NCAA Rules on SMU

[Kedsy]

I would think that the TV contracts are based in part on the ratings that the televised games produce. I doubt that SMU has ratings that come close to those of UNC games. If so, then why are so many UNC games on national TV? Not wanting to argue, just seems to make sense to me....

As Olympic Fan said, this is not correct. And as he also said, by the time they negotiate a new contract, UNC's punishment will be past. As far as I can tell, there is absolutely no economic disadvantage/advantage to the NCAA for punishing/not punishing UNC.

[devildeac]

Party Pooper!!! I really wanted the stakes to be high...
By the way are any of the members of Mt. Hatemore Sicilian....

I'm not. Darn close to 100% certain Ozzie is not. Not sure about weezie but she has 8 fingers, 2 opposable thumbs and 10 million posts here so I'll trust she can answer for herself. T-beard? Never met the fellow but I'm kinda/sorta thinking a no for him, too.

[ikiru36]

Williams has one thing in his favor in that the Wainstein report showed that he did not like the clustering and tried to make contact with the academic side about it but was basically told to mind his own business. Ironically, that's not unusual for academic departments who are resisting cheating to say. They are far more used to the athletic side trying to at least stretch the limits of academic integrity. He instructed his assistant (Halliday?) to either guide the players away from AFAM degrees (or to make sure they made their own choices), and that was several years before the rot was found.

I understand your line of argument, but I just want to re-state some facts that belie Williams' contention that he sought to address this issue (while simulataneously claiming that there wasn't anything ever wrong in the first place). From an earlier post of mine:

"I think that there is altogether too much focus on trying to parse the meaning of reduced majoring in AFAM Studies (a line of inquiry offered as defense by Williams himself) during Williams' tenure. Instead, the focus should be squarely on the number of bogus courses being taken by Men's Basketball players, since that is the actual crime. As already noted elsewhere, while majoring in African American Studies probably is some indication of an increased likelihood of having taken such courses, it is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for having been enrolled in the sham paper classes at all.

In any event, elsewhere in the Wainstein report it is noted that "There were 54 basketball player enrollments in AFAM independent studies during Dean Smith's 36 years, 17 during Bill Guthridge's three years, 42 during Matt Doherty's three years, and 167 in Williams' 11 years."

Let's do the math:
Dean Smith - 1.5 per year (though if the scandal began in 1993, Dean was only involved for 4 years, bringing his average up to 13.5 per year. In fairness, more of the classes during Dean's full tenure were likely legitimate courses, but who knows?)
Bill Guthridge - 5.67 per year
Matt Doherty - 14 per year
Roy Williams - 15.18 per year (though if this practice was truly curtailed in 2009, Roy's average increases to 27.8 per year)

This math is very difficult to square whatsoever with a narrative that Roy sought a reduction in these courses being taken, over the course of his tenure.

These facts (if I've correctly reported and interpreted the data) point to an increase in these sham classes being taken under the Williams/Welden regime, at the same time there was a reduction in AFAM majors on the team. A cynic (or one otherwise interested in Occam's razor) might interpret this to mean that Roy sought to diminish majoring (which happens to be the one aspect of his players academic pursuits that is PUBLIC and could therefore draw scrutiny), while doing nothing to diminish (and perhaps increasing) the taking of easy/fake classes by his players?

Hmmmm, methinks he doth protest too much?"

Go Devils!!!!!!!!! GTHCGTH!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MarkD83]

I'm not. Darn close to 100% certain Ozzie is not. Not sure about weezie but she has 8 fingers, 2 opposable thumbs and 10 million posts here so I'll trust she can answer for herself. T-beard? Never met the fellow but I'm kinda/sorta thinking a no for him, too.

My reference was too obscure...I am hoping someone one on the COI is Sicilian because you should never bet against them when the death penalty is on the line...

[OldPhiKap]

My reference was too obscure...I am hoping someone one on the COI is Sicilian because you should never bet against them when the death penalty is on the line...

Too obscure for this board? Inconceivable!

