Future reform was on the agenda, but three more immediate reform issues consumed most of the Division I Board of Directors' November 1 meeting in Indianapolis.

The Board heard an initial report from a task force it appointed in August to develop a planning framework for Division I and to identify a reform agenda, but after that, it was three issues concerning basketball that dominated Board discussion. All of those were forwarded from the Management Council, and all had undergone a good deal of debate both inside and outside the governance structure. Ultimately, the Board agreed with all three of the Council's recommendations, but the presidents -- as most other groups before it -- were not unanimous on any.

What garnered the most debate was what has garnered the most debate elsewhere -- the five/eight initial-counter rule in men's basketball. In October, the Management Council broke what essentially had been a tie in the membership as to whether to rescind or modify the rule. The compromise the Council reached was to effectively delay implementation of the rule by providing some short-term relief and then providing a "bonus" counter, tied to academic progress, after 2003 to institutions that experience unusually heavy attrition.

Schools will be afforded up to nine initial grants-in-aid, rather than eight, over the two-year period that began with the most recent recruiting class (which enrolled during the 2001-02 academic year) and extends through the next (which will enroll for the 2002-03 academic year). Beginning with the class enrolling in 2003, institutions can qualify for an additional (bonus) initial counter if graduation losses combined with the number of student-athletes who leave the institution (but were on schedule to graduate in a five-year period) exceed the number of initial counters awarded by an institution during that year.

The debate about the rule has been consistent since its inception last year. Proponents say the rule sends a message that coaches should recruit more with retention and graduation in mind. Opponents say that attrition can't be predicted up front and that the rule thus unfairly impacts schools that for a variety of legitimate reasons lose players who otherwise were in good academic standing.

Both sentiments were expressed again in the Board meeting, but ultimately the presidents saw what the Council had recommended as an adequate compromise. However, the Board did ask the Division I Administrative Review Subcommittee to develop waiver criteria to use when dealing with future appeals. Such criteria did not exist when the five/eight rule was first implemented, and the subcommittee denied all 16 appeals that were received. Some Board members felt that having criteria in place would give the subcommittee more flexibility to address cases in which an institution was in legitimate need of relief.

The modified rule becomes effective immediately, which means that institutions that had awarded only three or four initial grants this year will be allowed to sign up to five players during this fall's early signing period.

International athletes

The Board also reviewed a Council recommendation regarding international basketball student-athletes, an issue that has intensified as the NCAA's knowledge of the professional climate overseas has increased. In July, the NCAA enforcement staff sent letters to more than 50 Division I schools identifying currently enrolled men's basketball players who may have eligibility issues because of previous participation in professional leagues overseas. At issue is under what conditions basketball players who participated in the top-tier leagues but were otherwise eligible under NCAA rules should be reinstated.

The Division I Student-Athlete Reinstatement Subcommittee's long-standing reinstatement condition is to withhold those players from one intercollegiate game for each professional game played. Recently, though, the subcommittee modified that condition for participation on second-tier teams (one for two) and for players below the second tier (10 percent of the intercollegiate season -- three games). But it is the top-tier penalty, which the subcommittee let stand at one for one, that has been the most controversial.

The recommendation that came from the Management Council specifies that first-tier basketball players would be withheld from a maximum of 20 percent of the professional contests in which they participated, or eight games, whichever is less -- in effect, a one-for-five penalty instead of a one-for-one.

Though there was considerable debate, the Board approved the Council's recommendation, which means that the new policies will affect current, as well as future, cases.

The third issue of note for the Board was its review of the proposed changes to the summer recruiting period in basketball. The proposals, which came from the Basketball Issues Committee's men's subcommittee, are intended to address "unseemly outside influences" on the summer recruiting environment, something the Board had asked for in April 2000 when it said the summer evaluation period would cease to exist if an acceptable alternative to what existed then could not be found.

The alternative the Board approved strengthens the process for certifying summer basketball events; adds educational and mentoring components to that process; creates two 10-day evaluation periods (July 8 to 17 and July 22 to 31) separated by a four-day dead period; moves up the time at which a coach can initiate contact with a prospect; and sheds light on the financial relationships Division I schools have among institutions, corporations and coaches of prospects.

A reform environment

Though the Board's approval of the alternative system essentially completes the initial reform package that the Board called for two years ago, the group made it clear that further changes could be in order if the new system proves to be ineffective. In order to gauge the system's success, the Board has asked the Basketball Issues Committee's men's subcommittee for a report after two years, at which time the Board will decide whether to keep the alternative in place.

