International Prospective Student-Athletes & NCAA DI Amateurism – The professionalization threshold

1. International Prospective Student-Athletes & NCAA DI Amateurism – The professionalization threshold © 2005 Kaburakis

2. Who are they?

4. International Sport Structure Federalized club-based socio-cultural model One Sport Federation – All Levels Direct contact between professional and amateur clubs US Intercollegiate Amateur Sport model “Clear demarcation between intercollegiate and professional sports” (NCAA Constitution, Article 1, Bylaw 1.3.1) NCAA DI minimizing relations w/ Pro sports The nature of the problem US v. International Sport Structure

5. International Sport Structure Federalized club-based socio-cultural model One Sport Federation – All Levels Direct contact between professional and amateur clubs US Intercollegiate Amateur Sport model “Clear demarcation between intercollegiate and professional sports” (NCAA Constitution, Article 1, Bylaw 1.3.1) NCAA DI minimizing relations w/ Pro sports The nature of the problem US v. International Sport Structure

6. The tip of the iceberg • NCAA DI Amateurism (Bylaws 2.9, 12) • “Participation… motivated by education and by the physical, mental, and social benefits to be derived… avocation…” • “Professional athletics team… provides any of its players more than actual and necessary expenses” (12.02.4) • “An individual loses amateur status if… ever competed on any (12.02.4) team… even if no pay or remuneration for expenses was received” (12.1.1 & 12.3.2.2)

7. NCAA ConstitutionAmateurism definitions and regulations • 1.3.1: “The competitive athletics programs of member institutions are designed to be a vital part of the educational system. A basic purpose of this Association is to maintain intercollegiate athletics as an integral part of the educational program and the athlete as an integral part of the student body and, by so doing, retain a clear line of demarcation between intercollegiate athletics and professional sports” • 2.9: “Student-athletes shall be amateurs in an intercollegiate sport, and their participation should be motivated primarily by education and by the physical, mental, and social benefits to be derived. Student participation in intercollegiate athletics is an avocation, and student-athletes should be protected from exploitation by professional and commercial enterprises”

8. Bylaw 12Amateurism definitions • 12.01.1: “Only an amateur student-athlete is eligible for intercollegiate athletics participation in a particular sport” • 12.01.3: “NCAA amateur status may be lost as a result of activities prior to enrollment in college…”

9. Bylaw 12Amateurism definitions • 12.02.2 Pay. Pay is the receipt of funds, awards or benefits not permitted by the governing legislation of the Association for participation in athletics • 12.02.3 Professional Athlete. A professional athlete is one who receives any kind of payment, directly or indirectly, for athletics participation except as permitted by the governing legislation of the Association

10. Bylaw 12Amateurism definitions • 12.02.4 Professional Athletics Team. A professional team is any organized team that: • a) Provides any of its players more than actual and necessary expenses for the participation on the team, except as otherwise permitted by NCAA legislation. Actual and necessary expenses are limited to the following, provided the value of these items is commensurate with the fair market value in the locality of the player(s) and is not excessive in nature: • Meals directly tied to competition and practice held in preparation for such competition; • Lodging directly tied to competition and practice held in preparation for such competition; • Apparel, equipment, and supplies; • Coaching and instruction; • Health/Medical Insurance; • Transportation (i.e., expenses to and from practice and competition, cost of transportation from home to training/practice site at the beginning of the season and from training/practice site to home at the end of the season); • Medical treatment and physical therapy; • Facility usage; (Revised: 4/24/03) • Entry fees; and (Revised: 4/24/03) • Other reasonable expenses (Adopted 4/24/03; Revised: 10/28/04) • b) Declares itself to be professional

