PACIFIC-10 CONFERENCE
Student-Athlete Advisory Committee Meeting
April 9-10, 2004

The meeting was called to order by co-chair Courtney Carter at 7 p.m.

1. Approval of minutes of November 1-2, 2003, meeting

It was VOTED 18-0-0-2 ( WSU M/W absent)

"to approve the minutes of the November 1-2, 2003 meeting."

2. Meeting Materials

Dawson reviewed the materials which provided background information for the Pac-10 SAAC participants. Particular note was made of the Pac-10 List Serve. SAAC representatives were asked to make sure at least one person on their campus signed up for the list serve so that their campus could be kept informed of information sent from the Pac-10 office.

3. California SB 193 Update

Bruce reviewed the chronology of California Senate Bill 193, and its current status. He and Oman described their visit to California legislators on the Higher Education Committee in January, 2003, saying they had been welcomed and received assurances from a number of Committee members that SB 193 would not be passed out of Committee. Bruce cited the importance of SAAC leadership on this topic, explaining the significance of the legislators hearing directly from students who were opposed to the bill.

4. Pac-10 Intra-conference Transfer Rule

Leland gave an overview of the existing Pac-10 intra-conference transfer rule, and noted the Conference was considering changing the rule. He outlined arguments for and against transfer restrictions.

Factors favoring restrictions included: The value of educational stability. Since studies show that 80% of all freshmen would say at least once during some point in their freshman year that they considered transferring, such restrictions help them to stay the course and not act impulsively and transfer. This is educationally beneficial. Institutional investments in student-athletes. Examples of these investments include time, money (financial aid and support services, time and money spent recruiting), admissions slots, and positions on teams. The quid pro quo for such investments is a way to insure the student continues at that institution. The role coaches play. If students were allowed to transfer freely when coaches leave, it would wreak havoc with the team, as well as contribute to an environment where coaches could make even more unreasonable demands (e.g., salaries) since the departure of a coach could mean the loss of many team members.

Factors favoring relaxing the transfer requirements include: Student rights. Student-athletes should have the right to transfer freely for any reason, whether it be economic, family-related, or sports-related. The NCAA one-time transfer exception works. The original concern that there would be significant recruiting of student-athletes already in college has not been found to be true. There would be greater clarity if the NCAA and Pac-10 transfer rules were the same.

SAAC members engaged in an extended discussion about what the appropriate Pac-10 intra-conference transfer regulations should be. Options considered included 1) adopting the current NCAA rule; 2) keeping the existing Pac-10 rule; 3) requiring a year of residence without the ability to receive athletically-related financial aid, the loss of a year of eligibility, and a waiver provision for any of the elements; and 4) requiring a year of residence with the ability to receive financial aid, the loss of a year of eligibility, and a waiver provision for any of the elements. Some viewed the two year residence requirement and loss of eligibility as overly burdensome, and believed one year of each was sufficient penalty. A desire to keep talented athletes in the Conference rather than have them compete against the Pac-10 was another factor influencing the discussion. In addition, some cited the ability of institutions to deny permission to contact or a release to transfer as sufficient safeguards for the institutions.

It was VOTED (18-0-0-2, WSU M/W absent):

"to recommend that the Pac-10 intra-conference transfer rule be revised to require one year of residence with the ability to receive financial aid, the loss of one season of eligibility, and a process by which any of the penalties could be waived to the NCAA rule."

By a slim margin (10-8), SAAC members favored continuing to exclude football, basketball, and ice hockey from the NCAA one-time transfer exception .

5. NCAA Legislation

Smith reviewed the NCAA legislative process and timeline. Dawson explained that any legislative proposals initiated by the Pac-10 SAAC would be forwarded to the Pac-10 Council, which is the entity that ultimately decides which proposals from Conference groups would be forwarded to the NCAA.

