National Collegiate Athletic Association |
The NCAA News - News and FeaturesThe NCAA News -- January 18, 1999 Division III tackles contemporary issues during forums
Day I: Sportmanship discussion should involve athletes
BY KAY HAWES
A panel discussion January 10 focused on the campus student-athlete advisory committees' role in fostering sportsmanship and ethical conduct. Donna Ledwin, Division III Management Council member and athletics director at the College of New Rochelle, served as moderator. Other panelists were John Biddiscombe, chair of the Division III Management Council and athletics director at Wesleyan University (Connecticut); John Van Why, commissioner of the Iowa Intercollegiate Athletic Conference (IIAC); Maggie Trainor, student-athlete and campus SAAC member from Rosemont College; and John Galga-no, student-ath-lete and campus SAAC member from Manhattanville College. Biddiscombe mentioned several sportsmanship challenges faced in Division III, including the fact that students entering Division III institutions often have experience playing for club teams that do not embrace Division III values and that some coaches hired in Division III do not have a clearly articulated coaching philosophy. Van Why discussed sportsmanship issues that had been dealt with by the IIAC, including a decision to place the sports of men's and women's soccer on probation until better sportsmanship was observed. He also discussed a decision made by the IIAC to prohibit students from sitting on the front row of bleachers during games in gymnasium facilities. Van Why encouraged conferences to pursue changes that would result in better sportsmanship. "Every conference has somewhat the same problems, the question is how do you address it?" he said. Looking to student-athletes to assist with the sportsmanship issue is a good idea, Van Why said. "To say that we don't have problems (with sportsmanship) is to kid ourselves," Van Why said. "But with the help of the student-athlete committees, I think we can make some inroads with that. We do need to enlist the help of the students." Galgano agreed. "We as student-athletes have to take on the responsibility of showing good sportsmanship on our own," Galgano said. "We often put that responsibility onto the coaches, and I think that's a mistake. Why can't we show the coaches the way?" Trainor offered several suggestions for how campus SAACs could make a difference when it comes to sportsmanship. "One of the main things SAACs can do on campus is to make up their own ethical code of conduct, with a definition of sportsmanship," Trainor said, also noting that SAACs could participate in inter-team activities and perhaps give awards to those students who have been exemplary in upstanding the ethical code. Other issues that were discussed included respect for the game, unique challenges of Division III athletics, coaches choosing to run up scores to increase rankings, sharing responsibility for sportsmanship and implementing policies to change fan behavior. Alcohol/binge drinking/hazing After opening remarks by Cela Oceguera, a student-athlete at the University of California, San Diego, Edward Coll, president of Alfred University, spoke about a recent problem his campus had with alcohol-related hazing among sports teams. Until an alcohol-related hazing event that resulted in the hospitalization of several freshman football players at Alfred this fall, Cole was unaware that the problem existed. When the event occurred, it became obvious that the university needed to take quick, appropriate action, Coll said. "We could have had a real tragedy," Coll said, referring to the fact that the Alfred coach and athletics director virtually saved the lives of the freshman players whose rooms they checked. "I was shocked that something like this could happen on our campus." Coll also described a survey planned for all NCAA divisions to investigate the problem of hazing and alcohol-related athletics initiations. Cris Pellegrino, a student-athlete from Tufts University, stated that student-athletes must take the lead in learning to form team bonds without engaging in harmful behavior. "We've got to teach student-athletes a different way to bond," Pellegrino said, noting that alcohol played an important role in many rituals of life. Pellegrino encouraged athletics administrators to address the subject of hazing and drinking with their student-athletes, a suggestion echoed by Oceguera.
Stan Caine, president of Adrian College, offered a summary of the resources available to athletics administrators. Other topics discussed included student-athletes leading by example, difficulties in discovering problem drinking, and working with on-campus health educators.
