PDA

View Full Version : NCAA Division III -passes all 9 Proposals



norm1909
01-20-2010, 01:53 PM
Division III voting results (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/ncaa+news/ncaa+news+online/2010/division+iii/division+iii+voting+results)


Proposal No. 1: To specify in the Division III philosophy statement the expectation for presidential leadership and authority over intercollegiate athletics at the campus, conference and national governance levels. Effective date: August 1, 2010. Adopted by roll-call vote (466-0-0).

Proposal No. 2: To specify that a transfer student who meets the requirements of the two-year nonparticipation exception shall be immediately eligible on transfer to the certifying institution, even if the student was disqualified or suspended from the previous institution for disciplinary reasons. Effective date: August 1, 2010. Adopted.

Proposal No. 3: To deregulate and reformat the tryout legislation to specify that a tryout in which prospective student-athletes demonstrate their athletics abilities at a coach’s direction, tryout events and varsity competition against high school or preparatory school teams are impermissible; further, to specify that other physical related activities involving prospects that are not specifically prohibited shall be permissible. Effective date: Immediate. Adopted (motion to divide failed).

Proposal No. 4: To permit an institution’s coaching staff member to observe recreational activities of prospective student-athletes and nonorganized sport-specific activities of currently enrolled student-athletes, provided the coach observes these activities while monitoring an institutional facility for purposes of safety and facility security as part of normal employment duties and the facility is not restricted to specific users at the time. Effective date: Immediate. Adopted.

Proposal No. 5: To specify that all practice and competition conducted in the nontraditional segment (fall or spring) shall be completed no later than five weekdays before the first day of the institution’s final examination period. Effective date: August 1, 2010. Adopted (motion to divide failed).

Proposal No. 6: In football, to specify that an institution may conduct one one-hour walkthrough session per day during the preseason acclimatization period, provided protective equipment such as a helmet or shoulder pads is not worn, equipment related to football such as a football or blocking sled is not used, and conditioning activities do not occur. Further, to specify that student-athletes must be provided with at least three hours of continuous recovery time between the end of the on-field practice session and the start of the walk-through session. Effective date: August 1, 2010. Adopted.

Proposal No. 7: To specify that a student-athlete’s eligibility for a hardship waiver should be determined by a percent calculation using the maximum permissible number of contests or dates of competition for the applicable sport, plus one contest or date of competition. Effective date: August 1, 2010. Adopted.

Proposal No. 8: To permit a student-athlete to participate in one date of competition and an alumni contest during the nontraditional segment without using a season of participation. Effective date: August 1, 2010. Adopted.

Proposal No. 9: To permit institutions to conduct the exempted alumni contest at any time during the playing season, including before the first permissible contest date. Effective date: August 1, 2010. Approved.

norm1909
01-20-2010, 05:58 PM
I didn't want to start a new thread, but there appears to be a "2010 Men's Ice Hockey Survey from NCAA and USCHO.com (http://www.prsurvey.com/PotentialMIH)" being e-mailed on behalf the USCHO, I for one refused to answer "The name of the NCAA Men's Ice Hockey Championship" as the "Frozen Four", because as a DIII hockey fan, that is NOT the name.

NUProf
01-20-2010, 06:53 PM
I didn't want to start a new thread, but there appears to be a "2010 Men's Ice Hockey Survey from NCAA and USCHO.com (http://www.prsurvey.com/PotentialMIH)" being e-mailed on behalf the USCHO, I for one refused to answer "The name of the NCAA Men's Ice Hockey Championship" as the "Frozen Four", because as a DIII hockey fan, that is NOT the name.

I got the same email. Where they had spaces for comments I said "what about DIII"?

Matthew Webb
01-21-2010, 07:30 AM
Proposal No. 4: To permit an institution’s coaching staff member to observe recreational activities of prospective student-athletes and nonorganized sport-specific activities of currently enrolled student-athletes, provided the coach observes these activities while monitoring an institutional facility for purposes of safety and facility security as part of normal employment duties and the facility is not restricted to specific users at the time. Effective date: Immediate. Adopted.

So, if one were to think creatively, we can assume this permits the application of frosting on the cinnamon buns that are already on top of the pink bunnies?

