NCAA approves major scholarship changes

[ElonFirefighter]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/10/27/2726932/ncaa-approves-major-scholarship.html


NCAA approves major scholarship changes at meeting
By MICHAEL MAROT
AP Sports Writer
By MICHAEL MAROT
Posted: Thursday, Oct. 27, 2011
Modified: Thursday, Oct. 27, 2011 Slideshow
« Prev of 2Next »
NCAA President Mark Emmert, right, talks with Northwestern University President Emeritus Henry Bienen, left, and Knight Commission Co-Chairman Brit Kirwan, chancellor of the University of Maryland System, during the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics meeting in Washington, Monday Oct. 24, 2011.

NCAA President Mark Emmert speaks about policy changes being considered by the NCAA during the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics meeting in Washington, Monday Oct. 24, 2011.


INDIANAPOLIS The NCAA is giving college sports a whole new look.

On Thursday, the Division I Board of Directors approved a package of sweeping reforms that gives conferences the option of adding more money to scholarship offers, schools the opportunity to award scholarships for multiple years, imposes tougher academic standards on recruits and changes the summer basketball recruiting model.

It was one of the busiest board meetings in history, and it was all by design.

Just 2 1/2 months after NCAA President Mark Emmert told school leaders that they could not wait to clean up college sports, university presidents passed four landmark measures.

Conferences will now vote on whether to add $2,000 in spending money to scholarship offers. Previously, scholarships covered the costs of tuition, room and board, books and fees. But Emmert came out earlier this week in favor of increasing the allowable money, which the NCAA calls full cost-of-attendance.

BCS leagues are expected to quickly approve the changes, but it's unclear how many other conferences can afford it. All additional funding in men's sports would have to be matched equally in women's sports because of Title IX rules.

Individual schools also will have the option of awarding scholarships on a multiple-year basis or keeping the current model, which is done year-by-year. Critics contend the move is long overdue.

"The coach can cancel those (annual scholarships) for any reason, and the reason usually is they find a prettier girl to bring to the dance," said Ohio University professor David Ridpath, past president of The Drake Group, an NCAA watchdog. "If you're Frank Beamer or Nick Saban, they make a lot of money and they should be able to coach that kid up. I will tell you this from personal experience, it happens all the time. The way it's set up, the kids have no recourse. You just have to notify them by July 30th every year."

The board also decided to phase in the new Academic Progress Rate cutline over four years. In August, presidents approved increasing the cutline from the current 900 to 930. Schools that fail to meet the benchmark will be ineligible for postseason play.

On Thursday, the board approved a measure to use 900 starting in 2012-13. The cutline will increase to 930 in the fourth year. It also adopted a measure to include the rule in bowl licensing agreements, meaning it would apply to the 120-member Football Bowl Subdivision - the only sport the NCAA for which does not sanction a postseason tourney.

In addition, the board agreed to increase eligibility requirements for incoming freshmen and junior college transfers. Both groups needed a 2.0 GPA to be eligible. Now, high school grads will need to maintain a 2.3 GPA in the 16 core courses and take 10 of those core classes before their senior year. Junior college players will have to maintain a 2.5 GPA and the NCAA will limit the number of physical education credits that will count toward eligibility.

The board also adopted a new summer basketball recruiting model.

Under the new measure, coaches would get four evaluation days in April and 12 in July. Previously, April was a dead period and coaches had 20 evaluation days in July. Coaches also will be permitted more contact with their own players during the summer and will benefit by the elimination of a text messaging ban.

Jim Haney, executive director of the National Association of Basketball Coaches, said coaches support the changes.

"Oh yes, I think the feedback from our coaches has been very positive," he said. "I do see some challenges to evaluate in April, and it does reduce what can be done in July."



Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/10/27/2726932/ncaa-approves-major-scholarship.html#ixzz1c0lMal33

[BlueHenSinfonian]

Since there doesn't seem to be any mention of the rumored scholarship reductions does that mean that those are now off of the table, or were those part of a different vote?

Overall these seem to be positive moves.

Regarding the 'full cost of attendance' allowances, do they have to be approved and offered conference wide, or can individual schools decide if they want to offer beyond the basic tuition/room/board/books?

[eagle07]

930 APR may hurt a good many teams.... Anyone have any stats on the subject as to how many teams this would affect if it were currently enforced at 930?

