NCAA Infractions Database

[pfister1]

For anyone with some time on their hands, here is a link to the NCAA Major infractions database. You can search cases and the database will provide you with information on each case including, the charges, findings and penalties. You can even get download the official Infractions Report. Here is the report of our flogging from the early 90s.

Maybe one of you enterprising yutes could summarize and tell us what the NCAA has been handing out in terms of penalties since the process was reformed in August 2013.

 

[jordoo]

OK so on a quick first scan through I have determined that the NCAA is wildly inconsistent with its charges, penalties, investigations and appeals. Basically each case seems to have its own special form of NCAA insanity. I'm not sure we can accurately extrapolate any usable measuring stick from this information.

 

[Brooky03]

OK so on a quick first scan through I have determined that the NCAA is wildly inconsistent with its charges, penalties, investigations and appeals. Basically each case seems to have its own special form of NCAA insanity. I'm not sure we can accurately extrapolate any usable measuring stick from this information.

Sounds like what we all pictured from the NCAA.

Since we're Syracuse, we'll get the worst punishment... simply for being Syracuse because Syracuse.

 

[PeteCalvin]

Sounds like what we all pictured from the NCAA.

Since we're Syracuse, we'll get the worst punishment... simply for being Syracuse because Syracuse.

That isn't far from the truth. We got hammered in 1991-92 because UNLV was letting players play in Las Vegas hot tubs with big shot agents.

 

[jordoo]

Come on guys got free meals and some even got a Christmas present.

 

[urban96]

I heard rumors one of the players used an unauthorized hose to wash their car...

 

[Orangezoo]

As someone who has participated in and dealt with hearings/inquiries/audits from regulatory institutions .. what a joke. Had never taken the time to look through this database and I realize only completed/published infractions are on here but wow. Even down to the explanations they are all over the board. This looks like how you would do a writeup for a detention violation of a kid in high school.

What it truly wreaks of is a regulatory function that needs to show its purpose and value and thus utilizes self reported incidents and a lot of hyperbole around very cut and dry allegations to overcomplicate. It becomes a witch hunt because , as expected, most of the universities are much better run organizations who can handle their own business. Probably a series of over paid investigators who do a half ass job. Sure the published documents are robust but they are 20 pages of fluff to say 5 things. What a disgrace that this is the regulatory institution tasked with oversight of many prestigious and highly respected institutions.

Just wow...

 

[Lawrinson14]

For anyone with some time on their hands, here is a link to the NCAA Major infractions database. You can search cases and the database will provide you with information on each case including, the charges, findings and penalties. You can even get download the official Infractions Report. Here is the report of our flogging from the early 90s.

Maybe one of you enterprising yutes could summarize and tell us what the NCAA has been handing out in terms of penalties since the process was reformed in August 2013.

So this is what Syracuse was found guilty of:

* Transportation of prospective student-athletes by a representative of the university's athletics

interests to the university's campus and to other off-campus sites.

* Provision of meals, lodging and game tickets to prospective student- athletes at no cost to them

by a representative of the university's athletics interests.

* Contacting prospective student-athletes off campus during noncontact periods and prior to the

beginning of the prospective student- athletes' senior years in high school.

* Providing improper transportation for the relatives of a student-athlete or prospective studentathlete

from the young men's homes to the university campus.

* Providing articles of athletics clothing to prospective student- athletes.

* Permitting a representative of the institution's athletics interests to be present during a

recruiting visit by the head men's basketball coach and an assistant men's basketball coach at the

home of a prospective student-athlete. [Page 5]

* Providing improper transportation, meals and lodging for and permitting the use of an

automobile by prospective student-athletes during their summer employment or during unofficial

visits to the university's campus.

* Participation by basketball prospective student-athletes in recreational basketball games on the

university's campus with current and former student-athletes.

* Provision of extra benefits, which included gifts, meals, lodging, automobile transportation and

other services, to several student-athletes by representatives of the university's athletics interests.

* Provision of substantial cash gifts to several student-athletes over a period of four years by

representatives of the university's athletics interests.

* Providing extra benefits to a student-athlete through repair work on the student-athlete's

automobile on a credit basis when credit was not available to the dealership's regular customers.

* Provision of free legal services by a representative of the university's athletics interests to

student-athletes, a benefit not available to other students.

* Allowing a student-athlete to charge telephone calls at a hotel and not requiring the cost of

those calls to be repaid at the time of checkout.

* Permitting a student-athlete to repeat an academic course without registering for the course and

by improperly changing the official grade, in violation of university regulations.

* Employing a basketball student-athlete for a short period of time at a basketball camp operated

by the men's head basketball coach.

* A student-athlete using his athletics skills for pay.

* Exceeding the number of basketball coaches permitted during one year.

* Arranging for a prospective student-athlete to receive complimentary admissions to an athletics

event.

In the football program, the violations included:

* Provision of free or reduced-cost meals to student-athletes by a representative of the

university's athletics interests.

* Exceeding the team financial aid limitations during the 1987-88 academic year.