The five/eight rule and the summer recruiting period in particular served as a springboard for the Board to discuss broader reform issues. Both are examples of how complex issues typically have been handled in the division's new governance structure -- the Board identifies an area that needs study and appoints a group to do so, and then that group develops proposed legislation that bubbles up through the structure. Some Board members feel that such a "bottom-up" approach dilutes the initial attempt at reform -- in other words, by the time the Board sees the legislation in its final form, it has been amended to satisfy a majority of groups in the structure and may not have the impact the Board initially sought.

In the cases of the five/eight rule and the summer basketball issue, the Board acknowledged that the proposed changes were better than the existing rules but perhaps not as encompassing as some members had hoped. That notion is important to the Board as it charges its newly created task force with identifying a reform agenda. There is a sense from the Board that the task force may need to be a stronger "top-down" entity, while still recognizing that the "bottom-up" process is inherent in the division's representative structure.

The task force, chaired by Francis Lawrence, president of Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, is undertaking an economic analysis of Division I sports that will provide a solid research base upon which to defend future reform. The study will explore why institutions spend what they do on athletics, and the benefits -- both tangible and otherwise -- that may be gained from such spending. Task force members believe that the motivation for spending must be fully understood before any meaningful attempt can be made at evaluating the perceived benefits to spending and refocusing more on the educational mission in Division I athletics.

Key to the study is participation from Division I institutions in research gathering. The 18 institutions represented by the Board members will serve as the test group for researchers, and the chief financial officer from each institution will be asked to participate in the study.

The task force hopes that the research will help ascertain answers to the following types of questions:

Do schools consciously increase spending in football or basketball in an effort to become more successful athletically, and if so, what do the data say as to the likely consequences and risks of doing so?

Do commercial arrangements between athletics departments and shoe, apparel, equipment, media and promotional entities interfere with institutional control, and do they enhance or detract from the educational mission?

Does success in athletics relate to academic success, positively or negatively, over time?

Do consistent winners over time spend more and achieve higher net benefits without adverse collateral costs on their investment than schools that do not win consistently?

To what extent does athletics spending reduce or increase spending on academic initiatives or other service components of the university?

Once the study is complete, the Board will be better positioned to assess what kinds of initiatives are necessary to effect meaningful change, and whether such change can be achieved from a "bottom-up" approach.

The task force expects the research-gathering phase of the study to be completed in the summer of 2002.

Legislation adopted by the Board of Directors

The Board of Directors adopted the following legislative proposals (with effective dates):

No. 2000-50, deleting computer science courses as acceptable core courses in meeting initial-eligibility core-curriculum requirements. (Effective date: August 1, 2005; for students first entering a collegiate institution on or after August 1, 2005.)

No. 2000-73, allowing women's basketball teams to participate in the Women's Sports Foundation Basketball Classic, WBCA Maui Invitational, WBCA Coaches vs. Cancer Challenge and WBCA Four on or after November 7. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 2000-74 (as amended by Proposal No. 2000-74-1), permitting an institution to hire a band composed of prospect-aged individuals to perform at regular-season and postseason contests. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-08, specifying that an institution shall not begin on-ice preseason practice sessions in the sport of ice hockey before the Saturday of the 25th full weekend before the first round of the NCAA championship. (Effective date: August 1, 2004.)

No. 01-10, permitting a student-athlete to compete in an institution's nonchampionship segment in the sports of women's volleyball, field hockey, and men's and women's soccer without using a season of competition, provided the student-athlete was academically eligible during the championship segment. [Effective date: Immediately (not to be applied before the 2001-02 academic year.)]

No. 01-13, permitting an institution to provide six complimentary admissions to a student-athlete who participates in or is a member of a team participating in a conference championship. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-14 (as amended by Proposal No. 01-14-1), permitting an individual who sustained an incapacitating injury or illness after the first day of classes in the senior year of high school but before becoming a student-athlete to qualify for a hardship waiver during his or her initial year of collegiate enrollment. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-20, permitting an institution to "bank" a maximum of six unused visits annually in Division I-AA football and specifying that the unused visits may be used only during the subsequent academic year. (Effective date: September 1, 2002.)

