As expected, the Division I Management Council opened the door for Division I to change the way it treats the term "amateur," moving along an amateurism deregulation package for membership comment with the goal of considering significant change by April 2001.

But while amateurism was a key component at the Council's October 25-26 meeting in Indianapolis, emerging issues in basketball and football shared the spotlight as well. A proposal to establish a 29-game regular season and eliminate preseason certified contests in basketball received Council scrutiny, as did recommendations to conduct a broader study of football issues.

With the amateurism package, the Council gave initial approval to a set of pre-enrollment proposals solely to receive substantial comments from the membership before final action is considered next April.

The eight-proposal package is designed to provide more liberal application of amateurism rules for prospective student-athletes.

One of the proposals would establish an organized-competition rule under which a student-athlete would lose one season of eligibility for each year the individual participates in organized competition after high-school graduation.

Other proposals in the package would permit individuals to:

Accept prize money based on place finish;

Enter a professional draft and be drafted;

Sign a contract for athletics participation;

Accept compensation for athletics participation;

Compete with professionals; and

Accept educational expenses in specific situations.

Still another proposal would preclude universities from initiating contact with prospects in baseball when they are participating in or have participated in organized competition after electing not to enroll in college at their first opportunity.

In order to generate as much membership discussion and review as possible, the Council approved the entire package solely for the purpose of distributing the proposals for comment and without the Council taking a substantive position on the package as a whole or on any individual proposal. The Council followed a similar process last year with the basketball issues reform package and was pleased with the opportunity afforded to member institutions and conferences to review the issues in detail and submit alternative proposals if they desired.

"I'm hoping we can have much more meaningful discussion now that for the first time we have

specific proposals for all the constituencies -- including basketball coaches -- to look at," said Ted Leland, chair of the Council and director of athletics at Stanford University. "Talking about different potential proposals regarding pre-enrollment amateurism status has caused a lot of rumor and misunderstanding to surface. Now that the proposals are in writing and out for comment, we hope that will at least clear up some of the debate."

Conferences and other groups will have until the end of November to submit alternative proposals before the Council revisits the issue at its January meeting. Such a timeline would target April 2001 (the Council's next legislative meeting) as the likely date for final action from the Council and Board of Directors.

Another set of proposals concerning amateurism rules for student-athletes currently enrolled also was moved on for comment, but this time with the Council's support. Those proposals would allow a student-athlete to engage in fee-for-lesson employment arrangements; accept Operation Gold money for place finish in such events as the Olympics; arrange for loans based on future potential earnings and provide for NCAA payment of student-athlete disability insurance premiums.

In addition to receiving membership review over the next few months, the amateurism proposals will be the topic of a forum discussion at the NCAA Convention January 8 in Orlando, Florida.

Exempted contests legislation

Two proposals in basketball were handled in much the same way the amateurism package was, with the Council sending them out for comment without endorsement.

One, Proposal No. 2000-106, would add one game to the regular season in basketball while eliminating preseason certified contests. The proposal also would permit an institution to participate in either one informal scrimmage against a four-year collegiate institution or one exhibition contest against a non-Division I four-year college in addition to 29 regular-season games.

The proposed effective date of the legislation is August 1, 2002.

Currently, Division I teams may play two preseason exhibition contests and 28 games, which includes one certified event. Participation in a certified event, regardless of the number of contests in the event, is considered one countable contest toward the 28-game limit.

The proposal is potentially contentious because of the varied opinions as to how the legislation would affect competitive equity.

Some sponsors of preseason games and tournaments are concerned the legislation could negatively affect their events because universities would not elect to participate in them if each game is considered countable. Other people argue the proposal is designed to promote competitive equity, create a more level playing field among Division I institutions, and enhance student-athlete welfare by reducing some demands during a traditionally heavy academic time.

Leland said that much like the amateurism package, Proposal No. 2000-106 needs time for membership review, and that such review should not be biased by an endorsement from the Council.

"Though there are some people who think this is easier than it seems and should be dispatched quickly, the Council wanted to take some time to listen to the membership," Leland said. "People argue on both sides. On the one side, the more successful programs probably have more opportunities to participate in these events -- and that can cause a significant increase in missed class time. At the same time, student-athletes enjoy participating in the events, and most institutions take advantage of the opportunities to play in them when they can.

"There are two sides to the story and we're just looking for feedback from the membership."

The other basketball-related proposal sent out for comment without Council endorsement was Proposal No. 99-121-A-1, which would tie financial aid limits in men's basketball to an institution's average four-year graduation rate in the sport.

The Board of Directors requested in April that the Council develop legislation that would create a two-tiered grant-in-aid system. The Board specifically requested that the Council determine how to calculate the graduation rate and "satisfactory progress" for purposes of applying the legislation and to forward the principles to the Board for final action in April 2001.

The two-tiered system the Council sent out for comment would decrease permissible financial aid awards in men's basketball to 12 for universities with an average four-year graduation rate of less than 50 percent and retain the current limit of 13 for institutions with graduation rates of 50 percent or higher.

The proposal also addresses the issue of what constitutes "good academic standing" in relation to the adjusted graduation rate by recommending that a school's current average four-year graduation rate be used with two exceptions: student-athletes who transfer to another Division I institution and student-athletes who leave a school before graduation to pursue a professional playing career, if the student-athletes have met satisfactory-progress requirements in the immediately preceding term, as specified in the proposal.

