Recruiting rule to be reviewed in May

Another piece of controversial recruiting legislation passed by the NCAA this year is headed back to the drawing board.

The collegiate governing body received the necessary 75 override votes from Division I membership on proposal 13-3 by the Wednesday deadline, mandating a review by the Division I board of directors at its May 2 meeting.

The rule, approved in January at the NCAA convention for implementation Aug. 1, would eliminate restrictions on private electronic communication, including phone calls and text messages, from college coaches to recruits.

The proposal was met with widespread criticism at the college and high school levels as concerns escalated that recruiting communications would overwhelm prospects and consume the schedules of coaches.

Two other proposals designed to deregulate recruiting -- 11-2 and 13-5-A -- were suspended Monday by the board of directors at the suggestion of the NCAA working group. If enacted, 11-2 and 13-5-A would have eliminated the requirement that only a full-time coach perform the duties of a recruiting coordinator and erased restrictions on printed materials mailed to recruits.

Those rules also received the necessary override votes, as did a rule passed at the convention that would prohibit coaches from scouting future opponents in person.

Proposal 13-2 was tabled for further review at the NCAA convention and remains under consideration by the board. It would set a uniform date of July 1 before a prospect's junior year for recruiting contact initiated by college coaches.

In originally passing the recruiting deregulation rules, the NCAA cited the burden required to enforce restrictions of the current bylaws and a desire to focus on meaningful legislation.

Several options exist for the rules under review.

The 18-member board of directors, comprised of college presidents, can maintain its course on the proposals, which would send them to an online vote of the Division I membership and require a 62.5 percent majority for dismissal.

The board could agree with the override, which would rescind the proposals. It also could amend the proposals, then refer them for further study, subjecting the legislation to another 60-day override period.