The NCAA will fight a ruling that struck down test-score requirements for freshmen athletes as unfair to blacks, saying the judge’s decision could create chaos at its member colleges.

The governing body of college sports today will seek to block the ruling while it appeals, Elsa Cole, NCAA general counsel, said Tuesday. She expects a response “within a day or two.”

U.S. District Judge Ronald Buckwalter in Philadelphia ruled Monday that the NCAA may not use a minimum test score to eliminate freshmen student-athletes from eligibility. He cited the NCAA’s own research showing that the practice harmed black students’ chances of being declared academically eligible.

The policy, known as Proposition 16, required the athletes to have a minimum score of 820 on the Scholastic Assessment Test regardless of their high school grades. The ruling did not rule out some use of the tests, which many educators have long said are racially and culturally discriminatory.

University of Maine athletic director Sue Tyler was surprised by the ruling and expected it might lower the quality of student-athletes at the institutions Maine competes against.

“In some ways, I’m a little disappointed. I think very few students don’t make the grade,” Tyler said. “I think it gave a reasonable baseline performance. With the sliding scale, the 820 is not a terrible barrier.”

Tyler said the ruling won’t change how Maine recruits students, but it might affect their competition. She wondered if the new standard wouldn’t put “undue pressure” on institutions where admissions are on a sliding scale.

“Without a baseline admission, you might get some that might be pushing the director of admissions for concessions here and there to allow students in below the instution standards,” Tyler said. “That won’t happen at Maine.”

Tyler said currently at Maine the SAT requirement was higher than 820, although the requirement depends on a students’ major, their grades and other factors – and that won’t change.

“I don’t think it will change at all, Maine wants to increase academics overall,” Tyler said. “I only see it getting higher. Not every institution might do the same thing.”

Tyler had no idea what the chances were – or what kind of push there would be – to have the ruling overturned. Some are hopeful.

“We are encouraged by the court’s acknowledgment that the initial eligibility standards … serve a legitimate educational goal,” said Charles Wethington, president at Kentucky and head of the NCAA’s executive committee.

“In addition, the judge has not precluded use of the SAT or ACT as a part of an initial eligibility rule. The challenge for the NCAA remains as it has always been: to develop standards to meet that goal.”

Without Proposition 16, the 302 Division I schools would be on their own in determining which freshmen would be academically eligible to play sports. Some administrators and officials worried that could create chaos.

“It means that there is no standard to guide the schools,” Cole said. “Each school will have to decide itself whether a student can play the first year.”

Chuck Neinas, former head of the College Football Association and one of the authors of Proposition 48, a forerunner of the current rule, called the judge’s decision a “giant step backward.”

Not everyone agreed, however.

“The only way to regulate this is within the university themselves,” said Utah basketball coach Rick Majerus. “Each university has a different mission, with Stanford’s mission being different than a community college and so on.”

Also Tuesday, the NCAA announced a settlement on another divisive issue. It agreed to pay $54.5 million to about 2,000 Division I coaches who had sued over the so-called restricted-earnings rule, which had capped their salaries at $12,000 for an academic year.

A judge had struck down the rule as unfair in 1995 and both sides had been fighting over a settlement ever since.

Tyler said she expected the NCAA would find creative ways to make Division I instutions contribute to the $54.5 million, possibly by reducing the amount of payback schools recieve for revenues from NCAA sports, and doing so over five to 10 years. She said it also may decided to have larger schools, like a Nebraska, contribute more.

“If each institution contributed 10,000 over 10 years, rather than $100,000 one year, it woudln’t impact the budget as much,” she said. “They’re not discussing how to do it . They wanted to find out first what the figure was. Typically, this is the last moment we can know for the following year, when we’re framing out the FY 2000. ”