The next in a long line of important philosophiclly based issues for Division I -- amateurism deregulation -- will be primary on the Division I Management Council's October 25-26 meeting agenda.

After being reviewed at the committee and cabinet level, the long-awaited amateurism deregulation package will formally make its way to the Council as a 13-proposal package designed to provide more liberal application of amateurism rules for prospective student-athletes while maintaining several current restrictions for postenrolled student-athletes.

The Management Council heard a comprehensive presentation on the package during its July meeting and discussed the concepts at length but did not take action on the package because the meeting was not a meeting at which the Council could vote on nonemergency legislation. The October meeting is one of two legislative meetings in the Council's new legislative calendar.

Because this will be the Council's first formal look at the package, the Council agreed in July that it intended to approve the package in October for the purpose of distributing the proposals for comment and without taking a substantive position on the package as a whole or on any individual proposal. That way, conferences and other groups would have an opportunity to submit alternative proposals (by December 15) before the Council would revisit the issue in January. Such a timeline would target April 2001 as the likely date for final action from the Council and Board of Directors.

A similar time frame was used for the basketball issues package the Council dealt with last year.

In addition to discussing the proposals, the Council also will hear a report from the Agents and Amateurism Subcommittee about a recent meeting with representatives from the National Federation of State High School Associations to gauge high-school administrators' level of acceptance regarding the amateurism deregulation package.

Football study

Also significant on the Council's agenda is a recommendation from the Championships/Competition Cabinet about the best way to deal with pressing issues in college football. Debate about who should address football issues has increased since June when the Division I Football Issues Committee called for the Board of Directors to appoint a group that would conduct a comprehensive study of the sport. The Championships/Competition Cabinet, however, maintains that the issues would best be handled within the existing structure and that a "comprehensive study" is not necessary.

Among issues of concern in football are the current subdivision structure in Division I, escalating costs in football and the general long-term viability of the sport.

The debate also includes Proposal No. 2000-36, which would modify attendance requirements for Division I-A football institutions. The details regarding the application of the proposed requirements have caused some concern and confusion within Division I-A and I-AA. In fact, the Football Issues Committee and the Championships/Competition Cabinet both have recommended that the Council table the proposal.

In whatever fashion football issues are studied -- and the final decision will be the Board of Directors' to make -- any review probably won't include the issue of a Division I-A football playoff, something several groups, including the Board, have indicated isn't necessary at this time.

In another football-related matter, the Council is expected to review proposed emergency legislation to establish a two-year moratorium on certifying more than 26 postseason football bowl games. The Champion-
ships/Competition Cabinet approved the action in September in order to allow the NCAA time to determine an optimum number of bowl games and whether there are enough bowl-eligible teams, given the recent large increase in the number of bowl games.

Legislation

Because this is a legislative meeting for the Council, much of the group's time will be spent considering proposals from committees, cabinets and conferences.

The legislative agenda includes 27 proposals that the Council initially approved last April. Among them are five proposals that would liberalize restrictions on benefits that Olympic athletes receive.

A total of 70 proposals have been submitted by cabinets and conferences for initial review. That includes the amateurism deregulation package. It also includes a proposal supported by the Championships/Competition Cabinet to establish a maximum of 29 regular-season basketball contests, allow one informal scrimmage or exhibition game before the season and eliminate the current certification process. The proposal would eliminate exempted contests in basketball.

Another legislative matter the Council will address is a proposal still lingering from the basketball issues package approved last year regarding a concept that would tie scholarships to institutions' four-year adjusted graduation rates in men's basketball. The Council defeated the proposal earlier but the Board of Directors asked the Council to revisit the issue as a way to strengthen academic expectations for men's basketball, which typically has been the lowest or among the lowest in graduation rates over the past several years.

The Board instructed the Council to address what constitutes "good academic standing" as it relates to adjusted graduation rates. The proposal the Council will consider during this meeting would exclude from the four-year graduation rate student-athletes who transfer to another Division I institution or who pursue a professional career, provided they had met NCAA satisfactory-progress requirements as specified.