NOVEMBER, 2012 | VOL. 2
Board adopts tougher, more efficient enforcement program By: Gary Brown | NCAA.org | Publish date: Oct 30, 2012 The Division I Board of Directors today adopted an overhauled enforcement structure that creates additional levels of infractions, hastens the investigation process and ratchets up penalties for the most egregious violations. New Violation Structure Level I: Severe breach of conduct Level II: Significant breach of conduct Level III: Breach of conduct Level IV: Incidental issues The Board’s action culminates a year-long effort from a 13-member group of presidents, athletic directors, commissioners and others assigned after participants at a presidential retreat in August 2011 called for a more stringent and efficient enforcement structure to uphold the integrity of the collegiate model of athletics. “We have sought all along to remove the ‘riskreward’ analysis that has tempted people – often because of the financial pressures to win at all costs – to break the rules in the hopes that either they won’t be caught or that the consequences won’t be very harsh if they do get caught,” said NCAA President Mark Emmert. “The new system the Board adopted today is the result of a lot of hard work and membership input devoted to protecting the collegiate model.” At its core, the new enforcement structure: •
I ntroduces a four-tier violation hierarchy that ranges from severe breaches of conduct to incidental infractions. The structure, which
replaces the current two-tier approach (major and secondary violations), is designed to focus most on conduct breaches that seriously undermine or threaten the integrity of the NCAA Constitution (Levels I and II in the accompanying list). •
E nhances head coach responsibility/ accountability and potential consequences for head coaches who fail to direct their staffs and student-athletes to uphold NCAA bylaws. Penalties include imposed suspensions that can range from 10 percent of the season to an entire season.
•
I ncreases the Division I Committee on Infractions from 10 to as many as 24 voting members from which smaller panels will be assembled to review cases more quickly and efficiently.
•
C ontinues to offer harsh consequences (postseason bans, scholarship reductions, recruiting limits, head coach suspensions, show-cause orders and financial penalties) that align more predictably with the severity of the violations. The new penalty structure also places a premium on aggravating and mitigating circumstances in each case.
•
mphasizes a culture among head coaches, E the compliance community, institutional leadership and conferences to assume a shared responsibility for upholding the values of intercollegiate athletics.
STAFF INTERP EXPENSES FOR COACHES TO RECRUIT
BACKGROUND: An outside group has offered several college coaches the opportunity to attend a soccer tournament in Nigeria to recruit prospect aged individuals (PSAs). The group is offering to cover the travel expenses for the coaches to attend the event (e.g., airfare, lodging, etc.). QUESTION: Is it permissible for a member institution’s soccer coach to receive expenses to travel to this type of event? ANSWER: No. See Bylaw 13.14.4 and October 6, 2011 Educational Column, Expenses from a Recruiting Service or Event Operator, which notes that “it is not permissible for any outside organization or individual (e.g., recruiting or scouting service, event operator) to provide institutional coaching staff members with expenses (e.g., travel, lodging) to attend any event for recruiting purposes. Such expenses are considered funds donated for recruiting purposes and such funds must be deposited directly with the member institution, as opposed to being provided directly to an institutional coaching staff member(s)”. M
Continued on Page 2
COMPLIANCE STAFF Nicole Green, Assistant Athletic Director
Ryan Crews, Compliance Assistant
Jon Michalik, Graduate Assistant
ngreen@memphis.edu
rcccrews@memphis.edu
jmchalik@memphis.edu
570 Normal Street | Memphis, TN 38125 | Office: 901.678.2088 | Fax: 901.678.1653 NOV 2012 | VOL. 2
Continued from Page 1 The new structure becomes effective Aug. 1, 2013, which means the following as far as processing cases is concerned: •
•
•
•
C onduct breaches that occurred before Oct. 30, 2012 and are processed before Aug. 1, 2013 will be subject to the current process and penalties. onduct breaches that occurred before Oct. C 30, 2012 but are processed after Aug. 1, 2013 would be subject to the new process but would incur the more lenient of the two penalty structures (current and revised). onduct breaches that occurred during a C span that includes both before and after Oct. 30, 2012 and are processed after Aug. 1, 2013 will be subject to new process and the revised penalties as long as most of the violations occurred after Oct. 30, 2012. onduct breaches that occur after Oct. 30, C 2012 and are processed after Aug. 1, 2013 will be subject to both the new process and the revised penalty structure.
