Men’s basketball student-athletes will have far less time to “test the waters” in the professional draft under legislation approved Monday by the Division I Legislative Council.

The Council also defeated a proposal that would have reduced the number of games in baseball.

All Legislative Council actions are subject to review by the Division I Board of Directors, which meets April 30.

The new basketball legislation (No. 2008-79) establishes May 8 as the date by which student-athletes must remove their name from the NBA draft to retain eligibility. In addition, the proposal removes the option for draft entrants who are not selected to resume college eligibility. Student-athletes with eligibility remaining previously had up to 30 days after the draft to declare their intention to return.

Coaches supported the shorter declaration period because it will assist in roster planning for the upcoming year. The change also is intended to encourage student-athletes to refocus on academics sooner after the season ends and decrease the potential for violations of amateurism rules.

The proposal is a softer version of the original measure the Atlantic Coast Conference proposed, which would have set the day before the spring  National Letter of Intent  signing period in mid-April as the deadline. Council members, however, favored May 8 based on a recommendation from the NBA and the NBA Players’ Association. The NBA recently changed its policies to allow student-athletes to work out with individual teams in late April, after the deadline for submitting their names into the draft. Council members believe that new policy allows players to obtain relevant feedback on their potential draft status.

If the Board of Directors approves the change, the legislation would become effective August 1, 2009.

In another major action, the Council defeated Proposal No. 2008-48, which would have cut the maximum number of games on baseball from 56 to 52. The proposal was intended to reduce missed class time and refocus baseball student-athletes on academics, but opponents argued that the reforms the Board of Directors adopted as a result of the Baseball Academic Enhancement Working Group need a chance to work before further changes are made.

At the same time, the Council supported adding a week to the start of the season (Proposal No. 2008-46), thereby spreading the 56 games across 14 weeks of competition instead of the current 13. The proposal was approved by a slim margin, with Northern conferences generally opposed to the idea because their climate does not allow for earlier practice or home competition.

The Board balked at a discussion of extending the season several years ago, instead forming the Baseball Academic Enhancement Group, which devised a set of reforms intended to improve academic performance in the sport. The Board can re-examine any action taken by the Legislative Council. Earlier in this legislative cycle, it indicated a desire to see the results of the working group reforms before making any further changes to the sport.

In other business, the Council defeated a proposal regulating the number of nontraditional courses a student-athlete could take to fulfill full-time enrollment requirements. The proposal had earned Academic Cabinet support because it would have provided a meaningful balance between the use of nontraditional course and in-class experiences. Several Council members, however, expressed reservations that the proposal would be more restrictive to student-athletes and could infringe on institutional autonomy.

The Council also:

•         Approved Proposal No. 2008-75 as amended, which requires institutions to submit final high school transcripts for student-athletes certified as early qualifiers. The legislation also allows the Academic Cabinet to grant waivers based on objective criteria.

•         Approved a Subcommittee on Legislative Relief (SLR) proposal stipulating that in tennis, swimming and diving, and women’s volleyball, the maximum relief provided for international mandatory military service is to permit a student-athlete to regain season(s) of competition, not to exempt the academic year-in-residence requirement.

•         Supported a second SLR recommendation that would allow institutions to self-apply specific waiver requests that had been previously approved by SLR rather than submitting the request to the national office. Only certain types of waiver requests would be considered. For a list of waivers that would fit this recommendation, see the SLR report.