The Division II Student-Athlete Reinstatement Committee has issued a directive instructing the staff to apply the seasons-of-competition rule to individuals who previously were deemed permanently ineligible due to an amateurism violation.

The directive, issued in light of recent changes to Division II amateurism rules, applies to individuals who enrolled before August 1, 2001, the effective date of the legislation.

The committee considered situations in which a student-athlete signed a contract with a professional team or entered the draft before enrollment but enrolled at a collegiate institution before August 1, 2001.

The committee noted that Division II legislation that was approved in January and becomes effective August 1 for students first entering a collegiate institution will permit such athletes to retain eligibility, although they will be charged a season of competition for every year of organized competition in which they participated after their first opportunity to enroll in college following high-school graduation and until initial collegiate enrollment. Additionally, the student-athletes will be required to sit out an academic year in residence.

The committee believed that the few athletes who have engaged in such activities and enrolled in college before August 1, 2001, have demonstrated their commitment to a college education and that granting them relief by applying the seasons-of-competition rule rather than ruling them permanently ineligible would be consistent with the intent of the January legislation. The committee also noted that if an individual has already spent a year in residence at the certifying institution, the year-in-residence requirement of the seasons-of-competition rule will be considered to be fulfilled.

The Division II committee also discussed the appropriate reinstatement condition for individuals who accept prize money or who compete with professionals but have not shown a clear intent to professionalize. The committee instructed the staff to continue to impose the reinstatement condition that was imposed before amateurism deregulation. The staff was instructed to continue to require repayment of any impermissible prize money accepted by a prospective student-athlete who enrolls at a collegiate institution before August 1, 2001. Also, any prospect who has not signed a contract but has competed on a team defined as professional and who enrolls before August 1, 2001, will be withheld on a one-for-one basis (one college contest for every professional contest played). The intent is to achieve equitable treatment for all student-athletes who enroll before August 1.

The Division II committee also reaffirmed its treatment of agent violations and its commitment to denying reinstatement requests to prospects who enter into agreements with agents. However, the committee noted that the rationale for the harsh penalty no longer relates to an intent to professionalize but is based instead on the belief that agents pose a threat to Division II athletics.

Division I

In Division I, the Subcommittee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement reviewed its December 2000/February 2001 directive regarding initial eligibility. The subcommittee reaffirmed that if a student-athlete involved in a violation of Bylaw 14.3.1 is subsequently determined to be a qualifier, he or she should be held on a one-for-two basis. The subcommittee also indicated that a withholding condition not be imposed when a student-athlete practices or competes before being certified by the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse if:

The student-athlete is subsequently certified as a qualifier.

The student-athlete took all necessary and appropriate actions to provide the Clearinghouse with all required information.

At its June meeting, the subcommittee expanded the directive to cover institutional errors not limited to failure to include the student-athlete on an IRL.

The subcommittee also reviewed amateurism guidelines and the two-prong analysis it developed in December 1999 to provide consistency and clarity in imposing conditions in cases where rules have been violated relating to involvement with professionals (see the January 3, 2000, issue of The NCAA News).

The subcommittee noted that the second prong, which relates to assessing competitive advantage, has been consistently applied by withholding student-athletes who compete on a professional team on a one-for-one basis. The subcommittee agreed that it cannot make meaningful distinctions in evaluating the nature of competition and the level of professional competition when reviewing violations of Bylaw 12.2.3.2 (competition with professionals) and therefore if an institution has concluded that the team is professional, the individual shall be withheld on a one-for-one basis.