Override Watch 2013: Week 2

Another week has passed, so it is time to check in on the override process for the Rules Working Group proposals.

RWG Proposal 11-2 – Noncoaching Staff May Recruit: 12 requests
This proposal has gained steam in the last week, now with 12 requests and still a long way to go before time is up. Alabama’s continual hiring of staff for football may be contributing to competitive equity fears even amongst the richest athletic departments.

RWG Proposal 11-3-B – Ban on Scouting Opponents: 7 requests
The scouting proposal also picked up a bit of momentum with 7 requests now, five more than last week. While 11-2 looks like it is headed for 75, 11-3-B will need to show some more progress over the next couple of weeks.

RWG Proposal 11-4 – Eliminate Off-Campus Recruiter Limits At Any One Time: 4 requests
Proposal 11-4 picked up three more override requests, showing some signs of life but not enough to see a path to 75. Perhaps some of these are spillover objection from Proposal 11-2.

RWG Proposal 12-5 – Payments from An Amateur Team or Event Sponsor: 1 request
Proposal 12-5 picked up a single request this week and was added to the list. The payments listed would only cover expenses, so this must be some philosophical objection, and not enough at this point to endanger the proposal at all.

Proposal 13-1 – Definition of a Student-Athlete: 1 request
Proposal 13-1 would allow schools to treat prospects as student-athletes once they sign, for a number of purposes. This proposal has picked up one request, which still lags behind my expectations given how vague it is and many issues it impacts.

RWG Proposal 13-3 – Unlimited Calls and Texts: 11 requests
Proposal 13-3 also separated itself from the pack with 11 requests, up from two last week. This one will get close to 75, if it does not blow through and gather much more opposition.

RWG Proposal 13-4 – Publication of Grad Rates and Banned Substances: 1 request
This proposal is added to the list because it appears some school really, really wants to make sure that the Eligibility Center keeps sending this information to prospects.

RWG Proposal 13-5-A – Deregulated Recruiting Materials: 14 requests
Perhaps the whole Big Ten got together and opposed this one as they said, because Proposal 13-5-A added 12 new requests this week. Like 11-2 and 13-3, this one will have a large group looking to overturn the proposal.

Proposal 13.7 – Publicity After Signing: 2 requests
Like 13-1, Proposal 13.7 applies after signing so it is not a major competitive equity issue. What looks to be the problem is just how far schools would be able to go with some of the celebration of an athlete’s signing.

RWG Proposal 13-8 – Deregulated Camp and Clinic Employment: 2 requests
After this week, Proposal 13-8 picked up another request, which does not show a lot of momentum.

RWG Proposal 16-3 – Academic and Other Support Services: 3 requests
That “other support services” language seems to be rubbing a few people the wrong way, with three requests now. 13-1 and 16-3 have not gathered a lot of public comment like some of the recruiting proposals have. If they do, especially from big schools, the slow start to this proposal’s override could speed up.

RWG Proposal 16-4 – Medical Expenses: 4 requests
That the medical expenses change continues to draw opposition is odd. That is has draw more opposition than the proposals about “other support services” and “entertainment” is especially odd.

RWG Proposal 16-5 – Benefits for Student-Athletes’ Families: 2 requests
Why this proposal has drawn any opposition is perplexing, because it really does not change much. It does not free schools completely from regulation in this area, and simplifies a lot of wording about the families of student-athletes. One guess is that schools might be opposing the proposal because it does not go far enough.

RWG Proposal 16-6 – Entertainment: 3 request
Like my comment on Proposal 16-4, it is a wonder that this proposal has not drawn more opposition that it has.

Posted on by John Infante
This entry was posted in Bylaw Blog, Headlines, NCAA Legislation. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Comment