Daily Compliance Item- 4.10.15- Current Event

Ohio State QB Braxton Miller broke NCAA rule with Instagram post

USAToday.com
Ohio State quarterback Braxton Miller broke an NCAA rule last month with an Instagram post that was determined to be a promotion for Advocare nutritional supplements. Though he was technically ineligible while the matter was under consideration, his eligibility has been reinstated “without any conditions,” the school announced Thursday.
On March 24, a photograph was posted to Miller’s Instagram account showing Miller and Brandon Oshodin, who is owner of Authentik Fitness in Columbus, Ohio, seated at a table with an array of Advocare products. Oshodin was later identified as an Advocare dealer.
Miller, a two-time Big Ten offensive player of the year who missed all of last season after a shoulder injury, later deleted the post, but the school investigated. According to the statement, Ohio State reported the violation to the NCAA, which prohibits student athletes from promoting “a commercial product.”
“This was considered a minor violation and the matter is now closed,” the school’s statement said.
Earlier today, the twitter account for Ohio State’s athletic compliance department (@OSUCompliance) tweeted: “Student-athletes may not endorse or promote (in any manner) businesses and/or their products or services. #ProtectYourEligibility”
Miller is part of a three-way quarterback competition for the Buckeyes, who won the College Football Playoff national championship in January.
This article was selected for educational purposes only.
Jennifer M. Condaras 
Associate Commissioner
BIG EAST Conference

Daily Compliance Item- 11/19/14- 16.6.1.2- Lodging at Postseason Events for Family Members

Ocean State University (OSU) men’s soccer team is participating in the first round of the NCAA tournament this weekend. A lot of parents are traveling to the game and asked if OSU can help secure rooms for them at the same discounted price that the team is receiving.
Is is permissible for OSU to secure rooms for student-athletes’ family members at a discounted price?
Yes.  NCAA Bylaw 16.6.1.2 states that an institution may reserve or secure lodging at any postseason event (other than a conference event) at a reduced or special rate for the family members of a student-athlete who is a participant. It is not permissible for an institution to cover any portion of the cost of lodging, including any cost associated with reserving or securing lodging. [R] (Adopted: 10/28/99, Revised: 1/19/13 effective 8/1/13)

 

Daily Compliance Item- 10/24/14- Current Event

SU basketball, football focus of NCAA ESPN.com
Syracuse University’s men’s basketball and football programs are under NCAA investigation for allegations, including providing extra benefits and academic issues, that date back at least 10 years, a source said Thursday.
Syracuse will go before the NCAA’s Committee on Infractions in Indianapolis on Oct. 30-31, sources said.
The majority of the allegations — and the most serious — involve the men’s basketball program. Among the allegations facing the men’s basketball team are receiving extra benefits and academic issues, a source said. Those allegations go back about 10 years and are as current as the 2013 season, a source said.
“There were things going on consistently (with the men’s basketball program) for a long time,” a source said.
Jim Boeheim has been Syracuse’s head basketball coach since 1976.
The football team is also facing allegations involving extra benefits, but only for a two-or-three-year stretch around 2004 or 2005, a source said. From 1991-2004, Paul Pasqualoni was Syracuse’s football coach, followed by Greg Robinson from 2005-08. Pasqualoni is now a defensive line coach with the Chicago Bears, while Robinson is defensive coordinator at San Jose State.
None of the football allegations occurred since Doug Marrone took over in 2009, a source said. Marrone left for the Buffalo Bills in 2013 and was replaced by Scott Shafer.
Syracuse.com reported part of the basketball investigation focuses on the academic record of Fab Melo, who was suspended in 2012. Also, former teammate James Southerland was suspended briefly for academics in the 2013 season but eventually returned to the team.
Syracuse.com also reported Southerland’s suspension was the result of an NCAA investigation into the basketball program’s academic records.
Since the NCAA’s inquiry began, Syracuse restructured the athletic department’s academic services department, which is responsible for keeping athletes academically eligible. The restructuring included at least three employees changing jobs, Syracuse.com reported.
CBSSports.com first reported in March the NCAA’s investigation into the men’s basketball program.
When investigations require hearings before the Committee on Infractions, it involves the more serious Level I violations and/or Level II violations. NCAA officials will not comment on pending cases.
This article was selected for educational purposes only.

Daily Compliance Item- 10/3/14- Current Event

Power 5 endorse benefits changes Updated:    October 1, 2014, 5:09 PM ET Associated Press
ESPN.com
The five wealthiest college football conferences have notified the NCAA of their proposals to provide more benefits to athletes under the new governance model that allows the Atlantic Coast Conference, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and Southeastern Conference to pass legislation without the support of the other Division I leagues.
The autonomy structure went into effect on Wednesday, which was also the first day for the power conferences to offer suggestions about what rules they want to implement. The NCAA board of directors in August passed a proposal to give autonomy to the five major conferences. The transition to the autonomy structure will happen in January.
Those conferences endorsed changes that would increase benefits to student-athletes, all of which have been touted by conference leaders for several years, including:
• Funding athletic scholarships that would cover the full cost of tuition.
• Guaranteeing multiyear scholarships for athletes.
• Lifetime scholarship guarantees that would allow former athletes to return to school at any time and complete their degrees.
• Providing long-term health care and insurance to former athletes.
The conferences have also said they will review the time demands for athletes.
The Pac-12 says presidents and chancellors will explore how to implement the proposed reforms at its board meeting Oct. 27, including by each institution, conference-wide action or among the five major conferences.
Any rule changes that occur would not start until the 2015-2016 academic year.
This article was selected for educational purposes only.

Daily Compliance Item- 9/5/14- Current Event

NCAA, conferences, seek dismissal of scholarship suits
The NCAA is appealing a federal district judge’s ruling in the bitterly fought EdO’Bannon antitrust case, which could increase what athletes receive while playing college sports.
However, on Thursday night, the association and a group of 11 major conferences cited that ruling as a primary reason the same judge should dismiss two other antitrust lawsuits, either of which could eliminate compensation limits in some sports and one of which seeks hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.
Both suits, which began in March, are seeking to become class actions. One of the cases originated in Northern California, the other in New Jersey. In June, a panel of judges that deals with similar federal lawsuits filed in different parts of the country assigned coordinated or consolidated pretrial matters in both cases to U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken — the Oakland-based jurist who handled theO’Bannon case.
With the NCAA and the five power conferences named as defendants in both suits, Wilken then ordered the association and all of the conferences to file a single response to both cases.
On Thursday night, in that response, the NCAA and the conferences argued thatWilken’s ruling and injunction in the O’Bannon case provides the basis for dismissal of these two cases because she allowed compensation limits to stand.
In the O‘Bannon case, Wilken ruled that the NCAA’s limits on what Bowl Subdivision football players and Division I men’s basketball players can receive while playing their sports in college “unreasonably restrain trade” in violation of antitrust laws. She also imposed a complex injunction that, beginning in the 2016-17 school year will allow athletes in those two sports to receive not only scholarships covering their full cost of attending school but also what amounts to deferred compensation — all as a form of compensation for the schools’ use of their names, images and likenesses.
But she also wrote that the injunction “will not preclude the NCAA from implementing rules capping the amount of compensation that may be paid to student-athletes while they are enrolled in school.”
In Thursday night’s filing, the NCAA and the conferences wrote that a decision in either of these suits to eliminate the limits “would directly conflict with thisCourt’s decision and injunction” in the O’Bannon case — although the NCAA and the conferences noted that they “respectfully disagree” with Wilken’s ruling inO’Bannon, which the NCAA had appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The NCAA last week gave a possible preview of what that appeal may look like when it filed a mediation questionnaire the 9th Circuit requires. It added to that look ahead Thursday night when it wrote that in addition to disagreeing withWilken’s finding of an antitrust violation, it also questioned her determinations of the appropriate cap on athlete compensation and “who — as between the Court and the NCAA — should be permitted to set that cap.”
Wilken is scheduled to hold a hearing on the motion for dismissal of the Alston and Jenkins cases on Oct. 9.
Following Thursday’s filing, the NCAA said in a statement: “While the NCAA and its co-defendants acknowledge Judge Wilken’s legal reasoning on the legitimacy of limiting the amount and nature of financial benefits to student-athletes, the NCAAwill continue to appeal the O’Bannon decision because it does not agree with thecourt’s finding in that case that the NCAA violated antitrust laws.”
Lawyers for the plaintiffs in the two cases will have until Sept. 18 to file papers opposing the request for dismissal. But late Thursday night, one of those lawyers said a more aggressive approach is forthcoming.
The bid for dismissal of the cases are “just more efforts to delay justice and fairness,” Jon King, a lawyer for one set of plaintiffs, said via text message. “We will seek an expedited trial.”
Although the NCAA is attempting to use Wilken’s ruling in the O’Bannon case to persuade her in these cases, it is important to note that while she has control of both cases now — and likely would oversee a potential trial in one of them – if the other case goes to trial, that proceeding would be held in New Jersey. That not only means a different federal court district from Wilken’s, but also a different appellate circuit.
The first of the new cases began on behalf of former West Virginia football player Shawne Alston and sought action for Football Bowl Subdivision players. It has since been consolidated with five other suits that were filed subsequently. The combined complaint now covers football, men’s basketball and men’s basketball players in the 10 FBS conferences and the Western Athletic Conference. It seeks an injunction and class-wide monetary damages. It is being led, in part, by lawyers from Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, the same firm that is involved in an array of cases against the NCAA and represented former Arizona State and Nebraska football player Sam Keller in a suit before Wilken that also involved video game manufacturer Electronic Arts and eventually settled.
The second case is being pursued on behalf of four named plaintiffs headed byClemson football player Martin Jenkins. It covers football and men’s basketball players in the power conferences, and it is being directed by Jeffrey Kessler, who gained renown for his representation of professional sports players’ unions and involvement in a case that set the stage for NFL free agency.
The Jenkins case does not seek a class-wide monetary damages award. But it seeks a more broadly drawn judgment and injunction than the Alston case does, actions that would:
— Void NCAA and conference rules that “prohibit, cap or otherwise limit remuneration and benefits” to the covered athletes.
— Prevent the NCAA and the five conferences from having rules that prevent schools from “negotiating, offering, or providing remuneration” to the covered athletes “in compensation for their services as athletes.” The Alston case seeks:
— A judgment that would void NCAA rules “that operate to impose a cap on grants-in-aid” that schools can provide.
— An injunction that would prevent the NCAA and the 11 conferences from being able to “cap the amount of financial aid available” to the athletes.
— Monetary damages based on the difference between the value of an athletic scholarship as currently defined by the NCAA
– basically tuition, mandatory fees, room, board and books
– and the actual cost of attending college, a figure that includes out-of-pocket costs such as transportation to and from school.
Federal antitrust law allows class action suits to reach back and cover plaintiffs and alleged damages starting four years prior to a case’s filing date and running through the date of judgment. The law also provides for the tripling of such damages.
So, the Alston case seeks damages that would be applicable to every football,men’s basketball and men’s basketball player who was on scholarship at a school in any of the 11 conferences in any year since March 5, 2010 — more than 100 athletes per school each year.
In 2009-10, the difference between the value of a scholarship and the cost of attendance ranged from about $1,200 to more than $8,000 at schools in the conferences covered by the lawsuit, a 2011 USA TODAY Sports survey found. In 2012-13, the difference ranged from about $1,350 to nearly $6,300, according to data schools listed on annual athletic financial reports to the NCAA that USATODAY Sports obtained through open-records requests.
The combined membership of the 11 defendant conferences has varied during the period covered by the suit, but using $3,000 as the average difference between the value of a scholarship and the cost of attendance, the potential damages total at present could be more than $600 million.
There could be additional financial consequences for the Pacific-12 Conference and its four member schools in California because the suit alleges that the NCAA’scurrent rules violate “the policy and spirit of the California’s Student Athlete Bill of Rights, as well as the policy and spirit of federal and California antitrust law.”
The suits seeks, only from the Pac-12 and the NCAA, “all their profits obtained from” allegedly limiting athletes economic rights.
But the NCAA and the conferences say the California-based claims also should be dismissed.
This article was selected for educational purposes only.

Daily Compliance Item- 11/12/13- 13.4.1.1.1, 13.9.2.1- Mailing NLIs

The women’s basketball staff at Ocean State University is preparing its National Letter of Intent (NLI) packets to be sent out today via federal express.  Included in this mailing is the NLI, NLI instructions, institutional financial aid agreement and a sports information questionnaire.

Are all of these items permitted to be in this packet?

 

 

No.  It is not permissible to send a questionnaire using express mail services.  NCAA Bylaw 13.4.1.1.1 states that an institution is not permitted to use express mail delivery services and may only use first-class mail or a lesser rate of service (e.g., parcel post) with no extra services (e.g., certified mail, delivery confirmation) to provide permissible printed recruiting materials to prospective student-athletes, their parents or legal guardians, their coaches or any other individual responsible for teaching or directing an activity in which a prospective student-athlete is involved, who resides within the 50 United States, other than the National Letter of Intent or other written admissions and/or financial aid commitment to attend the institution and necessary pre-enrollment information per Bylaw 13.4.1.1-(h).  [D] (Adopted: 4/28/05 effective 8/1/05,  Revised:  5/12/05, 1/14/08, 4/15/08)

NCAA Bylaw 13.9.2.1 states that an institutional or conference financial aid form may be included in the normal mailing of the National Letter of Intent, but none of the forms enclosed in the mailing may be signed by the prospective student-athlete prior to the initial signing date in that sport in the National Letter of Intent program. [D] (8/5/04)

 

PLEASE NOTE:  This is an actual fact pattern of a Division I secondary rules violation posted on LSDBi.  

Daily Compliance Item- 8/7/13- 14.4.3.1.6- Additional Football PTD Requirement

Hash Mark is a football student-athlete at Ocean State University. Here is Hash’s academic record for the 2012-13 academic year:

Fall 2012 semester- 6 degree applicable hours

Spring 2013 semester- 15 degree applicable hours

Summer 2013- 6 degree applicable hours

For this example, Hash is meeting the other progress toward degree requirements for GPA and % of degree.

Will Hash be eligible to compete during the 2013 season?

 

Yes with conditions.  NCAA Bylaw 14.4.3.1.6 states that in football, a student-athlete who is a member of the institution’s football team and who does not successfully complete at least nine-semester hours or eight-quarter hours of academic credit during the fall term or does not earn the Academic Progress Rate eligibility point for the fall term or does not successfully complete either requirement shall not be eligible to compete in the first four contests against outside competition in the following playing season.  (Adopted:  4/28/11 effective 8/1/11, Revised:  5/28/13)

Because Hash earned 27 academic credits prior to the start of the fall 2013 term, he can regain some or all of his eligibility back for the 2013 season.

NCAA Bylaw 14.4.3.1.6.1 states that a student-athlete who is ineligible, pursuant to Bylaw 14.4.3.1.6, to compete in the first four contests of a playing season against outside competition may regain eligibility to compete in the third and fourth contests of that season, provided he or she successfully completes at least 27-semester hours or 40-quarter hours of academic credit before the beginning of the next fall term.  A student-athlete in his or her initial year of full-time collegiate enrollment may use credit hours earned at the certifying institution during the summer prior to initial full-time enrollment and credit hours earned during the summer following the regular academic year to satisfy the 27-semester/40-quarter credit-hour requirement.  (Adopted:  4/28/11 effective 8/1/11, Revised: 2/6/12)

NCAA Bylaw 14.4.3.1.6.2 states that one time during a student-athlete’s five-year period of eligibility, a student-athlete who does not successfully complete at least nine-semester hours or eight-quarter hours of academic credit during the fall term or earn the Academic Progress Rate eligibility point for the fall term may regain eligibility to compete in the first four contests against outside competition in the following playing season, provided he or she successfully completes at least 27-semester hours or 40-quarter hours of academic credit before the beginning of the next fall term.  A student-athlete in his or her initial year of full-time collegiate enrollment may use credit hours earned at the certifying institution during the summer prior to initial full-time enrollment and credit hours earned during the summer following the regular academic year to satisfy the 27-semester/40-quarter credit-hour requirement.  (Adopted: 4/28/11 effective 8/1/11, Revised: 2/6/12)