2011-12 POPL Review: Eligibility

The amateurism and recruiting proposals in this year’s legislative cycle had a clear overall move toward deregulation. But every year has a few ideas that are a little out there. It’s a combination of good “outside the box” thinking and throwing proposals out more to generate conversation than to actually be passed.

This year most of those proposals are in the eligibility category. There’s a recycling of an idea that comes up every few years (five seasons of competition) and a brand new proposal that potentially changes how we think about acceptable academics.

2011-62 – International Eligibility Form

Sponsor: Big East Conference

Intent: To eliminate the requirement that the eligibility of an international student-athlete shall be certified on an international student-athlete eligibility form.

Analysis: The General Eligibility Form for International and Select Student-Athletes is duplicative and a burden. The trouble is that international student-athletes are often instructed by their coaches on how to slip through the Eligibility Center without being checked. The international form is completed when a student-athlete arrives on campus, so the chances for deception are reduced. If the form goes away, the Eligibility Center needs to alter who is automatically cleared by the computer.

2011-63 – Graduate Student After Final Term

Sponsor: Pac-12 Conference

Intent: To specify that a student-athlete who is eligible during the term in which degree work is completed (or is eligible as a graduate) remains eligible for any postseason event that begins within 60 days after the end of the term in which the student completes the requirements for the degree (or graduate eligibility).

Analysis: This proposal is the codification of a waiver that was issued for 2010-11 that allows a student-athlete to compete after graduate not just in the NCAA Championships, NIT, or a bowl game, but in any postseason event. So this cover events like the College Basketball Invitational, or the Dad Vail Regatta. Makes sense to treat all postseason events equally.

2011-64 – Five Seasons of Football Eligibility

Sponsor: Colonial Athletic Association

Intent: In football, to specify that a student-athlete shall not engage in more than five seasons of intercollegiate competition and may only engage in a fifth season at an institution at which the student-athlete previously used a season of competition.

Analysis: Originally thought to be an FCS-only proposal, FBS will vote on five years of eligibility for football players. I see three major issues that need to be sorted out before this proposal is passed:

1. If the proposal no longer applies to just FCS, why is there still the transfer restriction (i.e. that a student-athlete cannot transfer to use his fifth year of eligibility)? Especially given that restrictions on transfers in the last year of eligibility for student-athletes who graduate were recently loosened.
2. What happens when a coach has committed and/or signed a class, and suddenly in January or April his seniors all have another year of eligibility? It’s the oversigning problem to end all oversigning problems.
3. Is it not a major Title IX issue to allow one group of male athletes to play five seasons, but to allow all female athletes to play only four?

I also suspect that this proposal will not stay football only. Some major conference will offer an alternative to include men’s basketball, while a smaller conference may offer another alternate covering all sports.

2011-65 – Year of Academic Readiness

Sponsor: NCAA Division I Academic Cabinet

Intent: To establish a year of academic readiness for two-year college transfers, as specified.

Analysis: This proposal basically allows nonqualifiers to enroll for a year at a junior college, practice, and receive financial aid, but not use a year on their five-year clock if they don’t compete. To qualify they have to stay longer at the junior college (five semesters instead of three) and may only play two seasons in any sport once they show up at a Division I school. The move makes sense, but it also presents the first major threat to the five-year clock. That clock is the most important rule in Division I, and if exceptions swallow it, it would change the face of Division I.

2011-65 – Softball – Minimum Amount of Competition

Sponsor: Big 12 Conference

Intent: In softball, to permit a student-athlete to compete in an institution’s non-championship segment without using a season of competition, as specified.

Analysis: In fall sports like soccer or volleyball, a student-athlete can compete during the spring exhibition season without using a season of competition. The Big 12 is seeking to flip that rule for softball, a spring sport. It will allow for extended tryouts that include exhibition games. But if an athlete is put through such a tryout and is cut, it makes sense to not charge with a whole season of competition. Big question: how long until baseball asks for the same exception?

