How to STOP/CATCH Cheating?

[rockfordpi 91]

Ok, it is summer, nothing else much to talk about and I was pondering some comments posted in my other thread. I started thinking about HOW could the NCAA catch cheaters more easily and at less cost. Here is the Rockford Plan: 

1. Make a rule where a kid HAD to report all improper recruiting offers and if he did not he would lose eligibility.

2. Require schools to explain this on first contact and get the recruit to sign saying it had been explained

3. Make it known that the NCAA has agents undercover who will be offering benefits to recruits and if they fail to report it, they lose eligibility. This way a player never really knows if it is an NCAA guy or a real Booster.

4. Offer rewards to kids who turn in a real booster. This might make booster think twice.

Comments or any other ideas?

[Rabern57 0]

The schools and boosters will never stop. They will have to scare the recruits away from accepting the bribes. Rewarding for turning them in would mean the NCAA would then have to deal with recruits just wanting money or getting mad at certain coaches.

[WarEagle10 77]

There is one, and only, one way to stop cheating IMO. Make penalties severe enough that it has to stop. We always harp on the gumps, but here is a prime example IMO.... 16 sports at bama were "convicted" of athletes getting free extra text books. Now the NCAA found that not one single athlete made a single penny on these books. Therefore while 16 athletic teams were put on probation, not one program lost post-season play or scholarships. So basically this "probation" was nothing more than Andy taking Barney Fyfe's bullet away from him. LSU was on probation last year for a football player getting extra benefits. Both teams played for a NC while on probation. Make it a rule that if you are found cheating you lose X amount of years of post-season play depending on the severity of the crime. Make it a rule that you will lose X amount of scholarships depending on the severity also. If The NCAA makes penalties severe enough, I believe the cheating would stop. Some would still do it, but if they were made examples when caught then that would go a long way in curbing it IMO.

[rockfordpi 91]

There is one, and only, one way to stop cheating IMO. Make penalties severe enough that it has to stop. We always harp on the gumps, but here is a prime example IMO.... 16 sports at bama were "convicted" of athletes getting free extra text books. Now the NCAA found that not one single athlete made a single penny on these books. Therefore while 16 athletic teams were put on probation, not one program lost post-season play or scholarships. So basically this "probation" was nothing more than Andy taking Barney Fyfe's bullet away from him. LSU was on probation last year for a football player getting extra benefits. Both teams played for a NC while on probation. Make it a rule that if you are found cheating you lose X amount of years of post-season play depending on the severity of the crime. Make it a rule that you will lose X amount of scholarships depending on the severity also. If The NCAA makes penalties severe enough, I believe the cheating would stop. Some would still do it, but if they were made examples when caught then that would go a long way in curbing it IMO.

But was this really some elaborate plan to cheat that gave UAT some kind of competitive advantage or was it just a Sc**w up. UAT self reported the violation (and it was a violation).

My original questions/comments were more related to catching cheating in terms of recruiting violations.

[Auctoritas 2,828]

I actually think you are on the right track for a lot of this.  When it comes down to it, deterrence is based on a reward vs consequence, something I like to call "the economy of risk" (i.e., at what point does the consequence of my actions outweigh the positives of my actions).

I like your ideas, but the first problem I see is jurisdiction.  Can the NCAA force a student-athlete to do something before they are actually student-athletes?  In terms of the paperwork, who keeps it? Is it for official visits, unofficial visits, does it kick in when a coach comes to a school to visit a kid?  Its not really trackable or without loopholes.  I can extrapolate that you would start having instances where students commit to schools without ever signing any paperwork because all the recruiting was done below-the-table.  Law of unintended consequences, etc.

I think a way to address that is to say that for a student to be recruited at all and be eligible to receive athletic scholarships, they must file paperwork with the NCAA stating their intent and approval of being recruited, including accepting the rule you outlined.  Make it be required to be in by the start of your Junior year of High School, so a kid can't just at the last minute sign it then send a LOI.  Maybe make them take an 8 hour class on a saturday taught by the NCAA about recruiting rules, points of contact, etc.  That way, you have the paperwork on file with the central office and it is a blanket document that covers all schools.

[rockfordpi 91]

I actually think you are on the right track for a lot of this.  When it comes down to it, deterrence is based on a reward vs consequence, something I like to call "the economy of risk" (i.e., at what point does the consequence of my actions outweigh the positives of my actions).

I like your ideas, but the first problem I see is jurisdiction.  Can the NCAA force a student-athlete to do something before they are actually student-athletes?  In terms of the paperwork, who keeps it? Is it for official visits, unofficial visits, does it kick in when a coach comes to a school to visit a kid?  Its not really trackable or without loopholes.  I can extrapolate that you would start having instances where students commit to schools without ever signing any paperwork because all the recruiting was done below-the-table.  Law of unintended consequences, etc.

I think a way to address that is to say that for a student to be recruited at all and be eligible to receive athletic scholarships, they must file paperwork with the NCAA stating their intent and approval of being recruited, including accepting the rule you outlined.  Make it be required to be in by the start of your Junior year of High School, so a kid can't just at the last minute sign it then send a LOI.  Maybe make them take an 8 hour class on a saturday taught by the NCAA about recruiting rules, points of contact, etc.  That way, you have the paperwork on file with the central office and it is a blanket document that covers all schools.

Very good insight/questions. As they say, the devil is in the details.

"Can the NCAA force a student-athlete to do something before they are actually student-athletes?"

Very good point. However, I thought about the same thing in the Cam case. All the talk came BEFORE Cam was signed and no benefit ever changed hands and nothing happened after he signed. Cam's father NEVER became a part of the NCAA, yet he was crucified for allegedly breaking their rules.

So, yes, I think the NCAA can do that, not that I in ANY WAY think it is right. Maybe they could require that the student report all previous violations when he signed his scholarship.

On a side note, granted the NCAA can subject anyone who voluntarily joins their organization to their rules. However,  I totally REJECT the NCAA/MEDIA assertion that it is wrong for ME (or ANY private citizen) to do something (or simply discuss ANYTHING with ANYONE) JUST BECAUSE THE NCAA says it is. The NCAA is not mentioned in the Bible, the constitution, and it isn't part of my social contract, LOL, but I digress.

"In terms of the paperwork, who keeps it?"

When or before a school makes first contact, rule is explained and recruit is given paperwork to sign by coach/school. Coach/school keeps copy and sends copy to NCAA. Violation occurs if a player who has not signed paperwork is recruited. Paper work ONLY becomes as issue is recruit claims no knowledge of reporting requirement.

" Is it for official visits, unofficial visits, does it kick in when a coach comes to a school to visit a kid?"

All of the above. Once the kid becomes a "recruited athlete". The NCAA already has rules to define what constitutes a "recruited athlete".

"I can extrapolate that you would start having instances where students commit to schools without ever signing any paperwork because all the recruiting was done below-the-table."

Well, if you mean Commit, YES, because verbal committeemen is something the media made up. There is no recognition of such by the NCAA. ANYONE can make a verbal commitment, even without an offer.

However, IF a student signs a scholarship BEFORE signing the form, he loses eligibility with that school. Remember, the big time players are recruited by everyone, so if a guy recruited by UGA signed with UAT, yet argued he was never recruited by UAT, he has still signed the form and is bound by the rules.

I  do think your suggestion is a good one, just not sure about forcing it at the start of the Jr. year. Some kids may be late bloomers or not even begin football until Jr. year and may have no idea that they will be recruited.

Also, the parents or most every Jr who plays a sport is convinced their kid will be prospect, so you probably would have 80% if the Jr.'s in America sending in the form.

I think someway you have to put the responsibility to inform/notify on the schools/coaches as they are the ones initiating contact and defining who they are recruiting. You also have to put fear into the recruits and boosters that the person asking for or offering extra benefit might be the NCAA or someone with incentive to report to the NCAA.

As I said, the devil is in the details. My general point is that they need to go at it undercover like Law Enforcement does with drug dealers.

Taken one step further. If undercover NCAA offers recruit something and he does not report, he loses his eligibility, UNLESS he cooperates and is willing to wear a wire...

[Stripe 5]

I see one huge problem in all of this, The NCAA. Governing body they may be, but until they come out with a no-bull$**t rule book that people understand without having to have a 20 lawyer team and a corresponding "Set in stone" penalty for breaking those rules things won't change.

I agree that they need stiffer penalties. But just like in the cases of UA and LSU. Serious issues got smacks on the wrist. These issues should have had sever effects for both university sports. And neither of them should have been able to even play in the Conference championship much less the NCG. Or in Bama's case 2 NCG's

The NCAA has no standards. It's more of a matter of how they feel about you on the day they decide your punishment. All of which leads to favoritism of some programs and decimation of others.

If there are clear cut penalties then we all know what to expect, especially if those penalties are stiff.

