Inside HOKIE SPORTS | Vol. 9 No. 3 | January 2017

14 / 48

12 Inside Hokie Sports
Q: How come some schools always
seem to be in the news when it
comes to NCAA violations—Ole Miss,
North Carolina and Auburn come to
mind—while others, like Stanford never
seem to be in the news for infractions?
Is this because of good leadership
doing the right things? Just curious.
Thanks for your response. William
Dwyer, Blacksburg, Virginia.
TP: “Rules violations aren’t exclusive
to certain schools or conferences. Just in
the past few months for instance, we’ve
seen Stanford and Notre Dame tagged
with violations. At Stanford, a football
player received more than $3,000 worth of
impermissible benefits. The softball program
broke the 20-hour weekly practice limit, and
that head coach lost his job as a result. And
the NCAA ordered the Notre Dame football
program to vacate two years’ worth of wins
because of an academic misconduct situation
(the school is appealing)—a situation similar
to that at North Carolina.
“Many violations are not intentional —
coaches or student-athletes involved often
do not realize that rules are being broken.
The compliance corner answers questions concerning the governance of
intercollegiate athletics and its impact on our athletics department. Have
a question? Please send it to and we’ll answer
it in upcoming issues. Now, here are some questions that we’ve received
from Tech alums and fans over the past few months, with responses
from Tim Parker, Senior Associate AD for Compliance & Governance:
In other situations, schools maybe don’t
have the financial resources to invest into
compliance offices that are used for checks
and balances. There is no doubt, however,
that numerous coaches nationwide push the
envelope because of pressure to win.
“Very rarely are situations in the
compliance world black and white . . . and no
one is immune.”
Q: I saw where Louisville was charged
with four serious transgressions. What
do you think will happen to the Cards?
Death penalty? Thanks, Natalie in
Blacksburg, Virginia.
TP: “To recap, Louisville was charged with
four Level I violations—the most serious
level — including providing impermissible
benefits to basketball players. A former
member of the staff refused to be interviewed,
while another former program assistant
refused to provide phone records. The NCAA
defines that as a severe breach of conduct
and worthy of a show-cause order (which
effectively keeps an individual from working
in Division I athletics for specified period of
time). Finally, the NCAA alleged that head
Keeping up with Compliance
by
Jimmy
Robertson
coach Rick Pitino violated his responsibilities
by not monitoring his staff.
“This case doesn’t rise to the level of the
death penalty because Louisville was not
charged with a lack of institutional control or
a lack of head coach control of the program,
but the school may be forced to vacate its
2013 national championship. Louisville
had already self-imposed sanctions last
spring when it removed its basketball team
from the ACC and NCAA tournaments and
implemented recruiting restrictions, so those
proactive measures may yield some small
benefit in the end.
“The school now has 90 days to respond
to the NCAA’s notice of allegations (so by
late January). Once submitted, the NCAA
Committee on Infractions will have a month
to respond, at which time it will set a date for
Louisville representatives to appear in person.
Following that appearance, and barring the
introduction of relevant new information,
the committee—which is comprised of
employees from Division I schools, within
and outside of athletics—will then reach a
decision regarding the case.”