LA JOLLA, California — What should the Division I philosophy be when it comes to allocations to championships?

That is the question the Division I Championships/Competition Cabinet debated and answered during its June 27-28 meeting.

After spirited discussion within the bracket/format subcommittee and during full sessions of the cabinet, members reaffirmed that the working principles in place are the best way to conduct a fair and equitable championship with national-level competition.

But they did confirm that after automatic qualifiers earn their way into team championship brackets, the remainder of the field should be selected on an at-large basis without regard to conference or regional affiliations.

Cabinet members agreed that the policy should apply to individual-team championships with sport sponsorship above 30 percent. Individual-team championships with sponsorship below 30 percent may still make regional allocations to the championship bracket to help those sports’ viability.

Wrestling, for example, with its 26 percent sponsorship will keep its regional-allocations format.

An exception is the diving component of swimming and diving. Even though more than 30 percent of the membership sponsors diving, the cabinet recognized the subjective scoring element that occurs within zone diving competitions and thus allowed regional allocations to continue for that event. The exception also would apply to men’s and women’s outdoor track and field.

Pacific-10 Conference Associate Commissioner Chris Dawson, who chaired her last cabinet meeting, said the group is attempting to balance fairness with giving student-athletes the best possible postseason experience. "And for me," she said, "part of what is included there is the opportunity to compete against the other best teams in the country."

Dawson said, "The NCAA is a conference-based organization, and the cabinet fully embraces the idea of conference automatic qualification. But for the at-larges, the best of the rest is what we’re after."

The process of allocating regional berths in individual-team sports such as men’s golf and wrestling helped spur the discussion. Stakeholders in those sports are divided about how best to fill their brackets.

In men’s golf, for example, institutions can automatically qualify for the NCAA tournament by winning their conference championship. Short of that, some conferences are guaranteed a certain number of berths into one of the three regionals where teams can play themselves into the national tournament. But the regional-allocation format will end in men’s golf, which is sponsored by 88 percent of Division I institutions, starting in 2007-08.

Roxanne Levenson, chair of the bracket/format subcommittee, said the best-of-the-best philosophy is a definitive element of Division I championship competition.

"Our championships are for the best competitors, and they are those who’ve earned the chance to play in the championships. Because of that, we felt the new policy is a way of further defining that philosophy. Divisions II and III championships don’t have that same philosophy, and that is what sets us apart."

The decision did not come without debate. While the prevailing thought is that an AQ/at-large system captures the best teams, some sports are uniquely challenged in determining who those teams are. Again using golf as an example, access to the higher-profile tournaments in warmer climates is an issue, since those tournaments boost rankings that the golf committee uses in its selection process.

One cabinet member urged the group not to focus on individual sports but to look at the bigger picture. She said most administrators and coaches would be upset if one of their teams that clearly belonged in the championship field was left out because of regionalization. "Are we doing an injustice to those student-athletes if we don’t pick the best of the best?" she said. "We’re not intramurals."

The cabinet also took on the controversial issue of using male practice players in women’s sports, especially since the Division I Management Council asked the group for a recommendation.

Like the at-large selection policy, the male-practice-player issue generated discussion.

The cabinet noted that the Committee on Women’s Athletics already has been on record as regarding the use of male practice players as conflicting with providing equitable and competitive opportunities for female student-athletes. But the CWA at its latest meeting in June — realizing the number of constituents who favor the practice — proposed a set of compromise restrictions should the practice continue to be allowed, such as limiting the use of male practice players to two hours per week and only during the championship segment (see story in the July 3 NCAA News).

That debate carried into the cabinet meeting. Some cabinet members questioned whether the concept has outlived its intended purpose of improving the skills of women athletes by playing against stronger and faster opponents in practice. Others raised concerns about it taking away opportunities for women who aren’t starters on the team.

The issue also extends beyond basketball, traditionally thought of as the sport that most employs the practice. One cabinet member said her school’s women’s soccer team lost a potential all-American right before the NCAA tournament when she tangled with a male practice player and badly broke her leg.

That cabinet member also said she has noticed a philosophical change in the way in which male practice players are used. She said years ago people were talking about using the male practice players to develop women’s team members. "Now what I see and read about male practice players is that they are there for one reason — to be tough and beat up on the women and get them to be more physical," she said.

But another member said coaches believe there is an added value in terms of player development and preparation for an opponent when male practice players are used.

Another cabinet member said his department surveys women athletes on campus regularly about the issue and has not received negative feedback.

In the end, cabinet members voted by a narrow margin to oppose the use of male practice players and sponsor legislation to that effect. Before doing that, though, the cabinet will gather feedback from a variety of key stakeholders and consider that input as it develops specific language and rationale for the proposal. All feedback will be gathered in preparation for the cabinet’s February 2007 meeting.

Dawson said she wants to hear from the Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee members in particular who have experienced the male-practice-player issue firsthand.

• Agreed to sponsor emergency legislation specifying that effective August 1, 2007, the first contest date in men’s soccer will be September 1 or the preceding Friday if September 1 falls on a Saturday, Sunday or Monday. Alumni games may be played on the weekend before September 1 when it doesn’t fall on a Saturday, Sunday or Monday.
• Agreed to sponsor legislation to permit staff members employed at a single or multisport conference receiving automatic qualification to serve on Division I cabinets, committees and Association-wide or common committees provided the individual is nominated by his or her conference. Also agreed to sponsor legislation to permit individual staff members from institutions that sponsor a sport at a division other than their all-sport division to serve on that sport’s playing rules committee, as long as at least 25 percent of the institutions sponsoring the sport are Division II or III institutions.
• Agreed to sponsor legislation to provide an exception to the six-team requirement for team sports that are sponsored by less than 30 percent of the membership and are members of conferences that previously had six teams.
• Agreed to sponsor legislation in women’s basketball specifying that the one telephone call to a prospect that can be made during April will not be allowed to occur until the Thursday after the end of the Women’s Final Four. Also agreed to sponsor legislation to expand the dead period in men’s basketball recruiting until noon on the Thursday after the Men’s Final Four championship game.
• Did not support a recommendation from the Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports requiring all coaches to be certified in first aid and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Cabinet members believe the initiative should be promulgated as a best practice but is best regulated at the institutional level.
• The cabinet’s postseason football licensing subcommittee approved a new bowl game in Houston, effective for the 2006-07 bowl season. The game will be played December 28, 2006.