Summer Compliance Item- 6/29/12- 13.7.1.1, 13.7.1.2- Unofficial Visits in July

The men’s basketball coaches at Ocean State University (OSU) have been contacted by several prospective student-athletes interested in making unofficial visits during the month of July.  These prospects have not yet signed a National Letter of Intent with any institution.

Is it permissible for a prospective student-athlete in the sport of men’s basketball to make an unofficial visit during the month of July?

No.  NCAA Bylaws 13.7.1.1 states that in men’s basketball, a prospective student-athlete may not make an unofficial visit during the month of July; however, a prospective student-athlete is permitted to make an unofficial visit during July beginning the calendar day after he has signed a National Letter of Intent or the institution’s written offer of admission or financial aid, or the institution has received a financial deposit from the prospective student-athlete in response to an offer of admission.  (Adopted: 11/1/01 effective 4/1/02, Revised:  4/12/11 effective 8/1/11)

In women’s basketball, unofficial visits are impermissible in July during the evaluation periods.

NCAA Bylaw 13.7.1.2- In women’s basketball, a prospective student-athlete may not make unofficial visits during the July evaluation periods (see Bylaw 13.1.5.4.2).  (Adopted:  4/28/05 effective 8/1/05, Revised:  6/28/06)

BONUS: Summer Compliance Item- 6/28/12- 13.1.3.1.6- Women’s Ice Hockey Phone Calls

The women’s ice hockey coach at Ocean State University (OSU) is very interested in Zam Boni, a highly touted sophomore prospect.  Zam lives in Switzerland, so the coaches have not had a lot of face to face contact with her.  The coaches would like to call her next month to make sure she is still interested in attending OSU after she graduates from high school.

 

Is it permissible for the coaches to call Zam in July since she is just finishing up her sophomore year in HS or do the coaches have to wait until July following completion of her junior year in HS?

 

The coaches may telephone Zam as of July 7th of this year.  NCAA Bylaw 13.1.3.1.6 states that in women’s ice hockey, an institution is permitted to make one telephone call to an individual (or the individual’s relatives or guardians) who is a resident of a foreign country on or after July 7 through July 31 following the completion of the individual’s sophomore year in high school. An institution is permitted to make one telephone call per week to an individual (or the individual’s relatives or legal guardians) beginning July 7 following completion of the individual’s junior year in high school, or the opening day of classes of his or her senior year in high school (as designated by the high school), whichever is earlier. (Adopted: 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97, Revised: 4/26/07, 4/30/09, 1/15/11, 7/14/11

 

PLEASE NOTE:  This exception is only for women’s ice hockey.

Summer Compliance Item- 6/28/12- 15.3.2.3- Summer Financial Aid Agreement

Several student-athletes at Ocean State University (OSU) are receiving athletics aid to attend summer school sessions.  Is OSU required to provide these student-athletes a written statement of the amount, duration or conditions/terms of the award?

No.  NCAA Staff Interpretation- 5/31/12- Notification of Summer Financial Aid Award (I)-states that an institution that is providing a financial aid award to a student-athlete for attendance at the institution’s summer session is not required to provide the recipient with a written statement of the amount, duration, conditions or terms of the award.

[References: 15.2.8 (summer financial aid), 15.3.2.3 (written statement requirement), official interpretation (10/14/1992, Item No. 5-c-(4)) which has been archived]

Summer Compliance Item- 6/20/12- 13.12.2.2.3- Men’s Basketball Camp Employment

Ocean State University (OSU) Men’s Basketball coaches are conducting a camp next week.  One of their high profile freshman prospects, Shot Clock, will be attending the camp.  Shot’s AAU coach has worked camps at OSU the last three years and has been invited to work again this year.  Since the AAU coach has worked camps previously, is there an exception to the camp employment prohibition of individuals associated with a recruited prospect?

 

No.  NCAA Educational Column- 6/14/12-  Men’s Basketball — Camp Employment and Camp Logistics Issues (I)- states that NCAA Division I institutions should note that on April 26, 2012, the NCAA Division I Board of Directors voted to transfer the interpretive authority for basketball issues from the NCAA enforcement staff to academic and membership affairs, effective June 15, 2012. This educational column is intended to assist the membership with the transition of interpretive authority and provide clarity regarding interpretive issues the enforcement staff has addressed since the Board’s actions on October 29, 2009. Any questions related to the issues noted within this educational column should be directed to the academic and membership affairs staff.

 

Camp Employment Issues.

Pursuant to NCAA Bylaw 13.12.2.2.3, in men’s basketball, institutions are not permitted to employ (volunteer or paid) an individual associated with a recruited prospective student-athlete at the institution’s or a men’s basketball staff member’s camp or clinic. This legislation is intended to address concerns related to the funneling of money to individuals associated with prospective student-athletes through employment of such individuals at men’s basketball camps or clinics.

 

If a prospective student-athlete meets the definition of a recruited prospective student-athlete (see Bylaws 13.02.13 or 13.12.1.1.1.1), the institution or men’s basketball staff member is not permitted to employ any individual meeting the definition of an individual associated with that specific prospective student-athlete at the institution’s or men’s basketball staff member’s camp or clinic. The prohibition on camp employment applies only to employing individuals associated with recruited prospective student-athletes at men’s basketball camps or clinics. Therefore, it is permissible to hire an individual associated with a prospective student-athlete to work camp if that individual associated with a prospective student-athlete has no association with a prospective student-athlete that the institution is recruiting or has recruited.

 

The following questions and answers are designed to assist in the application of this interpretation.

 

Question No. 1: What is the definition of an individual associated with a prospective student-athlete?

Answer: An individual associated with a prospective student-athlete is any person who maintains (or directs others to maintain) contact with the prospective student-athlete, the prospective student-athlete’s relatives or legal guardians, or coaches at any point during the prospective student-athlete’s participation in basketball, and whose contact is directly or indirectly related to the prospective student-athlete’s athletic skills or abilities; or recruitment by or enrollment in an NCAA institution. This definition includes but is not limited to, parents, legal guardians, handlers, personal trainers and coaches. An individual who meets the definition of an individual associated with a prospective student-athlete retains that status during the enrollment of that prospective student-athlete at that institution.

 

Question No. 2: What is the definition of a recruited prospective student-athlete?

Answer: In men’s basketball, for purposes of applying Bylaw 13.12, a recruited prospective student-athlete is a prospective student-athlete who has been recruited pursuant to the definition of recruiting in Bylaw 13.02.13 or the definition of a recruited prospective student-athlete pursuant to Bylaw 13.02.13.1. In addition, Bylaw 13.12.1.1.1.1 provides that a men’s basketball prospective student-athlete is considered a recruited prospective student-athlete if any of the following conditions have occurred:

a. The prospective student-athlete’s attendance at any institutional camp or clinic has been solicited by the institution (or a representative of the institution’s athletics interests);

b. The institution has provided any recruiting materials to the prospective student-athlete;

c. An institutional coaching staff member has had any recruiting contact [including in-person or electronic contact (e.g., telephone calls, video conference, electronic correspondence)] with the prospective student-athlete (including contact initiated by the prospective student-athlete);

d. The prospective student-athlete has received a verbal offer of athletically related financial aid from the institution; or

e. The prospective student-athlete has verbally committed to attend the institution.

 

Question No. 3: Is it a violation if an institution employs an individual associated with a prospective student-athlete before a specific prospective student-athlete triggers recruited status?

Answer: No. If an institution employs an individual associated with a prospective student-athlete before a specific prospective student-athlete triggers recruited status, there is no camp employment violation.

 

Question No. 4: Is it a violation if an institution’s coaching staff decides to begin recruiting the specific prospective student-athlete during the camp in which the individual associated with a prospective student-athlete is employed?

Answer: Yes. In this situation, the staff should wait until after the camp concludes to begin recruiting the prospective student-athlete.

 

Question No. 5: How long does an individual retain individual associated with a recruited prospective student-athlete status?

Answer: An individual associated with a recruited prospective student-athlete retains that status until the specific recruited prospective student-athlete is no longer eligible to represent the institution, until he enrolls at another NCAA institution or until he has exhausted eligibility at the employing institution.

 

Question No. 6: Is there a “pre-existing relationship” exception to the prohibition against employment of an individual associated with a recruited prospective student-athlete at a camp?

Answer: No. There is no pre-existing relationship exception to this prohibition. Regardless of whether an individual associated with a recruited prospective student-athlete has worked camps in the past, if the individual is associated with a recruited prospective student-athlete, it is impermissible to employ that individual to work a camp or clinic.

 

Question No. 7: May individuals associated with a recruited prospective student-athlete who are high school and nonscholastic coaches be employed at institutional team camps?

Answer: No. Such a coach may not be employed by the institution at the camp or receive any financial benefit (e.g., free lodging, transportation, etc.) from the institution. However, high school (scholastic) and nonscholastic coaches who are individuals associated with a recruited prospective student-athlete may still accompany and coach their teams at team camps.

 

Question No. 8: May a current student-athlete with a younger brother who is of prospective student-athlete age and is being recruited by the institution be employed at his institution’s camp?

Answer: A currently enrolled student-athlete who has a sibling of prospective student-athlete age and who is being recruited by the institution may be employed at his institution’s camp only if all men’s basketball student-athletes are given the opportunity to work the camp. If only a limited number of student-athletes are offered employment, and the institution is recruiting the younger brother, then the current student-athlete may not be employed.

 

Question No. 9: May a former student-athlete work an institutional camp if the former student-athlete is an individual associated with a recruited prospective student-athlete?

Answer: No.

 

Question No. 10: May a former women’s basketball student-athlete work an institutional men’s basketball camp if the former student-athlete has a younger brother who is of prospective student-athlete age being recruited by the institution?

Answer: No. The former women’s basketball student-athlete would be considered an individual associated with a recruited prospective student-athlete and her employment at the men’s basketball camp is precluded.

 

Question No. 11: What institutional penalties can result from employing an individual associated with a recruited prospective student-athlete at an institutional or men’s basketball staff member’s camp or clinic?

Answer: The Board endorsed and strongly encouraged the use of suspensions of a head men’s basketball and/or assistant men’s basketball coach from coaching in NCAA tournament or regular season games in such cases.

 

Question No. 12: If an institution impermissibly employs an individual associated with a recruited prospective student-athlete, what impact does the violation have on the prospective student-athlete’s eligibility?

Answer: In the event of a violation, the institution is required to declare all involved prospective student-athletes ineligible at that institution and provide written notification and explanation to all such prospective student-athletes that the actions of the institution affected their eligibility.

 

Camp Operations Issues.

In men’s basketball, pursuant to Bylaw 13.12.1.4, institutions are not permitted to offer a different participation, registration procedure, fee structure, advertisement and/or logistical experience (e.g., lodging, meals, transportation or awards/mementos) than the institutions’ other men’s/boys’ basketball camps. This legislation is intended to address concerns that institutions use camps and clinics to gain an improper recruiting advantage through “elite camps” that provide participants a vastly different camp experience at a much lower cost (e.g., receipt of equipment and apparel, exclusive accommodations and dining options for a nominal camp fee). All camps must be operated in a similar manner and all camp participants should have a similar camp experience.

Differences in camp operations will likely prompt increased scrutiny by the enforcement staff. Institutions and men’s basketball coaching staffs should be prepared to defend why a camp is operated differently. There must be an objective, logical reason for operating camps differently, and that reason cannot result in a recruiting advantage.

 

Question No. 1: Do all men’s basketball institutional camps have to use a similar fee structure?

Answer: Yes. Camps must have a similar fee structure (e.g., per day or per week fee). Camp fees may be charged on a per camper or per group basis. Regardless of the method used, the total expenses incurred must be covered by the fee charged to all campers participating in the camp.