[eagle07]

Since there doesn't seem to be any mention of the rumored scholarship reductions does that mean that those are now off of the table, or were those part of a different vote?

Overall these seem to be positive moves.

Regarding the 'full cost of attendance' allowances, do they have to be approved and offered conference wide, or can individual schools decide if they want to offer beyond the basic tuition/room/board/books?

Im confused here too.... if it has to be unanimous, i see alot of problems and friction in some of the mid-level conferences, but it may just be majority and once it is passed in the conference any team can decide or not decide to do it

[Hammerhead]

I'm guessing the $2000 spending money will need to be given to female athletes (if not all athletes) if's given to the football players.

[danefan]

I'm guessing the $2000 spending money will need to be given to female athletes (if not all athletes) if's given to the football players.

Yes

[BlueHenSinfonian]

I'm guessing the $2000 spending money will need to be given to female athletes (if not all athletes) if's given to the football players.

I'd be interested to see what the actual rules are. If a school offers it, do they have to offer it on all scholarships, or can they choose? Since schools can already split scholarships to offer different amounts to different athletes I'd imagine they'd have some control over which players were offered more than the standard scholarship amount.

For title IX purposes a school would probably have to either offer the extra money to a female athlete for each male athlete which receives it, or add an entire extra scholarship for one of the women's teams to balance out the spending.

Of course, split scholarships could also bring up questions. If two players receive a half scholarship each, does the $2,000 have to be split between them, or can each receive the full extra amount? If a team that fields 63 scholarships adds the $2,0000 for each player that's $126,000 in extra scholarship money. Would just offering an extra 4 women's scholarships (assuming tuition+board is $31,500 at this school to keep the math easy) satisfy title IX, or would 63 women's athletes need to be given an extra $2,000 each? Does title IX even specify that spending on men's and women's teams has to be equal in each category of spending (scholarship costs have to equal scholarship costs, coaching salaries have to equal coaching salaries, etc) or could a school just invest the $126,000 into facilities improvements for women's sports teams and call it even that way?

[apaladin]

930 APR may hurt a good many teams.... Anyone have any stats on the subject as to how many teams this would affect if it were currently enforced at 930?

For an example if the 930 rule had been in effect last year 3 teams would have missed last year's basketball tourney including UConn.

[bluehenbillk]

Anyone read the exemption the HBCU schools received? What's up with that?

[ValleyChamp]

Anyone read the exemption the HBCU schools received? What's up with that?

Smh...

[danefan]

Anyone read the exemption the HBCU schools received? What's up with that?

The entire SWAC and MEAC conferences (except Norfolk State) would have been under the 930 APR for football.

[The Eagle's Cliff]

Schools with money (most BCS) will benefit greatly from these rule changes while everyone else will suffer. Even the increased APR cutline is a burden to schools lacking the funds to provide the kind of academic support found at BCS schools.

The $2,000 is a joke for the Big Boys pulling in tens of millions and should only be allowed to athletes whose sports actually generate revenue. Football needs to be completely removed from the Title IX equation as there is no equivalent for women. Better yet, let's just say ALL collegiate sports are Co-Ed. If we're all equal, let's stop with the gender segregation.

[SoCon48]

Schools with money (most BCS) will benefit greatly from these rule changes while everyone else will suffer. Even the increased APR cutline is a burden to schools lacking the funds to provide the kind of academic support found at BCS schools.

The $2,000 is a joke for the Big Boys pulling in tens of millions and should only be allowed to athletes whose sports actually generate revenue. Football needs to be completely removed from the Title IX equation as there is no equivalent for women. Better yet, let's just say ALL collegiate sports are Co-Ed. If we're all equal, let's stop with the gender segregation.

I totally agree with your comment about the separation of the schools with big money compared to the rest of us. Many of the FCS schools are having a tough time even giving our allowed 63 scholarships. $2000 is a significant amount especially considering the necessity of matching the sum for the women's sports.

[bluehenbillk]

The entire SWAC and MEAC conferences (except Norfolk State) would have been under the 930 APR for football.

Cue Jimmy the Greek?

[344Johnson]

This is going to start ruining college athletics. Schools with more money already had a big advantage but now they will be able to give money out too? This is stupid.