11. Bylaw 12Amateurism • 12.1.1 Amateur Status. An individual loses amateur status and thus shall be ineligible for intercollegiate competition in a particular sport if the individual: a) Uses his or her athletics skill (directly or indirectly) for pay in any form in that sport; b) Accepts a promise of pay even if such pay is to be received following completion of intercollegiate athletics participation; c) Signs a contract or commitment of any kind to play professional athletics, regardless of its legal enforceability or any consideration received; d) Receives, directly or indirectly, a salary, reimbursement of expenses or any other form of financial assistance from a professional sports organization based upon athletics skill or participation, except as permitted by NCAA rules and regulations; e) Competes on any professional athletics team (per Bylaw 12.02.4), even if no pay or remuneration for expenses was received; f) Subsequent to initial full-time collegiate enrollment, enters into a professional draft (NFL/NBA/NHL draft exceptions); or g) Enters into an agreement with an agent

12. Bylaw 12Amateurism • 12.3.2.2Competition with Professionals. An individual shall not be eligible for intercollegiate athletics in a sport if the individual ever competed on a professional team (per Bylaw 12.02.4) in that sport.

13. Amateurism and certification of eligibility–OLD • 14.01.1: “An institution shall not permit a student-athlete to represent it in intercollegiate athletics competition unless the student-athlete meets all applicable eligibility requirements, and the institution has certified the student-athlete's eligibility” • 14.1.2: “As a condition and obligation of membership, it is the responsibility of a member institution to determine the validity of the information on which the eligibility of a student-athlete is based.”

14. NCAA internal mechanism – OLD • MI = Main Actor implementing amateurism rules and initiating process • ISA questionnaire • Agents, Gambling, and Amateurism (AGA) staff contribution • NCAA DI form 04-10a completion • Institutional eligibility certification decision – SA Reinstatement (SAR) staff contribution

15. NCAA internal mechanism • Important policy notes – dates • Summer 2003 – Standard of SAR review shift [intent to professionalize (subjective) – reasonable person (objective)] – Executive Committee memorandum on “less bureaucratic – more responsive” initiative (err on the side of the student – “SA-first” philosophy) – Staff restructuring – SAR staff authority – Decrease in SARC appeals (5,5% - 3,5%) – In spite of concerns about MIs “riding the SA-first wave” ManCo unanimously passed the policy change… • 2002 – 2004 lobbying and discussion among membership for finding a “competitive equity – institutional control – SA welfare balance” – Seeds for an Amateurism Clearinghouse • Props 2004-60 – 2005-37 promoting Clearinghouse • Spring 2005 – Key staff restructuring – Task force

16. Student-Athlete Reinstatement Process Institution receives Eligibility Center (EC) decision and abides by EC and any appeals decisions – Once SA competes, institution continues to monitor SA status Initial Recruitment- evaluation, questionnaire, scholarship offer Ineligible SAR staff appeal and info collection, AGA staff contribution Eligible SAR staff review Eligible Ineligible Conditions (repayment, withheld from contests) SAR Committee Appeal

17. Student-Athlete Amateurism Certification Process Initial Recruitment Division I & II Register with NCAA Eligibility Center – online questionnaire & student release form 1 3 2 Membership Services staff applies rules ACP decision – Certified ACP staff fact-finding process Division III If conditional certification, triggering SAR Legislative Review/Interp. Process Amateurism Fact-Finding Committee request if dispute ACP Certification by institution No Certification Certified w/ conditions Amateurism Cabinet appeal – Final determination of facts Appeal to SAR Committee Ineligible Eligible w/ conditions Eligible w/o conditions

18. SAR conditions on professional competition amateurism violations Prior to first opportunity to enroll (e.g. pre-HS graduation) After first opportunity to enroll (e.g. post-HS graduation) Present 2for1, no max* 1for1, 1year max 1for1, 1year max Permanently ineligible Past * e.g.: exhausting remaining eligibility if total of pro games played ≈ 56 (56 X 2 = 112, approximate total of four reg. seasons of college basketball)

19. SAR Decision Making Philosophies and Withholding Conditions Structure

20. National Club

21. ISFs World Championships & Olympics CFs Continental (e.g. European) Championships NFs- NGBs National teams Regional Assoc. Regional select teams Senior Clubs Jr. Clubs, Rec, & School

