Out-of-season work and fourth-year-of-eligibility proposals have been defeated at previous Conventions, and both proposals again were opposed vigorously in Nashville.

The work measure (Proposal No. 62) again prompted concerns about the anticipated difficulty of monitoring compliance with the legislation's restrictions. "The benefits of this legislation do not justify the difficulties or cost," one longtime opponent told delegates.

The fourth-year-of-eligibility proposal (No. 68) raised protests that adoption would signal a retreat from recently strengthened academic standards.

But student-athletes -- led by NCAA Student-Athlete Advisory Committee student-athlete chair Bridget Niland of State University of New York at Buffalo -- unwaveringly countered arguments against those and other proposals.

'Issue of emotions'

Addressing the work proposal, Niland urged delegates to look past compliance concerns and recognize that the opportunity for employment is both wanted and needed by student-athletes. "It may be an issue of emotions," she acknowledged, "but that's because it's an issue of importance to student-athletes....Please don't let this go."

Support for Proposal No. 62 also came from sources such as Big Ten Conference Commissioner James E. Delany. "I know people will have to take a deep breath, but we have to do what is right, and what we know is right," he said.

The proposal was amended to require student-athletes to sign an affidavit attesting compliance with conditions for employment. Then, an attempt to refer the proposal for further study was defeated. Then, a section of the proposal requiring that employment occur outside the playing season was eliminated.

Finally, the amended proposal was adopted, 169-150 with six abstentions.

During a news conference later in the day, Niland pinpointed what she believed may have been the key moment in the debate.

"It was the suggestion of one of our committee members that I get up there and say, 'We're not going to go away.' And I think (delegates) realized 'they're not going to go away.'"

The vote approving the fourth season of eligibility for partial qualifiers also was close -- just as it has been at past Conventions. This time, however, it passed -- 173-145 with seven abstentions.

NCAA Presidents Commission Chair Samuel H. Smith of Washington State University later said he does not believe adoption of Proposal No. 68 represents a setback for NCAA academic standards. He noted that the proposal clearly reflected a desire to reward student-athletes for academic achievement.

"I think it's a positive step," Smith said.

Restructuring

The student-athletes' performance in the Convention halls may have stolen the show, but Presidential Agenda Day also saw the NCAA membership overwhelmingly approve proposals enacting details of restructuring.

After rejecting an effort to delay the effective date of restructuring -- an effort that unexpectedly became a debate over some institutions' frustration over exclusion from the Division
I-A bowl alliance (see story, page 1) -- all three divisions adopted measures to finalize the composition of governing bodies, create cabinet/ committee structures, lengthen the provisional-membership period for new NCAA members from three to four years and establish a procedure for the creation of National Collegiate (multidivision) championships.

In addition, Division I established minimum representation goals for women and ethnic minorities on its Board of Directors and Management Council, and approved an amendment-to-amendment that will require a two-thirds vote of the membership to alter the process for achieving those goals.

Division II moved up the effective date for legislative sponsorship requirements approved at the 1996 Convention from August 1, 1997, to immediately upon adjournment of the Nashville Convention. Division III approved an increase in sports-sponsorship requirements for membership.

Other actions

Presidential Agenda Day also featured the following:

Attendance for the 1997 Convention was 2,687, a record.