NCAA Grants AFCA’s Request; Coaches Will Be Punished For Violations

Although it took a strong hand on the back by the American Football Coaches Association (AFCA) to make it happen, the NCAA has nonetheless taken the plunge into the deep end and agreed to punish DI and DII football coaches (in some instances) when coaches commit secondary rules violations.  Coaches may be punished for up to two weeks or two games for overstepping rules such as:

• Exceeding the number of allowable phone calls to a recruit.
• Texting a recruit.
• Speaking to the media about a recruit prior to the recruit signing a National Letter of Intent.
• Posting comments about, or to, a recruit on social media sites.
• Creating a game type atmosphere in which the recruit’s name would be placed on a stadium’s video board and crowd noises piped through speakers as the recruit is introduced.
• Speaking directly with a recruit during an NCAA non-contact period.

However, every violation may not necessarily result in a penalty.  Since in most cases colleges report themselves for secondary violations, the NCAA apparently wanted some wiggle room in determining if a coach’s actions deserved full enforcement.  According to Stacey Osburn of the NCAA, the organization will consider the circumstances involved in each situation, implying that some coaches may not receive suspensions while others will, according to the severity of the violation.  Repeat offenders, for instance, will probably be dealt with more sternly than coaches with clean records.  

In this blog, we have continually called for tougher rules and punishments for offenders.  We support this move by both the AFCA and the NCAA.  Until consequences with sharper teeth are attached to the rules, coaches will continue to step across the line all the while knowing that their actions will not result in serious penalties.  There will always be rogue coaches willing to walk the high wire with no net, but making the ground below a hard surface instead of a soft air bag might discourage some of them from becoming quite so reckless.  

The NCAA has a clear obligation to prospects and parents, not to mention their member institutions, to enforce recruiting rules.  Prospects and their families are too often victimized by coaches whose ambitions outweigh their interest in maintaining a level recruiting field.  Offending coaches should face dire consequences, including loss of income, for breaking the rules.  The NCAA might use the example of the University of Tennessee which dealt harshly with Head Men’s Basketball Coach Bruce Pearl for lying to NCAA investigators.  He was not only suspended from off-campus recruiting for a year by his own AD, but his salary was substantially reduced.  Even though for his violations, some would argue that even these penalites fall short, swift action was taken by UT and the penalties hit Coach Pearl in two important places, recruiting and income.       

In particular, we applaud the AFCA for taking the steps which pushed the NCAA into adopting these tougher sanctions.  If it takes individual college coaching groups to answer the public’s concerns and to help push needed legislature through in a timely manner, then so be it.  The NCAA can at times appear so mired down by red tape that getting simple things accomplished is like watching a sloth navigate a dog agility course – it’s painful to watch and by the time the poor beast completes the task, we’re weary of waiting on the outcome.