 |
|
ku and NCAA maneuvering around the rules
Posted on: February 7, 2019 at 16:01:57 CT
FIJItiger MU
Posts:
147794
Member For:
22.50 yrs
Level:
Moderator
M.O.B. Votes:
0
https://www.kansascity.com/sports/college/big-12/university-of-kansas/article225523845.html
During a news conference Saturday, ku athletic director Jeff Long spoke in more detail about the school’s process of trying to get basketball forward Silvio De Sousa reinstated. Long said that the NCAA specified that ku had to declare former Adidas representative T.J. Gassnola, who previously testified in federal court that he had made a $2,500 payment to De Sousa’s legal guardian Fenny Falmagne, as a booster of the program “only as a hypothetical for the purposes of reinstatement.”
Josephine Potuto, University of Nebraska law professor and past chair of the NCAA Division I infractions committee, said a scenario like this would not signify a school like ku would be forced to deem Gassnola a “booster” in the future.
In this case, though, ku’s position appeared to be that of many schools in a similar position: It wanted to expedite the process because a student-athlete’s eligibility was on the line.
There’s precedent for changes of language by schools over time, Potuto said. North Carolina, for instance, started its highly publicized academic fraud case by admitting that NCAA violations took place while saying the school was culpable. Then, before the final infractions hearing, the school took a contrary position.
There’s a reason avoiding a “booster” designation for Gassnola could be seen as important for ku in the future. According to NCAA rules, schools are in charge of the conduct of boosters, meaning their violations are the school’s violations as well. That means if Gassnola was considered a booster in an NCAA enforcement case, ku could be hit with additional violations.
ku, by holding De Sousa out of competition and starting the reinstatement process, also essentially declared that a violation occurred, with Potuto stating that these cases involve a school self-reporting a violation (even if minor) to the NCAA enforcement staff. This also explains why it was necessary for Gassnola to be labeled as a “booster”; if he had no connection to ku, then the school could not admit any fault or report a violation, which was needed to start this particular process.
The school also had the option of continuing to play De Sousa while claiming no violation had taken place. The danger there, though, is that if a violation is later found during the NCAA infractions process, the school could face additional sanctions for knowingly using an ineligible student-athlete.
During a news conference Saturday, ku athletic director Jeff Long spoke in more detail about the school’s process of trying to get basketball forward Silvio De Sousa reinstated. Long said that the NCAA specified that ku had to declare former Adidas representative T.J. Gassnola, who previously testified in federal court that he had made a $2,500 payment to De Sousa’s legal guardian Fenny Falmagne, as a booster of the program “only as a hypothetical for the purposes of reinstatement.”
Josephine Potuto, University of Nebraska law professor and past chair of the NCAA Division I infractions committee, said a scenario like this would not signify a school like ku would be forced to deem Gassnola a “booster” in the future.
In this case, though, ku’s position appeared to be that of many schools in a similar position: It wanted to expedite the process because a student-athlete’s eligibility was on the line.
There’s precedent for changes of language by schools over time, Potuto said. North Carolina, for instance, started its highly publicized academic fraud case by admitting that NCAA violations took place while saying the school was culpable. Then, before the final infractions hearing, the school took a contrary position.
There’s a reason avoiding a “booster” designation for Gassnola could be seen as important for ku in the future. According to NCAA rules, schools are in charge of the conduct of boosters, meaning their violations are the school’s violations as well. That means if Gassnola was considered a booster in an NCAA enforcement case, ku could be hit with additional violations.
ku, by holding De Sousa out of competition and starting the reinstatement process, also essentially declared that a violation occurred, with Potuto stating that these cases involve a school self-reporting a violation (even if minor) to the NCAA enforcement staff. This also explains why it was necessary for Gassnola to be labeled as a “booster”; if he had no connection to ku, then the school could not admit any fault or report a violation, which was needed to start this particular process.
The school also had the option of continuing to play De Sousa while claiming no violation had taken place. The danger there, though, is that if a violation is later found during the NCAA infractions process, the school could face additional sanctions for knowingly using an ineligible student-athlete.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
ku and NCAA maneuvering around the rules - FIJItiger MU - 2/7 16:01:57