National Collegiate Athletic Association
NCAA News Archive - 2007
« back to 2007 | Back to NCAA News Archive Index
Fall-term certification proposed for baseball
Panel also suggests new aid structure
Panel also suggests new aid structure
|
By Greg Johnson
The NCAA News
The NCAA News
A Division I panel charged with enhancing academic performance in baseball is recommending that student-athletes be academically certified at the start of the fall term to be eligible for competition during both the fall and spring semesters.
The proposal is among several the Baseball Academic Enhancement Working Group drafted at its last formal meeting March 5 and will forward to the Board of Directors for consideration in April.
Working-group members say requiring fall certification will encourage student-athletes to pay more attention to their academics in the spring and summer instead of relying on the fall term to make up for light loads during the playing season. The proposal also requires midyear transfers to wait until the next season to be eligible.
Other proposals include:
Retaining the financial aid model of 11.7 equivalencies but limiting counters to 27 and requiring that each of their aid packages include at least 33 percent athletics aid. The proposal also caps the regular-season squad size at 35.
Eliminating the one-time transfer exception (resulting in four-year transfers serving one academic year of residence before becoming eligible to compete in baseball).
Requiring baseball programs with a four-year average APR under 900 to be subject to baseball-specific penalties in addition to penalties already stipulated in the Academic Performance Program (such as scholarship reductions). Examples of baseball-specific penalties would be a reduction in a team’s number of contests to 50 and limiting the playing and practice season to 119 days.
The Board will consider the working group’s recommendations at its April 26 meeting. The presidents charged the working group last year with rectifying baseball’s poor academic performance. Baseball’s APR has been among the lowest in each year of data collection despite baseball student-athletes entering college with higher academic profiles on average than student-athletes in most other sports. The Board asked the working group for meaningful change before considering a possible reduction in the sport’s contest limits.
The working group is still ironing out details, such as an effective date for the proposals, but members believe the recommendations will produce the academic improvement the Board is after.
The package addresses the problem areas the working group identified early on, such as student-athletes using the fall term to become eligible for the spring, baseball’s high transfer rate (which is exacerbated by the one-time transfer exception) and challenges emanating from baseball’s comparatively low equivalency allocations.
What most prompted the working group to propose significant change was research showing that incoming baseball student-athletes typically enter college with higher grade-point averages and SAT scores than their peers in basketball and football but earn fewer credit hours per year once they are enrolled.
Fall-term certification
Research from 2004-05 showed that more than two-thirds of all transfers in baseball are junior college student-athletes moving to a four-year program. Those student-athletes lost retention points in the APR 21.8 percent of the time and eligibility points 22.2 percent of the time. Nine percent were “0-for-2s.”
Working-group members say the proposal will eliminate the instances of two-year college student-athletes transferring into a Division I program at mid-year to compete in the spring term without making a serious academic commitment and then depart the institution (for a professional baseball opportunity, for example) as an 0-for-2.
They add that student-athletes accustomed to “getting well” academically in the fall term will adjust to the proposal by earning enough hours to stay eligible in the previous spring term or enroll in summer school courses. That will keep them on track toward graduation and lessen the chances of losing an APR eligibility point.
Student-athletes who don’t earn academic certification may be eligible to practice or receive athletics aid at the institution’s discretion.
Financial aid
Since baseball has a financial model of 11.7 equivalencies, the working group believes an increased financial commitment from the institution will reduce the chances of a student-athlete transferring. The proposal stipulates that a minimum of 33 percent in athletics aid be granted with a maximum limit of 27 counters. Data show that 27 is the average number of student-athletes who receive athletics aid, though some programs divide the 11.7 equivalencies among as many as 40 student-athletes.
Working-group members say the proposal addresses instances in which talented student-athletes can participate without receiving athletics aid, but instead they receive aid from non-athletic or non-institutional sources (for example, state-funded programs for all resident students).
The proposal also limits institutions to a maximum of 35 student-athletes, regardless of the source of financial aid.
Working-group members say that under that scenario, coaches would be less likely to apply a “run-off” strategy after what amounts to a fall-term tryout.
Encouraging a student-athlete who is one of the 27 counters to transfer would cost the institution APR points, and the program would not be allowed to replace that student-athlete until the following year.
Transfer year in residence
According to working-group members, eliminating the one-time transfer exception — coupled with the increased financial commitment from the other proposal in the package — should reduce baseball’s high transfer rate.
Baseball would join Division I men’s and women’s basketball, football and men’s ice hockey as sports that do not allow the one-time transfer exception.
