Official Publication of the National Collegiate Athletic Association February 2, 1994, Volume 3 1, Number 5 Court upholds NCAA’s rights on drug testing The California Supreme (:oun the NCAA’s legitimate interest in Four of those justices advocated dard, while another favored a more Because of frequent physical January 28 upheld the legality of “ensuring fair and vigorous corn- using a “balancing standard,” under strict “compelling-interest” standard exarninations and the fact rhat stu- the NCAA’s drug-testing program, petition” and protecting student- which the rights of the NCAA and (but said the N(:AA met that test in dent-athletes dress and shower overturning lower-court decisions arhletes justified the drug-testing involved student-athletes arc this case). There was one dissent- together in locker rooms, the court that had found the program to be program. Six justices upheld the weighed together. That was the ing.justice. said student-athletes have a “dimin- an unproven and unjustified intru- NCAA drug-testing program, which position for which NCAA attorneys ished expectation of privacy.” A sion into the privacy of student-att- initially was challenged by a mem- argued. The NCAA dn ‘kr-testing proqam requirement that the urine sample letes at Stanford University. ber of Stanford’s women’s diving A fifth justice favored a retrial of was adopted at tt le 1986 NCAA In a 6-l decision, the court said team in 1987. the case under the balancing stan- Convention. See Court, page 32 ) Farrell Proposal selected to restructure to Council draws f”lre Dennis A. Farrell, commission- er of the Big West Conference, There is no equal representation, has been women’s athletics committee says chosen as the conference’s The NCfi Committee on Women’s Athletics representa- believes a recenr restructuring proposal by a group tive to the of Division I-A conference commissioners fails to NCAA represent wornen in its organizational structure, and Council. the committee has started developing principles it He re- believes need to be included if restructuring legis- places John lation is proposed. V. Kasser, The committee, which met January 25-26 in Kansas who joined ._ City, Missouri, is expected to hold a telephone con- Farrell the Council ference within the next few weeks to discuss such in July 19% principles. while director of athletics at the University of California, Santa Fightin’ words The cornmissioners’ proposal would create a board Barbara, but recently was selected of trustees with 15 members, all of whom would be as athletics director at the Uni- Rule changes designed to discourage fighting in football highlighted the institutional chief executive officers. That board versity of California, Berkeley. January 23-25 d..Iycussions of the NCAA Football Rules Committee, which would govern Division I. Nine “equity~governancc Farrell, whose term expires in units”-existing Division IA conferences (except the included Terrence M. Donahue, head football coach at the University of Rig Wesr and Mid-American Athletic Conferences) January 1995, has been Big West California, Los Angeles (right), and Ken Halfield, head jilotball coach at commissioner since 1992. He has and qualifying 1-A independcntsPcach would elect been at the conference since 1980, Rice University (It@). Seestory, page 3. having served also as assistant to See Proposal, page 27 F the commissioner, assistant corn- missioner and assoc iatr commis- sioner. CRS works to set meetings between NCAA, BCA He also has worked as a news- paper sports reporter and commu- The Community Relations Ser- act as a referee in addressing the istrators and Division I baskrtball increase cited financial constraints; nity rollcgc sports information vice is working wirh the NCAA and @evances raised by the BCA. As of co;1chcs. those who spoke for it said it would director. the Black Coar hes Association to February 1, the BCA had not for- increase minority access to higher Farrell has been chair of the establish meeling dates and an mally agreed to the process. The RCA threatened a boycott education. NCAA Two-Year College Kelations agenda for discussions hctwccn the Setting meeting dates in the near January 10 when rhe NCAA The boycott was delayed January Cornmittcc since 1991. organizations. future is complicated by the diffi- Convention voted against ;i niovc 14 after- HCA officials met with the Hc is a graduate of San Diego On January 28, the NC&4 agreed culty of finding mutually agreeable to irlcrrasc Division I men’s has- Congressional Blat k (laucus, which State University, where he earned to permit the CRS ~ a division of time in the busy schedules of