Board of Directors chair Nathan Hatch, president at Wake Forest, praised the new enforcement process that aligns with a companion effort to streamline bylaws and focus rules-making more on the NCAA’s fundamental principles. The Rules Working Group, led by Clemson President James Barker, forwarded a number of recommendations to the Board that are expected to be acted upon in January. “A more sensible rules book combined with a more efficient way to enforce those rules will serve to sustain the collegiate model and restore public trust in college sports and the NCAA,” Hatch said. “These outcomes are precisely what presidents sought after the 2011 retreat.”
Penalties in the previous structure relied on whether the head coach knew of the violations or whether there was a “presumption of knowledge.” But under the new structure, rather than focus on knowledge or the presumption of it, the bylaw will be amended to presume only responsibility. Accordingly, if a violation occurs, the head coach is presumed responsible, and if he or she can’t overcome that presumption, charges will be forthcoming. “We expect head coaches to provide practices and training and written materials that instruct their assistant coaches how to act,” Ray said. “If they’ve done that it can become mitigating evidence that they shouldn’t be held accountable for what the assistant coach did. But head coaches have to have these things in place or the presumption will be that he or she didn’t care enough to set standards. In that case, if the assistant goes rogue, then it’s partly the head coach’s fault and they need to be held accountable.” The entirety of the new structure is based on membership review and feedback over the past year. With approval of the new structure in hand, the NCAA enforcement staff will embark on an educational campaign over the next nine months to prepare the membership for the implementation of the new structure. “The working group developed these recommendations only after comprehensive and ongoing membership discussion and input,” Ray said. “I’m pleased not only with the magnitude of the changes but also with the representativeness with which they were achieved.” M
IMPORTANT DATES November 28 ������������Coaches Rules Education Meeting. UC Bluff Room 304 (Topics: Legislation, Financial Aid, Awards & Benefits)
RECRUITING PERIODS CROSS COUNTRY/TRACK & FIELD November 1–16 ��������������������������Contact Period November 17 ���������������������������������� Dead Period (from 12:01am – 12:01am)
November 18–30 ������������������������Contact Period BASEBALL November 1–11 ��������������������������Contact Period November 12–15 ���������������������������� Dead Period November 16–30 ����������������������������Quiet Period MEN’S BASKETBALL November 1–11 ��������������������� Recruiting Period November 12–15 ���������������������������� Dead Period November 16–30 ������������������� Recruiting Period WOMEN’S BASKETBALL November 1–11 ���������������������Evaluation Period November 12–15 ���������������������������� Dead Period November 16–30 �������������������Evaluation Period FOOTBALL November 1–24 ���������������������Evaluation Period 2 Evaluation Days during the months of September, Octo4 ber, and November selected at the discretion of the institution and on file in writing in the Athletic Compliance Office. Off-campus recruiters shall not visit a PSA’s educational institution more than once per week during this period. All other dates shall be considered Quiet Period
November 25–30 ������������������������Contact Period SOFTBALL November 1–11 ��������������������������Contact Period November 12–15 ���������������������������� Dead Period November 16–21 ������������������������Contact Period November 22–27 ����������������������������Quiet Period November 28–30 ���������������������������� Dead Period VOLLEYBALL November 1–11 ��������������������������Contact Period November 12–15 ���������������������������� Dead Period November 16–30 ������������������������Contact Period
NLI SIGNING DATES
for Prospective Student-Athletes Enrolling 2013-2014
INITIAL SIGNING DATE
FINAL SIGNING DATE
Basketball (Early Period)
November 14, 2012
November 21, 2012
All Other Sports (Early Period)
November 14, 2012
November 21, 2012
Football (Midyear JC Transfer)
December 19, 2012
January 15, 2013
MEN’S & WOMEN’S SOCCER November 1–30 ��������������������� Recruiting Period ALL OTHER SPORTS November 1–11 ��������������������� Recruiting Period November 12–15 ���������������������������� Dead Period November 16–30 ������������������� Recruiting Period
COMPLIANCE STAFF Nicole Green, Assistant Athletic Director
Ryan Crews, Compliance Assistant
Jon Michalik, Graduate Assistant
ngreen@memphis.edu
rcccrews@memphis.edu
jmchalik@memphis.edu
570 Normal Street | Memphis, TN 38125 | Office: 901.678.2088 | Fax: 901.678.1653
2
NOV 2012 | VOL. 2