D3boards.com

General => General Division III issues => Topic started by: Ron Boerger on January 12, 2018, 12:18:03 pm

Title: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: Ron Boerger on January 12, 2018, 12:18:03 pm
Nine proposals and one amendment proposed; among them

The basketball start date is currently Nov 15th.  The football section is way too dense for me to figure out net impact without spending way more time than I want to - see the Official Notice (http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D3OFFN18.pdf) if you want to give it a go.
Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: guest323 on January 19, 2018, 02:27:01 pm
I wish they'd let coaches follow recruits on social media - get with the times!
Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 19, 2018, 02:33:45 pm
I wish they'd let coaches follow recruits on social media - get with the times!

This isn't allowed for a HOST of reasons. If you heard the discussion last year from the SAAC, the fear or worry that coaches may be too involved in recruits lives and there wasn't a barrier of some kind was real. I can appreciate a recruit not having a coach stalking them on social media. I am fine with this.

Per Hoopsville last night, looks like basketball schedule change will pass, but waiting to see if the winds change as sometimes they do in 24-48 hours after a commissioners meeting. Also, if it passes, conferences will come together and possibly put some limits or restrictions in place ... even schools might (like, you can play, but you must be on the road that first weekend).

Football seems to have overwhelming support, for a change, to get their schedule timing passed. Basically, it is to set the start date of the practices to be the same for everyone not based on the first game for each team, but the first scheduled Saturday. The idea is, you are welcome to get an exemption and start earlier and you are welcome to skip the opening weekend, but all football programs will start on the same date no matter. Think that makes sense - it is the same with basketball for example.

No clue on the graduate transfer one... going to check on that one this evening. A similar bill was rejected last year, though I disagreed. This one has been tweeked to make it better for those who were on the fence and voted no. In the spirit of DIII, I feel this should pass.

Alumni game should be a slam-dunk...

BTW a reminder that "reconciliation" is gone. In the past, any votes that were close could be re-voted on after a 30 minute break including second debate before voting. However, 1/3 of the room was usually gone for flights or other factors (not going to get into the convention schedule which I think needs to be changed)... so the vote sometimes could flip with those against not being in the room. Anyway... it is gone. One vote on a topic. Pass or not. Move on.
Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: Just Bill on January 19, 2018, 04:41:39 pm
Alumni game should be a slam-dunk...
Nobody dunks in an Alumni game. Too many fragile ACLs.
Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: sunny on January 20, 2018, 09:38:08 am
I wish they'd let coaches follow recruits on social media - get with the times!

I'd prefer they simply lift some of the restrictions on public interaction. No following/friending and if a prospective student-athlete has a protected/private social media account, total hands off unless the prospective asks a question in public - coach should be allowed to respond in some way - publicly or privately. No unprompted @ mentions and no public discussions of things like setting up visits for the prospective, etc. (And obviously no announcements about recruit "x" visiting campus.) But, right now, technically a coach or team or department account cannot even publicly respond directly (like an "@" reply on Twitter) to a general question on social media to a question from a prospective athlete asked publicly. And, frankly, given the option of relative anonymity in some forms of social media, it'd be very easy to violate that rule without even knowing you're doing it. 

While I think the smartest social media rules would be constantly evolving and would have to be fairly detailed, there should be some common sense at play. Right now, a coach can privately message a prospective until the cows come home but basically has to be incredibly careful of who they interact with publicly on social media in any way, shape, or form.  (Do I think there are already violations of this - intentional or not - on a daily basis? Absolutely.)
Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: Ron Boerger on January 20, 2018, 10:09:51 am
The football practice date change (25 days prior to 1st permissible Saturday) got shot down 168-182-113.
Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: Ron Boerger on January 20, 2018, 10:11:04 am
Prop 4 (permit graduates w/remaining eligibility to participate at another D3 institution while seeking grad degree) was adopted 369-91-3.
Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: Ron Boerger on January 20, 2018, 10:15:14 am
Prop 6 (Permit annual exemption for alumni contest w/exception of FB) also adopted, 414-54-2.
Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: Ron Boerger on January 20, 2018, 10:32:47 am
Prop 7 (establishes 1st permissible basketball date as Nov. 8) was adopted 326-134-4
Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: monsoon on January 21, 2018, 04:02:50 pm
Thanks for keeping us updated, Ron.
Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: Ron Boerger on January 21, 2018, 06:17:03 pm
You're welcome. :-)

In an interesting development, D2 voted in a proposal to allow teams from Mexico to apply for membership (they already allow Canadian schools to apply, with Simon Fraser of Vancouver [Burnaby, a suburb] the only one so far).  Schools have to meet typical NCAA minimums and standards to apply and will go through the same provisional timeframe as US-based schools.
Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: phil on January 22, 2018, 09:56:24 pm
I'm curious to hear any thoughts on this:
http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/diii-management-council-recommends-2019-legislation
Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 22, 2018, 10:55:52 pm
I'm curious to hear any thoughts on this:
http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/diii-management-council-recommends-2019-legislation

I would love to read the full language which will come out soon I am sure. I highly suspect it will be heavily debated between now and next January... not to mention a very hot topic on the floor next year.

I can't read enough there to fully understand what it is trying to allow.
Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 24, 2018, 06:45:24 am

They've been doing a voluntary academic progress rate for several years now, with around half the schools participating.  It's a number similar to the D1 figure that accounts for transfers and not simply who gets a diploma.  You can see reports from it and more info on the NCAA site.
Title: DIII Presidents Council rejects snack proposal
Post by: justafan12 on August 13, 2018, 01:06:21 pm
You really can't make this stuff up.

https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/diii-presidents-council-rejects-snack-proposal?sf195300474=1

Not sure D3 schools will continue to exist in the future.

Title: Re: D3 Proposals at the 2018 NCAA Convention
Post by: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on August 13, 2018, 01:16:09 pm
The way the bill is written, to paraphrase Pat Coleman, is rather generic and vague. Of course it got shot down. That kind of writing opens itself up to problems.
Title: Re: DIII Presidents Council rejects snack proposal
Post by: sunny on August 13, 2018, 02:08:02 pm
You really can't make this stuff up.

https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/diii-presidents-council-rejects-snack-proposal?sf195300474=1

Not sure D3 schools will continue to exist in the future.

Does it sound ridiculous on the surface? Yes, it does. On the other hand, Division III philosophy is supposed to very much be about not giving student-athletes too many additional perks beyond what the general student body has. Further, the idea of providing these *out* of season seems really out of whack since there are already restrictions on how/what kind of MEALS can be provided IN season.  What I will agree is ridiculous is the hand-wringing over some Division III schools being able to offer "better snacks" than others* - there are all kinds of things that athletes will get/get a higher quality of at Division III school "X" compared to Division III school "Y" and I very much doubt that snacks is going to be what sways a recruit. If Division III presidents are really concerned about a level playing field, they'd be going after caps on gear or facilities spending or streaming spending or all sorts of things more likely to sway people than snacks.

*though obviously some sort of good sense would have to be used ... I'm not sure anyone would be on board with someone just backing up a Frito Lay truck to an athlete's dorm room.

I also might add that the future of Division III in its current form is probably much safer than that of the opposite end of the spectrum ...