In the wrestling program, the violations included:

* Substantially exceeding the team financial aid limitations during the 1987-88, 1988-89, 1989-

90 and 1990-91 academic years. [Page 6]

In the men's lacrosse program, the violations included:

* Substantially exceeding the team financial aid limitations during the 1988-89, 1989-90 and

1990-91 academic years.

* Allowing student-athletes to charge personal telephone calls at a hotel and not requiring the

costs of those calls to be repaid prior to checkout.

In the women's basketball program, the violations included:

* Provision of gifts of clothing and free services to two student-athletes by representatives of the

university's athletics interests.



Let's be honest here, 99% of other schools would be found guilty of the same things.

 

[jordoo]

I heard rumors one of the players used an unauthorized hose to wash their car...

Not just unauthorized!!!! It was one of those magic ones on the infomercial that never tangles or twists and weighs only 2 pounds even though its 100' long. Plus he mentioned he wanted one and boom delivered to his doorstep the next day. Don't worry though because SU is being proactive and will send one to every enrolled student that lives on campus by Tuesday. No longer an extra benefit

 

[RF2044]

As someone who has participated in and dealt with hearings/inquiries/audits from regulatory institutions .. what a joke. Had never taken the time to look through this database and I realize only completed/published infractions are on here but wow. Even down to the explanations they are all over the board. This looks like how you would do a writeup for a detention violation of a kid in high school.

What it truly wreaks of is a regulatory function that needs to show its purpose and value and thus utilizes self reported incidents and a lot of hyperbole around very cut and dry allegations to overcomplicate. It becomes a witch hunt because , as expected, most of the universities are much better run organizations who can handle their own business. Probably a series of over paid investigators who do a half ass job. Sure the published documents are robust but they are 20 pages of fluff to say 5 things. What a disgrace that this is the regulatory institution tasked with oversight of many prestigious and highly respected institutions.

Just wow...

I take solace in the knowledge that [1] NCAA hypocrisy has been exposed the last few years, rendering them nearly completely impotent, and [2] that change is coming, and that NCAA largess is no longer needed / won't be tolerated for much longer.

 

[Orangezoo]

So this is what Syracuse was found guilty of:

* Transportation of prospective student-athletes by a representative of the university's athletics

interests to the university's campus and to other off-campus sites.

* Provision of meals, lodging and game tickets to prospective student- athletes at no cost to them

by a representative of the university's athletics interests.

* Contacting prospective student-athletes off campus during noncontact periods and prior to the

beginning of the prospective student- athletes' senior years in high school.

* Providing improper transportation for the relatives of a student-athlete or prospective studentathlete

from the young men's homes to the university campus.

* Providing articles of athletics clothing to prospective student- athletes.

* Permitting a representative of the institution's athletics interests to be present during a

recruiting visit by the head men's basketball coach and an assistant men's basketball coach at the

home of a prospective student-athlete. [Page 5]

* Providing improper transportation, meals and lodging for and permitting the use of an

automobile by prospective student-athletes during their summer employment or during unofficial

visits to the university's campus.

* Participation by basketball prospective student-athletes in recreational basketball games on the

university's campus with current and former student-athletes.

* Provision of extra benefits, which included gifts, meals, lodging, automobile transportation and

other services, to several student-athletes by representatives of the university's athletics interests.

* Provision of substantial cash gifts to several student-athletes over a period of four years by

representatives of the university's athletics interests.

* Providing extra benefits to a student-athlete through repair work on the student-athlete's

automobile on a credit basis when credit was not available to the dealership's regular customers.

* Provision of free legal services by a representative of the university's athletics interests to

student-athletes, a benefit not available to other students.

* Allowing a student-athlete to charge telephone calls at a hotel and not requiring the cost of

those calls to be repaid at the time of checkout.

* Permitting a student-athlete to repeat an academic course without registering for the course and

by improperly changing the official grade, in violation of university regulations.

* Employing a basketball student-athlete for a short period of time at a basketball camp operated

by the men's head basketball coach.

* A student-athlete using his athletics skills for pay.

* Exceeding the number of basketball coaches permitted during one year.

* Arranging for a prospective student-athlete to receive complimentary admissions to an athletics

event.

In the football program, the violations included:

* Provision of free or reduced-cost meals to student-athletes by a representative of the

university's athletics interests.

* Exceeding the team financial aid limitations during the 1987-88 academic year.

In the wrestling program, the violations included:

* Substantially exceeding the team financial aid limitations during the 1987-88, 1988-89, 1989-

90 and 1990-91 academic years. [Page 6]

In the men's lacrosse program, the violations included:

* Substantially exceeding the team financial aid limitations during the 1988-89, 1989-90 and

1990-91 academic years.

* Allowing student-athletes to charge personal telephone calls at a hotel and not requiring the

costs of those calls to be repaid prior to checkout.

In the women's basketball program, the violations included:

* Provision of gifts of clothing and free services to two student-athletes by representatives of the

university's athletics interests.



Let's be honest here, 99% of other schools would be found guilty of the same things.

