You are here: Home / Archives for investigations

UConn’s Title Is A Step Forward

April 6, 2011 by

A lot of people are focusing on the negative from last night: that a school on probation won the national title. I’d like to focus on the positive from last night: that a school on probation won the national title. If that’s a bit confusing, it’s because nothing is as simple as it seems or we would like it to be in college athletics.

We have short memories. So short that it appears people have forgotten what almost happened in 2008. If a buzzer-beating three didn’t go in for Mario Chalmers and Kansas, Memphis would have vacated not just a trip to the Final Four, but a national title. It’s one thing when the NCAA vacates a team’s season. It’s another when the national championship is vacated, which happens more often across the NCAA’s 88 championships than you might expect. Then it’s as is the whole season never happened since the final prize was never awarded to anyone.

I agree with Gary Parrish of CBSSports.com to a point. Connecticut is a fitting champion for this era. And I also agree with Tony Barnhart, also of CBSSports.com, also to a point. A tipping point, line in the sand, or whatever “no turning back now” imagery you prefer has been reached. Where I disagree with Mr. Parrish is what era that is. And likewise where I disagree with Mr. Barnhart is what reaching this point means.

When most people call UConn a fitting champion for this era, the implication is that everyone is cheating now, so it’s not crazy that a school punished for violations would win the championship. Also implied in that argument is that this is somehow different, either in degree or in kind, from what went on in the past in major college athletics. But again, we need to go back no further than 2008 to find a case where eligibility questions and extra benefits wiped out a Final Four participant and almost wiped out the national champion. You can laugh or cry at what it means, but a school winning the national title having recently been through a major infractions case is a step forward, not a step back.

The tipping point that has been reached is not the point at which college football or basketball is out of control. That point was passed long ago and one needed to bury their head in the sand not to recognize it. The point that has been reached is that the combined efforts efforts of the NCAA and the media have made it impossible for anything to stay hidden for long. You can no longer push your head far enough into the ground to ignore the seedier side of college athletics.

We would all prefer that teams who are on probation aren’t winning all the spoils. And the stories of just how dogged and creative NCAA rule breakers can be will likely get a lot worse before it gets better. But where we are now is an improvement on where we were years ago, when teams who should have been on probation won, confident they would never be punished. UConn’s title is not the new low point. It’s one step in the long climb out of this hole.

The opinions expressed on this blog are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by the NCAA or any NCAA member institution or conference. This blog is not a substitute for a compliance office.

About John Infante

The opinions expressed on this blog are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by the NCAA or any NCAA member institution or conference. This blog is not a substitute for a compliance office. If you’re a coach, do not attempt to contact the author looking for a second opinion. If you’re a parent, don’t attempt to contact the author looking for a first opinion. Compliance professionals are by their nature helpful people generally dedicated to getting to the truth. Coaches should have a bit of faith in their own, and parents should talk to one directly.

Filed Under: Bylaw Blog, Feature Tagged With: , ,

The Third Path

April 2, 2011 by

The line between secondary and major violations has been getting fuzzier for quite some time. No longer does a major violation mean that you did something intentionally wrong or violated a bedrock principle of the NCAAa. It’s possible to be cited for a major violation through mere sloppiness or by forgetting-albeit repeatedly-one of the NCAA Manual’s many technical and often confusing rules.

So it does seem like there needs to be a new type of infraction. Something between a protracted and stigmatizing major infractions case and a secondary violation that is often never even discovered by the outside world.

There are actually three types of violations already though. There are secondary violations, there are full-on major violation, and then there are major violations that use summary disposition. A summary disposition case comes with all the stigma of commiting a major violation, but without a hearing. They also take substantially less time and cost less as well.

Rather than distinct forms of violations, what’s needed is for the NCAA process to match what the NCAA says about cases. Each is unique and it’s hard to pigeonhole cases into categories where they can be compared against each other. While there will still be steps, cases could move more smoothly from honest mistake to the death penalty with relatively minor changes to the enforcement process.

By allowing the enforcement staff to apply the two penalties seen in virtually every major infractions case-public reprimand and censure and probation-in severe secondary cases, there would be a much greater stigma to violations generally. The biggest thing that seperates major and secondary cases is that the NCAA announces major cases. Having a penalty of public reprimand and censure for at least some secondary violations would mean a coach’s good name is at stake in any case.

If public reprimand and censure is to scare potential rulebreakers, probation would help bring some violators back to the right path. By requring schools to improve monitoring early on and report on their progress to the NCAA, perhaps some petty criminals never become felons. And it could be cheaper for schools too. Small upgrades are normally less costly than a complete overhaul.