The SAAC discussed and took positions on several pieces of proposed legislation which were already in the NCAA cycle, as follows: 2003-74, mandatory day off/travel day: not favored, 9-9-0-2 (STAN M/W, ARIZ M/W, USC M/W, WASH M/W, ASU M favored, WSU M/W absent). Those in favor stated such a rule would reassert the importance of academics. Those opposed believed that practice time would become limited, or that difficult practices would be instituted on travel days. (Note: Subsequent to the SAAC meeting, this was defeated by the Management Council) 2003-88, elimination of printed media guides: No vote taken, but consensus was guides should be kept. While not a determining factor in recruiting, they were worthwhile to recruits as tangible evidence of commitment to sport. SAAC members felt media guides were more valuable to enrolled student-athletes as a memento of participation. Note: Subsequent to the SAAC meeting, this was referred to the AEC Cabinet by the Management Council). 2003-33, change in recruiting calendar to permit earlier contact: favored, 10-7-1-2 (ASU W, UCLA M/W, ORE M, OSU W, WASH M/W opposed, OSU M abstain, WSU M/W absent) (Note: Subsequent to the SAAC meeting, this was approved by the Management Council).

Smith reviewed the so-called "40-60-80" rule which requires completion of a fixed percentage of degree requirements based on year in school. SAAC members expressed concern about the lack of flexibility in the rule, believing it might have the effect of tracking student-athletes into certain majors whose requirements are more easily fulfilled. In addition, it would effectively prevent them from changing majors, as well as discourage them from exploring academic interests outside their selected majors. Smith noted that junior college transfers were the students who were most likely to have difficulty meeting the requirements of the rule.

SAAC members also gave input on potential NCAA legislation regarding number of competitions. There was general agreement that a fixed number of contests per sport, including non-traditional season contests, was appropriate. It was noted that non-traditional season contests were important for several reasons: breaking up the boredom of training; development of players; and training for the Olympics. SAAC members did not wish to see a reduction in the number of actual contests.

In addition, rather than folding all events into one number, it was suggested that there could be two numbers: one for intercollegiate contests, regardless of when and where they occur, and another for what was termed "auxiliary events," such as alumni games and fund raising activities.

There was little support for the concept of "exempt events" which were contests that counted in a team record. SAAC members believed every team should have the opportunity to play the same number of contests every year.

6. NCAA SAAC Report

No new NCAA SAAC information was presented. The next NCAA SAAC meeting was scheduled for the week after the Pac-10 SAAC meeting.

SAAC members reviewed the NCAA SAAC newsletters from the 2003-04 year. They were encouraged to make sure these received wide distribution on their respective campuses. It was suggested that each campus as well as the Conference office provide the link to the NCAA SAAC website where the newsletters could be viewed and downloaded.

7. Pac-10Sportsmanship Award

There were five nominees for the inaugural Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award: Pete Carroll, USC head football coach; Josh Childress, Stanford men's basketball player; Heidi Goehring, Oregon State gymnast; Grayling Love, ASU football player; and Dave Rubio, Arizona head women's volleyball coach. Because of the timing of submission of the applications, they were not prescreened by the subcommittee, and all five nominees were discussed.

After a series of votes, Grayling Love of ASU was selected as the Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award winner. ASU will be recognized at the Pac-10 Summer Meetings, where the award will be presented. All other nominees will receive a certificate.

SAAC members were asked to encourage their institutions to participate in the nominating process next year, as there are worthy nominees on each campus. It is hoped the establishment of the award will encourage acts of sportsmanship at member institutions.

8. Pac-10 Speakers' Bureau

Dawson presented information about the NCAA "Stay In Bounds" program, as a way to fulfill the fall, 2003, Pac-10 SAAC recommendation that the SAAC sponsor a speakers' bureau. This program provides materials which student-athletes can use to deliver positive messages and engage in activities to school groups of various ages. The Stay In Bounds program is based on the "RICHER" principles: respect, integrity, caring,harmony, excellence, and responsibility." It was pointed out that at least one of these principles could apply to any topic student-athletes might be requested to speak on.

Dawson explained that all the materials are expected to be available on the internet, so that schools would be able to access them for ease of distribution to student-athletes.

It was VOTED (20-0) "to adopt the NCAA Stay In Bounds program as the vehicle for the Pac-10 Speakers' Bureau."

Dawson said she would communicate this information to the institutional SAAC advisors to encourage its use. It was agreed that the program would be reviewed in the fall.

The name for the speakers' bureau was debated, and it ultimately decided that individual campuses should retain the flexibility to have their own name. However, the Conference SAAC desired to have its name attached as evidence of its activity.

It was VOTED (20-0) to have the nomenclature for institutional speakers' bureaus be "(Institution name) Speakers' Bureau, brought to you by the Pac-10 SAAC."

