NCAA Convention : Scholarship Proposal Will Not Come to Vote

SAN FRANCISCO —  A scholarship proposal, which was expected to be among the most hotly debated issues this week at the National Collegiate Athletic Assn. convention, will be withdrawn before it comes to a vote.

It will be substituted with a resolution that will refer it to a committee for further study, the NCAA’s executive director, Dick Schultz, said Sunday.

Conceived by Peter Likins, president of Lehigh University and a member of the Presidents Commission, the complex measure would have based a portion of athletic scholarships on financial need.

Scholarships, according to the proposal, would be limited to basic educational expenses, including tuition, fees and books. Other aid, including room and board, would be based on financial need.

At a time when half of the nation’s big-time athletic programs are said to be losing money, the proposal would have been presented as a cost-cutting measure.

However, it will be withdrawn because it has several flaws, Schultz said. Among the problems, some have argued, is that the measure would not comply with Title IX, which mandates equality for women’s sports.

The proposal was expected to be the most controversial of the 147 items that will be considered by about 1,800 delegates this week in what NCAA President Wilford Bailey described as a “minor agenda.”

Reflecting on legislation from recent conventions that provided for drug testing, stricter academic requirements, cost-related cutbacks in coaching staffs and scholarship numbers and invoked the “death penalty,” which wiped out the Southern Methodist University football program for two years, Bailey said: “We have fewer items that are likely to evoke prolonged debate or considerable controversy.”

Schools will vote on proposals that would redefine and adjust freshman eligibility as first outlined in Proposition 48, which became Bylaw 5-i-j when it was approved three years ago and has since been one of the most controversial and ever-changing rules in college athletics.

Some would toughen the standards; others would lighten them.

Three measures would affect “partial qualifiers,” prospects who have an overall grade-point average of 2.0, but fail to meet the minimum grade-point average in college preparatory courses or do not achieve the minimum required score on standardized entrance exams.

A proposal by the Southeastern Conference would eliminate the partial qualifiers, who currently can be awarded full scholarships but cannot play or practice in their freshman year and must forfeit a year of eligibility.

Another measure would restore those athletes’ fourth year of eligibility.

And a third, sponsored by the Big West Conference, would retain partial qualifiers and allow them to regain their fourth year of eligibility by completing 96 semester units or 144 quarter units toward a specific degree.

“It’s designed to serve as motivation for the marginally prepared student-athlete and to hold out a reward (for them),” Bailey said of the measure favored by the Big West schools.

The Big Ten is sponsoring a “satisfactory progress” rule that would require athletes to attain a 1.6 grade-point average after their first season of competition, 1.8 after their second and 2.0 thereafter.

Although a similar proposal has been rejected by Division I schools in recent years, such a rule already exists in Division II.

Among several proposals that will be considered by Division I-A football schools is one that would allow schools to play a 12th game, although the measure gained little support Sunday in a straw vote among members of the College Football Assn.

“We didn’t have time to get the coaches’ input because they were in the season when this was first discussed in October,” said Athletic Director Frank Broyles of Arkansas, one of the chief proponents of the measure. “You’re not going to get the coaches interested in talking about a 12th game at that time. Most of them have already lost a game at that time, and they just look at (a 12th game) as another loss.”

Those in favor of a 12th game say it is necessary to keep athletic programs financially afloat.

“College football is too rigid with its scheduling,” said Broyles, pointing out that the schedules are sometimes made out as many as 15 years in advance. “The first time we can play LSU is the year 2000 or 2001. We might be out of business by then.”

Another measure to be considered by Division 1-A football schools would lower the maximum number of scholarships that can be given in 1 year from 25 to 24 while eliminating the overall maximum of 95. Allowing for redshirt seasons, that would allow a school to have as many as 120 players on scholarship at any one time.

“You can’t bring in 25 new players each year and keep them without exceeding the limit of 95,” Bailey said.

Eliminating the overall limit, Bailey said, “would more likely encourage institutions to make their best effort to help athletes maintain their eligibility. (Under current rules) There is the potential abuse--and I think sometimes the real abuse--of runoff.”

Another measure, which apparently has gained little support, would keep the overall limit at 95, but increase the initial limit to 30.

None of the items, though, has sparked as much debate as the measure that would have set financial-aid limitations.

The primary objective of the proposal was to cut costs, which would curb the elimination of nonrevenue sports.

However, “There are two or three areas that really cause a great deal of concern about this, notwithstanding that the basic concept is very attractive to a large part of the membership,” Bailey said.

Women’s athletic officials say that it would affect a larger percentage of women than men in nonrevenue sports.

Also, several administrators are philosophically opposed to making a distinction between sports.

Said Bailey: “Notwithstanding the fact that football and basketball produce most of the revenue, an awful lot of people have a deep concern saying to the swimmer or tennis player, ‘You can only have so much academic aid, while a football player or basketball player can have, ‘a full ride.’ ”

The measure might have a better chance of passing in the future, Bailey said, if it applied to all sports, making all athletic scholarships based on need.