No, Temple basketball Coach John Chaney has not walked off the court (like Georgetown's John Thompson) in protest of newly adopted and highly criticized Proposal 42. Neither has Penn State's Bruce Parkhill, though he jokes his team may be better off if he did.

But both men, whose teams clash tonight at Rec Hall in an Atlantic 10 battle, hope that Proposal 42 is repealed before it goes into effect in August 1990.

The rule in question attempts to return a golden image to the tarnished world of collegiate athletics. According to Proposal 42, an incoming freshman athlete who does not have a 2.0 grade point average and 700 on the SAT (or 15 on the ACT) cannot receive an athletic scholarship for his first year of college. However, in cases of financial need, the athlete can still qualify for non-athletic aid.

"I'm not happy that Prop 42 passed," Parkhill said.

"I really hope they'll re-evaluate that decision. I really think it's unfair to a young fella or a young lady who may have the ability to do college work but may not have the financial means to get into college, and therefore, really depends on an athletic scholarship to have a chance. And Prop 42 eliminates that."

To Chaney, who called it "inhumane, un-American and insane," Proposal 42 discriminates against individuals who may not be able to fund their first year of college.

"If someone's going to adopt a rule affecting only the poor," Chaney said, "that, tome, is stupid."

Chaney's opposition to NCAA guidelines did not begin with Proposal 42. The coach, who has three highly recruited freshmen sitting out because of Proposition 48, dislikes that restriction as well.

"Forty-two is just the bullet," Chaney said. "Prop 48 is the gun."

And that gun has Chaney smoking.

Yes, Chaney favors academic requirements for athletes. But Proposition 48, besides requiring athletes who do not meet NCAA academic standards to sit out a year, leaves them with just three years of eligibility. And to Chaney, who said 89 percent of athletes affected by Proposition 48 are black, that's not fair.

"There should not be a punishment factor when there has been no crime," Chaney said. "The crime is on the youngster who is from a poor, disadvantaged background. I don't mind him sitting out. If (after his freshman year) he's matriculating towards a degree, he should be given full status, four years of competition."

Chaney has drawn up a proposal of his own that requires incoming freshmen to meet the stipulations of Proposition 48, but allows them four years of athletic eligibility if they do not.

Under Chaney's version of the five-year plan, a Proposition 48 individual would not play during his freshman year but would be permitted to practice with the team and would receive an athletic scholarship. After his first year of college, if he has 24 credits with a 2.0. GPA, the athlete begins his sophomore year with four years of competition ahead of him.

But there's a catch. If after five years that athlete -- walk-ons and dropouts do not apply -- does not graduate, Chaney said the school would lose a scholarship for the following year.

"We want him to come, but we want him to get his act together, or we're going to suffer the consequences," Chaney said. "It's fair to everybody; and it shows what educators should be about. That kind of policing and academic integrity is what I'd like."

Another aspect of Proposal 42 which irks Chaney is that it will shrink the pool of available freshmen athletes who can step into football and basketball programs across the country. And, he said, when that pool shrinks, the best will get better while the struggling programs will continue to wallow in mediocrity.

"When you make any rules which limit anybody, the people who tend to get better are the 'haves,' " Chaney said. "Penn State football won't be hurt. If you ask football players around the country to write down their top 10 schools, I guarantee you Penn State will be on every list. In basketball, Notre Dame and (North) Carolina will be in the top 10 as long as there is athletics.

"Whenever the pot gets smaller, the greedy get all of it. The poor don't get any."