Future of Division III

[bbald eagle]

Can you provide a link to the proposed legislation so we can read it?

[Ralph Turner]

Can you provide a link to the proposed legislation so we can read it?

Please find the link to the NCAA site in my post below.

http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=3880.510

[bbald eagle]

Ralph,

Thanks. Your link took me to .pdf of a September Commissioner's Update that didn't seem to address this as near as I could tell. I'm betting the link originally went to an earlier Commissioner Update that's now been replaced.

I did find this on the internet, though. The August 22, 2006, MINUTES OF THE NCAA DIVISION III ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE CONFERENCE NO. 6 say:

"Acting for the Division III Management Council and Presidents Council, the Administrative Committee:
1.         Reviewed and approved proposed 2007 NCAA Convention legislation sponsored by the NCAA Division III Presidents Council and not yet reviewed in legislative form, consistent with the September 1 deadline.
...  
g.                   Eligibility – General Eligibility Requirements – Male Practice Player Eligibility – Requirements.  To establish requirements for the use of male practice players as follows:  male practice players shall only be permitted to practice in the traditional segment; use is limited to one practice per week, and the number of male practice players for each team sport shall not exceed half of the number of student-athletes required to field a starting unit in that sport.
The committee recommended that a reference be added in the rationale statement regarding the related noncontroversial proposal that requires complete eligibility certification for male practice players.  Further clarifications will be addressed in the Convention Proposal Q & A document."

http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/governance/division_III/administrative_committee/2006/2006-06_ADCOM_minutes.htm

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I'm going to merge this debate into the "Future of Division III Board"  This topic has been discussed there earlier this summer and it seems to fit there better.

[hoopwitch]

Does anyone know how often are males used in sports other than women's hoop?  Also, you can see from the proposed legislation that in women's hoop, only 2 males would be allowed to practice and only once a week.  I believe that the use of males is not widespread at the DIII level but those programs that need the option should be able to retain it.  No player or coach complained about males in practice until possibly after the proposal was made known.   This may be simply another example of a rule suggestion to justify a committee's existence or a personal agenda!

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I've seen guys practice with the women's tennis team on occasion if there happened to be odd numbers that day, but that would probably most often fall within the allowances of this rule.

[wilburt]

My goodness, with these new "rules" the NCAA rule manual must be as thick as the U.S. Tax Code.  The only difference though is that the tax code is probably easier to understand!!!

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

No one likes the NCAA, but you can't give the IRS a break here, man.  Come back to reality, please, for your own good.

[frank uible]

wilburt: And less unjustifiable!

[Ralph Turner]

My goodness, with these new "rules" the NCAA rule manual must be as thick as the U.S. Tax Code.  The only difference though is that the tax code is probably easier to understand!!!

In Wilburt's world, the Tax Code is easier to understand.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

My goodness, with these new "rules" the NCAA rule manual must be as thick as the U.S. Tax Code.  The only difference though is that the tax code is probably easier to understand!!!

In Wilburt's world, the Tax Code is easier to understand.

Wow, I'm not sure what to make of this.  Either he can afford a good accountant or he's homeless.  I'm not sure which is better.

[bbald eagle]

Does anyone know how often are males used in sports other than women's hoop?  

"Many coaches and administrators feel that using male practice players is most common among women's basketball teams, but the system is also used in a variety of other sports, including women's volleyball, women's soccer, women's ice hockey, softball and rowing."

http://volleytalk.proboards88.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1156096650&page=1#1156096650

And, from the Division I Championships/Competition Cabinet:

"The issue also extends beyond basketball, traditionally thought of as the sport that most employs the practice. One cabinet member said her school's women's soccer team lost a potential all-American right before the NCAA tournament when she tangled with a male practice player and badly broke her leg."

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/newsdetail?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/NCAA/NCAA+News/NCAA+News+Online/Division+I/Cabinet+gives+philosophical+nod+to+at-larges+in+selections+-+7-17-06+NCAA+News 

[wilburt]

My goodness, with these new "rules" the NCAA rule manual must be as thick as the U.S. Tax Code.  The only difference though is that the tax code is probably easier to understand!!!

In Wilburt's world, the Tax Code is easier to understand.

Wow, I'm not sure what to make of this.  Either he can afford a good accountant or he's homeless.  I'm not sure which is better.

Answer:  Good accountant .  And yes, parts of the Tax Code are easier to understand than these NCAA regulations.  At least my accountant can give better explanations than the people at the NCAA...

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Yes, I'm sure "tangling with a male practice player" was the definitive reason for breaking that girl's leg.  I doubt it would have happened if she tangled with a female practice player.


There might be a need for more regulation and tracking of male pracitce players, but it shouldn't be a strict as it has become. 


The NCAA.... it's FANtastic.

[Trailer Dog]

The UAA schools share an academic philosophy that very few other D3 schools share (perhaps limited to CalTech and Johns Hopkins): the national research-oriented university.

Would you label the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Chicago as "national research-oriented universit(ies)"?