Division II's football-sponsoring delegates at Saturday's business session of the 2024 NCAA Convention narrowly approved a proposal that permits schools to play their first permissible contest one week earlier than the current legislative date. The proposal is effective Aug. 1.
Another football proposal that would have guaranteed all football-sponsoring conferences representation in the championship bracket was defeated by one vote. That proposal was also voted on only by football-sponsoring delegates.
The full Division II delegate body approved two other proposals with legislative changes to championships.
Football-only proposals
The membership-sponsored proposal amending the first permissible football contest date to a week before the Thursday preceding Sept. 6 was approved by an 89-80 vote margin, with one abstention. Rationale of support for the proposal included providing schools with the flexibility to schedule and play the maximum allowable 11 contests over a 12-week period, if desired, and decreasing the burden of finding available nonconference opponents. Supporters of the proposal noted this change will provide the ability to schedule a bye week during the season, which will benefit student-athlete health and safety. The first permissible practice date will be 24 days before a school's first contest or 10 days before the school's first day of classes, whichever is earlier.
The Division II Student-Athlete Advisory Committee opposed the proposal, citing concerns that football players' summers will be reduced and include less time for internships. Davaris Cheeks, former football player at Concordia-St. Paul and member of Division II SAAC, spoke against the safety merits of the proposal during the business session.
"The bye week is not a true week off as practices would likely still be required by coaches," Cheeks said. "This legislation poses a misconception that football student-athletes would get a week off. However, it would be an extension of the season, and it would add additional practices, increasing the possibility of injury for football student-athletes."
The other football proposal, sponsored by the Division II Presidents Council, was defeated by an 83-84 vote margin. The proposal would have amended earned access legislation to require representation in the championship bracket from all football-sponsoring conferences by including the highest-ranked team in a conference not already represented in the bracket. Currently, earned access legislation in football only applies if a conference is not represented in the bracket and has a team ranked within the top nine of a super region.
Another football proposal that would have guaranteed all football-sponsoring conferences representation in the championship bracket was defeated by one vote. That proposal was also voted on only by football-sponsoring delegates.
The full Division II delegate body approved two other proposals with legislative changes to championships.
Football-only proposals
The membership-sponsored proposal amending the first permissible football contest date to a week before the Thursday preceding Sept. 6 was approved by an 89-80 vote margin, with one abstention. Rationale of support for the proposal included providing schools with the flexibility to schedule and play the maximum allowable 11 contests over a 12-week period, if desired, and decreasing the burden of finding available nonconference opponents. Supporters of the proposal noted this change will provide the ability to schedule a bye week during the season, which will benefit student-athlete health and safety. The first permissible practice date will be 24 days before a school's first contest or 10 days before the school's first day of classes, whichever is earlier.
The Division II Student-Athlete Advisory Committee opposed the proposal, citing concerns that football players' summers will be reduced and include less time for internships. Davaris Cheeks, former football player at Concordia-St. Paul and member of Division II SAAC, spoke against the safety merits of the proposal during the business session.
"The bye week is not a true week off as practices would likely still be required by coaches," Cheeks said. "This legislation poses a misconception that football student-athletes would get a week off. However, it would be an extension of the season, and it would add additional practices, increasing the possibility of injury for football student-athletes."
The other football proposal, sponsored by the Division II Presidents Council, was defeated by an 83-84 vote margin. The proposal would have amended earned access legislation to require representation in the championship bracket from all football-sponsoring conferences by including the highest-ranked team in a conference not already represented in the bracket. Currently, earned access legislation in football only applies if a conference is not represented in the bracket and has a team ranked within the top nine of a super region.
Comment