BOSTON -- The NCAA's biggest bylaw received an appropriately big review during the third Division II Deregulation Summit July 20-21.

Administrators, student-athletes and coaches representing most Division II sports and constituencies participated in a comprehensive assessment of Division II playing and practice season legislation, which consumes 85 pages of the 413-page Manual. The gathering involved more people than any other review so far in the division's five-year deregulation effort.

After two days of consideration, a consensus emerged that modifications to the bylaw should support student-athlete education and welfare, promote competition and ease administration. The challenge now falls to the Division II Legislation Committee, chaired by Paul H. Engelmann of Central Missouri State University, to develop a package of modifications that is acceptable to the Division II Management Council, Presidents Council and membership.

Although all groups participating in the Summit stated ways in which they would streamline the bylaw, most of the discussion focused on issues identified by administrators during the Summit's first day. They were:

Individual out-of-season skill instruction, in particular whether the phrase "at the request of the student-athlete" should be eliminated.

Whether it would be beneficial to have common start-of-season dates for fall, winter and spring sports.

Whether it would be beneficial to have more unified lengths of seasons.

How playing and practice time limitations should apply to multisport athletes.

Whether travel days should count as days off for student-athletes.

Simplifying the administration of exempted contests.

Providing more structure for playing seasons in championship and nonchampionship seasons.

Eliminating inconsistencies with how conference postseason tournaments are treated (they are exempted in all sports but basketball, in which they are counted as one game).

Fresh ideas

Out of it all, several novel ideas emerged that could make life easier for Division II compliance coordinators and athletics directors. Many (but not all) of the participants were intrigued by the administrative appeal of a suggestion to specify the length of nonchampionship seasons -- perhaps 30 days that must be completed within a 45-day period (similar to the concept currently in place in football). Also, there appeared to be support for the idea of simply permitting a specified number of exempted contests against non-Division II competition rather than having Bylaw 17 describe exempted contests sport by sport, as is currently the case.

But along with the fresh ideas came frequent admonitions to do no harm.

"Are things that much out of control that these (issues) are primary?" asked Michael J. Kovalchik, athletics director at Hillsdale College and a member of the Legislation Committee.

"What we have now is not broken," said Thomas R. Wistrcill, commissioner of the Rocky Mountain Athletic Conference. "We can do a little more tweaking, but we should be careful."

Even the athletes, almost always perceived to have the greatest interest in change, seemed to endorse a conservative approach. They were solidly in support of having as many competitive opportunities as possible and opposed anything that would shorten playing seasons. They also said that existing time restrictions on practice and competition are necessary and that legislation should continue to indicate that out-of-season skill instruction is voluntary, even if everybody believes that it is often not the case in the real world.

Ease of use

Still, a conservative approach doesn't mean that Bylaw 17 cannot be modified in ways that could aid most of the membership. After hearing a Summit discussion about legislation with limited application, staff members considered whether detailed playing and practice season information for emerging sports and NCAA sports with small Division II sponsorship should be included in the Manual. Archery, badminton, bowling, equestrian, squash, synchronized swimming, team handball, fencing, women's ice hockey, rifle and men's ice hockey are treated in as much detail as any other sport but are collectively sponsored by only 14 Division II institutions. Together, they consume 30 pages of the Manual. With that in mind, there was discussion about whether playing and practice season legislation for those (or possibly all) sports could be placed in a "handbook" on NCAA Online and eliminated from the Manual.

Some Summit discussion related to Bylaw 17 but perhaps not directly to deregulation. For instance, a fair amount of time was spent on whether a travel day should count as the day off to which student-athletes are entitled under Bylaw 17.1.6.4. On that matter, there was significant disagreement. Student-athlete representative Kevin Listerman of Northern Kentucky University said, "That one's a solid no," but coaches said they sometimes have to count travel days as days off because the calendar leaves them little choice.

On the other hand, there appeared to be widespread agreement that multisport athletes whose sports overlap -- for example, volleyball and basketball -- would he aided by legislation that would limit total athletics participation to 25 or 30 hours per week; the student-athletes currently could be obligated for up to 20 hours for each sport.

Also, all parties seemed to support legislation that will be considered in January that would increase the number of athletes who can participate in out-of-season individual skill instruction from three to four. Listerman said that four makes sense for a number of reasons, but that it is an absolute ceiling. "If you go to five, you have a basketball team, and that becomes a practice," he said. "And then that's an uneven number, so you would have to go to six, which is a volleyball team."

Presidents Council member Patricia P. Cormier of Longwood College agreed. "The intent was individual skill instruction, not practice," she said.

The first Division II Deregulation Summit in 1998 examined Bylaws 11 (personnel) and 13 (recruiting); legislative changes were approved with minimal debate at the 2000 Convention in San Diego. Last year's Summit focused on Bylaw 15 (financial aid), for which legislation will be considered in January.

With the input from this Summit, the Legislation Committee now will begin a long process of determining what changes are appropriate and then gaining support from the governance bodies. Any proposed legislation will be considered at the Convention in January 2002.

While there is a broad consensus on what Bylaw 17 should accomplish, there may be less agreement on specifics than was found in the early part of the deregulation process. Clint Bryant, director of athletics at Augusta State University and chair of the Division II Management Council, said that is all right.

"The membership should have confidence that a thorough review has taken place," Bryant said. "It won't always be a slam dunk like it was last year, but I think that's healthy."

Playing and practice seasons variations

Examples of differences in playing and practice seasons in Division II:

Sport First practice date First contest date End of regular season Length of season

Football Date that permits 29 Not before the Thursday Second Saturday or Beginning of

practice opportunities preceding Labor Day. Sunday in December. preseason practice

before first game to end of regular season.