SAAC members shared information about how community service activities were organized on their respective campuses. It was agreed that having a staff member dedicated to coordinating the activities was the optimum system. The system at Arizona was cited as a program that works extremely well,with a staff member who performs outreach, communicates with the student-athletes, follows up with all concerned, and drives student-athletes to the site as needed.

9. Recruiting Practices

SAAC members discussed recruiting practices and the changes which were being contemplated as a result of highly publicized unethical and illegal behavior on recruiting trips.

The question was raised as to whether special host groups of non-athletes students were desirable. Many believed that hosting recruits should properly be the responsibility of team members, who would be the best judges of a prospect's fit with the institution. However, such hosting could be burdensome because of the time and energy required, particularly if there were also contests on that day. In some sports (e.g., football) the length of the game required that someone other than players be assigned to host prospects, especially when large numbers of recruits visited on the same weekend.

The SAAC took the following positions on various aspects of recruiting: favored allowing institutions to have host groups (17-0-2-1, WASH M, OSU M abstained, CAL M absent). opposed host groups of the opposite gender (1-16-2-1, ASU M favored, WASH M, ARIZ M abstained, CAL M absent) opposed requiring staff members as escorts for recruits at all times (0-18-1-1, OSU M abstain, CAL M absent) favored retaining current NCAA regulations on entertainment (19-0-0-1, CAL M absent) favored retaining current NCAA regulations on host funds, but requiring student-athletes to provide receipts and and explanation of what was done (19-0-0-1, CAL M absent) opposed establishing a curfew for recruits (2-17-0-01, OSU M/W favored, CAL M absent)

No support existed for reducing the number of paid visits, nor for having staff members accompany recruits at all times during a visit. The view that recruits "did not need a baby sitter" but rather the student-athlete host should be held accountable for the activities was expressed.

10. Pac-10/SEC SAAC Initiative

Partly as an outgrowth of discussions with legislators about California Senate Bill 193, Bruce noted the need for increased strength of institutional SAAC's. He noted that the NCAA and Conference SAAC's seemed to be up and running effectively, but the weak link seemed to be on campus. Discussions with Southeastern Conference SAAC representatives led to the development of an initiative to strengthen institutional SAAC's. The chief methods for doing this would be a DVD which would outline pertinent SAAC issues, as well as the establishment of an NCAA internship for a person who would travel around the country and assist institutions in developing credible SAAC's. In order for this to move forward on the NCAA SAAC level, the Pac-10 SAAC needed to endorse the idea.

It was VOTED (18-0-1-1, ASU M abstaining, CAL M absent) to approve this concept as a Pac-10 SAAC initiative."

An outline of the initiative is attach as Supplement A of the minutes. Note: Subsequent to the Pac-10 meeting, the NCAA SAAC adopted the initiative as a project.

11. SAAC Subcommittees

SAAC members were asked to submit a list of their subcommittee preferences. They were advised the newly-elected SAAC officers would make appointments to subcommittees.

12. Election of Officers

Those interested in serving on the Executive Committee were identified from the subcommittee preference list. The SAAC elected Lauren Westendorf of Oregon as a co-chair of the SAAC for 2004-05, and Jake Arnold of Arizona as a SAAC co-vice-chair.

The other Executive Committee members should have been elected at the fall, 2003, SAAC meeting. Since that had been overlooked, the election was to take place in Fall, 2004.

13. SAAC & Forum Meeting Dates and Format

The dates for future meetings were discussed. It was desired that future SAAC and Forum meetings not be held on Easter weekend.

Noting the SAAC vote to include a community service activity in the fall meeting, Dawson asked the group to consider reducing the number of students attending the Forum in order to pay for the additional fall expenses. It was also noted that finding five students per institution to attend the Forum in April was difficult, due to team schedules and other spring activities.

It was VOTED (17-0-2-1, WASH M, WSU W abstaining, CAL M absent) to recommend reducing the number of student-athletes who attend the Forum from five to four.

14. Championship Mementos

The sterling silver key ring and clock which were chosen as the memento for members of Pac-10 Championship teams at the suggestion of the SAAC were displayed. Suggestions for future mementos included: ring holder; blanket; paperweight; trophy; pen set; watch; bag; business card holder; license plate frame; and patch.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:50a.m.

cad

4/27/04

Printer-friendly format

Email this article