All Samford athletics placed on NCAA probation

[Libertine]

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/samford-failed-monitor-its-eligibility-certification-process


Samford University failed to monitor its eligibility certification process, which resulted in improper certifications for student-athletes, according to a decision issued by a Division I Committee on Infractions panel. For 4½ years, the university’s lack of a process to certify progress-toward-degree requirements allowed 33 student-athletes in eight sports to compete while ineligible.


Penalties and corrective measures include the following:


Public reprimand and censure for the university.
Three years of probation for the university from April 12, 2016, through April 7, 2019.
A vacation of records in which student-athletes participated while ineligible. After the release of the public report, the university will identify the games affected.
An independent, external review of the university’s compliance program within the next six months. The university must implement any recommendations made by the review before the conclusion of the second year of probation.
A $5,000 fine.



No loss of scholarships and no postseason ban, presumably, because the violations appear unintentional. Still, having the entire athletic department on probation is not a good look.

[SU DOG]

Without a doubt this should NOT have happened. It should be noted, however, that the violations were discovered and corrected after 2014. They occurred between 2010-2014, and that is not a lot of athletes for that long of a time. Another compliance person was added, and the school continued its own internal audit, and these sanctions are the penalties for the final findings.

All-in-all certainly an embarrassment for Samford, and a shame for the student-athletes who won championships during that time frame. Our compliance people made mistakes that they shouldn't have. These have been corrected, and now they will need to toe the line going forward.

http://samfordsports.com/news/2016/4/12/general-ncaa-releases-penalties-for-samford-athletics.aspx?path=general

[BEAR]

This is terrible for Samford fans..and players. Do we know when they will publicly release the specific sports?

I ask that because Arkansas State had some violations they weren't detailing but if you changed the radio channel another station gives details. Kinda weird process.

[Libertine]

This is terrible for Samford fans..and players. Do we know when they will publicly release the specific sports?

From the article:

The violations involved student-athletes in the following programs: baseball; football; men’s basketball; men’s cross country; men’s tennis; men’s track and field; softball; and women’s soccer.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

That's a rough one. Good luck to getting back on track.

[FUBeAR]

It should be noted, however, that the violations were discovered and corrected after 2014. They occurred between 2010-2014

Question - I saw/heard that same 2014 date cited elsewhere, but the NCAA Report ( https://www.scribd.com/doc/308241985/NCAA-Samford-University-Public-Infractions-Decision ) says this:


During the 2010-11 through 2014-15 academic years, two baseball student-athletes, five football student-athletes and a men's track and field student-athlete competed without satisfactory completion of at least six semester-hours of degree credit toward the students' designated degree program during the preceding regular academic term.

So, wouldn't that, perhaps, cover the 2014 Football season and the 2015 baseball & track & field seasons?

[SU DOG]

Question - I saw/heard that same 2014 date cited elsewhere, but the NCAA Report ( https://www.scribd.com/doc/308241985/NCAA-Samford-University-Public-Infractions-Decision ) says this:


During the 2010-11 through 2014-15 academic years, two baseball student-athletes, five football student-athletes and a men's track and field student-athlete competed without satisfactory completion of at least six semester-hours of degree credit toward the students' designated degree program during the preceding regular academic term.

So, wouldn't that, perhaps, cover the 2014 Football season and the 2015 baseball & track & field seasons?

The link that you posted(third paragraph)says through the FALL of 2014.

[chattownmocs]

I'm interested to know who, if anyone, was ineligible off of their 2013 football team.

I'd also be interested to hear how many athletes that they DID rule ineligible during that period.

[FUBeAR]

The link that you posted(third paragraph)says through the FALL of 2014.

Thanks, I see that now & that would be the 2014-2015 academic year, so I understand the excerpt I previously posted now. And, using my Sherlock Holmesian deductive reasoning skills, that would lead me to conclude that, since Football is the only Fall sport mentioned in that academic year, then at least 1 of those 5 "football student-athletes" played in at least 1 game for the Bulldogs in the Fall of 2014. COULD mean, then, a retroactively, yet official, 7-5 winning (vs. a .500 or "non-losing") season for the Bears in 2014. Don't know exactly why that matters, but I guess it somehow 'feels' better to start off with 2 'winning' seasons.

