NCAA Working Group on the Collegiate Model – Rules Overview March 2012

Introduction August 2011 – Presidential Retreat.  Recognition that current regulatory culture and structure needs to change. Charge.  Reduce the number of unenforceable or inconsequential rules that do not support the NCAA’s enduring values; and modify the rules to emphasize the most strategically important matters. 2

Components of New Regulatory Model Redefine competitive equity. Rules must support values. Fewer regulations. More reliance on local decisions when appropriate. Appropriate penalty structure. 3

Three Key Areas Institutional Commitments. Operating Bylaws. Issues Related to Structure/Process. 4

Institutional Commitments Currently entitled “NCAA Constitution, Article 2 – Principles for Conduct of Intercollegiate Athletics.” Describes 16 different principles “to which the members are committed.” Designed to articulate the priorities at the highest level and set the overall direction for the Association. Intentionally broad, as implementing detail is provided in supporting and specific bylaws. All bylaws in the manual, and all future legislation, should advance one or more of these provisions. 5

Institutional Commitments Recommended changes are designed to:  More accurately capture the fundamental principles of the Collegiate Model;  Update arguably obsolete language; and  Streamline and simplify provisions in Constitution 2. *Not all constitutional principles are being reviewed by this group but remain very important (e.g., diversity, gender equity, fiscal management). 6

Institutional Commitments Discussion points include the following:  Are there additional commitments that should be included in the NCAA Constitution?  Should these commitments be reworded to be more specific or less specific?  Are these commitments understandable and consistent with the collegiate model?  Are any of these commitments unique to NCAA Division I, or are they all Association-wide? 7

Operating Bylaws Intended to regulate day-to-day activities. Should have a nexus to institutional commitments. Phase I – Part I review consists of NCAA Division I Bylaws 11 (personnel), 13 (recruiting) and 16 (awards and benefits). Phase I – Part 2 review consists of Bylaws 12 (amateurism) and 14 (eligibility). Phase II review consists of Bylaws 15 (financial aid) and 17 (playing seasons). 8

Operating Bylaws Discussion points include the following:  Is the bylaw meaningful and of consequence?  Is it an issue that merits a national regulation or can it simply be addressed by institutions or conferences?  Does it support one or more commitments?  Is the rule necessary?  Is the bylaw enforceable?  Does the rule present significant challenges either in monitoring compliance or proving violations?  Does the bylaw further student-athlete success?  Academic and/or athletics success.  What challenges may arise as a result of the change? 9

Operating Bylaws Nexus to Commitments Bylaw 11 (Personnel) Example NCAA Commitment.  2.5 Commitment to Institutional Control and Compliance. Operating Bylaw Concept – Bylaw 11 (Personnel).  Member institutions, as opposed to outside persons or entities, shall be responsible for determining who they employ and the amount of salary each employee receives, consistent with Association bylaws and subject to institutional policies and procedures. 10

Operating Bylaws Nexus to Commitments Bylaw 13 (Recruiting) Example NCAA Commitment.  2.8 Commitment to Responsible Recruiting Standards. Operating Bylaw Concept – Bylaw 13 (Recruiting).  Eliminate restrictions governing modes and restrictions (numerical limitations) on recruiting communication and, establish regulations that provide for earlier access (specific initial dates for communication and contact) with prospective student-athletes. 11

Operating Bylaws Nexus to Commitments Bylaw 16 (Awards and Benefits) Example NCAA Commitment.  2.6 Commitment to Student-Athlete Well-Being. Operating Bylaw Concept – Bylaw 16 (Awards and Benefits).  Permit an institution to provide academic counseling and support services that are determined reasonable and appropriate for the success of the student-athletes. 12

Structure and Process Expected changes to regulatory environment. New rules (bylaws) must have nexus to commitment. Impact on interpretations.  Greater responsibility at institution and conference level. Impact on other regulatory work.  NCAA Division I Institutional Performance Program, student-athlete reinstatement, etc. Collaboration with NCAA Working Group on Collegiate Model – Enforcement is ongoing and critical.  Bylaws should align with Enforcement Working Group outcomes. 13

Next Steps and Timing April 2012 NCAA Division I Board of Directors meeting.  Progress report, review institutional commitments and review membership feedback. Outreach – Membership feedback.  Spring and summer conference meetings.  Other outreach efforts. October 2012 or January 2013 Board meeting.  Legislative recommendations considered. Immediate action is unlikely.  NCAA Working Group on Collegiate Model - Rules would recommend comment window for such recommendation. 14

Additional Resources NCAA Staff. NCAA Website. 