Complian ce Corner - WeberStateSports.com
Volume 6, Issue 4
Compliance Corner
WEBER STATE UNIVERISTY
March 1, 2012
Head Coach Fired for Recruiting Violations and Cover up The University of Tennessee was sanctioned for major NCAA violations when the men’s basketball head coach and three assistants had impermissible contact with high school juniors and subsequently lied to cover it up. The violations stemmed from a September 2008 incident where the prospective student athletes were making unofficial visits to the university. Following a University of Tennessee football game, the coaches invited the prospective student-athletes, along with their families, to dinner at the home of the head coach. After dinner, the head coach ushered the prospects and their families to an outdoor patio. There he informed them that their attendance was a violation of NCAA rules and asked them not to disclose their attendance of the dinner to others. Compliance officials became aware of the incident when they received an anonymous package. The package contained a photograph of the head coach and one of the prospective student-athletes standing inside the coach’s kitchen. Printed below the photograph was the question, “Is having a high school junior
recruit in your home an NCAA violation?” The violations escalated when, after failing to report the incident, the coaches denied knowledge of the incident. When the head coach was questioned a second time, he encouraged his staff to provide false information regarding the incident. After a lengthy investigation the head coach finally acknowledged the incident. As a result of these violations the University was publicly reprimanded, censured, and placed on two years of probation. As part of the NCAA sanctions, the head coach was issued a three-year “show cause” penalty, which means the penalty remains in force if the coach is hired by another NCAA member institution. During the penalty period, the coach is prohibited from engaging in any recruiting activities. Additionally, the university imposed its own sanctions; firing the head coach, reducing the basketball coaching staff salary, and prohibiting off campus occasional meals for men’s basketball. What do we learn? Honesty is the best policy. The discovery of a cover
Inside this issue:
up is often regarded as more reprehensible than the underlying violation. Coaches have a responsibility to act ethically (NCAA bylaw 10.1). When under investigation, for any violation, coaches also have a duty to cooperate through full and complete disclosure (NCAA bylaw 19.01.3). Need to report a violation? Have compliance questions? Contact the compliance office: (801) 626-8552.
Tennessee Head Coach Bruce Pearl Photo: Gerry Broome-AP
“Oh, what a tangled web we weave...when first we practice to deceive.” —Sir Walter Scott
Head Coach Fired
1
Congratulations to Damian Lillard 2011-2012 Big Sky MVP
Congratulations to Damian Lillard
1
Lillard averaged 24.5 PPG
Academic Honesty
2
Weber State All-Academic Teams
2
Lillard earned the Big Sky MVP his Sophomore season 2009-10
Weber State All-Academic Teams Continued
3
The Difference Between Eligibility and Enforcement
4
Important Dates to Remember
4
Lillard ranks 6th in the nation for 3-pointers Lillard has been named a finalist for the John Wooden and Oscar Robertson Player of the Year Awards.
Student-Athletes Dismissed for Academic Dishonesty Five East Carolina Pirate student-athletes were ruled ineligible for competition after they were caught committing academic fraud. Four members of the Pirates baseball team paid a women’s tennis player, who was also employed by ECU as an academic tutor, to write their English papers. After composing the papers, the employee/student-athlete emailed them to the baseball players in exchange for $10 per page. The baseball players then turned in the papers to their professors and received credit for the work.
which they had intervened and handled the situation. However, when the NCAA discovered that the university employed the tennis player as a tutor, the NCAA deemed the university responsible for her
The incidents were discovered when an Photo Credit: Chapman University Academic Integrity Awareness intern in the athletics department told http://www.chapman.edu/academics/advising/integrity.asp the Director of Student Development, that two of the players told him, someone actions and assessed penalties. ECU reelse had written the papers for them. ceived one year of probation and had to Initially the NCAA commended East Carolina for the efficient manner in
vacate all their baseball wins during the period in which the four baseball players
engaged academic fraud. The tennis player also had her tennis matches vacated. What do we learn? Cheaters never prosper. Those who commit academic dishonesty almost certainly be caught. It is a violation for a prospective athlete, current athlete, current or former institutional staff member to be involved in arranging fraudulent academic credit for an enrolled student-athlete (NCAA Bylaw 10.1b). Student-athletes and University employees have a responsibility to act ethically. Those who are found in violation of bylaw 10.1 shall be ineligible for further intercollegiate competition. For more information regarding academic honesty see WSU Student Code: http:// www.weber.edu/mls/degrees/campus/ student_handbook_campus.html
Big Sky Announces Fall 2011 All-Academic Teams The Big Sky Conference has announced the members of the 2011 Fall All-Academic teams for football, volleyball, soccer and men’s and women’s cross country. Eligible student-athletes must have met and/or exceeded the following minimum requirements: 1)Participated in at least half of the team’s competitions; 2)Achieved a 3.2 cumulative grade point average (on a 4.0 scale) at the conclusion of the most recently completed term; 3)Completed at least one academic term at his/her current Big Sky institution. Courtesy: bigsky.com Football Name
Class
Major
Jordan Clemente
So.
Health Administrative Services
Curtis Cosgrove
So.
Criminal Justice
Tony Epperson
So.
Business Administration/Finance
Karl Finai
Fr.
Forensic Science/Investigation
Mike Hoke
Jr.
Technical Sales
Brian Jankowski
Jr.
Psychology
Luke King
Fr.
Computer Science
Matt Miller
Sr.
Human Performance Mgmt.
Trevor Pletcher
Jr.
Human Performance Mgmt.
Austin Raught
Sr.
Organizational Communication
Shelton Robinson
Fr.
Human Performance Mgmt.
Ceejay Santos
Fr.
Business Admin/Management
Darchon Taggart
Fr.
Law and Justice
Caldwell Taylor
Jr.
Accounting
Tevia Tolutau
Fr.
Design Graphics Eng. Tech.
CJ Tuckett
Jr.
Human Performance/Wellness
Marvin Walker
Sr.
Communication/Electronic Media
Page 2
C O M P L I A N CE C O R NE R
All Academic Team Honors Continued. . . Name
Class
Major
Mackenzie Clark
Fr.
Zoology
Shelby Earl
Fr.
Elementary Education
Emily Jones
Jr.
Health Promotion
Kirstin Knowles
Jr.
Psychology
Shanae Langston
So.
Health Promotion
Ashley Orr
Fr.
Health Administrative Services
Caitlin Penrod
Jr.
English Teaching
Chris Burnett
Sr.
Microbiology
Brett Hales
Sr.
Athletic Therapy
Braden Perry
Fr.
Athletic Therapy
Kayla Blackford
So.
Microbiology
Sarah Callister
Jr.
Nursing
Natalie Clark
Fr.
Microbiology
Jenna Deelstra
Jr.
BIS
Amber Henry
So.
Nursing
Laken Hintze (Skidmore)
Jr.
Dental Hygiene
Suzanna Sorenson
Jr.
Psychology
Loren Storey
Sr.
Elementary Education
Taylor Thornley
Jr.
Advanced Radiologic Sciences
Alyssa Amano
So.
General Studies
Kendra Bailey
Fr.
Nursing
Mackenzie Day
Fr.
Athletic Training
Bailey Eames
So.
General Studies
Ryley Hansen
Fr.
General Studies
Kylie Johnson
Sr.
BIS
Abbey Kennedy
Fr.
Nursing
Sarah Mager
So.
Human Performance/Wellness
Kierstin Raught
Jr.
Human Perfomrance/Wellness
Volleyball
Men’s Cross Country
Women’s Cross Country
Soccer
VOLUME 6, ISSUE 4
Page 3
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ELIGIBILITY AND ENFORCEMENT The NCAA makes a purposeful distinction between determining student-athlete responsibility through an eligibility decision and university culpability through the infractions process. Institutions are accountable for rules violations through the infractions process. Student-athletes are responsible for rules violations through the eligibility process. Reinstatement decisions are independent of the NCAA enforcement structure and typically are made once the facts of the studentathlete’s involvement are determined. The reinstatement process is likely to conclude before an investigation closes. An enforcement investigation could affect student-athlete eligibility, which is why the reinstatement process must be addressed by institutional officials as soon as they are aware of violations. The NCAA looks at each student-athlete eligibility decision based on its merits. In making the decision, the staff and Student-Athlete Reinstatement Committee examine a number of factors, including guidelines established by the membership for what conditions should be applied based on the nature and scope of the violation. Decision-makers also consider mitigating factors to determine if relief from the guidelines should be provided. The easiest way to think about the two processes is this: Enforcement involves violations involving an institution or its employees. The eligibility process is triggered when a student-athlete has culpability for a violation. Courtesy: http://ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/enforcement/resources/in+the+news/
Mark You Calendars—Important Dates
March 2012 Sun
4
Mon
5 Summer
Tue
6
Wed
Thu
Fri
Sat
1
2
3
7
8
9
10
14
15
16
17Saint Pat-
Course Schedule Available Online
11
12Fall Course 13 Schedule Available Online
rick’s Day
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26Summer
27
28
29
30
31
Registration Begins
Compliance Corner
WEBER STATE UNIVERISTY
March 1, 2012
Head Coach Fired for Recruiting Violations and Cover up The University of Tennessee was sanctioned for major NCAA violations when the men’s basketball head coach and three assistants had impermissible contact with high school juniors and subsequently lied to cover it up. The violations stemmed from a September 2008 incident where the prospective student athletes were making unofficial visits to the university. Following a University of Tennessee football game, the coaches invited the prospective student-athletes, along with their families, to dinner at the home of the head coach. After dinner, the head coach ushered the prospects and their families to an outdoor patio. There he informed them that their attendance was a violation of NCAA rules and asked them not to disclose their attendance of the dinner to others. Compliance officials became aware of the incident when they received an anonymous package. The package contained a photograph of the head coach and one of the prospective student-athletes standing inside the coach’s kitchen. Printed below the photograph was the question, “Is having a high school junior
recruit in your home an NCAA violation?” The violations escalated when, after failing to report the incident, the coaches denied knowledge of the incident. When the head coach was questioned a second time, he encouraged his staff to provide false information regarding the incident. After a lengthy investigation the head coach finally acknowledged the incident. As a result of these violations the University was publicly reprimanded, censured, and placed on two years of probation. As part of the NCAA sanctions, the head coach was issued a three-year “show cause” penalty, which means the penalty remains in force if the coach is hired by another NCAA member institution. During the penalty period, the coach is prohibited from engaging in any recruiting activities. Additionally, the university imposed its own sanctions; firing the head coach, reducing the basketball coaching staff salary, and prohibiting off campus occasional meals for men’s basketball. What do we learn? Honesty is the best policy. The discovery of a cover
Inside this issue:
up is often regarded as more reprehensible than the underlying violation. Coaches have a responsibility to act ethically (NCAA bylaw 10.1). When under investigation, for any violation, coaches also have a duty to cooperate through full and complete disclosure (NCAA bylaw 19.01.3). Need to report a violation? Have compliance questions? Contact the compliance office: (801) 626-8552.
Tennessee Head Coach Bruce Pearl Photo: Gerry Broome-AP
“Oh, what a tangled web we weave...when first we practice to deceive.” —Sir Walter Scott
Head Coach Fired
1
Congratulations to Damian Lillard 2011-2012 Big Sky MVP
Congratulations to Damian Lillard
1
Lillard averaged 24.5 PPG
Academic Honesty
2
Weber State All-Academic Teams
2
Lillard earned the Big Sky MVP his Sophomore season 2009-10
Weber State All-Academic Teams Continued
3
The Difference Between Eligibility and Enforcement
4
Important Dates to Remember
4
Lillard ranks 6th in the nation for 3-pointers Lillard has been named a finalist for the John Wooden and Oscar Robertson Player of the Year Awards.
Student-Athletes Dismissed for Academic Dishonesty Five East Carolina Pirate student-athletes were ruled ineligible for competition after they were caught committing academic fraud. Four members of the Pirates baseball team paid a women’s tennis player, who was also employed by ECU as an academic tutor, to write their English papers. After composing the papers, the employee/student-athlete emailed them to the baseball players in exchange for $10 per page. The baseball players then turned in the papers to their professors and received credit for the work.
which they had intervened and handled the situation. However, when the NCAA discovered that the university employed the tennis player as a tutor, the NCAA deemed the university responsible for her
The incidents were discovered when an Photo Credit: Chapman University Academic Integrity Awareness intern in the athletics department told http://www.chapman.edu/academics/advising/integrity.asp the Director of Student Development, that two of the players told him, someone actions and assessed penalties. ECU reelse had written the papers for them. ceived one year of probation and had to Initially the NCAA commended East Carolina for the efficient manner in
vacate all their baseball wins during the period in which the four baseball players
engaged academic fraud. The tennis player also had her tennis matches vacated. What do we learn? Cheaters never prosper. Those who commit academic dishonesty almost certainly be caught. It is a violation for a prospective athlete, current athlete, current or former institutional staff member to be involved in arranging fraudulent academic credit for an enrolled student-athlete (NCAA Bylaw 10.1b). Student-athletes and University employees have a responsibility to act ethically. Those who are found in violation of bylaw 10.1 shall be ineligible for further intercollegiate competition. For more information regarding academic honesty see WSU Student Code: http:// www.weber.edu/mls/degrees/campus/ student_handbook_campus.html
Big Sky Announces Fall 2011 All-Academic Teams The Big Sky Conference has announced the members of the 2011 Fall All-Academic teams for football, volleyball, soccer and men’s and women’s cross country. Eligible student-athletes must have met and/or exceeded the following minimum requirements: 1)Participated in at least half of the team’s competitions; 2)Achieved a 3.2 cumulative grade point average (on a 4.0 scale) at the conclusion of the most recently completed term; 3)Completed at least one academic term at his/her current Big Sky institution. Courtesy: bigsky.com Football Name
Class
Major
Jordan Clemente
So.
Health Administrative Services
Curtis Cosgrove
So.
Criminal Justice
Tony Epperson
So.
Business Administration/Finance
Karl Finai
Fr.
Forensic Science/Investigation
Mike Hoke
Jr.
Technical Sales
Brian Jankowski
Jr.
Psychology
Luke King
Fr.
Computer Science
Matt Miller
Sr.
Human Performance Mgmt.
Trevor Pletcher
Jr.
Human Performance Mgmt.
Austin Raught
Sr.
Organizational Communication
Shelton Robinson
Fr.
Human Performance Mgmt.
Ceejay Santos
Fr.
Business Admin/Management
Darchon Taggart
Fr.
Law and Justice
Caldwell Taylor
Jr.
Accounting
Tevia Tolutau
Fr.
Design Graphics Eng. Tech.
CJ Tuckett
Jr.
Human Performance/Wellness
Marvin Walker
Sr.
Communication/Electronic Media
Page 2
C O M P L I A N CE C O R NE R
All Academic Team Honors Continued. . . Name
Class
Major
Mackenzie Clark
Fr.
Zoology
Shelby Earl
Fr.
Elementary Education
Emily Jones
Jr.
Health Promotion
Kirstin Knowles
Jr.
Psychology
Shanae Langston
So.
Health Promotion
Ashley Orr
Fr.
Health Administrative Services
Caitlin Penrod
Jr.
English Teaching
Chris Burnett
Sr.
Microbiology
Brett Hales
Sr.
Athletic Therapy
Braden Perry
Fr.
Athletic Therapy
Kayla Blackford
So.
Microbiology
Sarah Callister
Jr.
Nursing
Natalie Clark
Fr.
Microbiology
Jenna Deelstra
Jr.
BIS
Amber Henry
So.
Nursing
Laken Hintze (Skidmore)
Jr.
Dental Hygiene
Suzanna Sorenson
Jr.
Psychology
Loren Storey
Sr.
Elementary Education
Taylor Thornley
Jr.
Advanced Radiologic Sciences
Alyssa Amano
So.
General Studies
Kendra Bailey
Fr.
Nursing
Mackenzie Day
Fr.
Athletic Training
Bailey Eames
So.
General Studies
Ryley Hansen
Fr.
General Studies
Kylie Johnson
Sr.
BIS
Abbey Kennedy
Fr.
Nursing
Sarah Mager
So.
Human Performance/Wellness
Kierstin Raught
Jr.
Human Perfomrance/Wellness
Volleyball
Men’s Cross Country
Women’s Cross Country
Soccer
VOLUME 6, ISSUE 4
Page 3
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ELIGIBILITY AND ENFORCEMENT The NCAA makes a purposeful distinction between determining student-athlete responsibility through an eligibility decision and university culpability through the infractions process. Institutions are accountable for rules violations through the infractions process. Student-athletes are responsible for rules violations through the eligibility process. Reinstatement decisions are independent of the NCAA enforcement structure and typically are made once the facts of the studentathlete’s involvement are determined. The reinstatement process is likely to conclude before an investigation closes. An enforcement investigation could affect student-athlete eligibility, which is why the reinstatement process must be addressed by institutional officials as soon as they are aware of violations. The NCAA looks at each student-athlete eligibility decision based on its merits. In making the decision, the staff and Student-Athlete Reinstatement Committee examine a number of factors, including guidelines established by the membership for what conditions should be applied based on the nature and scope of the violation. Decision-makers also consider mitigating factors to determine if relief from the guidelines should be provided. The easiest way to think about the two processes is this: Enforcement involves violations involving an institution or its employees. The eligibility process is triggered when a student-athlete has culpability for a violation. Courtesy: http://ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/enforcement/resources/in+the+news/
Mark You Calendars—Important Dates
March 2012 Sun
4
Mon
5 Summer
Tue
6
Wed
Thu
Fri
Sat
1
2
3
7
8
9
10
14
15
16
17Saint Pat-
Course Schedule Available Online
11
12Fall Course 13 Schedule Available Online
rick’s Day
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26Summer
27
28
29
30
31
Registration Begins