A new enforcement process alone will not eliminate all bad behavior from college athletics. But also neither will a set of new and tougher penalties if the process is broken. The penalties and the process need to be tailored for both the type of behavior we’re looking to end and the strengths and limitations of the NCAA when it comes to rules enforcement.

The opinions expressed on this blog are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by the NCAA or any NCAA member institution or conference. This blog is not a substitute for a compliance office.

About John Infante

The opinions expressed on this blog are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by the NCAA or any NCAA member institution or conference. This blog is not a substitute for a compliance office. If you’re a coach, do not attempt to contact the author looking for a second opinion. If you’re a parent, don’t attempt to contact the author looking for a first opinion. Compliance professionals are by their nature helpful people generally dedicated to getting to the truth. Coaches should have a bit of faith in their own, and parents should talk to one directly.

Filed Under: Bylaw Blog, Feature Tagged With: , ,

Media Investigations Are Helping Compliance

March 11, 2011 by

“Freedom of the press is not an end in itself but a means to the end of achieving a free society.”
- Felix Frankfurter, former Supreme Court Justice

For a long time, the high watermark of NCAA investigation was the federal authorities. When the feds began sniffing around allegation of NCAA wrongdoing, it felt like only a matter of time before the case would be blown wide open. While it was over three years before the University of Southern California would appear before the Committee on Infractions, the fact that federal investigators were poking around the case as part of an extortion investigation made it seem more likely the original Reggie Bush report would result in NCAA sanctions.

Those two articles are just some of the many signs that there’s a new sheriff in town. Yahoo! Sports has proven to be stunningly, almost supernaturally good at uncovering NCAA violations by some of the biggest athletic departments in the country. They are the poster child, but they aren’t alone. While not in the field of compliance, Chip Brown of Orangebloods.com was in front of every move the Big 12 made during this summer’s conference reshuffling.

It’s only natural for compliance officers to have mixed feelings about the Yahoo! Sports team, and it’s hard to begrudge those that are hostile. When a reporter finds out about a potential violation before the compliance office does, it looks bad. There’s plenty of good reasons for it though. Maybe a source that wouldn’t speak to the compliance office will talk to a reporter. A compliance office has little reason to audit a coach’s emails due to the relatively loose rules, but a journalist might have a tip.

There’s also the feeling that the NCAA is “outsourcing” its enforcement responsibilities to the media. This means that larger schools are perceived to be targets because they bring more eyeballs and ad dollars. It also means that public schools, subject to open records laws, are at a disadvantage to private schools, who generally get to keep their documents under wraps.

As foolish as a compliance office might look, sometimes they are ahead of the media. While Yahoo! Sports gets the credit for being the first to report allegations that Ohio State head football coach Jim Tressel knew of his student-athletes receipt of extra benefits long before the violation was reported, the university had been on the case for almost two months at that point and was preparing a self-report of the violation.

Ultimately the team at Yahoo! Sports is a force of good in college athletics. The uncovering of violations and the sanctioning of offenders helps fix what is broken (sub. req’d) no matter who starts the process. We know that the NCAA and its members haven’t punted enforcement to the media and many talented and dedicated people are working from the inside. Outside help shouldn’t be turned away.

Plus the team at Yahoo! Sports is just like us compliance folk. How did the string of agent extra benefit violations this summer come to pass? Through the cultivating of sources by the Agents, Gambling, and Amateurism staff. Journalists aren’t getting this done with subpoena power and criminal charges. They aren’t using any tool that a compliance office doesn’t have at their disposal.

Instead of reacting to Dan Wetzel, Charles Robinson, Jason King, and the many others as threats, see them as a challenge. So avoid the feelings of schadenfreude when another school is in the media’s sights. And when the call comes to your school, accept that it will be good for college athletics in the long run and take the medicine, as bitter as it may taste.

The opinions expressed on this blog are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by the NCAA or any NCAA member institution or conference. This blog is not a substitute for a compliance office.

About John Infante

The opinions expressed on this blog are the author’s and the author’s alone, and are not endorsed by the NCAA or any NCAA member institution or conference. This blog is not a substitute for a compliance office. If you’re a coach, do not attempt to contact the author looking for a second opinion. If you’re a parent, don’t attempt to contact the author looking for a first opinion. Compliance professionals are by their nature helpful people generally dedicated to getting to the truth. Coaches should have a bit of faith in their own, and parents should talk to one directly.

Filed Under: Bylaw Blog, Feature Tagged With: , ,

Copyright �© 2010-2012 NCAA �·