tiger monthly- sept 11
DESCRIPTION
Tiger MonthlyTRANSCRIPT
SEPTEMBER, 2011 | VOL. 1
SEPTEMBER, 2011 | VOL. 1
COMPLIANCE STAFF
570 Normal Street | Memphis, TN 38125 | Office: 901.678.2088 | Fax: 901.678.1653
Defeat of Phone Call Proposal Makes NCAA Clean Up HarderJULY 18, 2011 by JOHN INFANTE
Proposal 2010-30 was supposed to the start of major deregulation of the recruiting rules. It wasn’t supposed to be about what the actual phone call rules were. Rather, it was about the fact that there are currently seven different regulations for when and how often a coach can call a prospect and their parents. The new rule would have cut that to three. Still not ideal, but a massive improvement over the current system.
After Proposal 2010-30 was passed with overwhelming support, coaches and ad-ministrators balked. Many of the comments on the 106 override requests opposed a move toward earlier recruiting and thought the increased workload would give an advantage to schools with larger coaching (and noncoaching) staffs.
Fewer rules slims down the Manual and cuts down on the cost of monitoring since you spend less time training staff on numerous rules. It also sets a baseline rule that could then be tweaked rather than creating a new rule on a sport-by-sport basis. A lot of inertia on basic recruiting rules would have been broken.
Instead we’ll keep the current set of rules.And more importantly, a bigger proposal coming this year that removes limits on the frequency of calls now looks much less
likely to pass. That proposal will cut down dramatically on monitoring costs since schools would only need to check that coaches are not calling prospects too early. Proactive monitoring systems would also become much more affordable and accessible for smaller schools.
It’s an issue of priorities. The membership has reiterated that early recruiting and competitive equity are still major priori-ties. But if extra benefits, agent activity, and pay-for-play are also priorities, that means something has to give, in this case having a smaller, simpler rule book which requires less administrative overhead to maintain and enforce. It also means more resources have to be spent on compliance rather than something else, which is good or bad depending on where you sit.
There’s talk now that just about every rule is becoming untenable. Amateurism, initial eligibility, recruiting regulations, financial aid limits, and staff limitations have come under fire. It’s likely only a matter of time before the concept of eligibility itself is challenged. If we’re going to declare rules failed though, we should start with the little ones that take a lot of time and effort first, rather than jumping straight to core values.
IMPORTANT DATESSept. 21 - Coaches Rules Education Meeting at 10 am Sept. 28 - New Employee Orientation at 9 am
Sept. 28 - Non-Coaching/Clerical Staff Recruiting Paperwork Meeting at 10 am
RECRUITING CALENDAR
CROSS COUNTRY / TRACK & FIELDSept. 1-30 - Contact Period
BASEBALLSept. 1-8 - Quiet PeriodSept. 9-30 - Contact Period
MEN’S BASKETBALLSept. 1-8 - Quiet PeriodSept. 9-30 - Contact Period
WOMEN’S BASKETBALLSept. 1-15 - Quiet PeriodSept. 16-30 - Contact Period
FOOTBALLSept. 1-30 - Evaluation Period
SOFTBALLSept. 1-30 - Contact Period
VOLLEYBALLSept. 1-30 - Contact Period
ALL OTHER SPORTSSept. 1-30 - Contact Period
Nicole GreenDirector of Compliance
Sally AndrewsAssistant Compliance Coordinator
Ryan CrewsCompliance Assistant
CUSA (logo) Interps
Question: Can a semester that a student was dually enrolled be utilized to meet the two year college
requirements per 14.5.4.2.2?
Answer: Per NCAA 14.2.2.3 a student-athlete would not have started his 5 year clock which means he could
not use the semester he was dually enrolled to meet the two transfer requirements of 14.5.4.2.2.
Question: Do fall dates of competition count in the first half of the season calculation for a hardship waiver in
the sport of tennis?
Answer: Yes, calculations for the hardship waiver in tennis have always been based on the entire season (nonchampionship and championship segments), based on the fact that the selections for individual participation in
the championships is based on the fall and the spring. Having said that, the issue was raised earlier this year and the NCAA agreed to do an editorial revision to clarify the application of the legislation. The ER was completed earlier
this month (ER-2010-11) and the legislation on LSDBi will be updated soon.
Question: Can high school coaches receive the benefit of a free meal while attending a free admission camp or
clinic?
Answer: Based on 13.8.2 and the August 17, 1988 interpretation, it would not be permissible for high school
coaches to receive the benefit of a free meal while attending a free admission camp or clinic.
INTERPS
Question: Can an athletics department provide items to be used in an auction that would directly benefit a high school athletics program?
Answer: No, per 13.15.1.2 an athletics department may not give items to be included in an auction that would directly benefit a high school athletics program.
SEPTEMBER, 2011 | VOL. 12
Recruiting – Electronic Transmissions – Social Networking Sites (I)Date Published: October 9, 2009 | Item Ref: 1
Educational Column: NCAA Division I institutions should note that pursuant to NCAA Division I Bylaw 13.4.1.2 an institution may send electronically transmitted correspondence to a prospective student-athlete in sports other than men’s basketball and men’s ice hockey beginning September 1 at the beginning of the prospective student-athlete’s junior year in high school. In men’s basketball and men’s ice hockey, an institution may send electronically transmitted correspondence to a prospective student-athlete beginning June 15 at the conclusion of a prospective student-athlete’s sophomore year in high school. Further, electronically transmitted correspondence that may be sent to a prospective student-athlete is limited to electronic mail (e-mail) and facsimiles until after the calendar day on which a prospective student-athlete signs a National Letter of Intent. All other forms of electronically transmitted correspondence (e.g., Instant Messenger, text messaging) are prohibited.
Institutions should note that e-mail is not limited to a traditional e-mail service provided by an institution, Web site or Internet service provider. Therefore, it is permissible for an athletics department staff member to send electronically transmitted correspondence to a prospective student-athlete using a social networking Web site’s (e.g., MySpace, Facebook) e-mail feature. All other electronically transmitted correspondence including, but not limited to, text messaging, Instant Messenger, chat rooms or message boards (e.g., a user’s wall) within a social networking Web site or through other services or applications remain impermissible.
For example, a coaching staff member with a MySpace or Facebook account may send electronically transmitted correspondence to a prospective student-athlete’s MySpace or Facebook account using the e-mail inbox feature located on that user’s profile page. However, a coaching staff member may not send electronic correspondence to a prospective student-athlete via the comments feature on MySpace or the wall-to-wall feature on Facebook.
Institutions should also note that in accordance with Bylaw 13.10.2, before the signing of a prospective student-athlete to a National Letter of Intent or an institution’s written offer of admission and/or financial aid, a member institution may comment publicly only to the extent of confirming its recruitment of the prospective student-athlete. The institution may not comment generally about the prospective stu-dent-athlete’s ability or the contribution that the prospective student-athlete might make to the institution’s team; further, the institution is precluded from commenting in any manner as to the likelihood of the prospective student-athlete’s signing with that institution.
SOCIAL NETWORKINGREMINDER
continued on page 3
Complimentary admissions can only be provided through a pass list (Bylaw 16.2.1.2). Each individual on a student-athletes pas s list will need to show identification in order to receive their complimentary admission.
– An institution MAY NOT provide a special Arrangement to sell a student-athlete ticket(s) to an athletics event. Tickets shall be available for purchase by student- athletes according to the same purchasing procedures used for other students.
– A student-athlete MAY NOT purchase tickets for an intercollegiate athletics event from the institution and then sell the tickets at a price greater than their face value.
– A student-athlete MAY NOT receive payment from any source for his or her complimentary admissions and may not exchange them or assign them for any item of value (Bylaw 16.2.2.1)
– An institution or booster MAY NOT purchase or otherwise obtain tickets to a professional sports event and make these tickets available to student-athletes enrolled in an NCAA member institution. This would constitute an impermissible extra benefit.
– Individuals designated by the student-athlete to receive complimentary admissions are NOT permitted to receive any type of payment for these admissions or to exchange or assign them for any item of value (Bylaw16.2.2.2). Receipt of payment for complimentary admissions by such individuals is prohibited and considered an extra benefit.
COMPLIMENTARY ADMISSIONS
COMPLIANCE STAFF
570 Normal Street | Memphis, TN 38125 | Office: 901.678.2088 | Fax: 901.678.1653
Nicole GreenDirector of Compliance
Sally AndrewsAssistant Compliance Coordinator
Ryan CrewsCompliance Assistant
3
Social Networking, continued from page 2
PEARL HANDED THREE-YEAR SHOW-CAUSEinsufficient evidence football program had major violations ncaa.com
SEPTEMBER, 2011 | VOL. 1
Last Updated - August 24, 2011 3:03 GMTThe Division I Committee on Infractions on Wednesday announced that Tennessee failed to monitor its men’s basketball program and the penalties include a show-cause order for former head men’s basketball coach Bruce Pearl.
The show-cause order means that Pearl is prohibited from engaging in recruiting activity for three years at any NCAA member school. Any school wanting to hire him must go before the NCAA to explain why and could face penalties.
Additional penalties imposed by the committee include:• Public reprimand and censure.• Two years’ probation from Aug. 24, 2011, through Aug. 23, 2013.
Also, three former assistant coaches -- Tony Jones, Steve Forbes and Jason Shay -- were cited for a failure to cooperate with the investigation. Each of the former assistant coaches received a one-year show-cause order, which also prohibits recruiting activity.
In addition to the 20 penalties self-imposed by the university and the Southeastern Conference and agreed to by the infractions committee, Tennessee must also serve two years of probation.
While the investigation included allegations of major violations in the football program under former head coach Lane Kiffin, the
committee concluded that the evidence was insufficient to support findings of major violations.
The football staff committed 12 secondary violations over 10 months, all of which were related to recruiting.
While the basketball violations stemmed from impermissible recruiting contact and phone calls, the committee stated the most serious allegations included the former coaching staff’s provision of false and misleading information and their encouragement of others to do the same, including recruits and a parent.
“Head coaches bear primary responsibility for monitoring all aspects of their pro-grams and promoting an atmosphere for compliance,” stated the committee report. “It is also presumed that head coaches know or should know of violations in their programs, particularly when the violations occur over an extended period of time.”
The men’s basketball violations began when three prospects and their families attended a dinner at Pearl’s home in conjunction with their unofficial visits to the school. After they spent some time at the dinner, Pearl ushered the prospects and their families to an outdoor veranda. According to the committee, he informed them that their attendance was a violation of NCAA rules and encouraged them to not disclose their presence to others.
Pearl did not report the violations and denied knowledge of them when later questioned during the investigation. Further, he placed a series of phone calls to a prospect’s father in an effort to influ-ence him to make false and misleading statements during the investigation. Pearl later provided truthful information to inves-tigators during a subsequent interview.
Jones, Forbes and Shay did not cooperate with the investigation when they failed to provide full and complete information to the university and NCAA enforcement staff.
The investigation also revealed the men’s basketball coaching staff placed 94 imper-missible phone calls to 12 prospects over two years. The committee found these violations were not discovered in a timely fashion, which led to the failure to monitor by the university and Pearl.
13.1.3.3.1.1
Athletics department staff members may make unlimited telephone calls to a prospective student-athlete or those individuals accompanying the prospective student-athlete during the prospective student-athlete’s official visit transportation and during his or her official visit.
OFFICIAL VISITS
Accordingly, although it is permissible for a prospective student-athlete’s name and/or picture to appear on an athletics department staff member’s profile page of a social networking website to identify the prospective student-athlete as a “friend” of the athletics department staff member, staff members may not initiate or accept such requests until such time that it is permissible to send electroni-cally transmitted correspondence to a
prospective student-athlete. Institutions should note that the identification of the prospective student-athlete as a “friend” on an athletics staff members profile page confirms only the institution’s potential recruitment of that individual. However, institutions are reminded they may not make any public comments about the prospective student-athlete’s ability, the contribution that the prospective student-athlete might make to the institution’s team
or the likelihood of the prospective stu-dent-athlete’s signing with that institution.
[References: Division I Bylaws 13.4.1.2 (electronic transmissions), 13.4.1.2.1 (ex-ception -- electronic transmissions after National Letter of Intent signing or other written commitment) and 13.10.2 (com-ments before signing)]
COMPLIANCE STAFF
570 Normal Street | Memphis, TN 38125 | Office: 901.678.2088 | Fax: 901.678.1653
Nicole GreenDirector of Compliance
Sally AndrewsAssistant Compliance Coordinator
Ryan CrewsCompliance Assistant