22. Champions League, Euroleague ISFs FIFA/UEFA, FIBA/FIBA Europe CFs Professional Leagues Associations (ULEB, G14) NFs & NGBs Professional Clubs Associations (EPL, ESAKE) Top (pro) competition (Super Leagues, A1, A2) Lower levels (amateur or pro-am; Divisions II, III, IV, V, etc.) + Promotion and relegation Regional Assoc. Promotion to First team Senior Clubs Junior Clubs (U12, U14, U16, U18) High School and College competitions Jr. Clubs, Rec, & School

23. Summary of key findings from international sport governance structure • Top club level competition in MW BB = pro • Junior clubs may compensate IPSAs • IPSAs may be promoted to senior pro clubs • IPSAs may be urged to participate in pro clubs • IPSAs may participate in pro competition w/o compensation or contracts • IPSAs level of NCAA DI Amateurism knowledge is low • Certain federation administrators’ and coaches’ level of NCAA DI Amateurism knowledge is high – Insurance practices to prevent athletes from fleeing to the US

24. Summary of key findings from international sport governance structure • Sports Academies’ IPSAs = amateurs • First opportunity to enroll varies – Dependant upon graduation age or mandatory military duty • Difficult for MIs – NCAA staff – ICs to verify records and document amateurism violations • Some IPSAs are sponsored by corporate partners of their federations – Creation of US pro sports leagues’ farm system • M>W BB per amateurism violations

25. Notable areas of controversy • Institutional contribution – Truth & Dare • Whistle-blowing – Random distribution • Balance Institutional control – SA welfare – Competitive Equity principles • Decision-making consistency & flexibility • Treatment and sanctions pre and post-1st opportunity to enroll (e.g. new “2 for 1” withholding condition policy, w/o max. limit) • Staff experience & handling of cases • Legal ramifications and policy extensions?

26. Constitutional issues

27. Case Law • NCAA v. Lasege and University of Louisville, 53 S.W.3d 77 (S. Ct. Ky. 2001)

28. NCAA v. Yeo, 171 S.W.3d 863, 48 Tex. Sup. J. 1016 (Tex. 2005) • Most recent case • Demonstrating trend in (lower) courts decisions (challenging Associations’ dominant positions) • Amateurism-Eligibility Due Process-Property Interest confirmed • NCAA Intervention • State S. Ct. reversed – No right to participate = Privilege

29. High Schools Difficult to participate in HS sport but for US State Dept. and CSIET accredited Exchange Programs Direct placements are problematic (think Ed-Ville, Bloomington) HSAAs rules’ challenges Prep Schools Authorized to issue SEVIS docs for visas Athletic recruiting & financial aid rationale Compromising educational standards (see video) Accreditation problems NCAA monitoring What about interscholastic sports?

30. What do we learn? • Litigation is not the answer • Policy evolution works • Balancing NCAA constitutional principles – Certain way to fail = Trying to please everyone all the time • It is difficult to interpret and apply Amateurism in 21st Century competitive and commercialized sport • If you want to change the system, you need to work from within, through membership, legislative proposals, policy analysis and meaningful research yielding feasible recommendations • Lobbying via approaching & appreciating both sides – Mid-majors have made a difference re: policy drafting • Turnover in NCAA and institutional staff is a problem

31. Why care? Two Greek cents • Jobs • Frequency of investigations and needs in Compliance create Athletic Dept. openings • Policy evolution = NCAA staff positions’ creation • Lack of knowledge and applicable research skills (IU, SIUE courses service) • Law firms and Compliance consulting groups in need of specific tool sets – Knowledge costs ≈ $500/hr • Other avenues (scouting, recruiting consulting, academic services, transition & procedure care) • Times of extremes – Call for balance • Serve NCAA and US Constitutional principles

32. Case in point • Zoe: 17, Sr. in HS (GR) • Played 3 years in A1 (pro) competition in Greece alongside and against WNBA players • No contract, agent, or impermissible benefits • UConn Compliance? Thoughtfully deal with this case, as if you were in charge of institutional compliance and recruiting strategies © 2008 Kaburakis