New NCAA Penalty Rules

[Fern]

Looks like things are about to get tougher for schools that break rules in their sports program. Hopefully, more uniform treatment/penalties to those caught cheating, and possibly quicker action. Right now it seems to take forever for them to make a decision and hand down penalties, even worse they make no sense in many cases. Some get off easy, others get hamered.

In addition to following the principles of fairness, accountability and process integrity, flexibility is one of the key things the new model is designed to address as there are currently only two categories of violations: major and secondary. The new model would have four levels (most egregious, serious, secondary, minor) with the Committee on Infractions taking into account various mitigating or aggravating factors that would then help determine penalties. While many believe the enforcement side just makes it up as they go along (and they can because they don't follow past precedent), the model should help move cases along in the system quicker and result in more consistency among penalties given out to schools.

So yes, USC would have been punished even worse under the new proposed enforcement model coming from the NCAA. That's interesting because athletic director Pat Haden is on the enforcement working group and has made it a point to say that the Trojans were unfairly punished. In other examples provided by the NCAA, Baylor's basketball program would have seen the number of scholarships available slashed in half following the school's 2005 infractions case. Instead of fewer practice hours for Rich Rodriguez and Michigan in their case, the Wolverines could have lost up to four scholarships per year. Florida State's 2009 case could have seen football scholarship losses of 10-21 per year for three years instead of the six they received.

Given the new model, expect the hammer from Indianapolis to come down harder on cheaters in the future.

http://eye-on-collegefootball.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/24156338/34441353

IMO, this doesn't bode well for teams under investigation now - Miami, UNC etc.

Fern

 

[MotionMan]

I have a better idea:

1. No recruiting of/contact with high school student-athletes;
2. No official sports department visits for high school student-athletes;
3. College student-athletes in major TV sports (football and basketball) must live in on campus dorms with a food plan and be given $x for miscellaneous expenses;
4. All scholarships would be for four years and can only be cancelled by the school for cause (grades, criminal, etc.) and would NOT be tied to remaining on the team (with an appeal process for players who quit the team);
5. The player will be released from the scholarship commitment to go play at another school without a scholarship for the remainder of the players eligibility;
6. The player will be released from the scholarship commitment to go play at another school with a scholarship if not in the same conference or is not on the old school's schedule for the length of the players eligibility;
7. The player will be released from the scholarship commitment to go play at another school with a scholarship if in the same conference, is on the old school's schedule if approved by the old school or via an appeal process, if the head coach or position coach leaves or if the school is placed on some sort of sanction;
8. The individual violators with knowledge (coaches, administrators, players) shall be sanctioned by the NCAA and professional leagues. Schools shall only be sanctioned if the violation was so pervasive that it is hard to separate the individuals from the school.

These are just a few ideas.

Of course, this will never happen.

MotionMan

 

[CPA]

I'll believe it when I see it. There will continue to be behind-the-scenes dealmaking going on for rulesbreakers and slap on the hands for the big boys.

 

[Squisher]

I'll believe it when I see it. There will continue to be behind-the-scenes dealmaking going on for rulesbreakers and slap on the hands for the big boys.

Agreed, a lot of these deals are coming from third parties not affiliated with the school and sometimes get funneled to third parties, not the athlete themselves. I truly believe every program has some dirt that can be dug up.

But, then I also wonder if they go all draconian if this would go so far as stopping a kid from even getting a job. Who will determine if the pay is "fair" and not padded?

 

[Fern]

I'll believe it when I see it. There will continue to be behind-the-scenes dealmaking going on for rulesbreakers and slap on the hands for the big boys.

Yeah, we'll have to see. But seems to me this new, more detailed paradigm will make 'special deals' much more difficult.

It reminds me of sentencing guidelines used by criminal courts. It's going to be difficult to just blow that off for a favored school.

Edit: Forgot to say that this looks really stiff. I.e., losing half your scholarships for a football team is close to a death penalty.

Fern

 

[crashtestdummy]

I've got a better idea that's really much simpler and eliminates this disingenuous standard they've created.

It comes down to two choices:

1) Eliminate athletic scholarships entirely. If college sports are going to be about amateurism, then fill the teams with students who also just happen to play a sport the other way around.

2) Pay the players. As a graduate student, I receive a "stipend", basically a salary, that is a combination of that the university can afford and what they think I'm worth. There is no maximum payment. This is offset by the fact that the research I do brings in funding to the University that supplements the cost of my presence. Similarly, these players are making colleges a ton of money, and it reasonable for players to expect a share of that.

Having said that, it's clear that the NCAA will fight to the death to prevent either of these from ever occurring.

 

[GotIssues]

Agreed, a lot of these deals are coming from third parties not affiliated with the school and sometimes get funneled to third parties, not the athlete themselves. I truly believe every program has some dirt that can be dug up.

I think most programs do, but a few have a lot more (in amount and severity) than others.

But, then I also wonder if they go all draconian if this would go so far as stopping a kid from even getting a job. Who will determine if the pay is "fair" and not padded?

It's pretty easy to determine if you know what you are doing. You just have to know a bit about local labor markets and simple compensation practices.

 

[Sixguns]

As for some kids getting money and other goods, does that really make them a better player? I say, who cares if some kid is getting paid by a booster. Just let them make their money and play the game.

 

[mugs]

As for some kids getting money and other goods, does that really make them a better player? I say, who cares if some kid is getting paid by a booster. Just let them make their money and play the game.

Do you actually not understand why that stuff is not allowed?