National Collegiate Athletic Association |
CommentNovember 17, 1997
Guest editorial -- Process for certifying eligibility works as is
BY JIM ELWORTH An old Chinese proverb reminds us not to remove a fly from the forehead with a hatchet. That piece of sound advice came to mind as I reviewed Legislative Proposal No. 97-19, the Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet's proposed amendment to Constitution 3.2.4.3. The amendment would require certifications of continuing eligibility of student-athletes to be done by an institutional staff member outside the athletics department. This proposal obviously is a response to the recent unfortunate situation at Texas Tech University, where it was discovered that more than 70 athletes competed while ineligible because certain athletics department personnel failed to properly certify them. Yet the incompetence of those few administrators should not reflect on all of us who have the responsibility to certify student-athlete eligibility and actually take the time to read the rules and ask for interpretations when the need arises. Proposal No. 97-19 is completely unnecessary for the vast majority of athletics staffs that are properly performing their duties. Here at the University of North Dakota, home of the Division I men's ice hockey champions, we have a procedure in place that is quick and simple and that ensures the accuracy of our continuing-eligibility process. First, I open the Division I Manual, refer to Bylaw 14.4 and make sure all athletes have taken enough hours, have designated a degree program, have the minimum required grade-point average, etc. If there is a specific or unique problem, I call the membership services staff at the NCAA and the situation is resolved. After I had explained this procedure to one of our athletes who was interested in the process, he rather succinctly commented, "It ain't rocket science." He was absolutely right, but nonetheless, after I complete the process, it is essentially repeated, this time involving each athlete's academic advisor. The system utilized for the second check involves a form being sent to each hockey player's academic advisor; the professor is asked to confirm the number of hours taken by the student, the minimum grade-point average needed for graduation in the stu-dent's major, and the other requirements set forth in Bylaw 14.4. After the professor fills in the relevant information and returns it to the athletics department, it is again double-checked. These documents then are kept in a file for easy reference. This system involves people outside the athletics department, allowing other institutional personnel to be part of the process. But it leaves the final eligibility declaration in the hands of the athletics department, where it properly belongs. I do not tout our system here at North Dakota as the best; I simply offer it as an example of something that works just fine in its present form. I have spoken with several of the many competent, conscientious administrators who have developed eligibility checks on their campuses, and all of them seem to be getting along without any "help" from the Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet. The problems, when they arise, have to do more with people implementing the procedures rather than the system itself. Remove inept operators from the system and it works as it should. Should the amendment pass, a person in the registrar's office will be assigned to check the eligibility of North Dakota's ice hockey team. That person, unfamiliar with NCAA rules and inexperienced in applying them to specific transcripts, then will call me to ask if the players are eligible. Regardless of what "process (is) approved by the institution's faculty athletics representative," as required by Proposal No. 97-19, the scenario I just described will be the practical reality and I will be performing the duties anyway. Of course, at that point, another person will be unnecessarily involved in the process and there no doubt will be more paperwork to contend with. There is no question that situations like that which happened at Texas Tech are flies on the forehead of college athletics. But wielding the hatchet of proposals like No. 97-19 to remove isolated and rare problems is an overreaction that will only serve to unnecessarily complicate the certification procedure. Amendments such as this propose to take the certification process out of the hands of those who know it best and who, in the vast majority of instances, do it quite well. Jim Elworth is assistant athletics director at the University of North Dakota. Letter to the Editor -- Proportionality gaining more acceptance?Recently I was involved in developing a proposal to get funds for varsity women's rowing at some NCAA institutions. While I was working on the project, some very encouraging things happened. Supporting women's rowing obviously has strong gender-equity implications. Previously, my feeling was that the Women's Sports Foundation (WSF), when faced with the fact that men's sports were being eliminated to achieve proportionality, had avoided the issue and said it wasn't their fault. However, when doing research for this project, I found a recent statement from Donna Lopiano of the WSF saying that eliminating nonrevenue men's sports didn't help anybody and that she was against it. At about the same time, I received an unsolicited phone call from a college men's sports organization saying that it would fully support our women's rowing proposal. It seems that both groups have accept-ed the fact that proportionality will be achieved and that the higher the bar is raised, the more everybody benefits. It was a welcome display of cooperation from which everyone will gain, especially future student-athletes of both genders. I also ran across a few members of the "old boys network," former football men and athletics administrators who are in middle age. One of them described an eye-opening event that typified the experience of several others. When his daughter was 8 years old, she came home with a swimming trophy and a huge grin. He said it suddenly dawned on him that all the positive influences that athletics had on boys also applied to girls. At age 13, when she announced she was going to college on an athletics scholarship, he admired her spirit and encouraged her effort while privately dismissing the possibility. When she won the scholarship, he was a total convert. Now, he is the chair of the gender-equity committee at a Division I-A institution that is close to compliance. He says his school will reach proportionality soon and continue to ensure gender equity, not because the law requires it, but because it is the right thing to do.
