DESTIN, Fla. -- Jim McCullough, an associate commissioner with the Southeastern Conference, flipped open a cabinet panel that displayed a whiteboard that his league coaches had been focused on earlier in the day. Scrawled in black marker was his explanation of a new NCAA proposal that would make athletes work harder to retain eligibility during their college years.

"This is what I explained to my coaches today," McCullough said as he pointed to a series of numbers running across the top of the board. Numbers that show key NCAA leaders want athletes to acquire 40 percent of their degree credits by the start of their third year, 60 percent by the start of their fourth year and 80 percent by the start of their fifth year.

McCullough then pointed to his analysis of the proposal, written out beneath the numbers:

1) Setting student-athletes up to fail.
2) Eliminates change of major.
3) Restricts choice of major.

"If they want to kill the golden goose, this is one way," McCullough said.

The golden goose would be college football. And if McCullough and the SEC coaches are to be believed, the heart of the sport -- at least in this football-mad conference -- could very well be ripped out if many university presidents get their wish this October for stricter continuing-eligibility standards.

	“	I have some concerns about what they're expecting (the athletes) to meet. I think it's a bit on the demanding side. ”
		— Tennessee coach Phil Fulmer

Mark it down on the calendar. If the locomotive that goes by the name of academic reform gets derailed in the coming months, this may be the week when its troubles began. At the SEC annual meeting here at a resort along the white sand beaches of the Florida panhandle, the coaches and many administrators in this most influential of conferences sent a clear message that they aren't interested in raising standards if the new measures could cost them talented athletes.

"I have some concerns about what they're expecting (the athletes) to meet," Tennessee coach Phil Fulmer said. "I think it's a bit on the demanding side."

The impetus for the new proposal comes from university presidents bothered by low graduation rates for football and men's basketball players. In many cases at many schools, players are finding it easier to remain eligible for competition for four years -- without ever getting close to acquiring their degree.

That's because the NCAA does not begin evaluating an athlete's progress toward a degree until the start of his third academic year, which, depending on whether the player sat out a season as a redshirt, could be either their sophomore or junior year of athletic competition. At that point, athletes must have passed 25 percent of the courses toward their degree requirement -- the equivalent of 30 credit hours at many schools. The standard has been made easier for athletes, who have access to academic support counselors that are not available to a school's general student population.

By the start of the following year, an athlete must have completed 50 percent of his degree requirements. By the fifth year, if the player hasn't already exhausted his eligibility, he needs to have acquired 75 percent of his hours. Often, only then are many of the toughest classes taken.

Doug Dickey, Tennessee athletics director, said he's comfortable ramping up the requirements for the student's final two years but says too much should not be asked of athletes in their first couple years.

"The reality is they come in as athletes and during the first two years you try to turn them into students," Dickey said. "If you make it too tough, you may discourage them."

Kevin Lennon, NCAA vice president for membership services, said schools can blunt the impact of the proposed academic standards by recruiting athletes who are better students. He also suggests that coaches and administrators have more faith in their athletes' academic potential.

	“	If we change the system so that coach pays a price for a kid's failure (to stay on track for graduation), it seems to me you change the dynamic. It becomes in the coach's best interest to make sure the player makes progress. ”
		— Kevin Lennon, NCAA vice president for membership services

"You're telling me that a kid can't take the equivalent of one extra three-hour class per term and get a decent grade?" Lennon said. "I'd like to think our competitive kids could meet the challenge.

"If we change the system so that coach pays a price for a kid's failure (to stay on track for graduation), it seems to me you change the dynamic. It becomes in the coach's best interest to make sure the player makes progress."

Lennon, who gave a presentation to the SEC athletics directors and faculty athletics representatives Wednesday morning, said he's anxious to hear how the SEC would like to amend the proposal. But he expressed confidence that no matter how the SEC decides to come down on the matter, some version of the proposal is likely to pass when to vote by the NCAA Division I Board of Directors, made up of the same school presidents who approved the issue for formal discussion in April.

The presidents of the SEC schools, who ultimately vote for their institutions, will consider the measure Friday when they gather here on the final day of the conference meeting. Their decision will be closely followed, as the conference has several new presidents and two of them served on the committee that formalized the NCAA's academic proposals.

The presidents, though, also will be reminded that day of the financial value of football to member schools. The conference is expected to announce that a record amount, perhaps more than $90 million, in conference revenues will be shared this year, largely due to bowl and television payouts in football.

McCullough argued before the football coaches' group that the new proposal would encourage more players to sign up for the same few majors with less stringent credit requirements. Already, many players avoid tougher majors like architecture or business due to the amount of work in those courses, or because they conflict with the practice schedules of their teams.

The sentiment is pushing through the SEC hierarchy. After the coaches voted Tuesday to recommend that their schools not support the proposal, several athletics directors said Wednesday they, too, were troubled.

"We all want our youngsters to do better academically," Mississippi athletic director Pete Boone said. "But let's not rush to judgment and have unintended consequences just because we want to set the bar a higher."

Tom Farrey is a senior writer for ESPN.com. He can be reached at tom.farrey@espn.com.