National Collegiate Athletic Association
NCAA News Archive - 2007
« back to 2007 | Back to NCAA News Archive Index
Working group suggests two restructuring models
|
By Jack Copeland
The NCAA News
The NCAA News
After reviewing extensive research about current and potential future membership, a Division III working group is suggesting a pair of possible models for a restructuring of the Association to accommodate growth.
The suggestions eventually could find their way to an Association-wide working group created by the NCAA Executive Committee to study ways of dealing with divisional growth and inter-division migration. The Executive Committee specifically instructed that group to study restructuring through the creation of a Division IV or by subdividing Division III, among other possible solutions.
After two telephone conferences and two in-person meetings (most recently May 31), the Division III Working Group on Membership Issues suggested models — one for a new division, the other for a subdivision — that would feature higher levels of institutional sport sponsorship than currently is the standard in Division III. The group also supported the related concept of emphasizing participation in intercollegiate athletics by higher percentages of students among institutions that would populate the new grouping.
It forwarded its suggestions to the Division III Membership Committee for review at a June 26-27 meeting in Indianapolis — a first step in an effort to solicit feedback that ultimately will include discussion forums at the 2008 Convention and a membership survey in spring 2008.
After review by the membership committee and the Division III Management and Presidents Councils, the suggestions may be forwarded to the Association-wide working group, which previously has indicated it plans to create models for review by all three divisions at the next Convention.
The Division III working group also listed several other possible features of a new division or subdivision that merit further consideration — such as restrictions on eligibility, recruiting, and playing and practice seasons (including nontraditional seasons and spring football activities) that are distinctive from those in current divisions, as well as such features as an academic reporting process for comparing the scholastic performance of student-athletes with institutions’ general student populations.
The working group agreed that any new division or subdivision should be based on features that distinguish it from current membership classifications, including Division III — thus providing each institution the choice of remaining in its current membership classification, or “self-selecting” to move into the new structure.
The group suggested that increased sports-sponsorship and participation standards are features that appear most likely to encourage “self-selection” by enough institutions to make establishment of a new division or subdivision feasible.
Working-group members concluded those features seem most likely to influence any decision to move from one classification to another after reviewing an extensive analysis of Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (EADA) and other data compiled by the NCAA research staff.
The analysis, which attempted to project future growth of Division III, focused on factors including sport sponsorship, institutional athletics expenditures and other characteristics of current Division III members, as well as characteristics of non-NCAA members who might be most likely to join the Association in the future (including data from institutions that most recently have sought NCAA membership, as well as factors like nonmembers’ geographic location, enrollment and financial aid practices that might influence a decision to seek membership).
The working group noted that some nonmembers that might seek NCAA membership currently are NAIA members, some are members of other athletics associations, and others are newly created four-year or recent two-year institutions.
The information presented by the research staff is accessible through the Division III home page at www.ncaa.org, via the “Working Group on Membership” link.
Working-group members, noting that nearly 60 percent of current Division III schools sponsor 16 or more sports while most nonmembers who were included in the analysis sponsor fewer sports, suggested that a 16-sport minimum might be appropriate for a new division or subdivision.
Members acknowledged that distinctive restrictions in such areas as playing and practice seasons, eligibility and recruiting likely would affect the number of institutions that would choose to move into a new division or subdivision, as would institutions’ desire to maintain current conference membership and other traditional affiliations.
Another factor that likely would influence “self-selection” is the opportunity for championships participation. Working-group members acknowledged that a new division or subdivision could structure championships in a manner distinctive from how they currently are conducted in existing divisions, but offered no recommendations for doing so.
However, the group did agree that flexibility should exist for Division III institutions to compete regularly against institutions in a new division, and that competition also should be supported between members of subdivisions within Division III.
The group noted that any action to create a new division or subdivision ultimately will require a vote by the membership, and that no proposals will be forwarded for a vote by the Association-wide working group until the 2009 Convention at the earliest. As a result, the membership will have a lengthy opportunity to comment on any models that might be suggested for restructuring.
Working-group members agreed that a survey to solicit membership opinions should be conducted as part of the comment process, but also agreed it should occur after the Association-wide working group creates models for discussion at the Convention, in order to provide specific concepts for membership reaction.
