The issue of amateurism is one that has been with the NCAA since the Association's inception in 1906.

In fact, questions about amateurism and eligibility for competition are issues that were debated long before there were NCAA Conventions, NCAA committees or eligibility standards.

Some of the old ideas regarding amateurism -- such as the prohibition on granting athletics scholarships and the ban on recruiting high-school players -- have changed over time.

Other factors -- such as the recruiting of international players who may come from countries with no clear delineation between professional and amateur athletes -- have muddied the waters in recent history.

As the new millennium approaches, the history of amateurism is still quite relevant, both to the Association's present and its future. All three divisions are undergoing formal examinations of their amateurism policies, and the issue will be discussed in several forums during the 2000 NCAA Convention.

An elitist idea?

Just where did the idea of amateurism in U.S. sport originate and what was the original intent of amateurism rules?

Many scholars argue that our current ideas about amateurism have their roots in Great Britain during a time when there was a clear line between the leisure class and the working class.

Most students at elite schools in Britain in the 1800s participated in a variety of sports, and participation was thought to help shape the young gentlemen's character, serving as an important aspect of a liberal education. That became the model for sport in the United States in the 1800s since elite U.S. schools had their roots across the Atlantic.

Popular British schoolboy sports -- such as cricket, football (or rugby) and tennis -- were enjoyed by the elite and also were popular in the United States, as was the British idea of amateurism for such privileged young men.

This idea is basically grounded in the thought that aristocrats engaged in leisure activities purely for enjoyment and to become well-rounded gentlemen. Abstaining from productive labor was viewed positively, as a mark of social class.

An early definition of "amateur," promoted by the upper-class British Amateur Rowing Association in the 1800s, helps illustrate this point. The association ruled that no person is an amateur "who is or ever has been by trade of employment for wages a mechanic, artisan or laborer or engaged in any menial duty."

The Amateur Athletic Club of England went further with its definition in 1866, stating an amateur is "any gentleman who has never competed in an open competition, or for any public money, or for admission money, and who has never in any period of his life taught or assisted in the pursuit of athletic exercises as a means of livelihood; nor as a mechanic, artisan or laborer."

In addition to avoiding participation by those deemed not of a leisure class, the so-called "mechanics" clause also prevented those who worked with their hands from competing against those who did not. Apparently it was thought that manual laborers had an unfair physical advantage over "gentlemen," who were typically engaged in more genteel pursuits, including academic study.

Amateurism at first NCAA Convention

At the first NCAA Convention in 1906, members of the Association (then known as the Intercollegiate Athletic Association of the United States) felt strongly that amateurism was an issue to be addressed.

But what early NCAA members meant by amateurism in 1906 was still different than what generally is accepted today. And while their idea of amateurism did not include references to manual labor, it certainly included references to practices that would later be common, such as recruiting, scholarships and conduct.

The Principles of Amateur Sport as stated in the first NCAA Constitution, prohibited:

"Proselytizing, the offering of inducements to players to enter colleges or universities because of their athletics abilities and of supporting or maintaining players while students on account of their athletics abilities, either by athletics organizations, individual alumni, or otherwise, indirectly or directly; the singling out of prominent athletic students of preparatory schools and endeavoring to influence them to enter a particular college or university; the playing of those ineligible as amateurs; the playing of those who are not bona fide students in good and regular standing; and improper and unsportsmanlike conduct of any sort whatsoever, either on the part of the contestants, the coaches, their assistants or the student body."

Yet another part of the NCAA Constitution in 1906 covered eligibility, stating that "no student shall represent a college or university in any intercollegiate game or contest who has at any time received, either directly or indirectly, money, or any other consideration to play on any team, or for his athletic services as a college trainer, athletic or gymnasium instructor, or who has competed for a money prize or portion of gate money in any contest, or who has competed against a professional."

Other rules prohibited players from receiving money to play in contests, and still other rules stipulated that student-athletes fill out "Eligibility Cards," which institutions were directed to keep on file.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of these early amateurism regulations was that they were voluntary. The young Association had no way to enforce its rules, and such matters were up to individual institutions.

Amateurism prompts early crisis

One of the first divisive issues in the NCAA involved amateurism. In the 1900s, professional baseball began to grow in popularity. Many college athletes began turning to minor-league baseball as a way to make money during the summer months, setting off a heated debate.

Many in intercollegiate athletics held the position that simply by associating with professionals (regardless of whether they actually took money), these student-athletes had forfeited their amateur status and their college eligibility. Others argued that the college player who played baseball in the summer for profit was no different from a student actor who acted in summer stock.

In the latter part of 1906, the Association's Committee on Summer Baseball took a firm position on amateurism. The committee's report stated that "the playing of baseball in summer for (material) gain is distinctly opposed to the principles of amateurism." But the Association's first resolution on summer baseball, passed in 1907, left the question of enforcement up to member schools.

On December 28, 1908, the NCAA passed a Convention motion providing that a definition of amateurism be developed.

A lengthy debate followed, with Amos Alonzo Stagg of the University of Chicago articulating his opposition to a loosening of amateurism rules.

"Just the moment we allow men to play on our baseball teams who are professionals, just that moment will begin a new evolution of professional football," he said, noting that the Association will "break down the amateur spirit of college athletics by passing this rule, and it is my prophecy that in a few years you will find that many of our large cities will be supporting professional football teams composed of ex-college players ... the passing of this rule would be an unceasing catastrophe."

The other side of the argument was presented by J.P. Welsh of Pennsylvania State University.

"The student in good collegiate standing who earns money during the summer vacation is not sick. He does not need treatment. He needs to be let alone in the full, free, untrammeled exercise of his American citizenship, which entitles him to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which sometimes means money," Welsh said.

As the years passed without any changes in the rule, the Committee on Summer Baseball reported that many institutions claimed to be enforcing the rule, but that there was "a decided difference of opinion as to what that law is."

Defining and enforcing amateurism

In 1916, the Association's members finally agreed to insert a definition of amateurism into the bylaws. The definition that passed was one written by the Athletic Research Society: "An amateur athlete is one who participates in competitive physical sports only for the pleasure and the physical, mental, moral and social benefits directly derived therefrom."

After World War I, the issues of amateurism and eligibility became a focus for the Association again, as soldiers returning from war went to college -- and played football on weekends for professional teams.

At the 1924 NCAA Convention, amateurism was an important part of the president's message from Palmer E. Pierce.

"Summer baseball continues to give much trouble in the enforcement of the amateur law," Pierce said. "It is to be regretted that all the colleges do not unite on a whole-hearted and effective effort to prevent their undergraduates playing, without loss of amateur status, baseball for money or its equivalent. ... The popularity and spread of professional football has introduced another important factor into this upholding of the amateur law. Many prominent college players have been tempted to accept large sums for playing on Sundays or holidays in professional contests."

But until the Association had some means of enforcement of its rules, its members' concerns could not be dealt with on a national level.

Amateurism changes again

When the NCAA Committee on Infractions was established in 1954, amateurism rules began to be enforced on a national level. Other changes also affected how the Association came to view amateurism. Over time, it became permissible to offer athletics grants-in-aid and to recruit high-school students.

In the 1960s and 1970s, the Association received a growing number of requests for waivers from student-athletes who wanted to retain their amateur status in one sport while declaring themselves professional in another.

Those waivers were consistently denied until the 1974 NCAA Convention, at which time members passed sweeping changes to the Association's amateurism rules.

Student-athletes were allowed to compete as a professional in one sport while keeping their eligibility in other sports. They also were allowed to teach, coach and officiate sports (except on a professional level) and accept a tryout with a professional team provided they paid their own expenses and did not accept any form of remuneration.

Many critics now claim that NCAA eligibility standards have little to do with amateurism since they permit the provision of athletics grants-in-aid, professional coaches and athletics services such as training tables, tutoring and other support services.

In fact, the debate over amateurism may have changed in recent years from an attempt define athletics purity to questioning the degree to which athletes should receive a fair share.

