Although coaches were hoping to avoid a complete ban of text messaging, the NCAA Student-Athletic Advisory Committee supported its removal from the recruiting process.

"It's intruding on their lives and creating inappropriate relationships with coaches,” said Division I Committee Student-Athletic Advisory Council chair and former University of Arizona basketball player Anna Chappell. “If you don't stop it now, what roads are you going to have to cross later on?"

NCAA Vice-President Jim Berst said the board was influenced by student support for the ban.

"The board was swayed very much by what the student-athletes had to say," Berst said. "We heard anecdotal stories of someone waking up and having 52 text messages."

Even coaches, who were not united in their opposition to the ban, realized that some restrictions were needed to stem the swelling tide of messages coaches were sending. Columnist Ivan Maisel opined that:

“The coaches got beat by the recruits,” Maisel wrote. “The NCAA Student-Athlete Advisory Committee lobbied the board to stop the practice because it had become too invasive. The coaches killed the goose that laid the golden cell phone.”

In Maisel’s article, Syracuse University football coach Greg Robinson said:

"Sometimes, coaches are our own worst enemies."

Along with college coaches, high school athletes and coaches had mixed feelings about the use of text messages in recruiting. Some preferred them to phone calls, while others said the barrage of text messages sometimes caused problems.

But all hope is not lost for the coaches who love to text. Schools have 60 days to request an override of the Board of Directors’ decision. If 30 schools request an override, the board will reconsider its decision. If the board reaffirms the decision, the rule will remain in effect but face a vote of the Division I membership during the NCAA Convention in January. If 100 schools request an override, the rule would not be enacted until approved by a vote of the entire Division I membership.

However, it's more likely that other, less restrictive regulations, will be considered, especially after the board indicated it would be happy to consider other ways to address the issue.

"They would certainly be willing to listen," Berst said. "I think they recognized we had a dilemma where student-athletes suggested there were some problems with text messages whereas coaches and assistant coaches wanted it to continue."

The new legislation limits allowable recruiting electronic correspondence to faxes and e-mails. In addition to text messaging, this also bans use of instant messaging, messages exchanged through social networking sites such as MySpace.com, and any future electronic communication methods. Rules governing the timing and volume of recruiting phone calls remain unchanged and vary by sport.

Division II will consider a similar ban on text messaging next year. In Division III, text messages are not regulated in number since they are treated the same as phone calls.

Dennis Read is Associate Editor at Athletic Management.