NCAA: Ducks get off lightly
The University of Oregon's two-year-plus dance with the NCAA over football recruiting violations has come to an end, and the Ducks came out almost unscathed.
The Ducks can still play in bowl games and will lose only one scholarship per year over the next three years.
The NCAA levied some penalties Wednesday, many of them self-imposed by Oregon, for the football program's involvement with purported street agent Willie Lyles.
The Ducks have been put on three years of probation, must ban the use of recruiting services and disassociate from a recruiting service provider (Lyles). The Ducks also will lose paid football visits and evaluation days, meaning fewer opportunities to spend time with players they are trying to recruit.
In addition, former Oregon coach Chip Kelly has received an 18-month show-cause order. Penalties imposed on him, through his association with Oregon, would be imposed should he be hired by another NCAA school in the next year and a half and encounter another violation. Kelly now coaches the NFL's Philadelphia Eagles.
The NCAA's Division I Committee on Infractions found that the Ducks used Lyles as a representative of the university's athletics interests to "assist the school with the recruitment of multiple prospective student-athletes."
Lyles, the report found (although it did not name him), provided cash and free lodging to a prospect (running back Lache Seastrunk of Temple, Texas) and engaged in impermissible calls and off-campus contacts with football prospects, their families and high school coaches.
The Ducks' relationship with Lyles began in 2008 through an assistant director of operations. The university paid Lyles $25,000 for a subscription to his recruiting service, but did not receive the scouting reports, the NCAA found.
There was also a breakdown in communications between the UO compliance office and the football staff.
The UO program allowed staff members to engage in recruiting activity, which resulted in the program exceeding coaching limits.
Both Kelly and the university agreed that they failed to monitor the football program, the report said.
Seastrunk signed with Oregon in February 2010 and redshirted during the 2010 season. He attended training camp in 2011, before leaving the team and transferring to Baylor. He enjoyed a stellar 2012 season, and enters the 2013 season as one of the country's top running backs.
The University of Oregon used a recruiting service provider, who became a representative of the universitys athletics interests, to assist the school with the recruitment of multiple prospective student-athletes, according to findings by the Division I Committee on Infractions.
The representative provided cash and free lodging to a prospect and engaged in impermissible calls and off-campus contacts with football prospects, their families and high school coaches. Additionally, the football program allowed staff members to engage in recruiting activity, which resulted in the football program exceeding coaching limits. Both the former head football coach and the university agreed they failed to monitor the football program.
Penalties in this case, many of which were self-imposed, include a three-year probation period, a ban on the use of recruiting services, a disassociation of the recruiting service provider and a reduction of scholarships and evaluation days. Additionally, the former head football coach received an 18-month show-cause order and the former assistant director of operations received a one-year show-cause order. If these individuals seek employment at an NCAA member school during the show-cause periods, they and the schools wishing to hire them must appear before the Committee on Infractions to determine if the school should be subject to the show-cause procedures.
In May 2008, the representative began assisting the universitys football program in recruiting prospects. Through the relationships he cultivated, the representative gave the football staff valuable information that would not typically be included in the recruiting services written reports. The former assistant director of operations was aware of the representatives involvement in the recruiting of prospects and it was common for him to ask the representative to tell a prospect to contact the football staff. Further, the former assistant director of operations and an assistant football coach sought and obtained the representatives assistance in facilitating a prospects taking of the SAT.
On two occasions, the representative provided a prospect with lodging and training in advance of US Army All-American events. The representative also gave the prospect cash.
After a rule change requiring four reports annually from recruiting/scouting services, the university paid $25,000 for a subscription to the recruiting service but did not receive the necessary reports. The compliance office provided the football staff with rules education about the rule change, but it did not follow up or monitor the staff to ensure the reports were received.
While the former head coach was unaware that the involvement of the representative in the recruiting process, the staffs recruiting calls and the lack of recruiting service reports all violated NCAA rules.The committee noted that it is the head coachs responsibility to know NCAA rules and ensure that every coach and staff member complies with those rules. Because of this, the former head coach agreed that he failed to monitor the football program.
Additionally, three noncoaching staff members placed or received approximately 730 recruiting-related phone calls over a four-year period. The staff members stated they were not aware the calls would be considered recruiting telephone calls and claimed they were administrative in nature. The athletics department did not have a rules education session tailored for the football operations staff and did not have a monitoring system in place for the staffs phone calls.
From 2009 through 2011, the former assistant director of operations engaged in recruiting activities, resulting in the program exceeding the number of allowable coaches. The former assistant director of operations knew and communicated with the representative, asked the representative to have prospects contact the staff and made recruiting-related telephone calls.
The university also agreed that it failed to monitor the football programs use of a recruiting service, the provision of athletics apparel and telephone calls made by noncoaching staff members with sport-specific responsibilities.
The penalties include:
Public reprimand and censure.
Three years of probation from June 26, 2013 through June 25, 2016.
An 18-month show cause order for the former head coach. The public report contains further details.
A one-year show-cause order for the former assistant director of operations. The public report contains further details.
A reduction of initial football scholarships by one from the maximum allowed (25) during the 2012-13 and 2013-14 academic years (imposed by the university).
A reduction of total football scholarships by one from the maximum allowed (85) during the 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 academic years (imposed by the university).
A reduction of official paid football visits to from 56 to 37 for the 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 academic years.
A reduction of permissible football evaluation days from 42 to 36 in the fall of 2013, 2014 and 2015 and permissible football evaluation days from 168 to 144 in the spring of 2014, 2015 and 2016.
A ban on the subscription to recruiting services during the probation period.
A disassociation of the recruiting service provider. Details of the disassociation are included in the public report (imposed by the university).