After almost two years of discussion and debate, a new day in the way Division I men's and women's basketball is administered off the court is closer to dawning.

The Division I Management Council during its April 10-11 meeting in Indianapolis approved eight legislative proposals that are intended to dramatically change the culture of the sport. The proposals, which are being forwarded to the Board of Directors for possible adoption at the Board's April 27 meeting, are designed to improve basketball student-athletes' collegiate experience, change the recruiting process and enhance the image of the sport.

The Council's actions follow months of deliberation within the Division I membership and answer a charge from the Board of Directors to alleviate growing concerns regarding the health of the sport. In all, the Council considered 31 proposals, 13 from the Division I Working Group to Study Basketball Issues and 18 others submitted as alternative proposals from various conferences.

Of the eight proposals that were eventually approved, several underwent last-minute amendments as the Council worked to deliver a package that will affect meaningful change.

"I was pleased that the Management Council, which represents a very diverse group of institutions and conferences, was able to reach a strong consensus," said Council Chair Ted Leland. "The Council did well to narrow down what began two years ago as dozens of proposals to eight that I think will have substantial impact on the way we administer the sport."

One of the most significant proposals approved will allow schools to provide aid to entering men's and women's basketball student-athletes the summer before their first fall term. Proposal No. 99-120-C from the Big Ten Conference allows the summer aid provided the student-athlete is enrolled in a minimum of six hours (other than physical education activity courses) toward any of the school's degree programs.

The proposal is designed to allow schools to more quickly and efficiently acclimate prospects and transfers into the college environment and increase the likelihood of academic success. The proposal also assumes that an early start on the front end will lead to an increased graduation rate on the back end. Graduation rates in Division I men's basketball have been the lowest of any sport for several years, and rates for Division I women's basketball student-athletes have been among the lowest in all women's sports.

The proposal, which will become effective for the summer of 2001, will allow for a five-year study regarding the impact on graduation rates for basketball student-athletes. The effects of the proposal will be monitored and reviewed as necessary by the Division I Basketball Issues Committee, which was recommended when the Council approved Proposal No. 99-132-B. That committee will report to the Division I Championships/
Competition Cabinet.

Before approving the summer-aid proposal, the Council clarified that, as under existing rules, a maximum of five summers of aid could be awarded. There also was some discussion of interpretations regarding summer enrollment in six hours, but the Council agreed that for now, initial enrollment in the six hours satisfied the intent of the legislation in order to receive aid, though that could be modified by the Basketball Issues Committee at a later date.

The Council also noted that a plan for NCAA matching grants would be discussed as an aid in the funding of this initiative.

Another significant proposal that was approved will limit to eight the number of initial counters in men's basketball during any two consecutive years, with a maximum of five during any given year. The Council believes the limits will alleviate the pressure to award a high number of scholarships to incoming freshmen and two-year college transfers each year instead of renewing the aid of enrolled student-athletes who may not be performing athletically as well as the coach may have hoped.

One of the ongoing concerns regarding the state of the sport has been the increased movement of student-athletes between schools, or out of the intercollegiate system altogether. The Council believes that the amended Proposal 99-122-A, modeled after similar legislation that applies to Division I football, will translate into lower attrition/transfer rates by reducing an institution's ability to replace student-athletes after a one- or two-year "tryout."

"The new legislation should encourage everyone within the system -- athletes, coaches, administrators and admissions personnel -- to make sure that the fit among the athlete, the student and the institution is a good one," said Leland, the director of athletics at Stanford University. "This will put more credence in the initial scholarships we offer."

The proposal has an effective date of August 1, 2001.

Summer evaluation

No aspect of the basketball issues package has been more contentious than what to do with the summer recruiting period, and that held true to form during the Council's deliberations. Though the Council agreed to ensure significant changes in the current summer recruiting structure within two years, the nature of those changes has yet to be determined. What is known, however, is that the current system of summer recruiting is on the way out.

"There was a strong voice from the Management Council members that they could no longer support the current summer recruiting system, and they felt we needed an orderly transition to what might be an effective alternative," said NCAA President Cedric W. Dempsey.

Seven of 31 proposals in the basketball issues package concerned the summer recruiting period, including Proposal No. 99-128-B from the Big Ten and Southeastern Conferences that, among other things, called for the elimination of summer evaluations by NCAA coaches altogether.

Council members ended up approving an amended version of Proposal No. 99-128-B because they were reluctant to eliminate the summer recruiting period without being able to institute a clear and effective replacement. In the absence of such a replacement, the Council took steps toward an orderly transition, agreeing to maintain the current summer evaluation system for 2000, adopting an interim structure for summer 2001 and instituting a new system by August 1, 2001, which would affect the summer of 2002.

