DI Membership Standards

[FargoBison]

The Division I Leadership Council will put the finishing touches on its recommendations for Division I membership standards at its Thursday (Jan 14) meeting at the NCAA Convention in Atlanta.

The DI moratorium lasts until August 2011, and the Leadership Council hopes to sponsor appropriate legislative changes from its recommendations in the 2010-11 legislative cycle.

The Council’s recommendations include:

1. A five-year “reclassification” process for new members following no less than five years of membership in Division II.

2. New members must have a bona fide offer of membership from a multisport, voting Division I conference.

3. An application fee, the nature of which has yet to be determined.

4. A requirement to meet Division I sport-sponsorship and financial aid requirements upon beginning the reclassification process.

5. A stipulation that institutions subject to historically based Academic Progress Rate penalties will not be elected to active membership.

6. A policy that new active members of Division I should not qualify to receive revenue distributions related to sport sponsorship, grants-in-aid, academic enhancement or Special Assistance/Student-Athlete Opportunity Funds for three calendar years after election to membership.

7. After the 2010-11 academic year, a discontinuation of the multidivisional practice that permits Divisions II or III institutions to designate one men’s and one women’s sport in Division I, except in sports that do not have a Division II championship. Institutions that currently “play up” could continue to do so, but would forfeit the opportunity permanently if the school failed to conduct the sport in Division I in any ensuing academic year.

8. Eliminate the designations of “core” and “continuity” for Division I institutions and create a more meaningful definition of a multisport conference, including a minimum number of active members, minimum sport sponsorship, officiating and compliance program rules.

9. Administration Cabinet recommendation of active membership to the Board of Directors instead of the Leadership Council.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaah...news+-+1-11-01

[DSUrocks07]

The Division I Leadership Council will put the finishing touches on its recommendations for Division I membership standards at its Thursday (Jan 14) meeting at the NCAA Convention in Atlanta.

The DI moratorium lasts until August 2011, and the Leadership Council hopes to sponsor appropriate legislative changes from its recommendations in the 2010-11 legislative cycle.

The Council’s recommendations include:

1. A five-year “reclassification” process for new members following no less than five years of membership in Division II.

2. New members must have a bona fide offer of membership from a multisport, voting Division I conference.

3. An application fee, the nature of which has yet to be determined.

4. A requirement to meet Division I sport-sponsorship and financial aid requirements upon beginning the reclassification process.

5. A stipulation that institutions subject to historically based Academic Progress Rate penalties will not be elected to active membership.

6. A policy that new active members of Division I should not qualify to receive revenue distributions related to sport sponsorship, grants-in-aid, academic enhancement or Special Assistance/Student-Athlete Opportunity Funds for three calendar years after election to membership.

7. After the 2010-11 academic year, a discontinuation of the multidivisional practice that permits Divisions II or III institutions to designate one men’s and one women’s sport in Division I, except in sports that do not have a Division II championship. Institutions that currently “play up” could continue to do so, but would forfeit the opportunity permanently if the school failed to conduct the sport in Division I in any ensuing academic year.

8. Eliminate the designations of “core” and “continuity” for Division I institutions and create a more meaningful definition of a multisport conference, including a minimum number of active members, minimum sport sponsorship, officiating and compliance program rules.

9. Administration Cabinet recommendation of active membership to the Board of Directors instead of the Leadership Council.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaah...news+-+1-11-01

This one is the most interesting in my eyes. xreadx

[onbison09]

2 would've kept us out.

[TexasTerror]

#2 will probably keep the GREAT WEST CONFERENCE around a bit longer, since schools will look to that league to help them out and there will probably be several schools moving out of there as the dominoes fall...

[GannonFan]

This one is the most interesting in my eyes. xreadx


Why is that interesting? The way it reads means that anyone doing it now could continue to do it as long as they do it continually. So a Johns Hopkins can keep playing DI lacrosse, forever, as long as they continue to do so. All the while playing DIII everything else.

[TexasTerror]

Just wanted to 'bump' this subject up since there is more and more membership related talk bouncing around the forums...

[chrisattsu]

These new rules make me less interested in seeing Tarleton go Division I. I expressed this in the other thread. I can't see any of the National Competitive teams (IE- the ones you want) from the LSC moving to the Southland with all of these hurdles in front of them.

[DSUrocks07]

Why is that interesting? The way it reads means that anyone doing it now could continue to do it as long as they do it continually. So a Johns Hopkins can keep playing DI lacrosse, forever, as long as they continue to do so. All the while playing DIII everything else.

Its interesting because it would take the option off the table of dropping to a lower division to save money, then returning...the new rules won't allow that.

[Syntax Error]

The Leadership Council completed its work on the development of new membership standards for aspiring members of Division I. The Council will present a formal report of its recommendations to the Board of Directors in April and make the report available for conferences to review during their 2010 spring meetings. Appropriate legislative proposals will be developed for Board sponsorship and consideration in the 2010-11 legislative cycle.http://web1.ncaa.org/web_files/DI_MC_BOD/DI_BOD/2010/January/Board_report_combined.pdf

[TexasTerror]

Its interesting because it would take the option off the table of dropping to a lower division to save money, then returning...the new rules won't allow that.

Only for schools that have a sport at a different level (i.e. John Hopkins, LeMoyne, Dallas Baptist)...

If the athletic department as a whole went from sub-Div I to Div I, they could do it.

