The NCAA Committee on Infractions has outlined potential penalties for rules violators in leadership positions beyond the coaching staff, including school presidents in a move prompted by new legislation emphasizing individual accountability.
Individuals who were active or passive actors in the violations could be identified by name in public infractions reports. Previously, the identities of violators were kept anonymous.
Matt Mikrut, managing director for the committee, said Friday that the discussions at a meeting in Charlotte this week stemmed from the Division I council’s passage of new accountability legislation last month. Yahoo Sports first reported details of the meeting.
Mikrut said the expansion of penalties applies to individuals such as athletic directors, chancellors and presidents if they are found to have been actors in the violation of rules.
Previously, members of coaching staffs generally were the only individuals penalized when disciplinary action was taken.
Mikrut provided examples of disciplinary measures at the committee’s disposal.
An administrator found to have participated in violations could be suspended from some activities associated with athletics for a certain amount of time, or a show-cause order could be imposed that would restrict or reduce the administrator’s activities.
If a case involved a lack of institutional control or a failure to monitor that allowed violations to occur, the committee would have the discretion to use the president’s and athletic director’s name in the public infractions report, just as other individuals can be named for their role in specific violations.
The first public identification occurred this month when former Alabama baseball coach Brad Bohanon’s name appeared in the report on his violation of wagering and ethical conduct rules when he provided inside information to an individual he knew to be engaged in betting on Alabama baseball games.
Mikrut said the committee would never name an athlete, prospective athlete or parents.
“It’s solely people in leadership positions at the school,” he said.
Mikrut said there is now an emphasis on shielding athletes who had no involvement in violations from penalties. But he said probation, postseason bans and scholarship reductions — all of which could affect a current athlete — could still be imposed under certain circumstances.
Mikrut said the committee continues to support the vacation of records as part of penalties “because it’s rooted in fair competition, which is ultimately one of the missions and priorities of the NCAA and the infractions program.”
However, he said, there could be occasions for nuance.
“A track athlete might have his or her team record vacated, but my individual finish might be able to be maintained,” Mikrut said. “That’s a very narrow circumstance the committee is working through. There are going to be situations where the student-athlete was not an active participant (in violations).”