The Division II Presidents Council supported the core recommendation of the Division II Football Task Force at its April 27 meeting — and then took one additional giant step.

The Football Task Force, charged after the 2005 Convention with addressing issues pertaining to Division II postseason football, had recommended that it be authorized to develop legislation to create two national championship brackets. That action would fulfill a commitment made at the 2005 Convention to develop options that would enhance competitive equity in Division II football and hopefully heal a growing divide between large and small Division II programs.

Not only did the Presidents Council join the Division II Management Council in supporting that proposal, it also authorized the Football Task Force to draft additional legislation to address the broader membership concerns that the football rift has raised.

The Council requested that the task force examine the issue more broadly by putting all elements of the discussion — perhaps including new financial aid limits — on the table for discussion at the 2007 Convention. The Football Task Force was scheduled to meet May 3-4 in Houston.

“The work of the Football Task Force has been innovative and responsive,” said Charles Ambrose, president of Pfeiffer University and Presidents Council chair. “But if its proposal to establish two brackets is not deemed viable, then we still have the issue of whether the current aid limits are appropriate.”

At the 2005 Convention, the Division II football-playing membership voted down by a 2-1 margin a proposal that would have lowered football financial aid limits from 36 to 24. While the vote was decisive, it may not have reflected the division’s overall attitude toward the aid question since an assurance was provided before the business session that a “no” vote would trigger an examination of competitive equity. Thus, a number of institutions may have voted “no” because (a) they thought the drop from 36 to 24 was too severe and (b) they wanted to see what other options might exist.

Since then, many administrators in the division have speculated about what might happen if Division II could not develop a postseason arrangement to accommodate both large and small football programs. One prominent thought is that some members would sponsor legislation to reduce football equivalencies to a more acceptable number — perhaps 32 or 30. The question then involves whether larger programs would remain in the division if the limits were lowered.

“If the limits are going to be an issue,” Ambrose said, “then we should go ahead and include them in the discussion now so that when a decision is made, it will be a forward-thinking decision.”

Division II Vice President Mike Racy said, “The Division II membership, specifically the football-playing members, has been operating with a cloud regarding the future direction of the sport for the past several years. It’s time to move forward. We can’t have that divisiveness and succeed over time.”

The approach is unusual in that the Football Task Force is not being directed to provide a single legislative “solution” to the question. Rather, it has been asked to provide a package in which the football-playing membership may be asked to choose between significantly different options or to decisively reject the alternatives and leave football in its current state.

The football group also will consider whether to sponsor a proposal to change the voting standard for approving financial aid changes. The membership currently can modify the limits with a simple majority vote, but the complexities of the football issue have raised the question of whether requiring a two-third vote to change financial aid limits in all sports might be preferred.

Regardless, any vote to modify limits at the 2007 Convention would require only a simple majority.

While the football action was significant, it was not the only important item on the agenda. Among other things, the Council approved a new policy for championships regionalization and adopted legislation to lessen or eliminate the effects of “diploma mills” in the initial-eligibility process.

Regarding regionalization, the Council approved the recommendations of the Championships Committee to create eight national regions that will create the basis for regional play in all Division II sports (see the April 24 issue of The NCAA News). Some sports, probably including football, will use four super-regions, each of which would be created by combining two regions. A few sports with low sponsorship may have only two super-regions.

The changes will be mandatory for all sports in the 2008-09 academic year, although individual sports may implement them for 2007-08 if they desire.

The action on questionable secondary schools will expand the Association’s review of nontraditional high schools. It also will strengthen the Association’s authority to review the records of high school students who appear to show dramatic academic improvement in a short time or who graduate from high schools with questionable academic profiles.

The Division I Board of Directors also approved the emergency legislation.