[coover]

An exemption for the Historically Black Universities and Colleges? That should only be given if Black men and women are not as bright as others. We know that is not the case, and in fact, any exemption should be considered an insult to the black community.

i cannot believe that the NCAA would insult a large minority group by telling them that since they aren't as bright as others, they'd give them some help.

[WMTribe90]

This rule change will allow BCS schools to spend an extra $340,000/yr for football scholarships and matching funds for female athletes. This will only furhter the competitive gap between BCS and rest of FBS. Another example of a rule change with seemingly good intentions, but actually does more harm than good. As a former player I worked during the summer and saved money to spend on incidentals during the school year.

A better solution would have been for the NCAA to set-up some sort of hardship fund and allow individual student athletes to apply for the $2,000/yr in additional assistance. Or, allow each school to offer "harship assistance" to a certain number or percentage of their scholarship athletes. This would have solved the real problem, without widening the competitive chasm between have and have nots. Majority of players will spend these bribes on tatoos and beer, not food and gas.

Basically, the NCAA is saying poor athletes at money-rich FBS schools deserve/need extra assistance, but poor athletes at FCS or non-BCS schools can go without. If looking out for student athletes was the real goal, the NCAA would find a way to help all student athletes at all levels of competition for which these incidental costs represent a real obstacle/hardship. Instead, this is just more pandering to the influential BCS power conferences.

[danefan]

An exemption for the Historically Black Universities and Colleges? That should only be given if Black men and women are not as bright as others. We know that is not the case, and in fact, any exemption should be considered an insult to the black community.

i cannot believe that the NCAA would insult a large minority group by telling them that since they aren't as bright as others, they'd give them some help.

I guarantee the HBUs lobbied for this knowing almost all of them would be ineligible immediately if they didn't get an exemption.

[WestCoastAggie]

Anyone read the exemption the HBCU schools received? What's up with that?

They do not want to see an entire conference banned from post-season play?

[BlueHenSinfonian]

What is the exception being made for the HBCUs? I've read the articles and I can't seem to find mention of it anywhere, anyone have a link? In fact, this bit I found makes it seem like there won't be any differences in how the APR rules play out:


• Tied academic performance to postseason play. Beginning in 2012-13, teams must hit 900 on the Academic Progress Rate over four years or have an average of 930 over the two most recent years to be eligible for postseason play. In 2014-15, teams must have a four-year score of 930 or a 940 average in the two most recent years. In 2015-16, everybody has to hit 930, no exceptions. There will be waivers and appeals, though they will be kept to a minimum.

[danefan]

What is the exception being made for the HBCUs? I've read the articles and I can't seem to find mention of it anywhere, anyone have a link? In fact, this bit I found makes it seem like there won't be any differences in how the APR rules play out:

http://www.ncaa.com/news/ncaa/article/2011-10-27/di-board-adopts-package-proposals


The structure will allow for some adjustments for teams that improve once they enter the second level of penalties. The Board provided special allowances for historically black colleges and universities (HBCU) and low-resource schools and supported the creation of an HBCU advisory group to study academic performance of student-athletes at those institutions.

[AppStsGr8]

http://web1.ncaa.org/maps/aprRelease.jsp APR for all football

Notable teams not meeting 930 break:
Chattanooga
SC State
Georgia Southern
ODU
Bethune-Cookman
Jacksonville State

[Brad82]

This $2K is not mandatory -correct?
Schools have a choice?
The rich will just get richer.
Many schools will not or cannot afford to pay it?

[danefan]

This $2K is not mandatory -correct?
Schools have a choice?
The rich will just get richer.
Many schools will not or cannot afford to pay it?

Schools have a choice, but the NCAA is "recommending" conference uniformity.

[BlueHenSinfonian]

Schools have a choice, but the NCAA is "recommending" conference uniformity.

I wonder how this will play at the FCS level. My guess would be that the CAA, Big Sky, and probably the MVC offer it, while the OVC, MEAC, SWAC, Southland, NEC, and Big South abstain. It seems like the Ivy League and PFL would get a pass by virtue of being non scholarship. The Patriot League would end up in an interesting position - they probably couldn't (and wouldn't anyway) offer it with their current system of equivalences in football, but PL schools do offer scholarships in other sports - is basketball big enough at any of the PL schools that this could be an issue?

