Recruiting, Blanket Aid Waiver, Summer Benefits and more
Athletics Veritas is a weekly series aimed at helping higher education executives, faculty, and other stakeholders stay tuned in on trending national issues impacting college athletics, especially NCAA Division I. Athletics Veritas is created by senior DI athletic administrators around the nation.
Preview of this Week’s Highly Anticipated NCAA Division I Council Meeting
Executive Summary
The Council is expected to make a decision this week to reopen recruiting June 1
The SEC has asked the Council to consider extending for one more year the current COVID-19-influenced blanket waiver exempting athletics aid for student-athletes exhausting their eligibility at the same institutions in which they’ve been enrolled
The Council will consider approving a blanket waiver to allow Division I institutions to provide benefits and expenses to basketball and football student-athletes during the summer without requiring summer school enrollment
Additional football recruiting concepts for the remainder of 2021 could be greenlighted this week
The NCAA National Office may receive approval from the Council this week to identify a third-party administrator to manage NIL activity disclosures
The NCAA Division I governance structure has been in a meeting frenzy since the onset of COVID-19, and although many significant decisions have been reached the past 12 months, this week’s Division I Council meeting is particularly noteworthy for key policy decisions that have been in the on-deck circle for months. AV highlights several of the headlining topics on Council's agenda, with none bigger than the resumption of in-person recruiting.
1. Lifting the Temporary Dead Period so Division I Coaches May Return to Recruiting
The most popular question heard across Division I athletics departments and particularly from coaches in recent months: “When is the NCAA lifting the recruiting dead period?”
This week we should find out. The Council is poised to take action to officially lift the temporary recruiting dead period with an effective date of Tuesday, June 1, 2021. The one question in the balance is what the Council will exactly approve for this summer recruiting-wise.
There’s acknowledgement from the Division I governance structure that there will be differences in what institutions are able to do based on campus, local and state requirements; however, the focus may steer toward the national perspective and the impact on student‐athletes, prospects and coaches. The NCAA Division I Student‐Athlete Experience Committee has developed models for a return to in‐person recruiting activities after the temporary recruiting dead period is set to expire on May 31.
The committee is focused on two return-to-recruiting models for sports other than basketball and football. The first model would permit sports other than basketball and football to return to sport‐specific calendars June 1 -- in essence back to normal summer recruiting. The second model under consideration would create a blanket quiet period from June 1 through July 31 for sports other than basketball and football, after which these sports can return to sport‐specific recruiting calendars. Under this second model, some sports would “gain” quiet period days in June or July (that would allow on-campus recruiting contacts, camps and clinics) because their current recruiting calendar for June and July includes dead period days that would be most restrictive.
On the flip side, the blanket quiet period for June and July would neutralize some sports’ off-campus evaluation and contact periods currently in their recruiting calendars. The coaches associations’ coalition representing soccer, volleyball, baseball, tennis, rifle, golf, field hockey, ice hockey, water polo and softball prefers a return to an evaluation period as soon as possible (therefore favoring the first model).
For this summer, the Council is also considering temporarily permitting on-campus evaluations, which are functionally direct tryouts of prospects on campus -- an activity that is normally prohibited in all sports except basketball. The reasoning for this possible action is to provide expanded opportunities to evaluate prospects on-campus while mitigating a coach’s need to travel and engage in non-institutional camps. Concurrently, the Council will also be assessing whether it needs to apply additional restrictions specific to camp activity this summer, such as restricting employment of Division I coaches at non-institutional camps.
In terms of football, men’s basketball, and women’s basketball, each of their respective Division I oversight committees endorse a return to their normal recruiting calendars on June 1. The anticipated decisions of the Council on reopening recruiting will also be informed by the latest medical guidance regarding vaccination rates and any impacts of the virus variants.
2. Summer Benefits for Football & Basketball Student-Athletes
The Council will consider a recommendation to approve a blanket waiver of Bylaw 16 benefits and expenses legislation to allow additional flexibility to provide football and basketball student-athletes with funds up to the amount that would have been received through summer athletics financial aid to cover meals, lodging and expenses (other than tuition/fees and books) through a summer athletics scholarship.
This recommendation relates to summer access activity in these high profile sports without requiring the student-athletes to be enrolled in summer school, which is the traditional pre-requisite for Division I schools to provide such benefits and expenses. The recommendation hinges on the continuing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on student-athletes and returning to the flexible approach (of not requiring summer school enrollment) that was used for the summer of 2020.
3. The Council may approve additional Football Recruiting Concepts for the Remainder of 2021
The Council will consider a slate of football-specific recruiting concepts from the Football Oversight Committee (FBOC), including a recommendation to approve a blanket waiver to permit on-campus evaluations of prospective football student-athletes during unofficial visits after the prospective student-athlete’s scholastic season has concluded in June and July 2021 when institutional football camps are otherwise permissible.
The FBOC also recommends the Council approve a blanket waiver to increase, from 42 to 56, the number of evaluation days during the fall 2021 evaluation period to help make up for lost evaluation opportunities this past year.
The FBOC also recommends the Council approve a blanket waiver through December 31, 2021, to permit all institutional staff who have passed the appropriate recruiting exam to initiate telephone calls to prospects.
4. The Southeastern Conference’s (SEC) Recommendation to Extend the Blanket Waiver Exempting Athletically Related Financial Aid for Another Year
SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey wrote a letter to the Division I Council Chair requesting that the Council extend, for one year, its previous action to exempt the aid of a student-athlete who: 1) is in their final year of eligibility; 2) had their eligibility extended via a COVID-19 waiver; and 3) has remained enrolled at the same institution.
