Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, January 11, 1992 TAG: 9201110156
SECTION: SPORTS PAGE: B3 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: BILL BRILL SPORTSWRITER
DATELINE: ANAHEIM, CALIF. LENGTH: Medium
NCAA CHIEF PLEASED WITH MOVES
Like a coach whipping his team into shape, executive director Dick Schultz on Friday proclaimed himself pleased with the movement within the NCAA's reform movement."Nothing is easy," said the former Virginia athletic director, "but I was surprised with the ease [with which major proposals passed]."
When the 1993 convention convenes in Dallas to discuss certification of athletic programs by an outside entity, Schultz said, "That will be the final piece of the [reform] puzzle."
The question now becomes one of perception, and whether the work the past two years within the NCAA will be enough to fight off federal and state legislation.
All but two proposals to restructure the much-disputed infractions process will be in place soon. Legislation will need to be passed in '93 permitting open hearings during enforcement proceedings, which is certain to be controversial.
In fact, when the NCAA committee headed by Brigham Young president Rex Lee met here to discuss opening hearings, that meeting was closed.
Lee said there was a concern individuals wouldn't speak their minds. The great fear of open hearings in enforcement cases is that media coverage will make it difficult to achieve an equitable conclusion.
One move by the NCAA Council to enhance infractions cases was voted down. The proposal would have required athletes or coaches to appear before the committee or be charged with unethical conduct.
That required a two-thirds vote, and despite a 379-206 advantage, did not achieve that. "I was surprised at that," Schultz said.
Many Division III schools voted against, apparently because they perceive it as a violation of student rights and a subtle means of achieving subpoena power without actually having it. That measure, certain to come up again, also was supported by members of the Big East and the traditionally black schools, who have become somewhat of an unofficial alliance.
Schultz clarified his stand on Proposal 16, the new academic eligibility requirement that will replace Proposition 48 in 1996.
A headline in USA Today suggested Schultz wanted Proposal 16 reconsidered. That, he said, is not true.
"What I said was that I understood the concerns of the traditionally black schools. Academic research will continue. If our research shows something to have a dramatic effect, it would be corrected," he said.
Schultz called debate on Proposal 16 healthy but noted the vote for the enhanced academic requirements was overwhelming.
"I have to trust the research, which indicates the impact on minorities will be no more than 1 percent. I hope this will be helpful to inner-city schools," he said. "When we passed Proposition 48 [in 1983], it looked like a mountain to climb."
Instead, five-year figures show minorities have not been affected and that the overall academics of scholarship athletes has improved steadily.
"This does not limit access to education," Schultz said. "If you don't meet the requirements, there's either prep school, junior college or one year [in a four-year school] to prove you're a student."