The Division I leadership should be commended for listening to the concerns of the membership and studying the effectiveness of the NCAA governance structure. Based on the initial findings of the studies conducted by the Management Council and the Executive Committee, it seems clear that some adjustments to the governance structure, the legislative process and the NCAA Convention may be forthcoming.

Imperative in any of this is increased involvement from Division I presidents. The presidents currently involved in the governance structure know the importance of meeting at least annually to discuss issues in intercollegiate athletics. But while this has been noted in the recent studies, it is clear that more attention should be given to involving the 300-plus presidents who are not members of the Board of Directors.

The first of the two studies, conducted by the Executive Committee, was Association-wide and evaluated a range of NCAA governance issues. The study concluded that presidential involvement in Division I may be less in the new process than it was before. The study, however, did not address ways of re-engaging college and university presidents, whether through the NCAA Convention or other methods.

The second of the two studies, conducted by the Division I Management Council's governance subcommittee, appears to be focusing on ways to provide administrators a stronger voice in the decision-making process, as well as on ways to enhance the importance of the Convention for the Division I membership while maintaining a majority vote for Division I-A. However, the issue of division-wide presidential involvement in the legislative process does not appear to be a part of this study, either.

Members of the Knight Foundation Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics said in June 2001 that presidents must be instrumental if any significant reform is to occur. The Commission recommended the unification of presidents through a coalition composed primarily of presidents from schools eligible for the Bowl Championship Series.

It puzzles me that these studies, and the Knight Commission report, do not address the desire of the 300-plus presidents not serving on the Board of Directors to be more involved and engaged. I conducted a study of my own, on which I based my doctoral dissertation, which had a return rate of 72 percent and was completed in early 2001. My findings indicated that 70 percent of Division I presidents wanted the Knight Commission or the Board of Directors to get them more engaged in issues relating to college athletics. From this same study, six of every seven presidents who responded indicated they would like to have a forum or convention to discuss issues involving intercollegiate athletics.

The NCAA and/or the presidents on the Division I Board of Directors should address the issue of presidential involvement, taking the initiative to unite all Division I presidents to discuss important issues relating to intercollegiate athletics. The facts indicate a clear desire for presidents to be more engaged in the issues relating to intercollegiate athletics -- presidents even have indicated that this interest is great enough that they desire to gather to discuss such issues.

There currently is a working group composed of presidents from BCS conferences that meets regularly to discuss issues. There also is, of course, the Division I Board of Directors that meets quarterly. But as long as Division I exists in its current state, with subdivisions of I-A, I-AA, and I-AAA, all Division I CEOs should gather to discuss athletics issues. While there does seem to be some recognition that all presidents want to be more involved and engaged, there currently is no forum in which all Division I CEOs meet strictly among themselves. Such a meeting could be held at the NCAA Convention or in conjunction with other national gatherings that presidents attend.

Certainly, the Board of Directors should be pleased that presidents desire to gather. Such an initiative should be viewed not as a rating of the Board's performance, but as a way -- similar to the Executive Committee and Management Council studies -- to improve the governance structure by making sure that all Division I administrators, including presidents, feel more involved in the governance and the direction of Division I intercollegiate athletics.

Kurt Patberg is the general manager of Competitive Resources Group, a placement and training company for former collegiate athletes. He formerly was the commissioner of the Rocky Mountain Athletic Conference and the Northern Sun Intercollegiate Conference.