[BD80]

I'm puzzled by the recurring comments here suggesting that the NCAA Committee On Infractions is likely to be lenient towards UNC because UNC is "too big to fail" or is an "elephant" with respect to the revenues generated for the NCAA. ...

But if it is repeated enough times, doesn't that make it true?

...I am hoping someone one on the COI is Sicilian because you should never bet against them when the death penalty is on the line...

But NEVER get involved in a ground war in the SEC

[SCMatt33]

I'm pretty sure jimsumner is correct. I think Semi is eligible to play this season for SMU after the end of their first semester. His competing in the second half of SMU's 2015-26 season will complete his second year. He will then be eligible for the 2016-17 and 2017-18 seasons.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebask...le-next-season

Yep. This is why Semi - and many other transfers, including Alex Murphy - decide to leave before spring semester. To salvage as much of their eligibility as they can.

This is definitely not the case. Any competition regardless of how small counts as a season of eligibility. In very specific cases, most notably due to injury for which the player has played in less than 30 percent of games and not during the second half of the year, an additional season may be granted. Here is the NCAA rule on what constitutes using a season of eligibilty (see page 80 of the linked document which is page 94 of the pdf itself):

12.8.3.1 Minimum Amount of Competition. Any competition, regardless of time, during a season in an intercollegiate sport shall be counted as a season of competition in that sport, except as provided in Bylaws 12.8.3.1.1, 12.8.3.1.2, 12.8.3.1.3 and 12.8.3.1.4. This provision is applicable to intercollegiate athletics competition conducted by a two-year or four-year collegiate institution at the varsity or subvarsity level. (Revised: 1/11/94, 4/28/05 effective 8/1/05, 5/9/06, 1/16/10 effective 8/1/10, 7/31/14)

I won't bore you with the details of those exceptions, but they all describe different types of exhibitions/scrimmages that wouldn't count or sport specific exceptions not related to basketball. In order to "get a year back" through a medical redshirt or the like, officially called a "Hardship waiver" described here (page 82 of the previously linked document which is page 96 of the actual pdf):

12.8.4 Hardship Waiver. A student-athlete may be granted an additional year of competition by the conferenceor the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement for reasons of “hardship.” Hardship is defined as an incapacity resulting from an injury or illness that has occurred under all of the following conditions: (Revised:1/10/92 effective 8/1/92, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97, 4/26/01 effective 8/1/01, 11/1/01, 4/3/02, 8/8/02, 3/10/04, 5/11/05, 8/4/05, 4/26/07, 9/18/07, 11/1/07 effective 8/1/08, 4/24/08, 7/31/14)

Again, I'm leaving out some details as to what "the following conditions" are, but they simply describe at length the 30% and first half of the season rule. I don't know where Jon Rothstein got the idea of 2.5 years for that article, but it's wrong, and it appears some others mistakenly picked up on it as well based on a google search.

It can happen where someone gets an extra half year, but that hardship waiver must be granted. The best example of this is Jamal Boykin, who transferred to Cal during his sophomore year, but had a bad case of mono and got a redshirt for it. From the original transfer announcement by Cal:

Boykin played in just three games this past November for Duke, scoring four points and grabbing 12 rebounds in 30 minutes of action, before being sidelined with a severe case of mononucleosis. Cal intends to apply for a medical hardship waiver this spring to enable Boykin, who is still recovering from his illness and has not been cleared to practice, to retain his sophomore status for the 2007-08 campaign.

He was later granted that hardship waiver. For further reference, Semi is listed on SMU's official roster as a junior for this season. If he were to have that extra half year, they would list him as a sophomore or redshirt sophomore. Alex Murphy is listed as a redshirt senior this year. Remember, he redshirted his freshman year at Duke, played a full redshirt freshman year, half of his sophomore year at Duke, sat out the second half of his sophomore year and first half of his junior year at Florida, played the second half of his junior year there, and will now be a senior. Even though he only played 1.5 years at Duke, he only had 1.5 years of eligibility left at Florida, regardless of the fact that his 5 year clock is up. The same thing also happened with Olek Czyz, who played 1.5 years at Duke, transferred to Nevada, and played another 1.5 years there. He was a Senior on their 2012 roster after transferring during the 2009-10 season and playing half of the 2010-11 season for Nevada.

I apologize if I'm missing some big exception to this rule that I couldn't find (please link it for me should it exist!), but I'm fairly certain based on these examples that whenever Semi plays, it will be his junior year and it might be a good idea for that year to be a full season for which the postseason is a possibility as opposed to half of a lost year, but then again, maybe he just wants to be out on the court the next two seasons and be able to move on, which is a fine choice as well.

[gumbomoop]

Any competition regardless of how small counts as a season of eligibility... Semi is listed on SMU's official roster as a junior for this season. If he were to have that extra half year, they would list him as a sophomore or redshirt sophomore. Alex Murphy is listed as a redshirt senior this year. Remember, he redshirted his freshman year at Duke, played a full redshirt freshman year, half of his sophomore year at Duke, sat out the second half of his sophomore year and first half of his junior year at Florida, played the second half of his junior year there, and will now be a senior. Even though he only played 1.5 years at Duke, he only had 1.5 years of eligibility left at Florida, regardless of the fact that his 5 year clock is up. The same thing also happened with Olek Czyz, who played 1.5 years at Duke, transferred to Nevada, and played another 1.5 years there. He was a Senior on their 2012 roster after transferring during the 2009-10 season and playing half of the 2010-11 season for Nevada.

This turns out to be, for me, an interesting mystery. The unpleasant thought crosses my mind that I may be wrong. Yet more unpleasant the thought that the estimable Messrs. FerryFor50 and jimsumner may be wrong, too.

As we seek Enlightenment and Truth on this most important issue to appear on EK in years, I think it unwise, first off, to mix the cases of Alex Murphy and Semi Ojeleye, as Alex redshirted his first year but Semi did not. However, it does appear that Semi's case exactly matches that of Olek Czyz: each played for 1 and 1/2 seasons at Duke, then transferred.

Now, despite this article ...

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sport...z-nevada_N.htm

... which said that the transferring Olek had 2 and 1/2 years of eligibility remaining (thus supporting the jim-bo-For50 position), Olek appears to have played only an additional 1 and 1/2 seasons at Nevada. That appears to support your insistence that there is no such thing as a half-year of eligibility.

But just to cross every T and dot every I, is it possible -- here a pathetic attempt to avoid saying, "I'm wrong" -- that Olek had another year of eligibility but chose to forego it in order to start playing professionally in Poland?

You know, it's 3 a.m., and I just sent an email to the Athletic Dept. at SMU. Speaking of pathetic. But just in case they report back that Semi has 2 and 1/2 years of eligibility, and so he plays through the 2017-18 season, but in fact he has but 1 and 1/2 years of eligibility, well, what the heck do you expect of Larry Brown?

And what do you expect the penalty will be? Death penalty squared for the Mustangs? Or should Cleveland State be worried?

[El_Diablo]

As is generally the case, SCMatt33 is right per the text of the NCAA rules. It also makes a lot of policy sense; otherwise players could simply sit out meaningless November and December games to get an extra half season that could be applied to a later January-March timeframe.

Czyz faced a choice after he transferred mid-season (and had burned two "seasons" of eligibility remaining). He sat out the second semester of his second year and first semester of his third year, and he was eligible to return for the second semester of his third year. He could have either (a) started playing then and spend another year of eligibility, or (b) sit out the remainder of that third year to preserve his two seasons for years four and five. He chose (a) and thus only played another 1.5 seasons that counted as two seasons.

Semi will be in the same boat. He has to sit out the first semester anyway, and he can choose to play in the second semester this year (using up his junior year in year 3) or wait until next fall to start playing again (using up his junior year next year and his senior year after that, in years 4 and 5, respectively). He can't play this fall and then another two years without some sort of hardship waiver applied to last fall or one of the future years (e.g., if he gets injured in the first game back).

[wsb3]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...rown/73055362/



Third paragraph...

Turner criticized the harshness of the penalties, and without mentioning the University of North Carolina by name, said other schools facing NCAA investigations and/or infractions rulings must be "shaking in their boots" after seeing the sanctions handed SMU.


We can only hope...

[OldPhiKap]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...rown/73055362/



Third paragraph...

Turner criticized the harshness of the penalties, and without mentioning the University of North Carolina by name, said other schools facing NCAA investigations and/or infractions rulings must be "shaking in their boots" after seeing the sanctions handed SMU.


We can only hope...

Well, deterrence is a goal of punishment. I hope they level the heels.

And while the penalty may be a bit higher than expected at SMU for a relatively isolated infraction, this is Larry Brown's third time getting caught cheating and/or failing to follow compliance requirements. That probably brings a multiplier, and SMU hired the dude knowing his background. He who plays with fire often gets blisters.

St. Dean's legacy takes another lump.

[moonpie23]

massive denial over at IC....

[sammy3469]

Just so we are clear... the major crime committed by SMU was that 1 player was given course credit for 1 class in which he did no work. The credit allowed him to remain eligible.

Do I have that right? Am I missing something? Sure, SMU lied and covered stuff up an that exacerbates the penalties, but this really comes down to an athlete taking a class and getting a grade he did not deserve, doesn't it?

...And SMU got 1 year probation plus 9 scholarships stripped.

-Jason "I figure Carolina's various sports will get a millennium or two of probation. That seems fair, doesn't it?" Evans

Sort of...it was later determined that the credit wasn't even needed to remain eligible (footnote 15). It was still academic fraud so the student-athlete was ineligible, but the actual credit itself wasn't needed.

The more interesting part as it pertains to UNC is the Infractions Committee decided this didn't amount to LOIC (which the enforcement staff wanted) even with their previous violation in 2011 since they put certain compliance systems in place. Without having SMU's NOA, it's tough to know how prominently the NCAA enforcement staff had the LOIC charge, but it just shows that the Infractions Committee can make up it's own mind on certain things. The other note is these are the least onerous penalties they could have given for Standard Level 1 violations at the institutional level, so basically these are at least full level down from least penalties UNC c/should be expecting.

You didn't make this point, but others are worried about Roy getting off, but Bylaw 11.1.1.1 Responsibility of the Head Coach has been on the books since 4/28/2005, so if the Infractions Committee wants to hammer Roy, they certainly can since it was his responsibility to promote an atmosphere of compliance.

[sammy3469]

Well, deterrence is a goal of punishment. I hope they level the heels.

And while the penalty may be a bit higher than expected at SMU for a relatively isolated infraction, this is Larry Brown's third time getting caught cheating and/or failing to follow compliance requirements. That probably brings a multiplier, and SMU hired the dude knowing his background. He who plays with fire often gets blisters.

St. Dean's legacy takes another lump.

I said this to Jason, but this is the least amount of penalties the Infractions Committee could give them once they decided these were Standard Level 1 violations (which is saying something vis a vis UNC's allegations). Heck, from the way the release is worded the Enforcement Staff wanted to basically nuke the whole thing at SMU with a LOIC charge as well which the Infractions Committee didn't find.

I still don't think the people over at UNC realize how big a cudgel having men's basketball named in LOIC charge is. That implicates Roy even under the old penalty regime under Bylaw 11.1.1.1 (the bylaw that got Brown and Boeheim). Yes, the penalty regime is different now, but even back then, the NCAA could suspend coaches if they "condoned a major violation". It's pretty easy to make that determination with Roy if the Infraction Committee wants to.

[AustinDevil]

Sort of...it was later determined that the credit wasn't even needed to remain eligible (footnote 15). It was still academic fraud so the student-athlete was ineligible, but the actual credit itself wasn't needed.