I would argue that that span of control for such items ( within a certain tolerance) belongs at the university level. Beyond that it should be at the conference level. Its a waste of time and money for this to require any sort of intervention of a regulatory institution.

 

[RF2044]

I heard rumors one of the players used an unauthorized hose to wash their car...

The incident you're referencing was the tipping point for me, when I knew once and for all that the NCAA had lost their @#$ minds, and had devolved into little more than a self-serving compliance bureaucracy.

 

[Orangezoo]

I take solace in the knowledge that [1] NCAA hypocrisy has been exposed the last few years, rendering them nearly completely impotent, and [2] that change is coming, and that NCAA largess is no longer needed / won't be tolerated for much longer.

Agreed and hopefully all of these additional last ditch efforts to re establish credibility expedite said lack of tolerance.

 

[RandygoCuse]

Not just unauthorized!!!! It was one of those magic ones on the infomercial that never tangles or twists and weighs only 2 pounds even though its 100' long. Plus he mentioned he wanted one and boom delivered to his doorstep the next day. Don't worry though because SU is being proactive and will send one to every enrolled student that lives on campus by Tuesday. No longer an extra benefit

It's actually worse than that...Because he ordered it right away, they doubled his order. He only paid separate shipping and handling.

 

[jordoo]

It's actually worse than that...Because he ordered it right away, they doubled his order. He only paid separate shipping and handling.

That is going to be an issue then. He's going to have to sit out 5min of the first exhibition game.

 

[CaptainJ]

I heard rumors one of the players used an unauthorized hose to wash their car...

It doesn't seem like a big deal unless it belonged to Bernie Fine.

 

[RF2044]

It doesn't seem like a big deal unless it belonged to Bernie Fine.

Bravo.

 

[jordoo]

Its good to see some have maintained their sense of humor.

 

[O-pulse]

I really love the one about being $.10 over budget

 

[NKR1978]

Interesting to look at the two-year ban. Seems like the punishment was much more common in the 90s and earlier. Very rare now. I'd be shocked if we have anything more than a one year ban.

 

[SUintheVille]

OK so on a quick first scan through I have determined that the NCAA is wildly inconsistent with its charges, penalties, investigations and appeals. Basically each case seems to have its own special form of NCAA insanity. I'm not sure we can accurately extrapolate any usable measuring stick from this information.

So if NCAA comes down on SU with substantial penalties and SU appeals, and assuming the NCAA has actually been wildly inconsistent or even just inconsistent, you would think that should help with a partial reduction in penalty since SU might be able to cite cases to help their cause. Thoughts?

 

[Orangezoo]

So if NCAA comes down on SU with substantial penalties and SU appeals, and assuming the NCAA has actually been wildly inconsistent or even just inconsistent, you would think that should help with a partial reduction in penalty since SU might be able to cite cases to help their cause. Thoughts?

I think the NCAA is going to need to be able to actually explain their reasoning and not just fall back on their favorite catch phrases like an "institutional lack of control". If they want to hand out real penalties then they need to point to the exact regulation, cite precedent and be transparent. They have lost the credibility to hand out tickets on a generalized interpretation of their regulations. With every infraction they implicate a school they potentially create a financial loss for the school they implicate. That loss does not circle back to them. So thus outside being a regulatory institution they don't have skin in the game beyond their credibility. So if they want to go blindly into the night stabbing at the wind then it will only usher them out the door sooner. If there is even the slightest bit of logical reasoning in that organization they will not penalize syracuse.

 

[Cheriehoop]

Was looking at the infractions committee and found it's' composition rather strange. 15 members and 3 or 20% are members of the SEC . No other conference is represented by more than 1 member. Just seems weird to me.

http://web1.ncaa.org/committees/committees_roster.jsp?CommitteeName=1INFRACTION

 

[CaptainJ]

Was looking at the infractions committee and found it's' composition rather strange. 15 members and 3 or 20% are members of the SEC . No other conference is represented by more than 1 member. Just seems weird to me.

http://web1.ncaa.org/committees/committees_roster.jsp?CommitteeName=1INFRACTION

I have a dream... that people would use that same skill set to look at the composition of the US Supreme Court percentage-wise for the the visible part of the iceberg, and that they may start to understand why things are like they are. I guess we should be grateful the names on that committee's list are public unlike the members of less interesting entities like the Federal Reserve.

If enough people take notice, eventually someone will speak out about the ill effects, right? (Im talking about the disproportionate weight of the SEC members and whatever pattern of judgments they hand out). Certainly there are no conceivable beneficial effects of a disproportionate majority?

 

[GonzoInMD]

I have a dream... that people would use that same skill set to look at the composition of the US Supreme Court percentage-wise for the the visible part of the iceberg, and that they may start to understand why things are like they are. I guess we should be grateful the names on that committee's list are public unlike the members of less interesting entities like the Federal Reserve.

If enough people take notice, eventually someone will speak out about the ill effects, right? (Im talking about the disproportionate weight of the SEC members and whatever pattern of judgments they hand out). Certainly there are no conceivable beneficial effects of a disproportionate majority?

Who says the members of the Federal Reserve aren't public? You might not know them, but they are public.