The interim structure, effective August 1, 2000, calls for a reduction in the summer evaluation period from 24 to 14 days and an increase in the number of evaluation days during the academic year from 40 to 50. The Council was clear, however, in stipulating that this is an interim rule with summer 2002 as the target date for a dramatically different recruiting calendar. The Council indicated that the new system must take into consideration the interests of prospective student-athletes during the fall of their senior year in high school, the interests of first-year student-athletes if coaches are off-campus recruiting during the fall, and providing balanced access to prospective student-athletes in basketball for all Division I schools.

"The intent is to have substitute legislation long before the summer of 2002," Leland said. "The effort on the part of the Council was to craft a compromise between those who wanted no summer recruiting and those who wanted substantial summer recruiting. What we've decided is that we're going to have substantial changes in the recruiting in the summer, which will be effective in 2002 but at the present date are undefined.

"There's a strong feeling in the membership that there needs to be some type of recruiting in the summer."

Dempsey said the search for an alternative system will begin immediately, and that the search will call upon many organizations that have an interest in the college game for assistance.

"We'll look at a lot of different models," Dempsey said. "We've already had an indication from some of the shoe companies that they'd like to be part of the solution. The NABC and the high-school federation are interested in working on this as well, as is USA Basketball. There are a lot of entities out there that can assist us in creating a new structure, and that structure will look dramatically different that what we currently have."

Dempsey had announced in recent weeks that he endorsed the replacement of the current summer recruiting system, as well as a limit on the number of initial counters and the allowance for summer financial aid.

The remaining basketball proposals the Council approved included one that establishes a two-tiered process of sanctions for sports-wagering violations, and another specifying that all midyear transfers in men's and women's basketball shall not be eligible for competition until the ensuing academic year.

Also approved was a proposal that requires Division I schools to offer an NCAA CHAMPS/
Life Skills or equivalent program for all student-athletes.

Among proposals the Council did not support were four that involved an incentive-based financial aid model that would have based the number of scholarships that could be awarded annually on a school's basketball graduation rate. The Council expressed some interest in the concept but was reluctant to support the proposals because it believes that graduation rates as a measure of academic success should be further defined.

The Council also defeated a proposal that would have allowed nonqualifiers in basketball to receive financial aid during their first academic year. It did, however, support Proposal No. 99-9, which permits nonqualifiers in all sports to earn a fourth season of eligibility if they graduate before beginning their fifth year of enrollment.

In addition, the Council did not support legislation that would have moved the first permissible playing date to the Friday after Thanksgiving.

"There's a cogent argument from those who feel that shortening the season is beneficial academically, but the Council didn't want to adopt legislation that would encourage schools to pack too many games into December because almost every student has finals then," Leland said. "In the end, the focus on academic performance of student-athletes won the day."

For a complete list of the Council's actions on the basketball issues package, see the above chart.

Because the Council's April meeting is one of two during the year in which the Council considers legislative matters, the agenda included more than 70 proposals -- in addition to the 31 basketball proposals -- that had been initially approved in October and distributed for membership comment or were submitted by conferences or cabinets for the Council's initial review.

Of the 33 proposals the Council considered for a second time, 31 were approved and forwarded to the Board of Directors for adoption. Among the more significant proposals were recommendations to establish four-team National Collegiate championships in women's ice hockey and women's water polo beginning in the 2000-01 academic year, and a recommendation to establish a separate Division I Women's Lacrosse Championship effective in spring 2001.

The two proposals the Council did not forward to the Board for adoption included a proposal to permit schools to allocate $20 per day in incidental expense money to student-athletes who remain on-campus to practice for a postseason bowl game. The Council referred that proposal back to the Championships/Competition Cabinet to consider the inclusion of other sports and championships.

The other proposal was one the Council originally approved but then defeated upon reconsideration. Proposal No. 99-103, which would have recommended an earlier calendar date for telephone calls to high school juniors in women's basketball, was defeated after receiving a strong request for reconsideration from the student-athlete members of the Council.

Several other proposals were approved as emergency legislation and forwarded to the Board for adoption, including a recommendation for a two-year NCAA membership moratorium applicable to institutions wishing to apply for Division I provisional membership, reclassify from Division II to Division I or becoming a multidivisional member with a Division I sport. Similar moratoriums were approved by the Divisions II and III Management Councils.

Escalating membership growth in recent years prompted the moratorium request, allowing time for the divisions to evaluate and plan for championships, educational/compliance programs, and necessary support services for provisional and active members; to ensure commitment to the philosophies of each division; and to plan for systematic and manageable growth.

