One of the things the NCAA has been busy working on for the past two years is redefining who it considers an amateur athlete. It continues to espouse the philosophy that college athletes should be amateur athletes, but wants to give student-athletes a bit more flexibility in their pursuits before college.

For many years, the rules were simple: If you ever got paid for playing a sport, you could not compete in that sport at an NCAA institution. By being compensated for your athletic prowess, you were considered a professional athlete and gave up your NCAA eligibility.

Currently, the NCAA is looking closer at that rule, and changing some of its specifics. It is examining whether high school athletes should have the opportunity to test the professional waters--and make some money in athletics--before going to college.

NCAA Division I athletics is still examining whether it should change its rules in this area, but NCAA Division II schools have taken the plunge and implemented new rules to this effect. Titled "Amateurism: Activities Prior to Initial Enrollment," the package passed by an overwhelming vote of 217-29-2, this past January, and will take effect August 1.

What does it mean for those wishing to play at the NCAA Division II level? The legislation permits pre-enrolled athletes, during their high school years, to enter a professional draft, be drafted by a professional sport team, receive compensation for athletic competition, participate on a professional team, and/or accept prize money based on finish position--without jeopardizing collegiate eligibility at Division II institutions.

However, there is a penalty for doing any of the above once an athlete completes high school. The rule states that athletes who do not enroll at a collegiate institution during the academic term following their class's normal graduation date, but instead opt to participate in organized competition (such as on a professional team), will forfeit one season of collegiate eligibility for every year they compete. In addition, athletes will be required to complete one academic year in residence before being eligible to play for their college/university. Some exceptions are provided if athletes compete for certain national teams, military programs, or college preparatory schools.

NCAA Division I schools are considering similar rules changes, but their chances of passing into legislation is less likely. Unlike the D-II legislation, the Division I package has garnered much criticism, and its future success is unclear. Many fear that the rules could have detrimental effects on the top level of collegiate play, as well as for high school athletics.

One opponent of the new amateurism rules is National Federation of State High School Associations Executive Director Robert Kanaby. Speaking to delegates at the NCAA convention in January, Kanaby expressed concerns that certain elements of the proposals will seriously jeopardize the viability of high school athletics. In particular, Kanaby criticized the pay for play and prize money components of both the Division II and pending Division I proposals.

Kanaby outlined similar sentiments in a letter to The NCAA News earlier this year. "The new NCAA pre-enrollment amateurism reform proposal is a wolf in sheep's clothing," he wrote. "It looks warm and fuzzy, but it contains elements that threaten the core values of education-based athletics in America.

"Experts tell us that athletics are most valuable educationally when they are in proper relationship with academics, and that pay-for-play would upset the apple cart ... Only five percent of high school athletes will become college athletes, but the majority will become students at your colleges. As you weigh the merits of the reform proposals, you should assess the risks and benefits (the welfare, if you will) not just of a few superstars, but of all your students."

Many college basketball coaches have also expressed concerns about unintended consequences. Some fear that allowing athletes to enter a professional draft will hamper a coach's ability to award scholarships and solidify a roster since coaches will have to wait to see if those prospects are drafted. Others have cited the concern that incoming athletes with professional experience will put existing college athletes at a disadvantage.

However, advocates of Division I's proposed changes argue that such rules will better empower pre-enrolled athletes with more options, which will lead to more committed students. They believe that an athlete who chooses to enroll at a college after going pro, and then completes an academic year in residence, will be all the more dedicated to both the school and academics. They also feel it is important to give athletes who make poor choices about going pro a second opportunity to obtain a college scholarship.

For more information on both the Division I and II amateurism proposal packages, log onto the NCAA Web site.