2011-67 – Advanced Placement – International Certification

Sponsor: West Coast Conference

Intent: To specify that for purposes of fulfilling the advanced placement requirements for initial eligibility, “similar proficiency examination,” must be an advanced or higher level, nationally administered proficiency exam with a uniform grading scale that is taken after high school graduation; further, to specify that an institution shall use the NCAA Eligibility Center to determine the initial eligibility of an international student-athlete pursuant to the advanced placement criteria.

Analysis: There is a little-known rule that says if a university awards a student-athlete a full-year of advanced placement credit, they do not have to go through the Eligibility Center’s academic certification. So for international students from exam-based educational systems, you simply must be willing to award a full-year of credit and you can skip half of the certification process. This sets standards for what exams count, and requires the credentials for those exams to pass through the Eligibility Center.

2011-68 – Football Nine-Hour Rule – Exception for Team Academic Performance

Sponsor: Big East Conference

Intent: In football, to specify that a student-athlete shall not be subject to the eligibility penalty for failure to successfully complete at least nine-semester hours or eight-quarter hours of academic credit during the fall term and earn the Academic Progress Rate eligibility point for the fall term, provided the institution’s Academic Progress Rate for football is 965 or higher as of the first day of classes of the fall term in which the penalty would otherwise apply.

Analysis: This proposal is the example of what appears to be a simple and logical exception but which asks a fundamental question. What should be the standard that schools are held to when it comes to educating their student-athletes? Should they be judged on their ability to generally educate student-athletes? Or should they (and the student-athletes) be held accountable for the academic performance of each student-athlete?

The other trouble with this proposal is the delay. If a school knows it will miss some student-athletes for the first four games, it has a whole term to manipulate the APR if it is close enough to earn a 965 multi-year rate.

2011-69 – 2-4 and 4-2-4 Transfer Requirements

Sponsor: NCAA Division I Academic Cabinet

Intent: To revise the two-year college and 4-2-4 college transfer requirements, as specified.

Analysis: This proposal has been in the works before the Presidential Retreat, but it was one piece of the reform that the presidents suggested. It would raise the required GPA to 2.500, and add a physical science credit requirement. And the research suggests the proposal is still a little generous. To predict a graduation rate equal to student-athletes who never enroll at a two-year college, you need a GPA even higher than 2.500.

2011-70 – Progress Toward Degree Waivers Committee

Sponsor: NCAA Division I Academic Cabinet

Intent: To increase, from eight to 14, the number of members of the NCAA Division I Progress- Toward-Degree Waivers Committee; further, to specify that the duties of the Progress-Toward- Degree Waivers Committee shall include oversight of the process for reviewing requests for waivers of the 2-4 and 4-2-4 transfer requirements.

Analysis: 2-4 and 4-2-4 transfer waivers are currently heard like all transfer waivers, by the waiver staff and the Subcommittee for Legislative Relief. But the waivers are almost always related to academics. This proposal puts those waivers in the hands of a committee who specializes in academic requirements and expands that committee to handle the load.

2011-71 – One-Time Transfer Exception – Women’s Ice Hockey

Sponsor: Big Ten Conference

Intent: To specify that the one-time transfer exception to the four-year transfer residence requirement shall not be applicable to student-athletes in women’s ice hockey.

Analysis: Along with football, basketball, and baseball, men’s ice hockey may not use the one-time transfer exception. This would add women’s ice hockey to the list as well. Women’s ice hockey is the first sport possibly added to the list since volleyball coaches requested they be added a couple years ago, an effort that failed. The same hurdle exists here: if rising transfer rates are the justification for eliminating the exception, why have the one-time transfer exception for any sport?

2011-72 – Outside Competition – USA Fencing National Championship

Sponsor: The Ivy League

Intent: In fencing, to specify that a student-athlete may compete during the academic year as a member of a USA Fencing member club team at the USA Fencing National Championships.

Analysis: Competing in national and international championships is a standard exception of the prohibition on outside competition. USA Fencing moved their championship from July to April, so it makes sense to establish an exception for fencers to participate.

The opinions expressed on this blog are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by the NCAA or any NCAA member institution or conference. This blog is not a substitute for a compliance office.