Not gloating though - I wrote a fairly long (and personal) post about it on another board. NCAA rules suck! The particular NCAA Progress toward Degree rules and their inflexibility really suck! Grand idea on their face, but a complete travesty in execution and 'blanket' administration (sounds a little bit like socialism, huh? xnodx ). The rules, themselves, can force SERIOUS student-athletes to pursue less rigorous majors / studies and negatively alter the course of the rest of their lives IF they want to continue playing their sport. Doesn't seem to me that the NCAA should be in the business of 'dumbing-down' their participants, but they often are...with that rule. But those are the rules...and, unfortunately, they have to be enforced by all schools to keep the playing field level, albeit, perhaps, a lower level.

[FUBeAR]

I'm interested to know who, if anyone, was ineligible off of their 2013 football team.

I'd also be interested to hear how many athletes that they DID rule ineligible during that period.

I believe the link I posted describes a report that Samford must publish in the next 45 days which will detail which athletes were ineligible, when, and in which contests they participated. I would imagine that report will be publicly available.

Was kinda wonderin' if this info would make Chatt fans even more salty over the 2013 playoff snub. Guess it does. It would me too...if I were a Chatty fan.

[dgtw]

A vacated win for one team does not erase the loss for the other. It is not the same as a forfeit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chattownmocs]

A vacated win for one team does not erase the loss for the other. It is not the same as a forfeit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No one said it did. But if they won a game in OT using ineligible players getting themn into the playoffs, keeping out the team they beat, maybe they need a postseason ban.

[FUBeAR]

A vacated win for one team does not erase the loss for the other. It is not the same as a forfeit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

interesting - didn't know that - source?

doesn't seem logical (, Watson :)) that no team would, officially, have a recorded win from a game that was, officially, played, but we are talking about the NCAA; so, logic is, officially, NOT in play!

[FUBeAR]

No one said it did. But if they won a game in OT using ineligible players getting themn into the playoffs, keeping out the team they beat, maybe they need a postseason ban.

Woo...EXTRA SALTY! He was @'ing me. I assumed it did & 'said' it. Don't forget your blood pressure meds for the next 44 days, while you're waiting on that detailed report to see if Sammy used any ineligible players vs. Chatt in '13.

[walliver]

A vacated win for one team does not erase the loss for the other. It is not the same as a forfeit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In 2013, FU, Chatty and Samford were "tri-champions" at 6-2. Chatty stayed home. If Samford played an ineligible player during one of those 6 conference wins, then FU and Chatty are champions, and UTC should have gone to the playoffs.

My personal feeling all along was that I would have picked Chatty before Sammy that year (and Sammy's 55-14 first round beat-down confirms that).

[jimbo65]

Shows the hypocrisy of the NCAA. Samford slammed while UNC allowed to play in the Bball championship game.

[Libertine]

But if they won a game in OT using ineligible players getting themn into the playoffs, keeping out the team they beat, maybe they need a postseason ban.

In my experience, the most effective way to ban a team from the postseason is to beat them during the regular season. Just sayin'. ;)

[walliver]

Shows the hypocrisy of the NCAA. Samford slammed while UNC allowed to play in the Bball championship game.

How was Samford "slammed"? They will have to vacate a few wins, and possibly a SoCon championship, but are not being punished in any ongoing way. No scholarship restrictions, no post-season bans .. basically they just have to say "we're sorry and won't do it again."

[jimbo65]

How was Samford "slammed"? They will have to vacate a few wins, and possibly a SoCon championship, but are not being punished in any ongoing way. No scholarship restrictions, no post-season bans .. basically they just have to say "we're sorry and won't do it again." My reading of the posts was that all sports were to be penalized. Seems like a slam to me. As far as taking away victories, the NCAA took away some of Paterno's victories and then reinstated them. Unfortunately for SU, they are not a PSU or UNC.

[JSUSoutherner]

In 2013, FU, Chatty and Samford were "tri-champions" at 6-2. Chatty stayed home. If Samford played an ineligible player during one of those 6 conference wins, then FU and Chatty are champions, and UTC should have gone to the playoffs.