Working-group members say it will encourage coaches and student-athletes to make more thoughtful decisions about the academic fit at an institution for the long term. It may also alleviate the recruiting that occurs during the summer leagues.
The proposal is among several the Baseball Academic Enhancement Working Group drafted at its last formal meeting March 5 and will forward to the Board of Directors for consideration in April.
Working-group members say requiring fall certification will encourage student-athletes to pay more attention to their academics in the spring and summer instead of relying on the fall term to make up for light loads during the playing season. The proposal also requires midyear transfers to wait until the next season to be eligible.
Other proposals include:
Retaining the financial aid model of 11.7 equivalencies but limiting counters to 27 and requiring that each of their aid packages include at least 33 percent athletics aid. The proposal also caps the regular-season squad size at 35.
Eliminating the one-time transfer exception (resulting in four-year transfers serving one academic year of residence before becoming eligible to compete in baseball).
Requiring baseball programs with a four-year average APR under 900 to be subject to baseball-specific penalties in addition to penalties already stipulated in the Academic Performance Program (such as scholarship reductions). Examples of baseball-specific penalties would be a reduction in a team’s number of contests to 50 and limiting the playing and practice season to 119 days.
The Board will consider the working group’s recommendations at its April 26 meeting. The presidents charged the working group last year with rectifying baseball’s poor academic performance. Baseball’s APR has been among the lowest in each year of data collection despite baseball student-athletes entering college with higher academic profiles on average than student-athletes in most other sports. The Board asked the working group for meaningful change before considering a possible reduction in the sport’s contest limits.
The working group is still ironing out details, such as an effective date for the proposals, but members believe the recommendations will produce the academic improvement the Board is after.
The package addresses the problem areas the working group identified early on, such as student-athletes using the fall term to become eligible for the spring, baseball’s high transfer rate (which is exacerbated by the one-time transfer exception) and challenges emanating from baseball’s comparatively low equivalency allocations.
What most prompted the working group to propose significant change was research showing that incoming baseball student-athletes typically enter college with higher grade-point averages and SAT scores than their peers in basketball and football but earn fewer credit hours per year once they are enrolled.
Fall-term certification
Research from 2004-05 showed that more than two-thirds of all transfers in baseball are junior college student-athletes moving to a four-year program. Those student-athletes lost retention points in the APR 21.8 percent of the time and eligibility points 22.2 percent of the time. Nine percent were “0-for-2s.”
Working-group members say the proposal will eliminate the instances of two-year college student-athletes transferring into a Division I program at mid-year to compete in the spring term without making a serious academic commitment and then depart the institution (for a professional baseball opportunity, for example) as an 0-for-2.
They add that student-athletes accustomed to “getting well” academically in the fall term will adjust to the proposal by earning enough hours to stay eligible in the previous spring term or enroll in summer school courses. That will keep them on track toward graduation and lessen the chances of losing an APR eligibility point.
Student-athletes who don’t earn academic certification may be eligible to practice or receive athletics aid at the institution’s discretion.
Financial aid
Since baseball has a financial model of 11.7 equivalencies, the working group believes an increased financial commitment from the institution will reduce the chances of a student-athlete transferring. The proposal stipulates that a minimum of 33 percent in athletics aid be granted with a maximum limit of 27 counters. Data show that 27 is the average number of student-athletes who receive athletics aid, though some programs divide the 11.7 equivalencies among as many as 40 student-athletes.
Working-group members say the proposal addresses instances in which talented student-athletes can participate without receiving athletics aid, but instead they receive aid from non-athletic or non-institutional sources (for example, state-funded programs for all resident students).
The proposal also limits institutions to a maximum of 35 student-athletes, regardless of the source of financial aid.
Working-group members say that under that scenario, coaches would be less likely to apply a “run-off” strategy after what amounts to a fall-term tryout.
Encouraging a student-athlete who is one of the 27 counters to transfer would cost the institution APR points, and the program would not be allowed to replace that student-athlete until the following year.
Transfer year in residence
According to working-group members, eliminating the one-time transfer exception — coupled with the increased financial commitment from the other proposal in the package — should reduce baseball’s high transfer rate.
Baseball would join Division I men’s and women’s basketball, football and men’s ice hockey as sports that do not allow the one-time transfer exception.
Working-group members say it will encourage coaches and student-athletes to make more thoughtful decisions about the academic fit at an institution for the long term. It may also alleviate the recruiting that occurs during the summer leagues.
© 2010 The National Collegiate Athletic Association
Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy