Woe 24, /pdy
NCAA Continued-
(Continued from page 5)
sity should have known that he was ineligible for intercollegiate competition due to his improper test score.
D. [NCAA Bylaws 10.1-(C) and 10.1-(d)]
A then men's assistant basketball coach acted contrary to the principles of ethical conduct inasmuch as he did not, on all occasions, deport himself in accordance with the generally recognized high standards normally associated with the conduct and administration of intercollegiate athletics. Specifically:
1. The coach demonstrated a knowing and willful effort on his part to operate the
"The scope and nature of the violations examined and found in this case demonstrate that, for at least several years, the university failed to exercise appropriate institutional control over its intercollegiate men's basketball program."
university's intercollegiate men's basketball program contrary to the requirements and provisions of NCAA legislation by his involvement in Part II-A of this report.
2. The coach provided false and misleading information to institutional officials, the NCAA staff and the Committee on Infractions concerning his involvement in and knowledge of the violation of NCAA rules set forth in Part II-A of this report.
E. (NCAA Constitution 2.1.1]
The scope and nature of the violations examined and found in this case demonstrate that, for at least several years, the university failed to exercise appropriate institutional control over its intercollegiate men's basketball program. This failure of institutional control manifested itself in at least seven areas.
1. During the period of time when the violations in this case occurred, the university failed to take meaningful steps to ensure that the basketball coaching staff and related administrative staff members understood and followed the requirements of NCAA legislation. This failure to educate staff members regarding NCAA legislation and the failure to monitor their activities resulted in the provision of improper benefits to student-athletes by men's basketball staff members, including the provision of local automobile transportation to student-athletes on several occasions (e.g., transportation to places of summer employment) and the provision of loans of small amounts of cash to student-athletes by a team manager.
2. The athletics department administrative staff and men's basketball coaching staff did not take adequate steps to: (a) identify representatives of the university's athletics interests who became involved with prospective student-athletes; (b) monitor the involvement of representatives of the university athletics interests with prospective student-athletes, or (c) educate representatives of the university's athletics interests regarding NCAA limits on recruiting activities. This failure resulted in a prospective student-athlete receiving improper automobile transportation, lodging and meals; further, prospects were brought into contact with representatives of the university's athletics interests in ways that violated
NCAA legislation.
3. The athletics department administrative staff failed to monitor the operation of the men's basketball summer camp, a failure that resulted in making very difficult the determination of whether payments for speaking fees and expenses to high school coaches who worked at the summer camp were in conformance with NCAA legislation.
4. The athletics department administrative staff and the men's basketball coaching staff did not monitor the operations of the athletics dormitory (Wildcat Lodge), a failure that resulted in: (a) the provision of housing to prospective and enrolled student-athletes on more favorable financial terms than available to other students, and (b) the provision of summer lodging to student-athletes who were not enrolled, which was contrary to university policy.
5. The athletics department staff failed to monitor the summer employment of prospective and enrolled student-athletes that had been arranged by the basketball coaching staff. This failure to monitor summer employment continued throughout the summer of 1988, months after the university's president had instructed the athletics department staff to implement such a monitoring system in order to meet commitments he made to the Committee on Infractions in February 1988.
6. The university did not include clearly in the terms of employment for assistant basketball coaches certain contractual provisions required by NCAA legislation, such as a requirement that the assistant coaches report all athletically related income to the university. Although the president took steps to force assistant basketball coaches to report their athletically related income after being informed of their failure to do so, the university previously had failed to include that specific requirement in the terms of each coach's appointment.
Letter to Eddie Sutton
May 18, 1989 Dear Mr. Sutton:
Enclosed is a copy of the NCAA Committee on Infractions finding of violation in which your name appears, as set forth in the committee's Infractions Report No. 28 concerning the University of Kentucky. Accordingly, no disciplinary action was contemplated regarding you, and it also should be noted that the allegation involving your son, Sean, was not found by the committee.
Please note that once the committee's penalties in this case become effective, either because the findings are accepted by the University of Kentucky or because they are sustained upon consideration of an appeal by the university, the information enclosed with this letter will be retained in this office for review by NCAA member institutions that request it.
The NCAA and the university will conduct a press conference at 10 a.m. on Friday, May 19, 1989, at Patterson Office Tower (eighteenth floor) at the University of Kentucky. A complete copy of the university's infractions report (with the names of the involved student-athletes and coaching staff members deleted) will be forwarded to you by facsimile at 9:30 a.m. (eastern time).
Please contact this office if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
S. David Berst
Assistant Executive Director
7. Prior to the 1988-89 academic year, the university failed to establish an adequate system for certifying the eligibility of incoming student-athletes. The certification system at the university was such that no athletics department or university staff member questioned the eligibility of a student-athlete after both staffs had received documents that should have raised questions about that student-athlete's eligibility.