The working group also suggested, if the membership ultimately decides to create a new division or subdivision, that at least a two-year period should be provided following approval to permit institutions to decide whether to remain in their current division or move to another classification.
The suggestions eventually could find their way to an Association-wide working group created by the NCAA Executive Committee to study ways of dealing with divisional growth and inter-division migration. The Executive Committee specifically instructed that group to study restructuring through the creation of a Division IV or by subdividing Division III, among other possible solutions.
After two telephone conferences and two in-person meetings (most recently May 31), the Division III Working Group on Membership Issues suggested models — one for a new division, the other for a subdivision — that would feature higher levels of institutional sport sponsorship than currently is the standard in Division III. The group also supported the related concept of emphasizing participation in intercollegiate athletics by higher percentages of students among institutions that would populate the new grouping.
It forwarded its suggestions to the Division III Membership Committee for review at a June 26-27 meeting in Indianapolis — a first step in an effort to solicit feedback that ultimately will include discussion forums at the 2008 Convention and a membership survey in spring 2008.
After review by the membership committee and the Division III Management and Presidents Councils, the suggestions may be forwarded to the Association-wide working group, which previously has indicated it plans to create models for review by all three divisions at the next Convention.
The Division III working group also listed several other possible features of a new division or subdivision that merit further consideration — such as restrictions on eligibility, recruiting, and playing and practice seasons (including nontraditional seasons and spring football activities) that are distinctive from those in current divisions, as well as such features as an academic reporting process for comparing the scholastic performance of student-athletes with institutions’ general student populations.
The working group agreed that any new division or subdivision should be based on features that distinguish it from current membership classifications, including Division III — thus providing each institution the choice of remaining in its current membership classification, or “self-selecting” to move into the new structure.
The group suggested that increased sports-sponsorship and participation standards are features that appear most likely to encourage “self-selection” by enough institutions to make establishment of a new division or subdivision feasible.
Working-group members concluded those features seem most likely to influence any decision to move from one classification to another after reviewing an extensive analysis of Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (EADA) and other data compiled by the NCAA research staff.
The analysis, which attempted to project future growth of Division III, focused on factors including sport sponsorship, institutional athletics expenditures and other characteristics of current Division III members, as well as characteristics of non-NCAA members who might be most likely to join the Association in the future (including data from institutions that most recently have sought NCAA membership, as well as factors like nonmembers’ geographic location, enrollment and financial aid practices that might influence a decision to seek membership).
The working group noted that some nonmembers that might seek NCAA membership currently are NAIA members, some are members of other athletics associations, and others are newly created four-year or recent two-year institutions.
The information presented by the research staff is accessible through the Division III home page at www.ncaa.org, via the “Working Group on Membership” link.
Working-group members, noting that nearly 60 percent of current Division III schools sponsor 16 or more sports while most nonmembers who were included in the analysis sponsor fewer sports, suggested that a 16-sport minimum might be appropriate for a new division or subdivision.
Members acknowledged that distinctive restrictions in such areas as playing and practice seasons, eligibility and recruiting likely would affect the number of institutions that would choose to move into a new division or subdivision, as would institutions’ desire to maintain current conference membership and other traditional affiliations.
Another factor that likely would influence “self-selection” is the opportunity for championships participation. Working-group members acknowledged that a new division or subdivision could structure championships in a manner distinctive from how they currently are conducted in existing divisions, but offered no recommendations for doing so.
However, the group did agree that flexibility should exist for Division III institutions to compete regularly against institutions in a new division, and that competition also should be supported between members of subdivisions within Division III.
The group noted that any action to create a new division or subdivision ultimately will require a vote by the membership, and that no proposals will be forwarded for a vote by the Association-wide working group until the 2009 Convention at the earliest. As a result, the membership will have a lengthy opportunity to comment on any models that might be suggested for restructuring.
Working-group members agreed that a survey to solicit membership opinions should be conducted as part of the comment process, but also agreed it should occur after the Association-wide working group creates models for discussion at the Convention, in order to provide specific concepts for membership reaction.
The working group also suggested, if the membership ultimately decides to create a new division or subdivision, that at least a two-year period should be provided following approval to permit institutions to decide whether to remain in their current division or move to another classification.
© 2010 The National Collegiate Athletic Association
Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy