« back to 2006 | Back to NCAA News Archive Index
|
DALLAS — Not that the notion needed any reinforcement, but the July 17-18 meeting of the Division II Management Council confirmed once again that the business of restructuring football is tricky.
The Management Council ultimately took a straightforward action by agreeing to sponsor the legislation recommended earlier in the year by the Division II Football Task Force:
n
To create two football playoff brackets, one for programs offering 0 to 36 financial aid equivalencies and another for programs offering up to 50 percent of the maximum equivalency limit (that is, 0 to 18 equivalencies).n
To require that any future modifications to existing financial aid limits in any sport be approved by a two-thirds majority.While the action was simple enough, the discussion that led to it reflected the myriad ingredients that make the issue so complicated: the loss of marquee members to Division I, the threat of programs giving up football because they can’t afford it, competitive equity and the difficulty in distinguishing institutional interests from the overall good of the division.
Although several Management Council members were not enthusiastic at the prospect of creating two brackets, most of the discussion focused on whether 50 percent (or 18) was an appropriate ceiling for the second playoff. Representatives of conferences that seem most suited to the smaller bracket sought to expand the second-level ceiling to 60 percent of the maximum, but that amendment was defeated.
Ultimately, the original proposal moved on to the Presidents Council with a comfortable majority. Although some support came from members who don’t necessarily support two brackets and from others who don’t support a ceiling of 18 for the second bracket, in the end the Council agreed that it must meet its promise to give the delegates a solution to consider at this year’s Convention.
Management Council Chair Jill Willson applauded the Council for looking beyond individual campus or conference concerns.
"This is an issue that the membership must address," said Willson, director of athletics at Texas A&M University-Kingsville. "The Management Council’s job was to provide the foundation for that discussion. If the Presidents Council chooses to sponsor this legislation, then schools and conferences will have a chance to debate the merits of this proposal when we gather at the Convention in January."
Division II Vice President Mike Racy said that if the proposal passes, the Management Council will be entrusted with developing policies and structures to make certain that Division II continues to operate as a single division.
"Division I’s entire approach to governance is tied up in football classification," he said, "but what we are proposing is nothing more than a second bracket for football. Still, I believe everybody understands that there is potential for a change like this to create a chasm if our leadership isn’t actively engaged."
The passage of the proposal to create a second bracket is not a foregone conclusion, which raises the question of what would happen if the legislation failed.
Speculation earlier this year was that conferences representing smaller programs would sponsor legislation to reduce football equivalency limits to a number that might be politically acceptable — perhaps 32. However, the July 15 deadline for membership legislation passed without any proposals to that effect.
The Presidents Council has until September 1 to sponsor legislation for the 2007 Convention, and Presidents Council Chair Charles Ambrose of Pfeiffer University suggested at the July 16 Student-Athlete Advisory Committee Summit that a vote on lower limits still may be possible if the Presidents Council believes it will help resolve the issue once and for all. The Management Council was not enthusiastic about that prospect and voted unanimously to request that the Presidents Council not take such an action. Some Management Council members suggested that a vote on scholarship reductions would signal a backward step at a time when Division II is trying to enhance its identity.
If the Presidents Council chooses not to propose a lower equivalency limit, that will greatly elevate the importance of the vote on a two-thirds super majority to change financial aid limits.
"Some of us think of it as a ‘football issue,’ " Willson said. "But football is so important to the schools and conferences that sponsor it that this is really a membership-stability issue.
"We must create an environment where programs know from year to year what the rules are going to be. It’s not doing us any good to put out a brush fire at one Convention, only to have a bigger one break out the next year."
The vote to sponsor legislation to require a two-thirds vote to change financial aid limits at future Conventions was without opposition.
One other piece of significant legislation was recommended to the Presidents Council with much less fanfare.
The Management Council approved a recommendation from the Membership Committee to create a new process for exploratory and provisional membership. The proposal, developed in collaboration with the Membership Task Force, would combine the processes for new and reclassifying members. The exploratory period would be expanded to two years and would place much greater demands on prospective members to demonstrate that they are ready to be invited to provisional membership. The length of the provisional period would depend on the institution’s readiness for active membership. In no event would the period be less than a year.
Current legislation calls for one year of exploratory membership and four years of provisional membership.
If the legislation is approved, current provisional members would complete their reclassification under the existing conditions. Current exploratory members, however, would begin as exploratory members under the new terms in the belief that the new system would be more advantageous for them.
In a related action, the Management Council voted to ask the Membership Committee to consider a "prodigal member" approach. The concept would make it easier for members that have reclassified out of the division to return if they realized that the reclassification had not been in their best interests.
© 2010 The National Collegiate Athletic Association
Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy