Daily Compliance Item- 1.29.16- 13.12.2.3.8- Fundamental Camps/Clinics

Ocean State University men’s and men’s soccer coaches would like to participate in a clinic that is being run by the local YMCA for young kids in the area. The purpose of the clinic is to introduce the sport and provide basic skills. The clinic has been advertised and is open to the general public. Because the coaches are anticipating a large turnout, they have asked some of the athletic department staff to help out with registration. Is this permissible?

Yes. NCAA Official Interpretation- 1/27/16- Athletics Department Personnel Employment at Noninstitutional Fundamental Skills Camps/Clinics (I)– states that in all sports, athletics department personnel may serve in any capacity at noninstitutional fundamental skills camps/clinics at any time.

NCAA Bylaw 13.12.2.3.8 states that an institution’s athletics department personnel may serve in any capacity at a noninstitutional camp or clinic conducted under the following conditions: [D] (Adopted: 1/13/03, Revised: 8/5/04)

(a) The camp or clinic is designed to develop fundamental skills in a sport (rather than refine the abilities of skilled participants in the sport);

(b) The camp or clinic is open to the general public (except for restrictions in age or number of participants);

(c) The camp or clinic is conducted primarily for educational purposes and does not include material benefits for the participants (e.g., awards, prizes, merchandise, gifts);

(d) Participants do not receive a recruiting presentation; and

(e) All participants reside in the state in which the camp/clinic is located or within 100 miles of the camp/clinic.

[References: NCAA Division I Bylaws 13.12.2.3.2 (institutional/noninstitutional, privately owned camps/clinics — basketball); 13.12.2.3.3 camps/clinics — bowl subdivision football); 13.12.2.3.4 (noninstitutional, privately owned camps/clinics, championship subdivision football); 13.12.2.3.5 (institutional/noninstitutional, privately owned camps/clinics — men’s volleyball); 13.12.2.3.6 (other noninstitutional privately owned camps/clinics — sports other than basketball, football and men’s volleyball) and 13.12.2.3.8 (noninstitutional fundamental skills camp/clinic)and staff interpretation 11/11/2015 item b, which has been archived ]

Jennifer M. Condaras
Associate Commissioner
BIG EAST Conference

The opinions expressed in the Daily Compliance Item are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by The BIG EAST Conference, JumpForward, or the Collegiate Sports Group of Bond, Schoeneck, and King. The Daily Compliance Item is not a substitute for a compliance office, case specific research, or the NCAA Bylaws. Do some homework, ask around, and get it right.

Daily Compliance Item- 1.27.16- Current Event

Judge Approves Settlement in Head Injuries Suit Against N.C.A.A.

NYTimes.com

A federal judge granted initial approval of a settlement Tuesday between the N.C.A.A. and a group of athletes who sued the association over its handling of head injuries. The agreement, which still needs N.C.A.A. approval, does not contain cash settlements for the plaintiffs in the proposed class-action suit, but mandates a new national protocol for head injuries sustained by players.

The proposed settlement, which was first submitted in July 2014, calls for a $70 million monitoring fund for former athletes, which would allow them the opportunity to receive neurological screenings to examine brain functions and any signs of brain damage like chronic traumaticencephalopathy, a degenerative brain disease. Under the settlement, the N.C.A.A. would also prevent athletes who have sustained a concussion from returning to a game or practice that day.

United States District Judge John Z. Lee did request one notable change from the original settlement: that the N.C.A.A. not have complete immunity against class-action concussion litigation. Lee’s terms for approval include a provision that would still allow athletes at a particular college to sue their university and the N.C.A.A. as a class.

The N.C.A.A. issued a statement saying it was still reviewing Lee’s terms.

“After all the wait, we’ve basically got 96 percent of what we expected to get,” said Steve Berman, the lead counsel for the plaintiffs. “It’s understandable, with a settlement this big, there could be some tweaking, but we’re happy with the result.”

Adrian Arrington, a former football player at Eastern Illinois University, was the first to sue the N.C.A.A. over concussions in 2011, claiming negligence related to the handling of several head injuries he sustained in his career.

Several similar cases were filed and then consolidated. Arrington announced that he opposed the proposed settlement last year, arguing that individual athletes should receive compensation.

The N.F.L. settled a concussion suit with former players that included millions of dollars to help those with one of several neurological diseases.

Regardless of the N.C.A.A.’s decision on Lee’s terms, Jay Edelson, a plaintiffs’ lawyer who opposed the initial settlement, said he was now looking into filing a new round of class-action suits against the N.C.A.A. and individual universities over their handling of concussions.

“We are going to get real relief for struggling athletes, and the court has now said filing class-action suits on a school-by-school basis is the proper way to do that,” he said.

A status hearing for the case is scheduled Thursday in Chicago.

This article was selected for educational purposes only.

Jennifer M. Condaras
Associate Commissioner
BIG EAST Conference

The opinions expressed in the Daily Compliance Item are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by The BIG EAST Conference, JumpForward, or the Collegiate Sports Group of Bond, Schoeneck, and King. The Daily Compliance Item is not a substitute for a compliance office, case specific research, or the NCAA Bylaws. Do some homework, ask around, and get it right.

Daily Compliance Item- 1.26.16- 13.2.1, 13.15.1- Gifts to Prospects

The Ocean State University (OSU) Men’s Basketball program would like to honor 2 local high school students that were severely injured in a car accident, leaving them paralyzed from the waist down. The coaches would like to provide them with autographed balls and framed jerseys with their names on the back.

Is it permissible for OSU to provide the gifts to these individuals since they are prospects?

Yes with conditions. NCAA Official Interpretation- 11/1/10- Application of NCAA Bylaw 13 to a Prospective Student-Athlete with no Reasonable Expectation of Participation in Intercollegiate Athletics (I)– states that the restrictions of Bylaw 13 do not apply to a prospective student-athlete who has no reasonable expectation of participating in intercollegiate athletics as a result of a disability or terminal illness, provided he or she is not a relative of a prospective student-athlete who is being recruited by the institution.

[References: Bylaws 13.02.11 (prospective student-athlete), 13.2.1 (general regulation), 13.2.2 (specific prohibitions) 13.10.5 (prospective student-athlete’s visit), 13.10.6 (introduction of prospective student-athlete) and 13.15.1 (precollege expenses — prohibited expenses); official interpretation (10/22/01, Item No. a) and staff interpretation (2/25/10, item a), which have been archived]

Jennifer M. Condaras
Associate Commissioner
BIG EAST Conference

The opinions expressed in the Daily Compliance Item are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by The BIG EAST Conference, JumpForward, or the Collegiate Sports Group of Bond, Schoeneck, and King. The Daily Compliance Item is not a substitute for a compliance office, case specific research, or the NCAA Bylaws. Do some homework, ask around, and get it right.

Daily Compliance Item- 1.25.16- 13.6.4.2- Inclement Weather Extending Official Visit

Ocean State University conducted a few official visits over the weekend. Because of Winter Storm Jonas all incoming/outbound flights were cancelled, and the prospects were not able to depart campus within the 48 hour period.

Does Ocean State University have to report a violation?

No. NCAA Bylaw 13.6.4.2 states that an official visit may extend beyond 48 hours for reasons beyond the control of the prospective student-athlete and the institution (e.g., inclement weather conditions, natural disaster, flight delays or cancellations, airport security activity). In such instances, the institution shall submit a report to the conference office noting the details of the circumstances. (Adopted: 4/26/07 effective 8/1/07)

Jennifer M. Condaras
Associate Commissioner
BIG EAST Conference

The opinions expressed in the Daily Compliance Item are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by The BIG EAST Conference, JumpForward, or the Collegiate Sports Group of Bond, Schoeneck, and King. The Daily Compliance Item is not a substitute for a compliance office, case specific research, or the NCAA Bylaws. Do some homework, ask around, and get it right.

Daily Compliance Item- 1.22.16- 13.6.2.1- Cancelled Official Visits

Full Back is a football prospect interested in enrolling at Ocean State University (OSU) next year. Full is supposed to take an official visit today and tomorrow on OSU’s campus. Due to inclement weather, OSU cancelled all official visits. Unfortunately the coaches were not able to contact Full prior to him getting on his flight. Full will be met at the airport by one of the assistant coaches and immediately returned home. Given the circumstances, will Full be permitted to reschedule an official visit with OSU? Yes. NCAA Staff Interpretation- 2/10/89– Prospect permitted additional official visit after the initial visit was canceled – states that in regard to an institution that canceled its expense-paid visits during a particular weekend due to inclement weather and attempted to notify each prospect of this decision, noting that one prospective student-athlete did not receive notification, was met at the airport in the institution’s home community by one of the institution’s coaches and immediately returned home; determined that inasmuch as the prospective student- -athlete never visited the institution’s campus or home community, the institution still would be permitted to provide that prospect with an official visit (including round-trip air transportation) to the member institution with the understanding that the contact at the airport between the coach and the prospect would count as one of the institution’s three permissible off-campus contacts with that prospect per Bylaw 13.1.4.4-(b).

Jennifer M. Condaras
Associate Commissioner
BIG EAST Conference

The opinions expressed in the Daily Compliance Item are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by The BIG EAST Conference, JumpForward, or the Collegiate Sports Group of Bond, Schoeneck, and King. The Daily Compliance Item is not a substitute for a compliance office, case specific research, or the NCAA Bylaws. Do some homework, ask around, and get it right.

Daily Compliance Item- 1.21.16- 13.11.2.1- Basketball On-Campus Evaluations

Which of the following is true regarding basketball on-campus evaluations?

A. They can be publicized

B. More than one prospect may participate in the same on-campus evaluation

C. On-campus evaluations can be recorded

D. Both B and C.

The answer is D. NCAA Educational Column- 1/23/13- NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball On-Campus Evaluations (I)- provides further clarification through the following questions and answers regarding the application of NCAA Division I legislation as it relates to on-campus evaluations in men’s basketball.

Question No. 1: May an institution publicize the on-campus evaluation of a prospective student-athlete?

Answer: No. NCAA Bylaw 13.10.5 specifies that an institution shall not publicize (or arrange for publicity of) a prospective student-athlete’s visit to the institution’s campus.

Question No. 2: May an institution conduct an on-campus evaluation with a prospective student-athlete who has graduated from high school and is enrolled in a preparatory school?

Answer: Yes, provided the institution has not previously conducted an on-campus evaluation with the prospective student-athlete (e.g., during senior year of high school); the evaluation is conducted at the end of the prospective student-athlete’s season; and, after he has exhausted preparatory school eligibility in basketball.

Question No. 3: May an institution conduct an on-campus evaluation with a prospective student-athlete during his senior year in high school and another while he is enrolled in a preparatory school during the following year?

Answer: No. An institution may conduct one on-campus evaluation with a prospective student-athlete while he is enrolled in high school or preparatory school and one after the prospective student-athlete enrolls full time in a collegiate institution.

Question No. 4: What activities are counted toward the permissible two hours of on-campus evaluation activities?

Answer: Any activities that are considered countable athletically related activities would count toward the permissible two hours.

Question No. 5: May an institution provide a prospective student-athlete access to locker and shower facilities during an on-campus evaluation?

Answer: Yes.

Question No. 6: May an institution conduct an on-campus evaluation with a two-year college transfer prospective student-athlete who has withdrawn from the two-year institution?

Answer: An on-campus evaluation may not be conducted with a two-year college transfer prospective student-athlete until he has exhausted two-year college eligibility in basketball. Once such a prospective student-athlete is considered to have exhausted his two-year college eligibility, he may participate in an on-campus evaluation.

Question No. 7: May an institution conduct an on-campus evaluation with a high school prospective student-athlete or two-year college transfer prospective student-athlete who is not a participant on his institution’s basketball team?

Answer: An on-campus evaluation may not be conducted with a high school prospective student-athlete or a two-year college transfer prospective student-athlete until he has exhausted his high school or two-year college eligibility in basketball, respectively. Once such a prospective student-athlete is considered to have exhausted his eligibility, he may participate in an on-campus evaluation.

Question No. 8: How does the exhausted eligibility standard apply to an international or home-schooled student who is not a participant on his institution’s basketball team?

Answer: For purposes of conducting an on-campus evaluation, an international or home-schooled student who is not a participant on his institution’s basketball team is deemed to have exhausted eligibility at the time of graduation from high school (or the international equivalent).

Question No. 9: May an institution conduct an on-campus evaluation with a four-year college transfer prospective student-athlete who has withdrawn from the four-year institution or who is not a participant on his institution’s basketball team?

Answer: An on-campus evaluation may not be conducted with a four-year college transfer prospective student-athlete until the conclusion of the prospective student-athlete’s basketball season. If the prospective student-athlete has withdrawn from the institution or is not a participant, then his season is considered to be concluded. Therefore, he may participate in an on-campus evaluation (permission to contact must be granted by the previous institution if the individual met the definition of a student-athlete at that institution).

Question No. 10: May an institution’s coach observe a prospective student-athlete participating in a pick-up game that includes the institution’s current student-athletes and count the observation as an on-campus evaluation?

Answer: If the evaluation occurs during the academic year (e.g., skill-related workouts), it is permissible if the student-athletes are eligible for practice. If the evaluation occurs in the summer, it is permissible if the student-athletes are eligible to participate in summer athletics activities (e.g., enrolled in summer school or meet the exception to summer school enrollment). Such participation counts toward each student-athlete’s limitation of eight hours of required athletics activities per week with not more than two hours of skill-related instruction (academic year or summer).

Question No. 11: May an institution’s coach observe a prospective student-athlete participating in a pick-up game that includes the institution’s current student-athletes and current student-athletes from another collegiate institution and count the observation as an on-campus evaluation?

Answer: No. If student-athletes from other institutions participate, the activity would not meet the requirements of the required summer athletics activities legislation.

Question No. 12: If an on-campus evaluation occurs during a period in which there is a limit of four on the number of student-athletes who may be involved with a coach in skill-related instruction at the same time, may four student-athletes and the prospective student-athlete participate in the activity?

Answer: Yes. The prospective student-athlete is not included in the limit of four student-athletes who may be involved at any one time in skill instruction.

Question No. 13: If an on-campus evaluation occurs during the summer, may student-athletes participate?

Answer: Yes, provided the student-athletes are eligible to participate in summer athletics activities (e.g., enrolled in summer school or meet the exception to summer school enrollment) and such participation counts toward the limitations of eight hours of required athletics activities per week and two hours of skill-related instruction.

Question No. 14: If an institution is conducting an on-campus evaluation with a prospective student-athlete during the prospective student-athlete’s unofficial visit, may it provide the prospective student-athlete with food and/or beverages?

Answer: The institution may provide water and/or electrolyte replacement drinks (e.g., Gatorade, PowerAde) to the prospective student-athlete; however, it is not permissible to provide food to the prospective student-athlete during an unofficial visit.

Question No. 15: May an institution record video of an on-campus evaluation for further review after the actual evaluation?

Answer: Yes.

Question No. 16: May more than one prospective-student-athlete participate in an on-campus evaluation at the same time?

Answer: Yes. There is no limit on the number of prospective student-athletes who may participate at the same time.

Question No. 17: May the two hours of an on-campus evaluation be divided and conducted on two different days of the prospective student-athlete’s visit?

Answer: No. Conducting evaluations (or portions of an evaluation) on different days would constitute different, separate on-campus evaluations.

Question No. 18: What constitutes the “conclusion of a prospective student-athlete’s season” for purposes of conducting an on-campus evaluation?

Answer: The “conclusion of a prospective student-athlete’s season” refers to the conclusion of the prospective student-athlete’s scholastic season. A prospective student-athlete’s season is considered concluded when his scholastic season ends, even if he will be participating in an all-star contest at a later date.

Question No. 19: Pursuant to Bylaw 17.1.6.7, a student-athlete who has exhausted his eligibility, but is eligible for practice under the five-year rule, is not subject to the time limits of Bylaw 17.1.6. Is it permissible for such a student-athlete to participate in more than one on-campus evaluation in a week?

Answer: Yes. The two-hour limitation on skill-related instruction does not apply to such student-athletes.

Question No. 20: Is a student-athlete who has exhausted his eligibility but is eligible for practice under the five-year rule subject to the prohibition on conditioning and skill-related instruction from one week prior to the institution’s final exam period through the conclusion of the student-athlete’s final exams?

Answer: Yes.

[References: Bylaws 13.10.5 (prospective student-athlete visit), 13.11.2.1 (on-campus evaluations — men’s basketball), 13.11.2.6.1.2 (exception — on-campus evaluation — men’s basketball), 17.02.1 (countable athletically related activity), 17.1.6 (time limits for athletically related activity), 17.1.6.2.1.1.4 (summer athletic activities — men’s basketball), 17.1.6.2.1.1.4.1 (exception to summer school enrollment — academic requirements — men’s basketball), 17.1.6.2.1.1.4.1.1 (application to transfer student-athletes), 17.1.6.2.2 (skill instruction — sports other than baseball and football) and 17.1.6.7 (exception — eligibility exhausted)]

Jennifer M. Condaras
Associate Commissioner
BIG EAST Conference

The opinions expressed in the Daily Compliance Item are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by The BIG EAST Conference, JumpForward, or the Collegiate Sports Group of Bond, Schoeneck, and King. The Daily Compliance Item is not a substitute for a compliance office, case specific research, or the NCAA Bylaws. Do some homework, ask around, and get it right.

Daily Compliance Item- 1.20.16- 17.31.1.3- Outside Competition

Spot Kick is a men’s soccer student-athlete at Ocean State University (OSU). Spot wants to participate on an outside team this spring. Which of the following must occur in order for his participation to be permissible?

A. Spot may not begin participating before May 1st.

B. Spot may not miss any class time for practice or competition

C. No more than 4 OSU teammates may participate on Spot’s team (total limit of 5 OSU student-athletes)

D. All of the above

The answer is D. NCAA Bylaw 17.31.1.3 states that in soccer, women’s volleyball, field hockey and men’s water polo, a student-athlete may compete outside of the institution’s declared playing and practice season as a member of an outside team in any noncollegiate, amateur competition, provided: (Adopted: 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97, Revised: 4/22/98 effective 8/1/98, 1/12/99 effective 5/1/99)

(a) Such participation occurs not earlier than May 1;

(b) In soccer, women’s volleyball and field hockey, the number of student-athletes from any one institution does not exceed the applicable limits set forth in Bylaw 17.28.2;

(c) The competition is approved by the institution’s director of athletics;

(d) No class time is missed for practice activities or for competition; and

(e) In women’s volleyball, all practice and competition is confined to doubles tournaments in outdoor volleyball, either on sand or grass.

Jennifer M. Condaras
Associate Commissioner
BIG EAST Conference

The opinions expressed in the Daily Compliance Item are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by The BIG EAST Conference, JumpForward, or the Collegiate Sports Group of Bond, Schoeneck, and King. The Daily Compliance Item is not a substitute for a compliance office, case specific research, or the NCAA Bylaws. Do some homework, ask around, and get it right.