Day 2: Delegates debate the many issues of nontraditional seasonsSAN ANTONIO -- After the voting on Division III legislation during the Division III business session January 11, a panel of speakers addressed the various issues involved with nontraditional practice and playing seasons. Panelists were Bob Malekoff, director of athletics, College of Wooster; Rocky Carzo, director of athletics, Tufts University; Howell Todd, president, Mississippi College; Christopher Walker, faculty athletics representative, University of Redlands; John Harvey, director of athletics, Carnegie Mellon University; Carol Fritz, senior woman administrator, Western Maryland College; Joy Reighn, director of athletics, Rowan University; Scott Carnehan, director of athletics and baseball coach, Linfield College; Amy Huchthausen, student-athlete, University of Wisconsin, La Crosse; Addy Malatesta, director of athletics, Wilkes University; Dana Feltz, student-athlete, William Paterson College of New Jersey. Linda Hopple, executive director, Middle Atlantic States Conference, facilitated the discussion, and a straw vote was conducted at the conclusion of the discussion. Results of multiple straw votes indicated that a majority of delegates favored modification over no change to the current legislation or elimination of the nontraditional season entirely. Following Malekoff's brief history of nontraditional-seasons legislation in Division III, Carzo discussed the Division III philosophy statement and the apparent conflict between parts of the philosophy statement and the existing nontraditional-seasons legislation. Walker indicated that, while the issue seems simple from an academic standpoint, it is not. "Would we discourage the music student from spending night and day pursuing their love? I think not," he said. "But what about the student who desires to spend more time with academics? What about student-athletes who are spending more time on part-time employment? If extensive participation in nontraditional seasons becomes the norm, would they be excluded? The bottom line for all of us should be striking a balance between academics and athletics." Fritz mentioned the concern of overloading coaching staffs and needing to hire more athletic trainers, equipment managers and groundskeepers. "We wonder, as an institution and as a conference, why some teams were so bent on having nontraditional seasons and some teams didn't seem to care. We don't know the answer to that," Fritz said. "We are student-driven, and therefore we need to listen to our student-athletes, be careful not to be coach-driven, and decide what we are going to do." Huchthausen spoke about skill development and team building and the benefits provided in those areas during nontraditional seasons. Malatesta discussed the strains nontraditional seasons placed on the multisport coach, including the pressure to remain competitive in both sports, the desire to ensure that student-athletes in both seasons receive quality instruction, and the challenges presented to recruiting. Feltz articulated the disadvantages of nontraditional seasons on the multisport student-athlete. "The biggest threat mentally is if you do not play in the nontraditional season, you may not make the team," Feltz said. "So, many times a multisport athlete participates in the nontraditional sport in addition to the traditional season." After the panelists' brief remarks, all delegates were invited to comment on the issues. Other factors presented as issues to consider included concerns of the Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports regarding adequate coverage of practices by medical personnel and trainers, budgetary concerns, insurance and liability con-cerns, weather-related needs, the social benefits of team activities, the opportunity for first-year students to bond with the team, and the concern that different sports are treated so differently. It is likely that additional membership feedback will be solicited by survey this spring, followed by an opportunity for additional feedback from the Division III committee structure. -- Kay Hawes
Day 3: Gambling not just a Division I issue anymoreSAN ANTONIO -- The Division III business session January 12 included a discussion session about financial aid, a session on gambling and its impact on Division III campuses, and a discussion related to deregulation of the Division III Manual. Shirley M. Liddle, director of athletics at Beaver College and chair of the Division III Financial Aid and Awards Committee, opened the first discussion with a presentation addressing the history and philosophy of financial aid in Division III, as well as the committee's mission. "The primary mission of the committee has been to educate and to increase compliance," Liddle said. Liddle noted that many issues will need to be addressed in the future regarding financial aid in Division III. "There has been some concern that members are doing one thing and reporting another," she said, noting that there were some issues of trust to deal with as the division approaches a "fork in the road" regarding financial aid. Walter Johnson, director of athletics at North Central College and member of the Management Council, summarized the committee's actions regarding the review of nonathletics achievement awards and awards of circumstance, noting that 92 percent of the Division III membership had submitted its awards for review so far. Johnson also noted that more than 10,000 awards had been submitted to the committee. Georgette R. DeVeres, associate dean/director of financial aid at Claremont McKenna-Harvey Mudd-Scripps Colleges, discussed the committee's review of financial aid from outside sources (Bylaw 15.2.5). DeVeres noted that it was difficult for financial-aid officers to identify the source and criteria for outside aid. Another issue is the fact that many institutions' financial aid officers do not know which students in their population are student-athletes. Jeff A. Ankrom, professor of economics at Wittenberg College, discussed the philosophy of Division III and the history of that philosophy as it relates to financial aid. "Behind this (history), I think is an assumption that we all trust each other," he said, noting that there was no mention early on in the history of the division of regulation of awards. Ankrom also noted that past Conventions had discussed the issue of athletically