AUGUST, 2012 | VOL. 2
Penn State Failures Draw Unprecedented NCAA Sanctions By perpetuating a “football first” culture that ultimately enabled serial child sexual abuse to occur, The Pennsylvania State University leadership failed to value and uphold institutional integrity, resulting in a breach of the NCAA constitution and rules. The NCAA Division I Board of Directors and NCAA Executive Committee directed Association President Mark Emmert to examine the circumstances and determine appropriate action in consultation with these presidential bodies.
paid into an endowment for external programs preventing child sexual abuse or assisting victims and may not be used to fund such programs at the university.
The sanctions also include a four-year football postseason ban and a vacation of all wins from 1998 through 2011. The career record of former head football coach Joe Paterno will reflect these vacated records. Penn State must also reduce 10 initial and 20 total scholarships each year for a fouryear period. In addition, the NCAA reserves “As we evaluated the situation, the victims the right to impose additional sanctions on affected by Jerry Sandusky and the efforts involved individuals at the conclusion of by many to conceal his crimes informed our any criminal proceedings. actions,” said Emmert. “At our core, we are educators. Penn State leadership lost sight The NCAA recognizes that student-athletes are not responsible for these events and of that.” worked to minimize the impact of its sancAccording to the NCAA conclusions and tions on current and incoming football sanctions, the Freeh Report “presents an student-athletes. Any entering or returnunprecedented failure of institutional integ- ing student-athlete will be allowed to imrity leading to a culture in which a football mediately transfer and compete at another program was held in higher esteem than school. Further, any football student-aththe values of the institution, the values of letes who remain at the university may rethe NCAA, the values of higher education, tain their scholarships, regardless of whethand most disturbingly the values of human er they compete on the team. decency.” To further integrate the athletics departAs a result, the NCAA imposed a $60 million ment into the university, Penn State will be sanction on the university, which is equiva- required to enter into an “Athletics Integrity lent to the average gross annual revenue of Agreement” with the NCAA. It also must the football program. These funds must be adopt all Freeh Report recommendations
IMPORTANT DATES August 1 ����������All other sports NLI Final Date August 9 �������Last Date of Summer 2 Classes August 15 ������������New Employee Compliance Orientation 9am at Penny Hardaway Hall of Fame Assembly Room August 22 �Coaches Rules Education Meeting 10am at Penny Hardaway Hall of Fame Assembly Room August 25 ��������� First day of Classes Fall Term
RECRUITING PERIODS BASEBALL August 1–31 ������������������������������Contact Period SOFTBALL August 1–Nov 21 ��������������������Contact Period* Nov 12–15 ��������������������������������������Dead Period WOMEN’S VOLLEY BALL August 1–Dec 2 ����������������������Contact Period* November 12–15 ��������������������������Dead Period CROSS COUNTRY/TRACK & FIELD August 1–11 ��������������������������������� Quiet Period August 12–Dec 9 ��������������������Contact Period* FOOTBALL August 1–31 ��������������������������������� Quiet Period MEN’S BASKETBALL August 1–Sep 8 ��������������������������� Quiet Period WOMEN’S BASKETBALL August 1–Sep 15 ������������������������� Quiet Period *EXCEPTION: 11/19 (12:01am)–20 (12:01am).......Dead Period
Continued on Page 3
COMPLIANCE STAFF Nicole Green, Director of Compliance ngreen@memphis.edu
Ryan Crews, Compliance Assistant rcccrews@memphis.edu
Jon Michalik, Graduate Assistant jmchalik@memphis.edu
570 Normal Street | Memphis, TN 38125 | Office: 901.678.2088 | Fax: 901.678.1653 AUG, 2012 | VOL. 2
EDUCATION NCAA Bylaw 12.02.1 — Definition of an Agent (I)
Q: How is the definition of an agent referenced above distinguished from the definition of an athletics scholarship agent?
Date Published: July 5, 2012 Item Ref: Column 16 #3 NCAA Division I institutions should note, pursuant to NCAA Bylaw 12.02.1, an agent is a person who directly or indirectly represents or attempts to represent an individual for the purpose of marketing his or her athletics ability or reputation for financial gain or seeks to obtain any type of financial gain or benefit from securing a prospective student-athlete’s enrollment at an educational institution. The following questions and answers are designed to assist the Division I membership with the application of this legislation. Q: Would an individual who organizes showcase events for prospective student-athletes to be evaluated by college coaches be considered an agent if the prospective student-athletes pay the individual a fee to participate in the showcase? A: No. In this scenario, the payment is to participate in a showcase event. The individual did not seek or obtain a benefit from securing a prospective student-athlete’s enrollment at an educational institution.
