This is the fifth in a series of articles to review Division I proposals for the 2009-10 legislative cycle.

The Division I Legislative Council will decide the future of printed media guides during the next legislative cycle.

A Pacific 10 Conference proposal would eliminate the printed publications altogether while a Southeastern Conference measure would prohibit the distribution of the guides to recruits.

Both Proposal No. 2009-41 (from the Pac-10) and Proposal No. 2009-42 (from the SEC) are framed as cost-containment measures, though it is widely anticipated that athletics departments will turn more to digital media to distribute the information. The Recruiting and Athletics Personnel Issues Cabinet, which has studied the issue over the last year, will offer initial thoughts at its September meeting.

The Council also will consider whether to require prospects to undergo testing for sickle cell trait, a proposal put forth by both Conference USA and the Southwestern Athletic Conference. Proposal No. 2009-75 would require schools to test incoming student-athletes for the trait as part of the traditional medical exam required of all first-time student-athletes.

Earlier this year, the NCAA recommended that all student-athletes be tested for sickle cell trait. Deaths tied to sickle cell trait are among the top three causes of non-traumatic sports deaths in high school and college student-athletes, according to the National Athletic Trainers’ Association. At least seven college football players with the trait have died since 2000.

According to the NATA, red blood cells can “sickle” during intense exertion, blocking blood vessels, a condition that could lead to death.

Incoming student-athletes are already required to undergo a medical exam or evaluation before participation in conditioning, practices, competition or out-of-season activities. Testing for sickle cell trait is considered inexpensive. NATA surveys suggest that more than half of Football Bowl Subdivision schools already screen for the trait.

Other significant proposals related to recruiting include:

• No. 2009-31, which would make assistant football coaches publicly designated as the next head coach subject to the same recruiting restrictions as a head coach.
• No. 2009-39, which would create limits on evaluation days in women’s sand volleyball.
• No. 2009-56, which would prohibit coaches from subscribing to recruiting or scouting services that don’t meet specific criteria. Those criteria would include regular dissemination of information, analysis beyond demographic information and rankings, and a publicly defined geographical scope of service.