It should be noted that the athletics department staff and other university staff members, pursuant to the instructions of the university's president, have taken significant steps during the past academic year toward establishing institutional control over the university's men's basketball program and in correcting the specific problem areas referred to in this finding.
F. [NCAA Bylaws 13.2.2 and 16.12.2.2] During the spring and summer of 1987,
several prospective and enrolled student-athletes received lodging and credit arrangements at Wildcat Lodge (a residence hall for men's basketball team members) that were contrary to normal university housing policies and that were not available to all students at the university. Specifically:
1. During the summer of 1987, six prospective student-athletes and three student-athletes resided in Wildcat Lodge, but were not billed for this lodging until August 1987, and six prospects and five student-athletes were billed only for days in which they actually were lodged, although they had use of the rooms for longer periods of time.
2. During the summer of 1987, six prospective student-athletes and two student-athletes received lodging in Wildcat Lodge, even though they were not enrolled in the university, which is contrary to university policies.
G. [NCAA Bylaws 13.1.2.1, 13.2.2, 13.4.1 and 13.14.2]
During the week of June 21-26, 1987, a representative of the university's athletics interests arranged for and provided round-trip automobile transportation (as well as lodging) for a prospective student-athlete and a friend of the young man between the prospect's home town and Lexington, Kentucky; further, on this occasion, through the efforts of this representative and without the knowledge of the university's men's basketball staff, the prospect was able to attend a portion of the university's summer basketball camp at no cost to him, and the young man's friend received a T-shirt at no cost to him. Also, the representative arranged for the prospect and two other young men to receive automobile transportation between Lexington and Louisville to attend the Indiana-Kentucky High School All-Star basketball game and to receive tickets for this game.
H. [NCAA Bylaws 13.1.2.1, 13.2.2, 13.4.1 and 13.14.2]
On October 14 and 15, 1987, a representative of the university's athletics interests provided round-trip automobile transportation, a meal and a gift of clothing to a prospective student-athlete and a friend of the young man when they attended "Midnight Madness," the university's initial men's basketball practice in 1987. Specificially, the representative transported the young men between the prospect's home town and Lexington, Kentucky, in order to attend this practice session; further, prior to the practice, the representative and the young men met the then men's head basketball coach and two
then men's assistant basketball coaches at the university's basketball offices; further, following their meeting, the representative purchased a meal at a restaurant for the young men; further, the young men and the representative returned to the basketball office where they watched a major league baseball playoff game on television, and finally, after practice, the representative purchased a T-shirt for each young man.
I [NCAA Bylaws 13.1.2.1, 13.2.2, 13.14 and 13.14.2]
On December 12, 1987, a representative of the university's athletics interests provided round-trip automobile transportation, lodging, meals and a gift of clothing for a prospective student-athlete and a friend of the young man. Specifically, the representative transported the young men between the prospect's home town and Lexington, Kentucky, in order for the young men and the representative to attend the University of Kentucky vs. the University of Louisville men's basketball game in Rupp Arena; further, the representative paid all lodging and meal expenses on this trip and purchased T-shirts for the young men, and finally, the young men went into the university's locker room after the game where they talked with a then men's assistant basketbal coach and were introduced to several team members.
J. [NCAA Bylaws 13.12.1 and 13.5.1]
On at least two additional occasions during the 1987-88 academic year not addressed in other findings, a representative of the university's athletics interests provided round-trip automobile transportation to a prospective student-athlete between the young man's home town and Lexington, Kentucky, and, on other occasion, provided round-trip automobile transportation for the prospect between the young man's home town and Cincinnati, Ohio. Specifically:
1. The representative provided round-trip automobile transportation for the prospect and a friend of the young man between the prospect's home town and Lexington in order for the representative to purchase yearbooks from the publisher of a publication that emphasizes the university's athletics program.
2. In the spring of 1988, the representative provided round-trip automobile transportation for the prospect between the young man's home town and Lexington in order for the young man to attend an AAU basketball game between the Soviet National Junior Basketball Team and an AAU All-Star team.
3. During the weekend of March 18-20, 1988, the representative provided round-trip automobile transportation for the young man between the prospect's home town and Cincinnati in order for the young man to watch the university's basketbal team participate in the National Collegiate Division I Men's Basketball Championship at Riverfront Coliseum.
K. [NCAA Bylaw 13.1.2.1]
During the summer of 1987, while a prospective student-athlete was making his official paid visit to the university's campus, a then men's assistant basketball coach transported the young man to the home of a representative of the university's athletics interests (a round-trip distance of approximately 30 miles) where he introduced the young man to the representative, even though such an in-person, off-campus recruiting contact between a prospect and a representative of the university's athletics interests was not permissible.