No. 01-24, permitting graduate assistant coaches to receive the same expenses incurred on road trips that are received by full-time coaches. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-27, eliminating the references to the methods in which it is permissible for a head coach or professional sports counseling panel to interact with agents, professional sports teams or professional sports organizations on behalf of a student-athlete. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-28, permitting a hometown group to pay the expenses of a student-athlete returning home to receive an award for athletics accomplishments. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-29, eliminating as a procedure for seating individuals receiving complimentary admissions, the option of directing individuals to a specific reserved seating sections or seating area. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-30, specifying that an institution is required to apply the same housing policies to student-athletes as it applies to the student body in general, provided student-athletes are not housed in athletics blocks or athletics dormitories; and to simplify the legislation related to housing and meals by eliminating the nonpermissible list of benefits and reformatting the list of permissible benefits. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-31 (as amended by Proposal No. 01-31-1), eliminating the mileage restriction related to transportation, housing and meal expenses for a student-athlete and the student-athlete's teammates to be present during situations in which an immediate family member of the student-athlete suffers a life-threatening injury or illness or, to be present at the funeral in the event of an immediate family member's death. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-32, reformatting the legislation so that all provisions related to foreign tours are located in the Administrative Regulations. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-39, specifying, for purposes of satisfying the initial-eligibility core-curriculum time limitation, that an international prospective student-athlete who graduates from a foreign educational system may repeat a regular term or academic year only within his or her home system. (Effective date: August 1, 2002, for those student-athletes who first enter a collegiate institution on or after August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-40, reducing the size of the Core-Course Committee from 18 to 15 members, as specified; further, specifying that the academic subcommittees shall consist of three members each, including two representatives from member institutions and one high-school representative. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-41, specifying that the term limits of the Foreign Student Records Committee members shall be three-year renewable terms. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-42, establishing the NCAA Division I Student-Athlete Reinstatement Subcommittee as a standing committee reporting directly to the Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-43, establishing a general principle of restitution for all Bylaw 16 provisions. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-44, clarifying that any promotional activity other than that permitted under Bylaw 12.5.1 is impermissible. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-45, permitting an individual to receive actual and necessary expenses to attend an academy funded by a professional sports organization without jeopardizing intercollegiate eligibility, provided: (1) the academy limits enrollment to participants who are age 15 and under; (2) athletics ability or achievements is not the sole criterion for selecting participants; and (3) the academy provides academic services to its participants. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-46, establishing a maximum equivalency financial aid limit of 15 for the sport of equestrian, and establishing the minimum number of participants necessary for sports sponsorship at 12. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-48, specifying a conference senior woman administrator as the female administrator (preferably no lower in rank than assistant commissioner) involved with the conduct of a Division I conference office. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-49, permitting active members to count contests against provisional members toward meeting scheduling requirements after the institution has been a provisional member for at least two years. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-51, establishing additional guidelines, as specified, to strengthen the process for certifying basketball events in which NCAA Division I men's basketball coaches are permitted to evaluate prospective men's basketball student-athletes. (Effective date: April 1, 2002.)

No. 01-52 (as amended by Proposal Nos. 01-52-2 and 01-52-3), establishing a recruiting model that modifies the current time period for contacting, evaluating, making telephone calls to and sending correspondence to men's basketball prospects as specified. (Effective date: April 1, 2002.)

No. 01-53, prohibiting institutional men's basketball staff members in attendance at nonscholastic certified summer events from having any contact with a prospect's coach or any other individual associated with the prospect as a result of the prospect's participation in basketball; further to specify that men's basketball prospective student-athletes may not make unofficial visits during the month of July. (Effective date: April 1, 2002.)

No. 01-54, requiring men's basketball institutions to publicly disclose information regarding fiduciary relationships among the institution, corporations and prospects' coaches; further to specify that an institution that fails to provide such information shall not be eligible to engage in summer recruiting activities. (Effective date: April 1, 2002.)

No. 01-55 (as amended by Proposal No. 01-55-1), specifying that in men's and women's basketball, the restricted coach may engage in off-campus evaluation activities during the summer evaluation period, provided no more than three coaching staff members are engaged in off-campus evaluation activities at any one time; further, specifying that the restricted coach may engage in off-campus recruiting activities during the academic year, provided no more than two coaching staff members are engaged in off-campus recruiting activities at any one time. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-56, amending Bylaws 19.1.1 and 19.1.2.2 to allow the Committee on Infractions to internally designate a vice-chair who will act on behalf of the chair in his or her absence. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-57, providing Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee representatives with voting rights on Division I committees on which they serve. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-58, providing Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee representatives with voting rights on Association-wide committees on which they serve. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-59, deleting certain requirements related to the collegiate programs in joint college/high-school programs and noting that an individual enrolled in a joint high-school/college program would not begin his or her five years of eligibility, provided the individual has not graduated from high school and does not participate in intercollegiate athletics while enrolled in the joint program. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-60, eliminating the requirement that at least once in every three term rotations of the chair of the Board of Directors and the Management Council, there shall be a Division I-AA or I-AAA conference representative serving as chair of either the Board or the Council; establishing separate rotations for the Council and cabinets and specifying that at least once in every three term rotations, the chair of each entity shall be a Division I-AA or I-AAA conference representative; eliminating the requirement that among the chairs of the Board, the Management Council and the cabinets, there shall be at least one representative from each subdivision serving as chair at any time; eliminating the requirement that the vice-chair and the chair of the Management Council shall not be from the same subdivision; finally, specifying that the chairs of the Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet and the Championships/Competition Cabinet shall serve two-year terms. (The Board defeated the portion of the proposal that would have established a requirement that at least once in every three term rotations, there shall be a Division I-AA or Division I-AAA representative serving as chair of the Board of Directors.) (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-61, expanding the Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet membership to 42 without mandating specific conference representation in Division I-A; further, maintaining the existing number of seats allocated to specific positions, and allocating the additional eight seats without consideration of the position. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-66, adding "championship operating costs" to criteria used in evaluating sites for all competition in NCAA championships; further, to require sports committees to submit championships bid information in a format approved by the Championships/Competition Cabinet. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-70, establishing a recruiting calendar for men's lacrosse. (Effective date: August 1, 2002.)

No. 01-92, establishing a dead period surrounding the Division I Women's Ice Hockey Championship. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-113, exempting the Women's Gymnastics Committee from the requirement that no subdivision shall have more than 50 percent representation on any committee. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-114, establishing an emerging-sports timetable that eliminates references to particular years (for example, 1994-95) and adding general references to years (for example, year one); further, to include compliance with Bylaw 13 by year one. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-115, eliminating the requirement that the Executive Committee shall ratify the appointments of all individuals serving on Association-wide and common committees and appointments of chairs and secretary-rules editors of those committees. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-116, modifying the indemnification policy of the NCAA, as specified. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-118, establishing a criterion for any event that requires NCAA certification that would prohibit such certification if the event is conducted in a venue where sports wagering on intercollegiate athletics is permitted, or on property sponsored by an establishment that permits sports wagering on intercollegiate athletics or branded with signage for such an establishment. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-119, allowing institutions to award up to a total of nine initial counters in men's basketball during this academic year and 2002-03, with no more than five initial counters in one year; further, specifying that beginning with the 2003-04 academic year, an institution shall be permitted to award eight initial counters during any two consecutive academic years, with no more than five initial counters during a given academic year; finally, that beginning with 2003-04 academic year, institutions may qualify for an additional initial counter within a two-year period when graduation losses combined with the number of student-athletes who leave the institution but are making appropriate progress to graduate in a five-year period exceeds the initial counters awarded in a given year. (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-124, specifying that before September 1, 2003, the eight-year core principle shall not apply to an institution that was a Division I active member, provisional member or member in the process of reclassifying to Division I as of April 27, 2000 (the membership moratorium date approved by the Division I Board of Directors). (Effective date: Immediately.)

No. 01-125, eliminating the Memorial Resolutions Committee and reassigning those duties to the Executive Committee. (Effective date: Immediately.)

Other highlights

Division I Board of Directors
November 1/Indianapolis

Approved a proposal that will prohibit certification of an event if it is conducted in a venue where sports wagering on intercollegiate athletics is permitted or on property sponsored by an establishment that permits sports wagering on college sports or is branded with signage for such an establishment.

Approved a bylaw that extends voting privileges to student-athletes on some Division I and Association-wide committees.

Tabled a recommendation that would permit a Division I-A institution to be bowl-eligible with a winning percentage of .500 during 12-game seasons.

Received and referred to the Board of Directors' task force a recommendation from the Pacific-10 Conference Chief Executive Officers Group that the current deregulation initiatives include significant reform of Bylaw 17, with an emphasis on lessening athletically related time demands on student-athletes during both the academic year and the summer, rather than focusing solely on deregulation.