[danefan]

I wonder how this will play at the FCS level. My guess would be that the CAA, Big Sky, and probably the MVC offer it, while the OVC, MEAC, SWAC, Southland, NEC, and Big South abstain. It seems like the Ivy League and PFL would get a pass by virtue of being non scholarship. The Patriot League would end up in an interesting position - they probably couldn't (and wouldn't anyway) offer it with their current system of equivalences in football, but PL schools do offer scholarships in other sports - is basketball big enough at any of the PL schools that this could be an issue?

I'd be surprised if anyone at the FCS level offers it.

Not many schools outside the BCS have a three hundred grand a year just lying around.

[BlueHenSinfonian]

I'd be surprised if anyone at the FCS level offers it.

Not many schools outside the BCS have a three hundred grand a year just lying around.

According to the USA Today tables during the '09/'10 seasons here are some FCS school athletics budgets (all rounded to the nearest million):

Delaware - $32 million
JMU - $29 million
Old Dominion - $29 million
Towson - $20 million
UND - $18 million
Montana - $17 million
Georgia State - $17 million
App State - $16 million
Northern Iowa - $16 million
Montana State - $15 million
Albany - $15 million
NDSU - $14 million

We're talking about a 1 and 2 percent increase in total athletic spending to offer the extra $2,000 for all 63 football players plus and equal amount to women's athletes to balance out for title IX.

Being able to offer the extra money could give top level FCS teams an edge over non-BCS FBS teams when competing for recruits.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

So many numbers, ginned up to make it seem like big-time athletic departments care primarily about "disadvantaged players" and "academic standards".

It's really all about power, though. How to give some big-pocketed conferences special advantages, while letting everyone else to twist in the wind.

It seems to be the American Way these days.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

According to the USA Today tables during the '09/'10 seasons here are some FCS school athletics budgets (all rounded to the nearest million):

Delaware - $32 million
JMU - $29 million
Old Dominion - $29 million
Towson - $20 million
UND - $18 million
Montana - $17 million
Georgia State - $17 million
App State - $16 million
Northern Iowa - $16 million
Montana State - $15 million
Albany - $15 million
NDSU - $14 million

We're talking about a 1 and 2 percent increase in total athletic spending to offer the extra $2,000 for all 63 football players plus and equal amount to women's athletes to balance out for title IX.

Being able to offer the extra money could give top level FCS teams an edge over non-BCS FBS teams when competing for recruits.

To recap, spending an extra $1 million a year for the same basic athletes you'd have anyway. Must be nice, having a school that can print money like that.

[BlueHenSinfonian]

So many numbers, ginned up to make it seem like big-time athletic departments care primarily about "disadvantaged players" and "academic standards".

It's really all about power, though. How to give some big-pocketed conferences special advantages, while letting everyone else to twist in the wind.

It seems to be the American Way these days.

With regard to academic standards, while schools that can afford to pay for tutors and compliance specialists certainly have an edge, that doesn't excuse schools that can't recruiting and accepting players that they know won't be able to keep the grades up and graduate given the help they can offer.

The academic success of each student athlete needs to be paramount, and if that means that some schools need to pass over certain recruits because they can't offer the academic help that recruit might need, then so be it.

From what I've read in your posts as well as other articles the major hurdle the HBCUs seem to have regarding the APR is students leaving the school due to financial hardship, or financial hardship in their families. If that's the case, I agree, that shouldn't be held against the school. On the other hand, a school admitting students whose grades and academic history coming in are only borderline acceptable when that school knows it doesn't have the resources in place to give that student a fighting chance to succeed is reprehensible.

[BlueHenSinfonian]

To recap, spending an extra $1 million a year for the same basic athletes you'd have anyway. Must be nice, having a school that can print money like that.

Interesting how the numbers keep inflating. 63 x $1,000 is $126,000, double it for compliance and you're looking at $252,000 if a FCS team gives the extra money to every single scholarship player on the team. Let's go wild and say that a school offers the extra money to every basketball, baseball, ice hockey, and lacrosse player they can, and that's another $111,000, or $222,000 adjusted for compliance, so all in all still less than half a million, and most schools aren't going to go crazy like that because at most schools not all of those sports are a big enough deal to spend the extra money on.