Kent Thackrey Opinions -- Not all college basketball changes are for the good
Nolan Richardson, men's basketball coach Discussing changes in college basketball: "In a few years you're not going to see college teams anything like what they are now.... "There are more players staying in college for just a year or two, more who skip college altogether. The kids are seeing the shoe contracts and the NBA contracts out there and saying, 'I'd like to have a part of that.'.... "I was on the phone with my grandson and he was saying, 'My jumper is really getting better and if things keep working, I may not go to college.' This kid is 15 years old. I said, 'Go get your mama and put her on the phone, please.'.... "I'm not going to just walk up and give anybody anything before they've proven that they've earned it. Because I grew up in an environment where I never got anything. You can't play for me if you're like that. If you are, I can't coach you.... "Pretty soon, five years is going to be considered a long time (to have stayed in one place as a coach). It's because the fans and administration have no more tolerance for bad years no matter what you did the year before. And then everything gets sensationalized on radio shows. It's becoming a tougher and tougher business."
Affirmative action
William N. Banks, professor of African-American studies Discussing whether minority student-athletes should boycott major athletics programs in response to the curtailment of affirmative action in many high-profile academic programs: "By getting behind the boycott effort, minority communities can signal that they are unwilling to accept the entertainment niche for their sons and daughters on campuses, especially campuses that have made matters difficult for talented students who can't run, jump or shoot baskets. A boycott would signal that the message of Caesar Chavez, Rosa Parks and Malcolm X -- that it is sometimes necessary to go beyond grumbling and act -- has sunk in. "Maybe Ward Connerly will endorse the boycott. After all, the absence of black and brown athletes would open up varsity slots for the high test-scoring students he so admires and claims to speak for. Let's let the able young coaches at UCLA and UC Berkeley fill up Pauley Pavilion and Memorial Coliseum with such student-athletes and let the black and brown athletes go where the hypocrisy is not so dramatic. "With Proposition 209-like measures showing up in the Texas legislature and others, the boycott may draw attention to the continuing exploitation of black and brown athletes."
Football scheduling
Ivan Maisel, sportswriter "Greed (won) another decision over quality in college football. The Division I Board of Directors (approved) a proposal that would allow a I-A team to count, once every four years, a victory over a I-AA opponent toward the six wins needed to qualify for a bowl game. The NCAA imposed the six-victory minimum in 1991, in part to restrict the number of teams that qualified for postseason play and thereby put a cap on the proliferation of bowls. By relaxing the minimum, the NCAA would give athletics directors the freedom to schedule more home games against I-AA opponents for, say, the $200,000 guarantee that Iowa paid Northern Iowa this year instead of the $450,000 that Nebraska paid I-A Akron. In addition to scheduling a sure win, the home team makes a windfall in gate receipts and concessions. "The rule change was proposed by the Big 12, without the backing of Nebraska. " 'Imagine being at Wyoming or New Mexico, building your program up and trying to do things well, and then having South Carolina go to a bowl instead of you because it has a victory over Furman,' says Nebraska athletics director Bill Byrne. 'It's not right. It's a distinct advantage for the SEC, ACC and Big East because they live in a part of the world where there are a lot of I-AA teams.' "The rule could also hurt Division I-A schools such as some members of the Mid-American and Big West Conferences, which have upgraded their schedules and increased their revenue by traveling to play major-conference opponents."
Moving to Division I
L. Jay Oliva, president Discussing the difficulties of moving from Divisions II or III to Division I: "A lot of conferences at that level have taken in all the schools they want and have closed the doors. It's difficult to understand why anyone would want to enter at this particular time in big-time college sports."
Murray Sperber, author Reacting to those who say a high-profile athletics program makes it easier to recruit students: "Who is applying to a school because it has won in athletics? I call those students the 'beer-and-circus people,' because they're never in class on Monday morning and leave early on Friday."
Title IX
Stanley Caine, former president "My first objection to (Title IX as it applies to athletics) is that there is no good reason why Congress and the Supreme Court should be concerned with the whole question. Whether or not a proportionate number of men and women play games in college lacks national importance. No other nation on Earth even has the extracurricular sports programs we sponsor. We do not propose to establish proper ratios for more important things. For instance, only 20 percent of our graduating engineers are women.... "If it is fair and legal to keep men and women athletes in the proper proportions, why is it not true for band members and other voluntary student activities? Should we do something about black athletes who, by reason of superior ability, hold down much more than their share of places on basketball and football teams?.... "While most of the trouble over equal opportunity to participate in team sports comes about in Division I, all high schools and colleges are affected. The penalty to provide equal access is the loss of all federal funds for any purpose. It is apparent that Title IX will be the source of a good bit of litigation. "Educational institutions have enough problems of substance without being concerned with how many athletes are to play games."
|