Deal or No Deal?
Best Practices for Submitting a StudentAthlete Reinstatement Request
Presentation Overview.
Student-first philosophy. Policies and procedures. Best practices for submitting a student-athlete
reinstatement request. Best practices for submitting an appeal. Amateurism. Case studies.
Student-First Philosophy.
What does it mean?
How is it considered in the reinstatement
process?
What is the relevance of case precedent?
Principles Considered.
Student-athlete’s (SA) responsibility for the violation.
Institution’s responsibility for the violation.
Impact of condition on SA.
Could violation reasonably been avoided?
Other mitigation presented by the institution.
General Reinstatement Philosophy.
Put SA back in the position prior to violation. Assess SA’s responsibility for violation.
Evaluated totality of circumstances to reach
appropriate decision.
Spectrum of Impact of Flexible Approach on Outcome of Cases. (The Analysis for EVERY case has changed; the spectrum considers outcome.)
Professional Salary, Professional Contract, Professional Competition Entrance Exam (i.e., ACT, SAT) Fraud
Providing false information
Benefits from booster
Five-Year Clock Extensions
Contract w/ agent
Academic Fraud (e.g., having academic tutor write paper)
Competing for institution while ineligible (transfers, progress toward degree, initial eligibility) –
Benefits from sports agent
Prize Money
Financial Aid
Ethical Conduct, Amateurism, Extra Benefits (Student-athlete acting independent of institution)
General Eligibility, Financial Aid (Institution primarily responsible for violation)
Policies and Procedures.
Repayment Plans
Good faith agreement.
Must be current. Institution develops plan. Default = no plan for four years.
Policies and Procedures.
Contests used to fulfill reinstatement condition.
.
Must be otherwise eligible;
Must be medically cleared; and Must count toward team consideration for championship.
Urgent Cases.
Pending competition. 232 urgent cases processed from August 2006 through
October 2006.
Waivers.
To be processed prior to competition: The waiver must be received one month prior to the date of competition, and Complete information regarding the waiver must be received one week prior to the first contest.
Violations.
Generally takes at least 48 hours to review.
Prioritized based on:
Date of competition,
Order case received and
Date violation discovered.
Best Practices.
Review NCAA Student-Athlete Reinstatement
Committee Guidelines.
Division-specific guidelines available on Web site.
Guidelines are starting point for analysis.
Review Case Precedent.
Case precedent can provide arguments to assist. Case precedent can provide guidance for condition.
Best Practices.
Analysis.
Who was responsible for violation?
Could actions somehow reasonably been permissible?
Are there any unique factors or mitigation?
Best Practices.
Institutional arguments.
What does institution believe to be appropriate reinstatement condition? Why was no advantage gained? How could action have been permissible?
Best Practices.
Include all relevant information:
Description of facts;
All mitigation; Institutional arguments;
Comparison of precedent and guidelines;
Statement from student-athlete; Buckley statement; and
All relevant supporting documentation.
Appeals Process.
Staff decisions are appealable to Student-Athlete
Reinstatement Committee.
Staff and committee do not communicate about
on-going cases.
Preconference call, work with staff to develop
arguments.
Waiver Appeals.
Waiver appeals are generally reviewed by a
written review of documentation.
Violation Appeals.
Violation appeals are heard via conference call.
Best Practices for Submitting an Appeal.
Be clear and concise in your arguments. Understand why staff made its decision. Is institution in disagreement with each part of
decision?
Best Practices for Submitting an Appeal.
Committee has read all the information;
concentrate on arguments.
Research case precedent and committee
directives.
Focus on distinguishing this case from case
precedent and directives.
Amateurism Certification Process.
Creation of prescribed penalties to be imposed. Cases not on prescribed list or where mitigation is
present will be forwarded to reinstatement staff.
Reinstatement staff will provide condition as part of
certification process.
Decision can be appealed by an institution to the
student-athlete reinstatement committee.
Amateurism Guidelines.
The threshold of professionalism…
Amateurism Guidelines.
Sign an agreement or contract that states the
team is professional or the individual is a professional.
Sign an agreement or contract that provides
the individual with money above expenses (even if the money is never provided).
Amateurism Guidelines.
Individual receives money above his or her
expenses.
Individual has profited from his or her sport.
Individual consistently represents himself or
herself as a professional athlete.
Amateurism Guidelines.
Individual enters into a written or verbal
agreement with an agent.
Individual accepts significant monetary benefits
from an agent.
Amateurism Guidelines.
Compensation.
Prize money.