[fly757au 0]

I don't think you need to worry with it being done at the beginning of the student's junior year. A prospective student athlete and his parents/guardians are required to attend an NCAA seminar prior to Jan 1st of their senior year. This should be a video presentation from the NCAA outlining the expectations and requirements of recruitment. At the end of the presentation the student athlete and parents/guardians are required to sign the affidavit acknowledging their understanding.

If the student-athlete has been offered anything they can, at this point, make the report without any impact to their eligibility. That is assuming they haven't taken improper benefits.

School's should not be required to get the prospects signature. They can recruit whomever they want within the rules of recruiting.

The recruits have to be held responsible in this process. A recruit is not allowed to sign with any school until they have accomplished this NCAA seminar.

This seminar can be held at every high school multiple times throughout the year.

If the recruit has been offered anything and it is not reported then they will lose their eligibility for one year. If the recruit reports an issue, that is not a set-up by the NCAA, then they will be required to help with the investigation or lose eligibility.

We need to remember that becoming a student-athlete is a privilege and not a right.

Creating rules is easy. Enforcing them is a whole other issue.

[keesler 5,931]

Thanks for the info Fly.

Sounds like procedures are already in place right now to deter illicit activity.

Honestly, I'd like to see some type of punishment that includes the "guardians" that these numerous 4-5* recruits seem to require.  When a "legal guardian" is also a recruits coach, whether it's football or AAU basketball, that should raise huge red flags to the NCAA compliance folks.  When an AAU coach has more say-so and contact/communications with various colleges on behalf of the top shot athlete, something is wrong, IMO.

What happened to the days when the high school coach was the initial point of contact for players?  What happened to the days when the dang parents worked with the HS coaches to communicate with recruiter's?

[Ed_ 3]

One other major change that needs to be made is on the back end with the universities compliance departments.  There is an inherent lack of independence with these departments since they are being paid by the universities.  Put in a real  world context and assuming there were no rewards for whistle blowers, if you found out your company was cooking the books on say a worldcom/enron scale, would you go to the government and rat them out?  If you did there's a good chance your company would go under and you lose your job.  Now think about a compliance department  finding out their is rampant willful violations going on with their FB program.  If you turn them in your school gets the hammer dropped which ends up with major revenue losses (usually).  Do you think a school is going to be happy with you? 

What the NCAA needs to do is have a mandatory fund that each school pays into and the NCAA provides compliance officer(s) for each school out of that money.  These officers would also not have any prior affiliation with the program they are assigned to (think a tide fan having to make the decision on whether to torpedo his beloved program).  I think that would clean up a ton of the problems by itself. 

[AURandy1345162767 14]

I wonder if the NCAA would consider adding up "secondary violations." It seems like many  colleges self-report multiples secondary violations, but only get slaps on the wrists. If a school reports, say, 25 secondary violations, but 10 of those are members of the coaching staff "bumping" into recruits when they shouldn't be, why won't the NCAA say that's more than enough secondary violations to tote up to one major violation?

[keesler 5,931]

I wonder if the NCAA would consider adding up "secondary violations." It seems like many  colleges self-report multiples secondary violations, but only get slaps on the wrists. If a school reports, say, 25 secondary violations, but 10 of those are members of the coaching staff "bumping" into recruits when they shouldn't be, why won't the NCAA say that's more than enough secondary violations to tote up to one major violation?

I'm not sure I want AU to do that.  Have you seen our list of secondaries that have been self-reported to the NCAA?  How much is too much?

[Rabern57 0]

I wonder if the NCAA would consider adding up "secondary violations." It seems like many  colleges self-report multiples secondary violations, but only get slaps on the wrists. If a school reports, say, 25 secondary violations, but 10 of those are members of the coaching staff "bumping" into recruits when they shouldn't be, why won't the NCAA say that's more than enough secondary violations to tote up to one major violation?

I'm not sure I want AU to do that.  Have you seen our list of secondaries that have been self-reported to the NCAA?  How much is too much?

Uat reported 40 something a while back, while on probation and got nothing.

The first thing they have to do to stop cheating is form a committee where every school is represented and has an equal say in guilt. Then reward the schools for catching the others cheating with things like automatic approval of waivers or requests or something. The bigger the committee the harder it is to get away with covering up and certain schools getting to slide. Then second put a set punish for each violation and for repeat violations. So there is no schools getting by with almost nothing while another gets nailed for the same violations.

[CMPluvAU04 0]

The main problem with cheating is the NCAA doesnt wanna stop some schhols from doing it.