So long as it's for safety, of course...

NUProf
01-21-2010, 09:53 AM
So, if one were to think creatively, we can assume this permits the application of frosting on the cinnamon buns that are already on top of the pink bunnies?

So long as it's for safety, of course...

That's what I was thinking - of course, the hockey frosting can only be applied at schools that own their facilities, unless, of course, the rented facilities hire the coaches to part time jobs watching the ice (So long as it's for safety, of course...)

Dyce
01-21-2010, 01:13 PM
If I know my friend in the baseball program at Plattsburgh, Proposals 8 and 9 will have him prepping his arm to embarrass his players each fall :)

norm1909
01-22-2010, 06:21 AM
More from the NCAA: (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/ncaa+news/ncaa+news+online/2010/division+iii/academic+reporting+gets+a+look+in+diii)


"The Division III Presidents Council recently approved a two-year pilot program to collect data from volunteering institutions for use in exploring the possibility of calculating graduation and academic-success rates for student-athletes."


"Debra Townsley said Nichols College will participate in the pilot program to learn from it, but “our participation doesn’t mean we agree” that Division III should collect academic data."

norm1909
02-13-2010, 09:14 AM
2010 NCAA Convention Division III Legislative Proposals (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/21c8d2004082b31ca3cabb62921c9519/QA+Document_2010+NCAA+Convention_2nd+edition.pdf?M OD=AJPERES&CACHEID=21c8d2004082b31ca3cabb62921c9519)

This "Question and Answer Guide" provides the most in depth clarification/descriptions I have seen on the passed proposals. IMO, particularly proposal 7 "ELIGIBILITY -- SEASONS OF PARTICIPATION -- HARDSHIP WAIVER – PERCENT CALCULATION."

Also of potential interest: “Follow your passions and discover your potential (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/ncaa+news/ncaa+news+online/2010/division+iii/platform+launch+highlights+diii+forum).”

The Presidents Council’s incoming chair, Jim Harris of Widener University, pledged resources to help in that work, noting that the lion’s share of a proposed $1.2 million expenditure for platform activation will go directly to campuses in the form of $1,000 annual allocations to purchase materials. Division III also will allocate $100,000 annually to national activation of the platform.

This too: Student-athlete fund-raising prompts debate (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/ncaa+news/ncaa+news+online/2010/division+iii/student-athlete+fund-raising+prompts+debate)

The committee’s proposal makes distinctions between types of activities that would and would not be permitted. It supported earmarking funds raised by a student-athlete from “volunteering or working a fund-raising activity,” listing examples such as working concessions or ticket booths or serving as an usher at an athletics event. It also specified activities for which earmarking would be prohibited, including selling goods, writing letters soliciting donations or participating in events featuring athletic ability.

The Council, however, could not reach a consensus on the basic question of whether it is philosophically appropriate to earmark fund-raising proceeds for individual student-athletes.

Current legislation prohibits earmarking fund-raising proceeds for individual student-athletes, except for donations from family members. Many Council members think that remains the simplest way to treat fund-raising.

Members agreed, however, they would benefit from membership feedback given the increasing importance of fund-raising activities in a challenging economic climate. They will seek input this week in such forums as conference meetings, the Division III Commissioners Association meeting and a joint breakfast involving members of the Division III Presidents Council, Management Council and Student-Athlete Advisory Committee.

Note on above: DIII student-athlete fund-raising rule remains unchanged (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/ncaa+news/ncaa+news+online/2010/division+iii/diii+student-athlete+fund-raising+rule+remains+unchanged+-+ncaa+news+01-22-10)

Member conferences that support a change in the rule could propose legislation for consideration at the 2011 Convention in San Antonio, Texas.

Changing topics from the proposals, there is this:
Academic reporting gets a look in DIII (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/ncaa+news/ncaa+news+online/2010/division+iii/academic+reporting+gets+a+look+in+diii)

The panel also included two university leaders, including a college president who doubts the value of compiling student-athlete academic data beyond campuses. Debra Townsley said Nichols College will participate in the pilot program to learn from it, but “our participation doesn’t mean we agree” that Division III should collect academic data.