Competition with professionals.
Contracts.
Agents.
Case Study - Tennis
Competed in 20 dates of competition - did not
meet 40 percent of degree.
Earned nine credits of college prep courses that
were erroneously posted as "transfer credit."
SA completed a one-credit physical education
class that was recommended by the director of student-athlete academic support.
SA was one-credit hour short.
Deal or No Deal?
Case Study.
Guideline is one-for-one.
SA meets with appropriate individuals.
Only one-credit hour short. Misadvised on class to complete – could have
completed another class to be eligible.
Partial/complete relief.
Case Study – Baseball
Competed in nine baseball contests while enrolled in less than a full-
time schedule.
Was initially enrolled in 12 hours, including a one-hour jogging class.
SA attended the initial two classes. Was notified by e-mail January 20
that the course would be cancelled.
Meet with academic advisor and found another section to add.
SA spoke with the professor who indicated he would add SA to the
course.
SA's academic advisor checked SA's schedule several times and
indicated SA was enrolled full time.
Case Study – Baseball
Original class was cancelled; professor failed to add SA to
new section.
Institution provided statements from professor indicating
he repeatedly assured SA he would take care of enrolling him in the course and that he failed to realize significance of delay in enrolling SA.
SA indicated he was unaware that he was not a full-time
student and he attended class regularly.
Deal or No Deal?
Case Study.
Guideline – one-for-one. Did SA do all that is reasonably expected? Did SA continue to attend class? Unique situation since class SA enrolled in was
canceled.
Statements from professor.
Case Study – Wrestling
Competed in two dates of competition as a member
of an outside team.
SA was registered online for competitions by the
mother of one of his friends and was mistakenly listed as a member of a wrestling club.
SA attempted to change his status but did not have
the password to make the changes.
Case Study - Wrestling
SA contacted the meet directors and requested
he be listed as unattached.
Institution's head coach was aware that SA was
participating in the events.
SA paid all his own expenses and could have
participated unattached.
Deal or No Deal?
Case Study.
Guidelines – one-for-one. SA made efforts to compete unattached. Did SA bear any of the responsibility? Is there any competitive advantage?
SA paid all own expenses.
Case Study - Basketball
Two-year college transfer, initial information
indicated graduated June 2005.
Subsequent to being admitted, two-year college
rescinded the degree based on classes not being earned appropriately.
SA had received credits for classes he had not
attended or completed any work.
Case Study - Basketball
SA had enrolled in winter and summer classes at
another institution and received transferable credits for those courses, despite never having attended a class, taken an exam or completed an assignment.
Two-year college coach arranged for credits to be
completed.
Deal or No Deal?
Case Study
Guideline – minimum of sit a season of
competition (charged with a season of competition).
Magnitude of fraud. Admission to institution and two-year diploma
based on fraud.
Student-athlete’s knowledge and participation in
the fraud.
Case Study - Books
Numerous student-athletes in eight different sports
received books for classes they were not enrolled.
Institutional errors and flawed policies enabled
student-athletes to receive the impermissible books.
Case Study - Books
SA No. 1 used his book scholarship to purchase
books for his girlfriend. SA used scholarship during both fall and spring semester. Value of the benefit is $560.
SA No. 2 purchased books for a class he planned
to enroll the fall semester. Due to a scheduling conflict ,SA did not enroll in the class and failed to return the books until the end of the semester. Value of the benefit is $185.
Deal or No Deal?
Case Study
Guidelines – dollar amounts: $100-$299 = 10% $300-$500 = 20% Above $501 = 30%
What is culpability of student-athlete?
Reason to decrease or reason to increase.
Case Study - Track
Subsequent to his initial-collegiate enrollment,
accepted a total of $15,151.76 ($1,412.40 he did not repay) in impermissible benefits.
Benefits were provided by his former high school
coach, who also is a representative of the institution's athletics interests and an employee of an apparel company.
SA took a year off and trained with a group of
runners including athletes under contract with apparel company.
Case Study - Track
SA and his family made arrangements to
reimburse apparel company/booster for expenses.
SA and his family provided $13,739.36. SA received an additional $1,412.40 in benefits
not paid for by SA.
SA did not sign a contract with an agent or an
apparel company and has never accepted any prize money.
Deal or No Deal?
Case Study
Guideline – based on dollar amount.
Enrolled student-athlete.
Significant value of benefits
Involvement with booster/apparel company. SA and his family did reimburse for majority of benefits.
Explanation of remaining amount did not reimburse.
Questions…