related aid and leadership and merit awards beyond need -- all proposals that the Division III membership had rejected. "The point is that regulation has increased over time," he said. "The fork in the road is, do we face the choice of more regulation to hold together the original Division III philosophy, or do we increase institutional autonomy and decrease regulation? We need your guidance on this question. The committee needs to know where we are headed, and whether or not we should be reviewing all of these awards." "What direction should we go?" Johnson asked. "We need some feedback from you, the membership, so we can take that direction and move forward." Topics discussed by delegates included the possibility of periodic audits, the review of financial-aid awards by conference officials, and the issue of awarding athletically related financial aid. Gambling William S. Saum, NCAA director of agent and gambling activities, presented an overview of applicable NCAA legislation and positions on gambling. "The goal today is to raise your awareness of what is happening on your campus," Saum said. "None of us in this room may wager, legally or illegally, on intercollegiate athletics." Saum also discussed several academic studies pointing to the rising problem of gambling among college students. "Who is it on your campus who might gamble?" Saum asked. He then mentioned several characteristics of gamblers, such as an aggressive nature or risk-taking behavior. Ben Scaffidi, a former student-athlete at a Division III institution and a former bookmaker on that campus, discussed his college experience and how he was introduced to gambling. "I should be in a Division III school now, playing athletics, but because of what happened, I'm not in that position anymore," he said. Scaffidi detailed how his roommate had first gotten involved with gambling, leading him to get involved in a bookmaking scheme. "The furthest worry in our mind was getting caught. We barely took that into consideration. Everybody we knew did it. Our biggest worry was losing money," he said. "On a personal note, I would tell any student-athlete that it's not worth it. The money didn't begin to cover our legal fees. And now my basketball career has been cut short by two years." Julie Roe-Sumner, NCAA student-athlete reinstatement representative, discussed how Internet gambling worked, and how student-athletes had such easy access since they generally had both Internet access and credit cards. Roe-Sumner's presentation included a real-time review of two gambling sites on the World Wide Web. Roe-Sumner also detailed some cases reviewed by the Student-Athlete Reinstatement Committee, all involving Division III student-athletes. Al Bean, director of athletics at the University of Southern Maine, discussed an incident when he discovered that some students on his baseball team had been involved with gambling. "We attacked this very vigorously. We wanted to attack this, and we wanted to get to the bottom of it," he said, describing how he and the coach confronted the team at practice and asked who had been involved. They discovered that 17 people on the team had been involved. The bookie turned out to be a family friend of one of the student-athletes. "For those of us in Division III who have complained about lack of coverage of our athletics events, all you need to do to get some is to have a gambling incident," Bean said, noting that the institution had to hold two press conferences on the issue. "We talk very openly now with our students about gambling," Bean said. "We tell them about the problem we had, and we tell them how easy it is to get started." Other issues discussed were credit card applications on campus, an Association-wide gambling video, the issue of coaches owning race horses and gambling by female student-athletes. Deregulation Suzanne Coffey, director of athletics at Bates College and chair of the Division III Interpretations and Legislation Committee, explained that the committee had been given the charge of deregulation from the Division III Management Council. She explained that phase I of the committee's work involved removal of Division I and Division II references. "The result of the phase I work is a smaller and more manageable manual," she said. Phase II of the project involves clarification and simplification of the Division III Manual. This phase is scheduled to be completed by April 1999, so that it can be presented to the membership for vote at the 2000 NCAA Convention. Susan Chapman, director of athletics at Worcester State College, discussed standardization of terms and the challenges presented when terms are not clearly defined and uniformly used. Carlyle Carter, executive director of the Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference and a member of the Management Council, discussed the application of Division III philosophy to deregulation. "Our philosophy statement should serve as a litmus test for our legislation," Carter said. "I would like the membership to review how we count seasons of eligibility and see if this passes our litmus test." Dennis Collins, executive director of the North Coast Athletic Conference, discussed how Division III is unique in dealing with many issues in that it does not need to spell out for its membership precisely what is not permissible. "We felt the philosophy of Division III should make up an important part of our manual," he said. Elizabeth Sander, a student-athlete and committee member from Bryn Mawr College, pointed out several sections of Bylaw 16 that the committee would like to remove because it believes that those issues are covered under the Division III philosophy, including rules prohibiting institutions from providing cars, typing costs and a photocopier for student-athlete use. Delegates were also asked to fill out a deregulation survey, which will be reviewed by the committee in early February. -- Kay Hawes |
SAN ANTONIO -- Division III delegates to the NCAA Convention had the opportunity to discuss several important and timely topics with their peers.
"Go back to your institution and discuss these topics with your student-advisory boards," Oceguera said. "Ask them for their ideas. Brainstorm and ask them for their assistance. Don't be naive, don't let your student-athletes be naive. Awareness and education is the first step. Don't wait for a tragedy to occur before you act."