In an effort to become more malleable across all of its bodies, the NCAA has spent considerable effort in the last several months trying to become more nimble in its decision making processes. One of the solutions they came up with was to give more autonomy to Division I, Division II and Division III to make autonomous decisions commensurate with a broader governing NCAA constitution.
Earlier this month, we learned who was tabbed within Division II to vote on and discuss changes within their piece of the NCAA landscape. The implementation team includes 28 members, who include a large cross-section of the collegiate population. Athletic directors, university presidents, commissioners, faculty representatives and student-athletes are all represented. These diverse perspectives should provide context when it comes to wide-ranging decisions.
“The Implementation Committee represents a broad cross-section of the Division II membership, in terms of perspective and experience, said Steven Shirley, chair of the Division II Presidents Council. “And it will be vital in the work of aligning the division’s policies and rules with the NCAA’s new constitution. Via NCAA.org
The 28 members of the committee will commence meetings in January in order to lay the groundwork for the future of Division II. While the NCAA’s announcement doesn’t specify this point, it seems understood that the meeting will not be held before the five student-athlete representatives are finalized, which is also set for next month.
Delta State University president William LaForge is excited to get the proceedings underway early next year.
“I look forward to collaborating with NCAA officials and staff, university leaders from around the country, our Gulf South Conference colleagues, and our athletic department at Delta State to help ensure that NCAA constitutional changes are appropriately implemented in the best interests of all Division II institutions,” he said. Via DeltaState.edu
Once the meetings start, it will be fascinating to keep track of what types of issues are highest on the implementation committee’s agenda. At that point, we will get a sense of what their immediate priorities are, as well as what types of long term goals they will look to implement.