Division I moves closer to new structure

Posted on 7/18/14 8:54 AM

As Division I moves closer to changing its governance structure, the Division I Steering Committee on Governance today released an updated governance model to the membership. The updated model and legislative proposal reflect the feedback from campuses and conferences that guided the committee's decisions.

The restructuring effort aims to preserve and improve the model of collegiate athletics that has helped millions of student-athletes gain access to higher education and pursue a degree. Most importantly, committee members said, the changes will allow the governance structure to more efficiently and effectively meet the needs of student-athletes.

"We will begin to focus on student-athlete welfare in ways they will feel as early as next year," said Michael Drake, president of The Ohio State University and steering committee member.

The final model represents the latest work of the steering committee and the membership as a whole. NCAA President Mark Emmert praised the membership for expending the effort and compromise required to build the new model.

"The Division I membership overall and the steering committee in particular worked hard to create a structure that will allow the division to operate more simply and inclusively," Emmert said. "It shows a clear commitment to support student-athletes and allow them not only a place at the table but a voice in the process."

The board will vote on the complete model Aug. 7. Between today and Aug. 7, the steering committee members will reach out to their presidential colleagues to discuss the new model and the committee's reasoning and process.

The final model establishes a 24-member Board of Directors charged with ensuring the division adheres to appropriate values and principles as well as overseeing the workings of the substructure. The change in board composition and membership is the result of the steering committee members carefully considering the input offered by the membership and believing that the final model represents the best compromise.

The steering committee increased the size of the Council to include two additional faculty athletics representatives. In the new model, the Council would be responsible for day-to-day operations of the division, assisted by a three-group substructure focused on academics, championships and legislation, respectively. Athletics directors would comprise the majority of the council, and two student-athletes will vote.

Autonomy saw some changes as well, including: a refinement of the list of items over which the five major conferences would have autonomy, codification of how items will move from shared governance to the autonomous area and definition of how the five major conferences will conduct business.

The steering committee agreed to allow the Atlantic Coast, Big Ten, Big 12 , Pacific 12 and Southeastern conferences until October 1 to put together their first proposals that would be considered and possibly adopted when the five conferences conduct a business session at the 2015 NCAA Convention.

The steering committee also provided more detail requested by the membership about the structure of the governance bodies reporting to the board and council.

The proposed governance redesign legislation will be subject to a 60-day override period. At least 75 schools must request an override to require the board to reconsider a rule change. If 125 schools request an override, the rule is suspended until the board meets to reconsider. If the board members decline to change their mind, the full division will vote on the change through an online system. At least a five-eighths majority must vote for an override for the rule to be rescinded.

The changes will be voted on as one package, not individually.

 

HIGHLIGHTS

Board composition

The 24 members would consist of:

The FCS and Division I conferences would determine the rotation of conferences with representation on the board.

 

Council operations

The increase in size would make the weighted voting totals on the Council:

 

Autonomy

 

Substructure