Football study

The Council also addressed several football issues, including two regarding preseason and postseason games. One was a waiver granted to the Black Coaches Association (BCA) to conduct the preseason BCA Classic in 2003 and 2004. The Council two years ago approved legislation to eliminate preseason games in football after the 2002 season, when the existing television contracts for the National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics (NACDA) preseason games expire. The BCA, however, cited a pre-existing contract with ESPN, which existed when the legislation was adopted and continues through the 2004 season, and asked that it be allowed to conduct its event through that time.

The BCA also asked for a waiver of the "one-in-four" legislation (Bylaw 17.10.5.3, which allows a team to participate in a preseason exempted contest only once in four years), citing scheduling-equity concerns since a similar waiver had been granted to NACDA in 1999. The Council, however, denied that request since NACDA was granted its waiver based on it having a pre-existing contract in place before the one-in-four legislation was implemented in 1996, while the BCA did not have a contract at that time.

As for postseason games, the Council supported a recommendation from the Championships/Competition Cabinet that would impose a two-year moratorium on the number of certified postseason bowl games. The measure would limit the number of bowls to the current number of 26 through the 2002-03 playing season.

The recommendation originated with the cabinet's Football Certification Subcommittee, which had concerns about whether the number of bowl-eligible teams could support an increasing number of postseason events, particularly when teams are able to play 12 regular-season games in 2002.

The moratorium also will allow time for the certification process for postseason bowl games to be included in a broader study of football, the nature of which the Council discussed during its meeting.

In June, the Division I Football Issues Committee, citing concerns about the long-term viability of the sport, called for the Board of Directors to appoint a group that would conduct a comprehensive study of football under presidential guidance. The Championships/Competition Cabinet, though, recommended to the Council that any study of football be undertaken by existing governance groups, which the cabinet believed were in better position to gather information on the topics to be reviewed.

Ultimately, the Council modified the specifics of the cabinet recommendation, asking that the issues of escalating costs in football and the structure of the Division I-AA playoff system be studied by the Football Issues Committee, while the issue of Division I subdivision classification -- including the competitive and governance impact of any proposed change -- be reviewed by the Council's Membership and Governance Subcommittees. In addition, the bowl certification process and the two-year bowl moratorium would be reviewed by the Football Certification Subcommittee.

The Council made it clear that it did not support any of those groups taking on a review of a Division I-A playoff.

While the Council did not indicate the extent to which presidents should be involved in any review of football issues, NCAA President Cedric W. Dempsey said after the meeting that he supported significant input from CEOs.

"I'm pleased that the Council agreed that there are issues in football that need to be studied, but I think we need to go further," Dempsey said. "I think there should be presidential involvement in that study. In addition to the issues that the Council identified, there are concerns about the long-term viability of the sport, and about the possibility of regional scheduling alliances between Divisions I and II. Presidents have not dealt with a lot of those issues, and I think it's time they become more engaged."

In another football-related issue, the Council tabled Proposal No. 2000-36 dealing with Division I-A football attendance requirements. The Football Issues Committee, the Championships/Competition Cabinet and the Council's Membership and Governance Subcommittees asked that the proposal be tabled until a method for a broader review of football membership issues was determined.

Other legislation

Because this meeting was one of the Council's two annual legislative meetings, the group considered more than 100 legislative proposals, 29 of which were approved a sec-

Other highlights

Division I Management Council
October 25-26/Indianapolis

Reviewed the composition of the newly created Division I Basketball Issues Committee and requested that the Board immediately add two men to the Women's Basketball Issues Subcommittee and two women to the Men's Basketball Issues Subcommittee. The Council also requested that the Division I Basketball Issues Committee comply with the subdivisional requirements in Constitution 4.8.1 as early as practicable.

Agreed to distribute a draft report regarding athletic trainer education and its potential impact on health-care coverage at NCAA institutions for membership comment. The Council noted that the Executive Committee, which asked the Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports to develop the report, will review the report at its November meeting.

Supported a Championships/Competition Cabinet request that the Division I Budget Subcommittee allow the cabinet to use funds realized through reallocation of cost-savings initiatives for other aspects of the championships program.

Approved an application for conference membership submitted by the Great Western Lacrosse League.

Approved a recommendation from the Committee on Financial Aid that an exception to the Division I financial aid requirement be provided to the 30 institutions identified for the 2000-01 academic year that were more than one standard deviation above the mean for the 1998-99 average-per-student allotment of Pell Grant dollars for undergraduate students.

Tabled recommendations from the Committee on Financial Aid regarding expanded use of the Special Assistance Fund for student-athletes who have exhausted eligibility, and to include fees associated with accreditation or postgraduate-school exams.

Overturned an interpretation, which had specified that any use of an ergometer during required conditioning activities that may occur during the academic year outside the playing and practice season must be counted as part of the two hours of permissible skill-instruction activities. The Management Council determined that an ergometer (a rowing machine) is not considered equipment related to the sport of rowing. Therefore, in the sport of rowing, any use of an ergometer during required conditioning activities that may occur during the academic year outside the playing and practice season is not limited to the two hours of permissible skill-instruction activities.