NCAA to Consider Ban on Freshman Basketball Eligibility

Action could pave the way for more to jump to the pros

Overland Park, Kansas, June 10, 1999 -- Until 1972, freshman were not allowed to compete in NCAA varsity teams. A panel of 27 members formed by the NCAA is considering a return to that policy for men's (and possibly women's) basketball players.

The rules change could change the make-up of who goes to a Division I school and how these students who choose to do so will compete academically in these institutions.

Males basketball players are the focus on the proposal because of their low graduation rates. According to the NCAA's latest statistics, only 41 percent of male basketball players in the 1991 entering class got their degrees, including just 37 percent of black players. That was the lowest of all groups and does not compare favorable with the graduation rate for all Division I athletes, which was 57 percent. The rate for female basketball players, 66 percent, was the highest.

Often student-athletes are isolated from the rest of the campus and have had a hard time adjusting to the general college life. An freshman eligibility ban would give them the chance to concentrate on their studies and integrate themselves more easily with teachers and other (non-athletic) students. The NCAA has already passed legislation for 2000 mandating that student-athletes make "satisfactory progress" toward a degree so that they'll have to have a 1.8 grade-point average to play as a sophomore and a 2.0 as a junior. Not being eligible to play as freshmen will only help many students to attain those goals.

The major downside to this proposal is the likelihood of talented high school graduates to bypass college altogether and seek entry to the NBA. As adults, the NCAA nor the NBA can prohibit a person from doing this and in recent years, more and more players have bypassed the college route. Not playing competitively during freshman year is a good excuse for many to go pro.

The proposal has its merits and has a number of key allies, such as NCAA President Cedric Dempsey and former University of North Carolina coach Dean Smith, according to the New York Times. The group will convene in Chicago later this month to consider the matter. If the panel recommends the change, the recommendations will then be forwarded to the NCAA Board of Directors.

The idea has its share of detractors. According to the Washington Post, an NCAA survey last fall showed that 74.7% of administrators and coaches either "disagree" or "strongly disagree" with the proposal. Also problematic is the idea of whether women's basketball would be subject to the ban. As women's graduation rates are among the highest of any sport, one would question the wisdom of their inclusion.

Challenges in Court

If the NCAA were to bar freshmen, the decision might be challenged in court. The most likely challenge would be grounds that the distinction violated Constitutional rights of equal protection under the laws. Since many NCAA schools are state universities, the 14th amendment guarantees could very well apply. If that is the case, the NCAA (and the school) would have to prove that the distinction made between male basketball players and everyone else is justified. That is not easy to show, especially if a racial disparity is found (e.g. a substantial percentage of men's basketball players would be African-American as opposed to other student-athletic teams). The recent decisions regarding the NCAA's Proposition 16 eligibility for all athletes attests for the difficulties the organization would have in attempting to impose barriers to eligibility.

But there is an air of practicality in this idea. Dempsey was quoted in USA Today as saying: "College isn't for everybody." I think that is quite true. If this kind of proposal is enacted, maybe the definition of a college athlete may return to some kind of ideal of amateurism and love for the sport, rather than as a de facto minor league to the NBA.

Update:

July 1, 1999 -- The special NCAA committee rejected the proposal "because of potential legal problems and a lack of membership support for the proposal," according to the Washington Post. The freshman ineligibility proposal had "little grass-roots support," in part due to the increased risk of lawsuits. Since 80 percent of the players affected would be black, discrimination claims would be likely.