uni- kethall scholarship limits from 13 suggested the alternative of having a bachelor’s degree in journalism. the U.S. Department ofJustice - IO versity presidents, high-level admin- to 14. Those who spoke against the the CRS act as a medialor. n In the News n On deck February 3-5 Professional Sports Liaison Committee, In a guest editorial, NCAA Football Rules Briefly Page 3 n Tucson, Arizona Committee member Vincent J. Dooley says that pan- Comment 4 el has taken a major step toward eliminating fight- February 4-6 Committee on Infractions, Houston State legislation 5 ing in football: Page 4. February 6-9 Special Committee to Oversee Implemen- Basketball statistics 7 tation of the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Eligibility appeals 11 n Men’s gymnastics programs brace themselves for Clearinghouse, Key West, Florida NCAA legislation that apparently will prompt the Administrative February 7- 10 Division Ill Women’s Volleyball Committee, elimination of the National Collegiate Men’s Review Panel actions 18 Kansas City, Missouri Gymnastics Championships: Page 5. NCAA Record 28 February 8- 11 Women’s Soccer Committee, Men’s Soccer Committee, and Men’s and Women’s The Market 29 n Events are scheduled in all 50 states and the Soccer Rules Committee, Kansas City, District of Columbia in observance of National Girls Legislative assistance 32 Missouri and Women in Sports Day: Page 32. Page 2 The NCAA News February 2, 1994 TheNCAAN ews -/Ila--l w-w@ES~ L A weekly summary of major activities within the Association milling proposals. For more detail, see chc,Jatlu;rly I:! is<uc of ‘l‘hr NC :AA News. CRS working to set meetings Schedule of key dates for Staff contact: .l’ed (1. ‘1‘0~. between NCAA, BCA officials February and March 1994 Pool of possible reviewers sent to institutions (Xiirl rxt’c utivr olfic cr.5 Ior ttiobr instilu- tions whose sell~sturlies will be reviewed this fall as part of the NCAA athletics certilic:1- lion lnogram t!ilVC I,ccn riiailcd ;i list of about 20 possiblr prrr rrvirwrrs. ‘l‘he <XOs havr twcn ;iskctl to review Ihc “~l’his process will enable the NCAA and list and to note any rcvicwer whom they rlir IX A to sit dowii and discuss issues ofmu- would l”~cfcl- not to bc assigiicd to lhcir iii- FEBRUARY MARCH trml cvnccr~~ and cxplw c how WC r;n, work slirution. The (;t;.O may silggt3l rcrnov;tl of RECRUITING RECRUITING no more rhan one~thirtl 01 rhr rc-virwcrs on together IO reaolvt- Ihost> issurs,” N(:M Ex- Men’s Division I basketball Men’s Division I basketball the list. ‘I‘hcy arc asked to keep in mind that CCulivc. IXrec 1or (:ctIric W. Dempsey said. 1~17 _. ____ __ __. __ __ _. __ _. _. _.__ __. Quiet period. l-3 __.___________.__.__.___.____.___._____Quiet period. ‘l‘lic controversy was brought about by the 18-28 _._..... ._.. .._.... Evaluation period 4-22 _.___.__.__. _._______________ Contact period. Ihe NCAA (bmn~ittcc on Athletics Ccrtifi- passCqc of I!)!)4 Cbnvcntion Proposal No. 42. Women’s Division I basketball* 23-30 __._.__________._.__________._.___Quiet period. c-;uiorl is r~l~ligiitctl to sclcct pccbrcvirw tcarns ‘l‘hal proposal would have iiicrcascd ttic l-7 ._._._._._._._.. ._._. ..__.. ._._.__._. Quiet period. 3 1 ._._.._._.___._.._._.__._._._.____.__...Dead period. tha1 rellrcl gender and rat iiil/rlhI1it diver- 8-28 ...l...... ......I....... Evoluottion period. number of prrmissiblc scholarships For IX- Women’s Division I basketball* sity. Men’s, women’s Division II bask&all’ l-29 .._. .__._._._._.___.._..._. .__.._ Contact period. vision I men’s t)askctball prog ams from I3 The complete pool of po~rinial prcr rc- Quiet period to the date of the prospect’s ini- 30-3 1 _..___._.__..__.__.___._.._...__._.Dead eriod. viewers ~ about 600 individuals - il~)~KilRd to 1.1. It W2IStlcfcatcd by ;I votr of. l!)l-I I!) tial hi h-school or two-year college contest. Men’s Division II basketba PI’ in thr Janu;uy 26 issut- ol ‘l‘hr N(:AA News. with I7 ;ihstciitions. ‘I2iosc who supported After tf ot, evaluation period. Period between prospect’s initial and final high increasing the limit said approval would iirlb Division I foohall school or hvmyear college contests: evalua- In c&y FehrIJ;IIy, ;lpprOXi~lliIlrly I75 itdi- prove minority access to liiglicr crlucatioii; l-4 (8 a.m.) ._._.____._.___.__._._._.__Deod period. tion period. Otherwise: viduals from Lhr pool will br c otltac tcti IO SW 4 (8 a.m.)-7 _____. _. ___ __.__. Contact period. l-30 _.___.._..._._._._..______._.._._ Contact period. if they can commit 10 particip:iling in il I;111 rhose who opI~oscd it cited fiii;iiici;d coii- 8-28 _._________.._._._._._._.___._._._Quiet period.