[DSUrocks07]

Only for schools that have a sport at a different level (i.e. John Hopkins, LeMoyne, Dallas Baptist)...

If the athletic department as a whole went from sub-Div I to Div I, they could do it.

The sheer costs of such a move would severely handicap any potential decision by an institution. Say if John Hopkins (for example), were to undergo financial difficulties (unlikely), and decided to drop their lacrosse program down to D-II to save money (very unlikely), they wouldn't be able to return to D-I status unless they move their ENTIRE athletic department up to D-I in all sports sponsored (VERY unlikely). That's how I read it.

[TexasTerror]

The official legislation that will be voted on this January has been formally introduced...


* A requirement that all new Division I members first spend at least five years as active members in Division II.
* New Division I members must have a bona fide offer of membership from a Division I multisport voting conference.
* A four-year reclassification process would be created for new members.
* An application fee would be established commensurate with the estimated annual average value of direct benefits of Division I membership through distributions and championships (approximately $1.3 million currently).
* No school subject to a historically based penalty under the Academic Performance Program would be elected to active membership.
* Preliminary certification would be required in the first year of reclassification, and a full compliance review would be required before election to active membership.
* New members would be eligible for revenue distributions related to sport sponsorship and grants-in-aid after three years as an active member. Institutions would qualify immediately for Student-Athlete Opportunity, Special Assistance and Academic Enhancement Funds, as well as basketball grant funds as determined by its conference.
* The practice of allowing schools to sponsor a single sport in a different division would be eliminated, except in sports where no championship is conducted in its division. Divisions II and III schools currently taking advantage of this opportunity would not affected unless they fail to conduct the sport in Division I for any ensuing year.
* The Administration Cabinet would be responsible for review of the reclassification process and appropriate benchmarks.
* The Board would vote to elect institutions to active membership (not the Leadership Council).


http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/resources/latest+news/2010+news+stories/august+latest+news/board+sponsors+legislation+for+new+di+membership+s tandards?&utm_source=delivra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NCAA%20News%20Direct

[darell1976]

A requirement that all new Division I members first spend at least five years as active members in Division II.

I am not aware of an NAIA team or a D-III team jumping to D-I without going to D2 first.xconfusedx

[dakotadan]

We have a couple of them right within the Great West Conference.

Utah Valley University went straight from a junior college playing in the NJCAA to DI.

Granted they had been DI until the mid-80s, Houston Baptist is making the transition back to DI straight from the NAIA.

Not completely sure about UT Pan American but they had been NAIA. I can't find if they moved to DII before moving up to DI or not.

And considering the number of schools that have moved to DI in the last 20 or so years, I would assume there have been others.

[Cocky]

No mention of FCS to FBS?

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Why is that interesting? The way it reads means that anyone doing it now could continue to do it as long as they do it continually. So a Johns Hopkins can keep playing DI lacrosse, forever, as long as they continue to do so. All the while playing DIII everything else.

Correct, there's a grandfather clause in it, so RPI can continue playing hockey, JHU can continue playing lacrosse, etc. And RPI and JHU will not stop fielding those teams anytime soon, unless Division III decides that it will force them to bring all their sports to D-III.

Somewhere down the line I think this will come to a head. You can't tell me that JHU's D-I Lacrosse program and RPI's hockey program aren't huge advantages in recruiting at the D-III level, a la Dayton. Lacrosse and Hockey are becoming big-money sports. But - for now, anyway - it's the status quo.

If for some reason RPI and JHU were forced to go D-I, the Patriot League would be their logical home.

[TexasTerror]

Found it in the supplemental additions to the Div I Board of Director info from the Aug. 12 meeting...


This comes straight out of the legislation that the NCAA is going to be placing into the 2010-11 legislative cycle....

20.4.2 Football Subdivision Reclassification Options.

A member of Division I may petition to be classified in football in the Bowl Subdivision or the NCAA Championship Subdivision.


20.4.2.1.1 Reclassification from Football Championship Subdivision to Football Bowl Subdivision -- Notification Requirement.

The chancellor or president from a Football Championship Subdivision institution that intends to petition for reclassification to the Football Bowl Subdivision, per Bylaw 20.4.2, shall submit to the NCAA president written notice of the institution's intention to reclassify. The notice shall be received in the national office (by mail or electronic transmission) not later than June 1 two years prior to the September 1 when the institution intends to reclassify to the Football Bowl Subdivision. Before a Football Championship Subdivision institution may be reclassified to the Football Bowl Subdivision, the institution must receive a bona fide invitation for membership in a Football Bowl Subdivision conference.

20.4.2.2 Compliance with Criteria.

If the member has met all applicable division membership criteria of this article (other than scheduling requirements during the first year of reclassification) and has complied for the two years preceding June 1 with all other bylaw requirements as they pertain to the Football Bowl Subdivision, the member shall be eligible for participation in the Football Bowl Subdivision effective the August 1 that the institution selects as its effective date.

http://web1.ncaa.org/web_files/DI_MC_BOD/Presidential_Advisory_Group/2010/August/PAG_August_2010_Combined.pdf

[Bogus Megapardus]

If for some reason RPI and JHU were forced to go D-I . . . .

The way I read it Division III RPI and Hopkins would have to spent 5 years in Division II before moving up. I have to wonder if the single-sport Division I ties of those two schools would obviate the Division II purgatory requirement.