In the view of the SEC, this short-term extension will provide relief for spring sports during the 2021-22 academic year and fall and winter sports during the 2022-23 academic year, and will assist in providing clarity and avoid unnecessarily running off current student-athletes and breaking verbal commitments with prospects.
The SEC’s recommendation, if approved by the Council, would functionally swell the overall scholarship limits for another year which, in turn, adds inevitable pressure on to Division I athletic departments’ budgets.
5. While federal, state, and NCAA name-image-likeness (NIL) policies remain in flux, the Council may move forward this week in okaying the NCAA national office to select a third-party administrator to manage NIL activity disclosures
We couldn’t preview a highly anticipated NCAA governance meeting without something on the agenda related to NIL. The NIL Legislative Solutions Group is recommending that the NCAA Division I Council adopt the following policy directives: All NIL activities shall be disclosed to a third-party administrator selected by the NCAA or relevant governmental agency. Further, the NCAA national office shall move forward with identifying a third-party vendor to assist with the administration of NIL related activities. If adopted by the Council, this would take effect immediately.
The NCAA’s proposed legislative framework for NIL activities has included a requirement that information related to such activities must be disclosed. The disclosure requirements are intended to provide support to student-athletes, monitor booster involvement, ensure integrity of the recruiting process and identify activities that may not align with the values of the NCAA, conferences or institutions.
One of the NCAA's three primary NIL proposals -- NCAA Division I Proposal No. 2020-9 -- was introduced to allow the membership to decide, through legislation, whether to require an individual involved in NIL activities to disclose such activities to an independent third-party administrator. A third-party administrator would serve as a central hub for collecting disclosed information and would report national trends and help monitor and evaluate NIL activities for possible malfeasance. In addition, the third-party administrator could help ease the burden on campuses by providing education to student-athletes, prospective student-athletes and key stakeholders (e.g., boosters, professional service providers). A third-party administrator would not be a certification entity but may be able to assist in reducing the likelihood of impermissible activities.
With some uncertainty related to state and federal NIL legislation, it is unlikely that an NCAA vote on NIL proposals, including Proposal No. 2020-9 (which proposed to require disclosure of NIL activities to a third-party administrator), will occur in the immediate future.
To provide adequate time to develop appropriate technology and educate potential users, the NCAA Division I NIL Legislative Solutions Group recommends that the Council adopt a policy to establish the requirement that NIL activities shall be disclosed to a third-party administrator and that the national office shall move forward with identifying a third-party vendor to assist with the administration of NIL-related activities. Adoption of these proposed actions will render Proposal No. 2020-9 moot.
6. Formulating Season of Competition Waiver Criteria for Spring Sport Student-Athletes
The Division I Council declined to approve a blanket season of competition waiver for freshmen spring sport student-athletes. However, the Council recognized the need for these student-athletes to have the option for individual waivers filed on their behalf with the NCAA on a case-by-case basis. There had been public pressure in recent months from parents of spring sport freshmen wanting the NCAA (via the Council) to award a blanket seasons-of-competition waivers for 2020-21, in part, due to high school senior seasons that the now-college freshmen lost last year.
The Division I Council didn’t succumb to the public pressure and, in lieu of issuing a blanket waiver for all spring sport student-athletes, referred the issue of potential season-of competition waivers for 2021 spring sport student-athletes to the NCAA Division I Legislative Committee.
The Council has stated that it recognizes the challenges all student-athletes are facing this year due to the COVID-19 pandemic and understands the opportunity to compete varies widely across individual schools and conferences. Because of that fact, the Council asked the Legislative Committee to develop guidance on additional flexibility that should be considered for potential waivers if a spring competitive schedule is disrupted to the point where an additional season should be granted. The Legislative Committee will report back to the Council this week.
7. Other Issues The Council Could Take Up This Week
The Council may consider a recommendation to introduce legislation into the 2021-22 legislative cycle to add Stunt as an emerging sport for women.
The Council will likely take action on a variety of legislative proposals affecting membership reclassification from Division III to Division I, automatic qualification standards for the postseason, and bracketing principles for non-revenue sport NCAA championships.
On the medical and health and well-being side of athletics, the Council may introduce legislation into the 2021-22 legislative cycle to eliminate the option for a student-athlete to sign a written release or waiver declining the sickle cell solubility test. This recommendation comes from the NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports (CSMAS) and would be considered by all three NCAA divisions. CSMAS noted that in the administration of sickle cell solubility tests, student-athlete privacy and institutional management of the care of trait-positive student-athletes have evolved since the adoption of the original legislation which permits a student-athlete to sign a written release or waiver to “opt out” of test participation.
The legislation was intended to provide institutions with the flexibility to evaluate individual program risks and practices and determine test participation requirements at the campus level. CSMAS noted that, since there is now an opportunity for schools to efficiently and effectively manage the administrative and privacy burdens historically tied to testing, the benefits related to the appropriate monitoring of sickle cell trait-positive student-athletes support the idea of consistent mandatory testing across institutions.
The Council may consider a recommendation to adopt noncontroversial legislation to specify that an institution may appeal a drug testing penalty to the CSMAS (or designated subcommittee), as specified by the committee’s policies and procedures; further, to specify that the committee determination shall be final, binding and conclusive and shall not be subject to further review by any other authority.
In the rationale behind this concept, it was noted that unlike other committees with authority of appellate processes, CSMAS options to provide relief during the NCAA Drug‐Testing Appeals process are dictated by legislation. The thrust of this recommendation is that CSMAS should have authority over the appellate process, which would ensure that CSMAS can properly effectuate the intent of the Drug Testing Program and consider emerging trends in drug testing.
Athletics Veritas is presented for information purposes only and should not be considered advice or counsel on NCAA compliance matters. For guidance on NCAA rules and processes, always consult your university’s athletics compliance office, conference office, and/or the NCAA.
