I've been reading this case summary off and on today in between the myriad errands and such I had to do today. A lot of fans may not think the NCAA case summary released by University today was too earth-shattering. However, I've invested many hours buried deep inside the IDS or in my room pouring over these documents released by the NCAA (Unnecessarily long ones I may add because of the lawyer speak. Do I still want to go to law school? We'll check back with that one.).
I want to do a "formal" story for the IDS, but before that I want to go through the Case Summary and point out interesting things (at least interesting to me) to save you some time. I'm going to go through the Case Summary a second time and see what sticks out. For a copy of the case summary, we have linked the pdf file in the blog post below.
Introduction
The first 3 pages of the 96 page document is a roll call of all the actors (players, coaches, etc) in this never-ending drama that is IU basketball. Think of it as a who's who of NCAA infractions.
Next the NCAA has provided us readers with a time-line of everything that has happened with the IU program in regards to violations. Good thing it only dealt with the important events of the NCAA investigation, because if it included all the drama of the 2007-2008 season it would increase in size from 2 pages to 7.
Allegation No. 1 This allegation is that Sampson and his staff committed phone calls that violated the restrictions placed on the former IU coach and his staff from Sampson's NCAA violations at Oklahoma. The NCAA gives a break down of the rules which were broken what people have admitted in interviews. Next the NCAA has two remaining issues dealing with this allegation: 1) Did Sampson and Senderoff engage in phone calls that violated the recruiting restriction prohibiting Sampson from being present when his staff made recruiting phone calls and 2) Did Senderoff and Meyer commit over 100 phone calls that violated the NCAA probation put on the University?
After posing these questions, the NCAA states the position of IU, Sampson, Senderoff and the Compliance Staff. I doubt that you will be surprised to find out that Sampson and Senderoff denied knowingly breaking any rules where as IU and the Compliance Staff believed the two coaches did. Then there are pages of phone logs and evidence that will be discussed in the hearing next week.
Allegation No. 2 Allegation No. 2 is that Senderoff and Meyer committed 25 impermissible phone calls which violated NCAA rules (beyond just the probation put on IU). The unresolved issues under this allegation are: 1) Did Senderoff place impermissible phone calls to brothers Markieff and Marcus Morris, Dejuan Blair or their parents or coaches 2) Did Meyer place impermissible phone calls to current Purdue freshman Robbie Hummel and/or his parents or coaches and 3) should allegations be classified as major or secondary? This last question could be important to IU. If this is classified as secondary, the punishment could be less. Something to keep an eye on.
Again, each of the principal actors in this allegation state their position. What caught my eye is that the University, Meyer and Senderoff believe that IF a violation took place, that it would be secondary in nature. However, the compliance department believes it should be classified as major (right now everyone one of you three fans that have kept reading this far want to write nasty e-mails to the compliance department - they are just doing their job folks!).
Allegation No. 3 Allegation No. 3 is a piling on of Sampson for violating rules and creating a culture of rule-breaking at IU. The ruling on this allegation could impact the intermediate to long-term future Sampson has in the NCAA. The remaining questions the NCAA wants to answer are: 1) Did Sampson violate his probation 2) did Sampson give misleading or false information to the compliance staff and 3) did Sampson fail to promote an atmosphere of compliance in the basketball program?
IU and the compliance staff believe that Sampson did knowingly break the terms of his probation whereas Sampson said he did not.
This is where there are a lot of interviews with prospective players, parents and Sampson himself. Starting on page 63 Sampson begins to discuss his phone usage, particularly his caller ID. I know older people are not as tech savvy as college students (I'm talking about you, dad), but Sampson seems to be pretty unsure of how caller ID works. Let me know what you think.
Allegation No. 4 This allegation is referring to Senderoff if he knowingly broke NCAA rules. The NCAA specifically wants to know: 1) did Senderoff knowingly violate the probation put on the program and 2) did he submit false information to the compliance staff about recruiting calls?
Typical of the first three allegations - Senderoff denies doing anything knowingly wrong, but the University and the compliance staff disagrees.
Where there you have it - 96 pages of legal speak and such summarized in a few hundred (or thousand) words. The NCAA hearing is next week - as always, check back to the basketblog and the IDS for more coverage.