The recommendations will be forwarded to the appropriate presidential bodies in each division for consideration later this month before the Executive Committee considers the measure during its April 28 meeting.

The Division I Management Council also sent to the Board legislation to modify Division I-A football attendance requirements. The proposal provides that a Division I school meets football attendance requirements if it averages more than 17,000 in actual paid attendance for home contests in the immediate four-year period and eliminates exceptions and waivers for the requirements.

The purpose of the legislation is to establish more stringent attendance standards consistent with expectations for competing in the subdivision while providing deserving institutions interested in moving to Division I-A the opportunity to participate at that level.

Other highlights

Division I Management Council
April 10-11/Indianapolis

* Reviewed several budgetary matters, including a preliminary report from the Division I Budget Subcommittee regarding Division I allocations for 2000-01. The Council noted that the Division I Budget Subcommittee had not recommended funding to expand any men's championship brackets; considered a request that the men's soccer bracket be expanded to at least 40 teams, 48 if funding is available; and recommended that the Board reallocate funding from championships or other sources to expand the men's soccer bracket to 40 teams, for a cost of $100,000. The Council noted that expansion of the men's soccer bracket was the No. 2 priority of the Championships/Competition Cabinet and that the request could be funded in part by not adding another day of per diem for women's volleyball and softball (Priority No. 12 -- $45,000). The Council also noted that expanding the men's soccer bracket to 40 teams would reduce the number of required play-in games and recommended that the Board reallocate funding from championships or other sources for the remaining play-in games, which primarily occur in women's field hockey, soccer and softball.

* Approved and forwarded to the Board for adoption a recommendation from the Council's Subcommittee to Review Automatic-Qualification Requirements regarding modifications to requirements that member schools or conferences must satisfy in order to receive automatic qualification into Division I championships. The Council amended the requirement for conference automatic qualification in men's basketball to seven core institutions, rather than eight; established a one-year grace period to permit any conference whose membership falls below seven core institutions, provided the conference maintains continuity of membership, to remain eligible for automatic qualification into the Division I Men's Basketball Championship; and confirmed that single-sport conferences in existence on September 1, 1999, fall under the grandparenting provision and that multidivisional institutions can be considered "core" in a program sponsored at the Division I level.

* Reviewed a recommendation that a regional qualifying system in men's and women's outdoor track be implemented and that the number of participants be increased from 388 men and 388 women to 544 men and 544 women, effective with the 2002 championships. The Council noted that a regional qualifying system could increase the access of minorities to the championship, expressed concern about committing funding now for the 2001-02 budget and agreed that the Championships/Competition Cabinet should continue reviewing possible implementation and inclusion in budget requests for 2001-02.

* Referred to the Championships/Competition Cabinet a revised recommendation received from the chair of the Women's Basketball Committee regarding predetermined sites for the first and second rounds of the Division I women's basketball tournament.

* Reviewed a recommendation from the Committee on Women's Athletics to sponsor legislation to define a conference senior woman administrator as the highest-ranking female administrator (preferably no lower in rank than associate commissioner) involved with the conduct of a Division I conference office; and requested that NCAA staff draft legislation for Management Council review in October, with the exception that the position be no lower in rank than assistant commissioner, rather than associate commissioner.

* Referred to the Division I Budget Subcommittee a recommendation from the Minority Opportunities and Interests Committee that a percentage of any new allocation being considered for the Division I Conference Grant Program due to the new television rights fee contract with CBS that will become effective in 2002 be set aside for minority and gender enhancement.

* Supported 2000-01 budget allocations for existing Association-wide programs with a proven track record of success, rather than the establishment of new programs; and recommended that the Executive Committee allocate more funding for the Ethnic Minority and Women Enhancement Program and the NCAA Fellows Leadership Development Program and not provide new funding for YES clinics, in the belief that current clinics should be used to encourage increased ethnic minority participation. The Council also recommended that the Executive Committee allocate more funding for the current NACWAA/HERS program.

* Approved the recommendation to change the policies and procedures of the Administrative Review Subcommittee to allow the student-athlete reinstatement staff to cast the tie-breaking vote in the event of a tie and to prohibit ex parte communication between institutional representatives and committee members about a pending case.

* Gave initial approval and circulated for comment a proposal that would extend the comment period from 60 to 90 days for all legislative proposals initially approved by the Management Council and clarify that a membership comment period is not applicable when the Management Council supports emergency or noncontroversial legislation. The Council also adopted, as an administrative procedure, a requirement that all legislative proposals from conferences and cabinets/committees contain a legislative impact statement, including the impact on the time commitment of student-athletes, consistent with direction from the Board of Directors.