A: Whereas the definition of agent is more broad based, an athletics scholarship agent is an individual, agency or organization who receives compensation specifically for assisting a prospective student-athlete in obtaining an athletics scholarship. Q: Would a prospective student-athlete’s parents be considered agents if they assist their son or daughter in securing an athletics scholarship with an institution? A: No. The legislation does not apply to a prospective studentathlete’s parents or legal guardians or high school and nonscholastic coaches unless they are seeking a financial gain for placing the prospective student-athlete at a particular school. Q: Would the legislation allow an individual to use the services of an advisor who is also an agent without jeopardizing their eligibility? Continued on Page 3
Scouting Service Application Deadline Extended to August 15, 2012 (I) ing URL: http://web1.ncaa.org/scouting/school_search. An ncaa. As of June 1, 2012, NCAA Division I member institutions are only org account is required in order to access the list. If a scouting permitted to subscribe to scouting services in men’s basketball, service’s application is approved, the approval will be valid until football and women’s basketball that are approved through the May 31, 2013. NCAA scouting service approval process. A member institution that subscribes to an approved scouting Given that this is the first year in which it is mandatory for a service has an expectation of shared responsibility to monitor scouting service to be certified by the NCAA, the deadline for the product they are receiving and communicate any red flags a service to apply has been extended until 11:59 p.m. Eastern to the NCAA staff. Institutions are expected to confirm that the time on August 15, 2012. This is a one-time exception and under scouting service complies with the criteria set forth in Bylaw no circumstances will a service be permitted to apply after that 13.14.3 including: deadline. Similarly, after the 2012 application period has closed, 1. The fee rate charged to the institution is the same as the fee all deadlines will be strictly enforced and no consideration will rate listed on the NCAA approved scouting services list. be given to circumstances that resulted in a service missing the deadline to apply. The application period for 2013 will be be- 2. The institution received information from the scouting service (e.g., reports, profiles) about prospective student-athletes at tween April 1, 2013, and 11:59 p.m. Eastern time on May 31, 2013, least four times per annual cycle. with NO exceptions. 3. The product they received is consistent with the sample that Institutional List and Responsibility was submitted with the scouting service online application. Scouting service sample reports are viewable at the Approved Once approved, the service will be identified on the list of apScouting Services Search link. M proved scouting services that can be accessed with the follow-
June 27, 2012
COMPLIANCE STAFF Nicole Green, Director of Compliance ngreen@memphis.edu
Ryan Crews, Compliance Assistant rcccrews@memphis.edu
Jon Michalik, Graduate Assistant jmchalik@memphis.edu
570 Normal Street | Memphis, TN 38125 | Office: 901.678.2088 | Fax: 901.678.1653
2
AUG, 2012 | VOL. 2
Penn State, continued from Page 1 and appoint an independent, NCAA-selected Athletics Integrity Monitor, who will oversee compliance with the agreement. Effective immediately, the university faces five years of probation. Specifically, the university is subject to more severe penalties if it does not adhere to these requirements or violates NCAA rules in any sport during this time period. “There has been much speculation on whether or not the NCAA has the authority to impose any type of penalty related to Penn State,” said Ed Ray, Executive Committee chair and Oregon State president. “This egregious behavior not only goes against our rules and constitution, but also against our values.”
Because Penn State accepted the Freeh Report factual findings, which the university itself commissioned, the NCAA determined traditional investigative proceedings would be redundant and unnecessary. “We cannot look to NCAA history to determine how to handle circumstances so disturbing, shocking and disappointing,” said Emmert. “As the individuals charged with governing college sports, we have a responsibility to act. These events should serve as a call to every single school and athletics department to take an honest look at its campus environment and eradicate the ‘sports are king’ mindset that can so dramatically cloud the judgment of educators.”
Penn State fully cooperated with the NCAA on this examination of the issues and took decisive action in removing individuals in leadership who were culpable. “The actions already taken by the new Penn State Board of Trustees chair Karen Peetz and Penn State President Rodney Erickson have demonstrated a strong desire and determination to take the steps necessary for Penn State to right these severe wrongs,” said Emmert. M
OFFICIAL INTERPS Permissible Number of Contacts for Multi-sport Athletes (I) Date Published: March 12, 2012 Item Ref: 1
Education, continued from Page 2 A: An individual is permitted to have an advisor assist him or her in reviewing a proposed professional sports contract, provided the advisor does not represent the individual directly in contract negotiations. It is permissible for an advisor to discuss the merits of a proposed contract with an individual and provide suggestions about the type of offer the individual should consider. However, if an advisor makes direct contact with the professional team, then the advisor shall be considered an agent and the individual will have jeopardized future eligibility at a Division I institution. Q: May an advisor be present during negotiations between an individual and a professional team? A: An advisor may not be present during discussions of a contract offer with a professional team or have any direct contact (e.g., in person, by telephone and mail) with a professional sports team on the individual’s behalf without such action resulting in the advisor being considered an agent. [References: NCAA Division I Bylaws 12.01 (definition of an agent) 12.02.1 (agent) 12.02.1.1 (application), 12.3.1 (use of agents), 12.3.1.2 (benefits from prospective agents), 12.3.3. (athletics scholarship agent) and 12.3.3.1 (talent evaluation services and agents)] Notice about Educational Columns: Educational columns and hot topics are intended to assist the membership with the correct application of legislation and/or interpretations by providing clarifications, reminders and examples. They are based on legislation and official and staff interpretations applicable at the time of publication. Therefore, educational columns and hot topics are binding to the extent that the legislation and interpretations on which they are based remain applicable. Educational columns are posted on a regular basis to address a variety of issues and hot topics are posted as necessary in order to address timely issues. M
Interpretation: The committee confirmed that the maximum number of permissible offcampus contacts used by an institution for a multi-sport prospective studentathlete may not exceed the specific limit set forth in the contact legislation for the particular sport. For example, if an institution’s football coach and track coach contact a prospective studentathlete, the institution uses only one institutional contact; however, the track coach may not engage in more than three off-campus contacts, even if the coach makes contact on the same day as the football coach. Further, if the football coach already has contacted the prospective student-athlete on five occasions, the track coach only has one remaining contact. [References: NCAA Division I Bylaws 13.1.4.1.5 (multiple sport athlete) and 13.1.5 (contacts); and a staff interpretation (11/09/11, Item No. a), which has been archived] M
COMPLIANCE STAFF Nicole Green, Director of Compliance ngreen@memphis.edu
Ryan Crews, Compliance Assistant rcccrews@memphis.edu
Jon Michalik, Graduate Assistant jmchalik@memphis.edu
570 Normal Street | Memphis, TN 38125 | Office: 901.678.2088 | Fax: 901.678.1653
3
AUG, 2012 | VOL. 2