It was a primary point made in a 1995 book by former NCAA Executive Director Walter Byers, in which he charged that the Association had lost control of intercollegiate athletics to the detriment of student-athletes who play the games.

In "Unsportsmanlike Conduct: Exploiting Student-Athletes," Byers wrote that NCAA cost-cutting measures adopted in the 1970s and afterward were ineffective and increasingly achieved at the expense of student-athletes. He said grants-in-aid were reduced just as compensation for coaches and administrators soared, driven by increasing television revenue.

All the while, Byers claimed that institutions exerted control over athletes in the name of "amateurism" but that the control actually amounted to "economic tyranny."

Meanwhile, criticism in the media grew even louder.

"The conclusion reached by a growing number of experts: College athletes should, must and will be entitled to as much money as they can latch onto. Just like real students," wrote Douglas S. Looney in the July 1, 1996, issue of The Sporting News.

"Pay the athletes. Amateurism or whatever that was or is, is dead. Even the tradition-bound Olympics has given up, which is why we have Dream Teams composed of NBA players representing the United States."

In recent years, the issue has become more global with the growing trend of U.S. institutions recruiting student-athletes from all over the world. Christine H. Grant, chair of the Division I Amateurism and Agents Subcommittee and women's athletics director at the University of Iowa, explained the issue:

"What emerges from an analysis of the current state of amateurism is an exceedingly complex series of problems because we in the NCAA are attempting to collect accurate data in order to treat in a uniform fashion all prospective student-athletes in the world," Grant said.

"These prospective student-athletes (both national and international) belong to a vast array of sporting organizations, each of which has a different set of rules pertaining to amateurism and most of which cannot provide accurate records of financial transactions between the athlete and the organization."

While the history of amateurism is full of issues that have come and gone over the years, the debate over amateurism and the application of amateurism rules are far from over. The issues surrounding amateurism, like many of the issues the Association has dealt with over the years, are alive and well heading into this year's Convention, and likely beyond.

Amateurism and the Olympics

The NCAA is not the only athletics organization that has struggled with the concept of amateurism throughout the 20th Century.

The Baron de Coubertin, who founded the modern Olympic Games in 1896, had a specific ideal of amateurism that affected the Olympic movement over much of the last 100 years.

"He envisioned contests in which young men competed only for the love of sport without the promise of financial reward. This vision was the basis for the concept of amateurism that governed Olympic eligibility for the nearly 100 years," according to "An Olympic Games Primer," written by the Amateur Athletic Foundation of Los Angeles.

The primer also pointed out that Coubertin -- a French aristocrat -- held ideals that were rooted in the aristocratic concept of amateurism and sports participation by men of wealth. "But as sports became increasingly popular, people from a wider range of social classes participated and opportunities for profit appeared. These changes challenged the International Olympic Committee's strict definition of amateur status as the basis for Olympic eligibility," the primer stated.

The first notable case of an athlete losing Olympic eligibility because of an amateurism issue was that of Jim Thorpe, a 1912 gold medalist. Thorpe was stripped of his medals because he had earned a small sum of money playing semi-professional baseball two years before the Games. (In 1982, the IOC returned Thorpe's medals posthumously.)

Avery Brundage, IOC president from 1952 to 1972, was known as a fervent defender of the ideals of amateurism.

"Brundage maintained that the high ideals of Olympism would be destroyed if athletes were allowed to profit from sport," the primer claimed. "He believed that commercialism would destroy higher motivations of fair play and moral development. One consequence of Brundage's policy, however, was that dishonesty and secret payments plagued the Olympic Games during his tenure."

After Brundage's retirement in 1972, the IOC re-evaluated its policy on amateurism. In doing so, it noted that its rules discriminated against the poor while permitting state-supported training in many countries.

Over the years, amateur status was gradually eliminated as an eligibility requirement for the Olympics. The term "amateur" was removed from the Olympic charter in the 1970s, and international sport federations were given the power to determine age limits and the eligibility of professional athletes in the 1980s.

In the last several years, an increasing number of sport federations have changed their rules to permit professional athletes to compete in the Olympic Games.

-- Kay Hawes