UBC’s interest in joining the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) just got a little more complicated; the Canadian Interuniversity Sport (CIS), the organization which governs high-performance athletics at Canadian universities, passed a policy that states member schools are only allowed to play in the NCAA in sports not offered by the CIS.

The motion passed 55 to 20 at the CIS annual general meeting last Thursday sent a bold message to schools looking to join the (NCAA). This policy places stringent restrictions on schools that pursue membership in both the CIS and the NCAA.

“The NCAA is a gigantic, multi-sport business entity and quite frankly the CIS is not. So we believe that it could be a threat to the existence of CIS and we reacted accordingly,” said Dick White, University of Regina athletic director and outgoing CIS president. “I hope it at least creates some pause for thought, but I also understand that the school and its athletic director and its president will ultimately make a decision which they think is best.”

The two schools in question are UBC and SFU, the only CIS members who have openly expressed interest in joining the NCAA. SFU’s senior athletic director Dr David Murphy spoke passionately against the membership restrictions during the meeting, arguing that it “reeks of insecurity and protectionism,” and that the CIS shouldn’t shy away from competition, but rather use it as an opportunity to better itself and grow stronger. Dr Murphy expressed his regret that the new rule was adopted, but said that SFU’s plans are already in motion, as the university has already applied. “The [NCAA] application form is in. We wait, and we find out in July whether or not we have been accepted,” Murphy said.

For UBC, which deferred its decision regarding NCAA application until at least 2010, this provides one more piece of the puzzle. Uncertainty over what action, if any, the CIS would take regarding dual membership has long been one of the sticking points in the university’s consideration of NCAA membership. While the new rule is not an outright ban on dual membership, it essentially makes the pursuit of the NCAA an all-or-nothing proposal since the pool of sports offered by the NCAA—but not by the CIS is very narrow.

“We’re not saying you can’t join’,” explained CIS CEO Margaret McGregor. “UBC and SFU and any university that wants to can join. But as a result of that, we will not be the league of convenience. We want to be the league of choice.”

The issue of personal choice was indeed one of the key reasons UBC opposed the new rule. “I speak in favour of dual membership because I believe it does provide universities choices,” said Theresa Hanson, director of varsity athletics at UBC. “From a dual membership perspective, we could still make a commitment to CIS sport, continue some sports in Canada as well as move a considerable number of sports to the NCAA.”

UBC and SFU were not the only schools to oppose the new rule, with a handful of other schools also expressing their disapproval. Ivan Joseph of Ryerson opposed the change because he thought allowing
dual membership would enable more Canadian athletes to stay at Canadian schools. Jennifer Brenning from Carleton was also opposed, pointing to the fact that the CIS now has three different sets of dual membership rules depending on whether you want to play in the NCAA, the NAIA, or the CCAA. Before this year, the CIS had no policy on dual membership at all.

While uncertainty surrounding dual membership has finally come to an end, the result doesn’t make UBC’s NCAA decision any easier. One of the biggest issues, academic accreditation, remains unresolved. Hanson acknowledges that the closer you examine the issue of NCAA membership, the more complex it becomes: “I think it provides more challenges, the outcome, but I really think that [Toope] will make a decision that’s in the best interests of the university and of our student athletes.”

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...