Being able to offer the extra money could make the difference to a potential recruit trying to decide between playing for Delaware or Temple, or GA Southern vs. UAB. There are plenty of FBS schools in the non BCS conferences with attendance lower than the top level FCS teams, and with tighter budgets because of the extra scholarship expenses without the extra revenue. This could be a benefit for the right FCS programs.

[chattanoogamocs]

http://web1.ncaa.org/maps/aprRelease.jsp APR for all football

Notable teams not meeting 930 break:
Chattanooga
SC State
Georgia Southern
ODU
Bethune-Cookman
Jacksonville State

I am not worried...Chattanooga scored a near perfect 990 in the last reporting period. One more year of Huesman (and a drop year of Allison) and the Mocs will be in the upper tier of the SoCon in terms of football APR.

[The Eagle's Cliff]

With regard to academic standards, while schools that can afford to pay for tutors and compliance specialists certainly have an edge, that doesn't excuse schools that can't recruiting and accepting players that they know won't be able to keep the grades up and graduate given the help they can offer.

The academic success of each student athlete needs to be paramount, and if that means that some schools need to pass over certain recruits because they can't offer the academic help that recruit might need, then so be it.

From what I've read in your posts as well as other articles the major hurdle the HBCUs seem to have regarding the APR is students leaving the school due to financial hardship, or financial hardship in their families. If that's the case, I agree, that shouldn't be held against the school. On the other hand, a school admitting students whose grades and academic history coming in are only borderline acceptable when that school knows it doesn't have the resources in place to give that student a fighting chance to succeed is reprehensible.

APR is a really good idea, but Academic success depends upon more than just a student's attitude/ability. Public Schools in the South are not nearly as good as they are in the rest of the country. A lot of students arrive on campus at Southern schools, including HBCU's, unprepared for college and have to be "coached up" in the classroom more than on the field. These are students who did what was asked of them in high school. The socio-economic differences of the South and the rest of the country can't be understated.

[bluehenbillk]

I wonder how this will play at the FCS level. My guess would be that the CAA, Big Sky, and probably the MVC offer it, while the OVC, MEAC, SWAC, Southland, NEC, and Big South abstain. It seems like the Ivy League and PFL would get a pass by virtue of being non scholarship. The Patriot League would end up in an interesting position - they probably couldn't (and wouldn't anyway) offer it with their current system of equivalences in football, but PL schools do offer scholarships in other sports - is basketball big enough at any of the PL schools that this could be an issue?

CAA commissioner is already on record saying they will be doing it for men's & women's hoops but football is unlikely.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I've said it many times before, but I'll say it again: The "A" in Academic Progress Rate is simply window dressing.

The APR is all about RETENTION - keeping kids "in school".

"Resource-poor" schools have low retention rates because they take bigger-risk kids financially.

Now, the NCAA and/or the BC$ could do plenty about this by creating a huge fund to give $1,000 to every scholarship athlete in Division I. But instead, they're implementing a system that will allow some, extremely rich schools to do so, while leaving the "resource-poor" schools to fend for themsleves.

This dual announcement by the NCAA is so filled with hypocrisy it's sickening. It may as well have been drafted by the Big Ten office, perhaps by Delany himself.

[URMite]

CAA commissioner is already on record saying they will be doing it for men's & women's hoops but football is unlikely.

Really? I thought if a school offered it to any scholarship athlete than they had to offer it to ALL of them. That is why it can get expensive. How many total scholarships do most institutions offer? (x$2,000)

[URMite]

Schools have a choice, but the NCAA is "recommending" conference uniformity.

That's what I was wondering. If a conference decided to offer it would all schools in the conference be required to offer it.

The other point was if a school offers it to one of it's teams, do they have to offer it all of them?

[danefan]

That's what I was wondering. If a conference decided to offer it would all schools in the conference be required to offer it.

The other point was if a school offers it to one of it's teams, do they have to offer it all of them?

My understanding is that a school can mix and match by sport, but it must stay in compliance for Title IX.

The Title IX question I have in all of this is what happens when a schools decides to offer a kid a Multi-year scholarship and then that kid gets hurt. Does the school still need to include that amount in Title IX calc even though the kid isn't playing anymore (although he is on scholarship)?

[SoCon48]

To recap, spending an extra $1 million a year for the same basic athletes you'd have anyway. Must be nice, having a school that can print money like that.

The economy is in the tank and schools are suggesting millions more in expenditures for college athletics. Does anyone else see the irony in this?