 

Question No. 2: Do discounts to attend an institution’s sports (other than basketball) camps have to be identical to the discounts to attend an institution’s basketball camp?

Answer: All camp discounts must be provided in a similar manner, and the total expenses incurred must be covered by the fee charged to all campers participating in a camp. An institution should have an objective, logical reason for any differences in how camp discounts are applied, and that reason cannot result in a recruiting advantage.

 

Question No. 3: What impact does a violation have on the involved prospective student-athletes’ eligibility?

Answer: In the event of a violation, the institution is required to declare all involved prospective student-athletes ineligible at that institution and provide those prospective student-athletes written notification and explanation that the institution’s actions affected their eligibility.

 

Question No. 4: What factors may lead to a determination that an institutional camp is being operated in a different manner from other institutional camps?

Answer: Factors that may lead to a determination that an institutional camp is being operated in a different manner from other institutional camps include, but are not limited to, the following:

a. A significant number of recruited prospective student-athletes or elite high school teams at a particular camp session as compared to other camp sessions.

b. Use of different websites/contacts for camp registration, including varying lengths of time for open registrations.

c. Use of different methods of registration, including being able to contact a men’s basketball coaching staff member to register for a specific camp. For example, if some camps have an online registration component, all camps must have an online registration component.

d. Use of different advertising, including varying lengths of time in which camps are advertised.

e. Pop-up camps or camps scheduled with little or no notice or advertising to potential participants.

f. Use of different facilities for physical activities, lodging, meals, etc. (e.g., competition facility versus practice facility; off-campus lodging versus on-campus residence halls).

g. Use of different modes of local transportation for some campers.

h. Differences in amounts charged or expenses incurred.

i. Differences in costs of awards/mementos presented to campers. Each camp does not have to provide identical awards or mementos; however, the cost of the awards or mementos for each camp should be similar.

j. Differences in the instructional component provided to camp participants. For example, if 75 percent of in-camp time is spent on instruction and 25 percent of in-camp time is spent on competition, that ratio should be similar for all camps.

 

Question No. 5: If an institution conducts a team camp involving nonscholastic teams participating in some skill instruction, but also playing each other in a randomly assigned, nontournament format (no winner), will this be viewed as hosting a nonscholastic practice or competition on campus?

Answer: There is no restriction on the types of teams that may participate in a team camp (scholastic or nonscholastic); however, the ratio of time spent on instruction and competition must be similar for all institutional camps.

 

Question No. 6: What institutional penalties may result from operating a camp in a manner different from other institutional camps?

Answer: The Board endorsed and strongly encouraged the use of suspensions of a head men’s basketball and/or assistant men’s basketball coach from coaching in NCAA tournament or regular season games in such cases.

 

Summer Daily Compliance Item- 6/12/12

Third N. Long is a football prospective student-athlete that will be initially enrolling full-time at Ocean State University (OSU) this fall.  To help get a jump start on his academics, Third will be taking a few classes at OSU this summer.  OSU will be providing athletic aid to cover all of Third’s expenses.  Since Third is receiving athletic aid to attend a summer session, will he be an initial and/or overall counter during the 2012-13 academic year?

Yes for both limits.  NCAA Bylaw 15.5.1.9.1 states that in football, a prospective student-athlete who receives athletically related financial aid during a summer term prior to initial full-time enrollment at the certifying institution shall be an initial and overall counter for the ensuing academic year.  (See Bylaws15.02.3 and 15.5.6.) (Adopted: 1/14/12)

 

If Third is deemed a non-qualifier or decides not to enroll at OSU after the summer session, will he still be an initial and/or overall counter for the 2012-13 academic year?

Yes.  As presented at the NCAA Regional Rules seminar, Third will count against both the initial and overall counter limits.  The following was included as part of the PowerPoint presentation during the Division I Financial Aid– Part 1 session.

Proposal  No. 2011-75.

*In football,  prospective student-athlete who receives athletically related financial aid during a summer term is an initial and overall counter for the next academic year.

*Applies even if prospective student-athlete is a non-qualifier or does not enroll.

*Effective Immediately.