I got your massive package right here.

You may recall that, earlier this year, the NCAA announced with some fanfare an initiative with regard to time demands on student-athletes.

Division I athletes will have a say in shaping NCAA policies about time demands through a survey distributed this week to all 346 schools.

Athletes in every Division I sport will be asked to provide feedback in the survey, distributed Monday by the NCAA. The Power 5 conferences, the NCAA Division I council and the Division I student-athlete advisory committee formulated the survey. Results are due March 21 and will be relayed to the Division I council, which will meet in April.

The survey is being conducted online and not being administered by coaching staffs that could attempt to influence the responses.

According to a survey sent to a Football Bowl Subdivision player and obtained Friday by ESPN, respondents complete sections on in-season countable athletic-related activities (CARA), out-of-season time demands and travel.

A “massive legislative package” regarding time demands will be introduced by September, according to Northwestern athletic director Jim Phillips, chair of the council. After several months of review, a proposed policy will go to a vote at the NCAA convention in January 2017.

Yeah, well, the results are in and it’ll be interesting to see what kind of shape that so-called “massive legislative package” will take.  Not because of a lack of response from players, but because, shall we say, there’s a certain lack of consensus between labor… er, student-athletes, and management… er, coaches and ADs.

To start with, here are the spots where the parties see eye to eye:

All of the participants in the survey generally agreed that there should be at least eight hours overnight between activities that can be counted toward the NCAA’s 20-hour-per-week limit on what athletes can do with their teams during the season. There also was agreement about implementing what is termed a “mandatory no-activity period” immediately following the end of a season, as well as offseason no-activity period in which athletes would be encouraged to participate in an educational or career-development activity.

But even that last point was the start of a disagreement as to how long such a period should be.

Meanwhile, where the rubber meets the road…

The survey showed that a majority of athletes felt that travel to and from games, compliance meetings and organized team promotional activities also should be counted toward the 20-hour limit. A majority of the faculty athletics representatives agreed, but a majority of AD’s, coaches and administrators disagreed. For example, 63% of athletes said travel should count against the limit while 7% of coaches and 25% of AD’s said travel should count.

Participants also were asked: If the definition of countable activities was expanded, would you be supportive of increasing the hours limit? Athletes in some of the NCAA’s most prominent sports were among the least supportive of this idea. FBS football players were least supportive (34%), followed by those in men’s lacrosse (35%), women’s basketball and FCS football (38% each), men’s lacrosse (35%) and men’s basketball (41%). At least 60% of the head coaches in each of those sports supported that idea (73% in men’s basketball) and 64% of the athletics directors did so, including 56% of the ADs at Power Five conference schools.

Athletes in these sports also largely supported the creation of time limits on team activities during preseason practice and academic vacation periods, while majorities of head coaches in those sports did not, except 52% of men’s lacrosse coaches said they supported this during vacation periods.

Somehow, I think that legislative package may not be so massive now.  And the beat goes on…

10 Comments

Filed under Look For The Union Label, The NCAA

10 responses to “I got your massive package right here.

  1. Russ

    How nice of them to suggest some limited amount of time in the off-season so the “student” could pursue an educational opportunity. That would be something like going to class?

  2. Debby Balcer

    So much for being a student athlete maybe they should be called athlete students since that is what the schools want them to be.

  3. DawgPhan

    When the day comes that all of this comes crashing down around them I am sure the presidents, ADs, and coaches will all act totally surprised and claimed that there was no way to see this coming.

  4. 69Dawg

    Ah committees and surveys just another way to kick the can down the road while acting like you really GAS. Congress has made this into an art form.

  5. JCDAWG83

    Fans have to decide what they really want. Do they want the current NFL Light level of play in college or do they want High School All Star level of play?

    The only way to maintain the current level of talent and play is to maintain the current amount of time the players are putting into practice, conditioning and study of football. What is put in determines what is put out. This is true in all activities not only sports.

    • DawgPhan

      I wonder if the players would be more open to the continued increase of football activities if maybe they had a little extra coin in their pocket.

      Right now, why on earth would they want to do more knowing that it will be the coaches and ADs that reap even further rewards for their hard work. I would want less work, not more if I wasnt going to see any of the fruits of my labor.

      • JCDAWG83

        The scholarship is the fruit of their labor. Whether they are putting in 20 hours a week or 10 hours a week, the scholarship is the reward they get. If the scholarship isn’t worth the effort, the player can always quit the team and pay their own way in school or get student loans to pay for college. Of course, they won’t get the free NFL audition but that certainly isn’t worth being unfairly taken advantage of.

        What the coaches and ADs make has no bearing on whether or not the player is getting a fair deal. Not many people quit their jobs because they think their boss makes too much money.

        • If it’s not a job, why are you analogizing to jobs and bosses?

        • DawgPhan

          So they get the scholarship for the level of effort they put in today. Fair enough. So again, why would a student athlete want to put in the same effort to gain the same reward? just cuz?

          Also with regards to the relationship between time spent and quality of play, I would imagine that the relationship is not linear and some point you see diminishing returns and probably even cause harm to your team by increasing football activities.