BOSTON -- After 18 months of development and debate, Division II has moved within two steps of becoming the first NCAA division to revamp its approach to amateurism for pre-enrolled student-athletes.

The Division II Management Council, acting unanimously, voted to forward all proposals developed by the Amateurism Project Team to the Division II Presidents Council for consideration at its August 10 meeting. If the presidents support the six-proposal package, as they are expected to do, Division II delegates to the 2001 Convention will have a chance to make history by becoming the first part of the membership to base Bylaw 12 eligibility on a student-athlete's competitive experience rather than on whether the student-athlete has received compensation.

The Management Council's unanimous adoption was especially notable since the group had been a hard sell from the onset of the examination of the issue. Even at the recent meeting, several Management Council members posed difficult questions about how the new legislation would apply, but in the end a strong consensus emerged that the Amateurism Project Team had satisfactorily answered all significant questions.

The package, which does not in any way address eligibility for postenrolled student-athletes, would:

Require a student-athlete who does not enroll full time in a collegiate institution during the academic year after graduation of his or her high-school class to lose a season of competition during each calendar year in which the individual participates in outside competition.

Require student-athletes to fulfill one academic year in residency upon initial enrollment.

Permit an individual before full-time collegiate enrollment to sign a contract or commitment of any kind to participate in professional athletics, enter a professional league's draft or be drafted, and accept prize money.

Permit an individual before initial full-time collegiate enrollment to accept compensation (such as a stipend or educational expense) for athletics participation.

In a presentation to the Management Council, project team member Anthony Capon of the University of Pittsburgh, Johnstown, stressed that the amateurism examination was truly a Division II initiative and not a knee-jerk reaction to similar legislation under consideration in Division I. Instead, it arose out of student-athlete reinstatement concerns and questions about whether Division II student-athletes are being placed at a serious competitive disadvantage against older, more experienced student-athletes.

"The Proposal 150 study several years ago showed that average age doesn't differ between elite and non-elite teams," Capon said. "But it didn't examine whether elite athletes in Division II are significantly older or more experienced."

In that vein, stories were shared about the dominance of older international student-athletes at Division II conference and national events. At the Division II Student-Athlete Summit, which preceded the Management Council meeting, an administrator and student-athlete told of how international student-athletes took places one through seven at their conference cross country meet; the first five were teammates who held hands as they crossed the finish line together. A coach attending the summer meetings noted that at least five of the 10 starters in a men's Division II Basketball Championship semifinal were international players. Capon said that one Division II women's volleyball team included a 27-year-old former Olympic athlete from China while another institution's wrestling team featured a 29-year-old Olympic bronze medalist. Nobody disputed that Division II tennis is dominated by older international student-athletes.

"Some people say these student-athletes are professionals and they are competing only because you aren't enforcing the rules," Capon said. "But that's not the case. Many of these athletes are amateurs."

However, if the Convention approves the legislative package, their amateur status will become largely irrelevant. Instead, the standard will become the amount of experience they have in organized competition. The project team was able to convince the Management Council that the experience standard is much easier to prove than whether an individual has accepted compensation, which yields no competitive benefit in itself.

The Management Council concluded that permitting compensation for pre-enrolled student-athletes would simplify and make more fair the student-athlete reinstatement process, which relies heavily on an "intent to professionalize" provision.

Eventually, the last hurdle for the Management Council was a question about whether the seasons-of-competition rule should kick in upon high-school graduation or upon a student-athlete's initial collegiate full-time enrollment. Capon said he understood the apprehension about the grace period but said that the legislation had to be written in a way that "we don't catch those who we don't want to catch."

Making the legislation apply upon high-school graduation would have implications for many women's fast-pitch softball athletes and for baseball players competing in American Legion ball, for instance. He said that exceptions could be noted for those sports if necessary but that the project team recommends trying the legislation as written and making adjustments later.

The proposed legislation has the support of the Division II Student-Athlete Advisory Committee, which believes it promotes student-athlete welfare by providing previously ineligible student-athletes with the opportunity to participate. The SAAC also favors the competitive-equity benefits promised by the proposed legislation.

