Statement from North Carolina Director of Athletics Dick Baddour: "...As an institution, we must learn from these mistakes and work with the NCAA and others who love the game of football to repair the environment in which they occurred. College football is a wonderful game, but we need to closely examine and address the agent-related problems. The University of North Carolina pledges to do all it can to do that.
"I hate that these issues have hurt the University of North Carolina and our fans. We have so much to be proud of as a University. We will learn from this and we will become a better program as a result."
University of North Carolina football student-athletes Greg Little and Robert Quinn are permanently ineligible, according to a decision today by the NCAA student-athlete reinstatement staff. The university declared both student-athletes ineligible for violations of NCAA agent benefits, preferential treatment and ethical conduct rules. According to the facts submitted by the university, the total value of the benefits is approximately $4,952 for Little and $5,642 for Quinn.
Little accepted diamond earrings, as well as travel accommodations for the Bahamas, Washington DC and two trips to Miami, among other benefits. Quinn accepted two black diamond watches, a pair of matching earrings and travel accommodations for a trip to Miami, among other benefits.
Based upon information gathered by the institution and the NCAA Agent, Gambling and Amateurism staff during its joint investigation, unethical conduct charges were found against both student-athletes for providing false and misleading information. According to the facts submitted by the university, each student-athlete was not truthful during three separate interviews with university and NCAA enforcement staff members. Further, Little and Quinn only provided more accurate information when presented with evidence that was contrary to their assertions.
When reaching permanent ineligibility for each of the student-athletes, the staff noted the cases included multiple occasions where the student-athletes accepted benefits that were clearly against NCAA rules. The staff also noted that the student-athletes provided false information despite multiple opportunities to correct their assertions.
During the reinstatement process, NCAA staff reviews each case on its own merits and the specific facts. Staff decisions consider a number of factors including guidelines established by the Division I NCAA Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement for the type of violations and value of benefits, the student-athlete’s responsibility for the violation, as well as any mitigating factors presented by the university.
When a school discovers a student-athlete has been involved in an NCAA rules violation, it must declare the student-athlete ineligible and may request the student-athlete’s eligibility be reinstated to the NCAA national office staff for consideration. Reinstatement decisions are made independently of any NCAA enforcement process.
The university can appeal the decision to the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement, an independent panel comprised of representatives from NCAA member colleges, universities and athletic conferences. This committee can reduce or remove the condition, but it cannot increase the staff-imposed conditions. If appealed, the student-athlete remains ineligible until the conclusion of the appeals process.
Read more about the NCAA student-athlete reinstatement process at ncaa.org.