As a former collegiate water polo coach with more than a quarter century of experience and of emeritus status as a faculty member at California, I am writing now as a small voice in big-time collegiate athletics. But I have large concerns about reductions in the playing and practice seasons that are being contemplated.

The notion of reducing the playing and practice seasons seems to be based on an assumption that there is a need to decrease all sports training and competitions without regard to each individual sport's needs.

This isn't the first time water polo has been faced with such a challenge. In 1990, the NCAA reduced our playing dates despite the water polo community's pleas otherwise. The cut was 37 percent, down from 35 playing dates to 23. No reaction to our concerns ever was given.

Further cuts would have a more dramatic effect on water polo than any other NCAA sport. Water polo is considerably different than other "land" sports. Individuals can practice skills in football, basketball, soccer and baseball without supervision. What makes water polo different is that practices and competition must be conducted in a fully supervised training facility. It is a matter of safety -- deep water, plus the physical nature of the sport. If anything, there should be an increase in the number of practice and playing dates for water polo.

Each NCAA sport has different training needs and competitive schedules. Some teams practice for five months to play 11 games; others practice five months to play 30 games. Blanket legislation is unreasonable -- it doesn't work well in such varied athletics circumstances. To eliminate additional contests and/or practices also will severely weaken the quality of the United States Olympic Water Polo Team, which draws its members from the collegiate ranks.

Men's water polo has a limit of 4 ¹/2 scholarships. Rarely, if ever, does a water polo player receive a full scholarship. The position of part-time university lifeguard pays more than a partial grant from water polo. That alone emphasizes the fact that student-athletes compete in water polo because they want to. Water polo athletes also have a graduation rate that not only exceeds most sports but also the overall graduation rate of non-athletes. Thus, it would not seem that water polo's current training and competition schedule negatively affects our student-athletes' academic performance.

Most changes to NCAA rules are the result of trying to control football and men's basketball. Olympic sports often do not appear to have their voices heard. When this happens, those most directly affected, the coaches and athletes, question the NCAA's democratic process. The NCAA's attitude toward Olympic sports, no matter how inadvertent, seems to be paternalistic at best.

The NCAA would do well to consider the needs of each individual sport when it examines a complicated issue such as playing and practice seasons. If increased student-athlete welfare is at the heart of the desired outcome, blanket legislation surely will sabotage that goal. A better solution would be to consult -- and listen to -- those who best know the nuances of their sport, such as the players and coaches who have worked hard to promote their avocation.

Peter Cutino is a former water polo coach at the University of California, Berkeley, and a current member of the faculty there.