Bylaw 15

The Management Council also supported most Bylaw 15 deregulation proposals recommended by the Division II Legislation Committee. It paused, however, on a proposal that would permit an institution to count multiple-sport student-athletes in whichever sport they deem appropriate. The same proposal troubled the Presidents Council at its April meeting.

After concern about the potential for abuse became apparent, the Management Council considered pulling the proposal, addressing the concerns and resubmitting it for consideration at the 2002 Convention. However, the Council opted instead to see if the Legislation Committee could revise the proposal to close the loopholes it might provide, especially in football and basketball. Otherwise, the Management Council forwarded the rest of the Bylaw 15 deregulation proposals to the Presidents Council. Bylaw 15 deregulation proposals supported by the Presidents Council will be considered at the January Convention.

Academic requirements

In other business, the Management Council also voted to refer a proposal that would require midyear academic certification of freshman and transfer student-athletes back to the Division II Academic Requirements Committee.

Those advocating midyear certification are concerned that first-year student-athletes currently only have to meet initial-eligibility requirements in order to be eligible for the entire year of competition, barring institutional or conference rules to the contrary.

Those who suggested a further review acknowledged that current legislation provides an opportunity for abuse but they said that the proposed remedy (satisfactory completion of six hours) might send the wrong message to student-athletes struggling to fulfill their academic obligations.

The administrators maintained that such student-athletes might regard completion of only six hours as satisfactory performance when in fact such a light load might make it more difficult for an athlete to meet legislatively required satisfactory-progress standards in subsequent months.

Championships

The Management Council also approved several recommendations from the Division II Championships Committee, including a guideline for determining Division II bracket sizes so that they are based on the actual number of institutions that sponsor a sport (no less than a 1:8 ratio).

The Championships Committee stressed that the bracket sizes are only guidelines and not a strict formula. Among the factors that might cause exceptions are cost and gender-equity issues; in fact, the committee has recommended leaving football as a 16-team championship and expanding the women's basketball championship to 64 teams, along with the men, in 2002-03.

The Management Council also approved accepting sports committee plans to expand bracket sizes for softball from 32 to 48 teams and women's soccer from 16 to 24 teams for the 2001-02 academic year.

Changes in bracket sizes must be approved by the Presidents Council to become effective. Other Championships Committee proposals advanced to the Presidents Council included:

Establishment of a Women's Volleyball Rules Committee (Association-wide issue).

A requirement that at least 50 percent of the total positions on the Association-wide and common committees with rules responsibilities be filled with coaching staff members (Association-wide issue).

Interpretations regarding the application of the new distribution formula for the Division II enhancement fund.

The Management Council, however, declined to support a Championships Committee recommendation that the vice-chair of the Management Council be required to serve only as a member of the Championships Committee, rather than as chair.

Other highlights

Division II Management Council
July 24-25/Boston

Elected Lisa C. Colvin, senior woman administrator at Southern Arkansas University, Division II Management Council vice-chair, replacing Barbara J. Schroeder of Regis University (Colorado). The Council recognized Schroeder for her many contributions to the Management Council and the Division II Championships Committee.

Elected new Management Council representatives from independent institutions, the Great Lakes Intercollegiate Athletic Conference and the Heartland Conference. The new members will be announced after ratification by the Presidents Council.

Forwarded to the Division II Presidents Council a mandate for some sort of eye protection in women's lacrosse.

Endorsed a proposal from the Academic Requirements Committee to establish a degree-completion program in Division II.

Supported legislation to delete the category of computer science courses as acceptable courses in meeting initial-eligibility core-curriculum requirements. High-school principals still could designate appropriate computer science courses as core courses in other fields, such as math.

Approved active Division II membership, effective September 1, for the University of California, San Diego, (reclassification) and the University of Findlay and Western Oregon University (completion of provisional membership).

Approved compliance "blueprint" programs for active and provisional members to enhance the Division II compliance review program.

Declined to support a proposal to open membership on the Division II Management Council to associate and assistant athletics directors.