The more interesting part as it pertains to UNC is the Infractions Committee decided this didn't amount to LOIC (which the enforcement staff wanted) even with their previous violation in 2011 since they put certain compliance systems in place. Without having SMU's NOA, it's tough to know how prominently the NCAA enforcement staff had the LOIC charge, but it just shows that the Infractions Committee can make up it's own mind on certain things. The other note is these are the least onerous penalties they could have given for Standard Level 1 violations at the institutional level, so basically these are at least full level down from least penalties UNC c/should be expecting.

You didn't make this point, but others are worried about Roy getting off, but Bylaw 11.1.1.1 Responsibility of the Head Coach has been on the books since 4/28/2005, so if the Infractions Committee wants to hammer Roy, they certainly can since it was his responsibility to promote an atmosphere of compliance.

I have nothing to add to sammy's excellent summary on the points discussed, but I want to raise another aspect that hasn't been discussed on DBR yet: the NCAA leveled these sanctions based on the actions of an administrative assistant, with no evidence presented whatsoever that anyone more senior either knew of or directed her actions. There are aspects to the SMU situation that are worse than what we know of UNC (head coach knew of allegations for at least a month before they were self-reported; head coach "lied" in his interview, and then corrected himself half an hour later in the same interview), and there are aspects that are far worse (pretty much everything else). But this administrative assistant piece sounds very, very much like UNC, except it was a decade-plus, not one student for one course.

It will be very interesting to see what UNC gets. My heart says they should get the Death Penalty; my head says Jerry Tarkanian will be quoted a lot on Twitter.

[gumbomoop]

1.5, per SMU athletic rep's email back to me.

I was wrong. SCMatt33 is correct.

[grad_devil]

1.5, per SMU athletic rep's email back to me.

I was wrong. SCMatt33 is correct.

That, as I understand it, is technically incorrect, too.

Semi has 2 years of eligibility remaining - he used 2 at Duke (see SCMatt33's post above).

He has to do a year-in-residence at SMU. He can begin playing in Spring of 2016. At that point, he will use another season of eligibility.

When he plays in the 16-17 season, that will be his 4th, and final year of eligibility.

He will play 1.5 more seasons, but technically use 2 years of eligibility.

[El_Diablo]

That, as I understand it, is technically incorrect, too.

Semi has 2 years of eligibility remaining - he used 2 at Duke (see SCMatt33's post above).

He has to do a year-in-residence at SMU. He can begin playing in Spring of 2016. At that point, he will use another season of eligibility.

When he plays in the 16-17 season, that will be his 4th, and final year of eligibility.

He will play 1.5 more seasons, but technically use 2 years of eligibility.

Or he could (in theory) sit out Spring '16 and get two full years in '16-17 and '17-18. Something to consider if the '16 postseason is off the table.

[gumbomoop]

That, as I understand it, is technically incorrect, too.

Semi has 2 years of eligibility remaining - he used 2 at Duke (see SCMatt33's post above).

He has to do a year-in-residence at SMU. He can begin playing in Spring of 2016. At that point, he will use another season of eligibility.

When he plays in the 16-17 season, that will be his 4th, and final year of eligibility.

He will play 1.5 more seasons, but technically use 2 years of eligibility.

I'm wrong, again. [I sure hope Luke gets off the bench...]

Technically, then, I'm considering upstaging Joe Biden and throwing my hat in the ring for Pres, I guess on the Deez Nuts ticket. I'll be a single-issue candidate, with a platform of removing the designation ".5 years" from all discussions of eligibility for college athletes.

I do wonder whether any transfers have in the past chosen to sit out that half-season, in order to retain their full two years. I could see that circumstances such as an injury might necessitate a player delaying resumption of playing, and thus playing 2 years, after a long delay. I assume most coaches want an incoming transfer, especially one likely to play significant minutes, to play as soon as possible. Since the "second half" of a college bball season is more like 2/3 of a season, I'd be surprised if many delayed resuming playing. Semi's situation, though, could become complicated.

I'm preparing myself to be found further, technically and otherwise, deficient.