovine (bbelgiovine@ncaa.org).
Thank you for your involvement in and support of the VFGs.