My personal feeling all along was that I would have picked Chatty before Sammy that year (and Sammy's 55-14 first round beat-down confirms that).
You mean this beatdown?
http://www.anygivensaturday.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=22349&stc=1

Honestly, Samford probably did Chatty a favor. xthumbsupx

[SU DOG]

In 2013, FU, Chatty and Samford were "tri-champions" at 6-2. Chatty stayed home. If Samford played an ineligible player during one of those 6 conference wins, then FU and Chatty are champions, and UTC should have gone to the playoffs.

My personal feeling all along was that I would have picked Chatty before Sammy that year (and Sammy's 55-14 first round beat-down confirms that).

Had UTC beaten us on the field, they would have - but they didn't. But yes, UTC and FU are now the co-champions, and Samford's share is erased.

One thing that really bothers me is that during this time frame Samford underwent a recertification process(common procedure required by the NCAA), and the NCAA declared we had no irregularities, and everything was fine - NOW THIS. Also, I'm not happy that our school didn't seem to fight for some relief. Maybe a heavier fine or something that would have allowed these student-athletes to keep their accomplishments. Technically ineligible? I can't argue, but just to point out that some things are rather strange, I personally know that one of these players to be named had a GPA good enough to be a Presidential Scholar.

A big fault at Samford is there isn't always a cooperative spirit between academia(including admissions) and the athletic department. Don't know how prevalent that is at other schools, but our Pres. has said that steps will be taken to improve the situation.

As for JSU chiming in on this, I will say that a player being arrested for physical assault at Samford would definitely be against the school's code of conduct. LOL!

[FUBeAR]

Technically ineligible? I can't argue, but just to point out that some things are rather strange, I personally know that one of these players to be named had a GPA good enough to be a Presidential Scholar.

Doesn't matter - Progress toward Degree applies the same %'s to Astrophysical Engineering majors with a 4.0 GPA as it does to Media Studies majors with a 1.0 GPA. Stupid, stupid, stupid NCAA rule...but it's still the rule. STUPID, not "strange."

[JSUSoutherner]

Had UTC beaten us on the field, they would have - but they didn't. But yes, UTC and FU are now the co-champions, and Samford's share is erased.

One thing that really bothers me is that during this time frame Samford underwent a recertification process(common procedure required by the NCAA), and the NCAA declared we had no irregularities, and everything was fine - NOW THIS. Also, I'm not happy that our school didn't seem to fight for some relief. Maybe a heavier fine or something that would have allowed these student-athletes to keep their accomplishments. Technically ineligible? I can't argue, but just to point out that some things are rather strange, I personally know that one of these players to be named had a GPA good enough to be a Presidential Scholar.

A big fault at Samford is there isn't always a cooperative spirit between academia(including admissions) and the athletic department. Don't know how prevalent that is at other schools, but our Pres. has said that steps will be taken to improve the situation.

As for JSU chiming in on this, I will say that a player being arrested for physical assault at Samford would definitely be against the school's code of conduct. LOL!
Go read the report. It was an argument. No physical assault occurred.


At least we still have our conference championships. xthumbsupx

[SU DOG]

Maybe yes maybe no on the assault. However, after an investigation, an arrest WAS made for physical violence. This, however, has been discussed in previous threads, and no need to beat a dead horse. I guess when you're on top(at least 2nd), as the Gamecocks are, it is fun to kick others who are down or at least having difficulties.

[PaladinFan]

In 2013, FU, Chatty and Samford were "tri-champions" at 6-2. Chatty stayed home. If Samford played an ineligible player during one of those 6 conference wins, then FU and Chatty are champions, and UTC should have gone to the playoffs.

My personal feeling all along was that I would have picked Chatty before Sammy that year (and Sammy's 55-14 first round beat-down confirms that).

Hard to pick UTC over a Samford team with the same record that beat them head to head.

Doesn't make much of a difference for Furman. We beat Samford like a drum in Greenville that season.

2014 was a different deal altogether.

[dgtw]

At least we still have our conference championships. xthumbsupx

There was the one we won but didn't get because we were on probation due to poor APR.

[JSUSoutherner]

There was the one we won but didn't get because we were on probation due to poor APR.
Didn't know that. Learn something new every day I suppose.

Let me guess, it was during Cap'n Jack's tenure?

[dgtw]

Didn't know that. Learn something new every day I suppose.

Let me guess, it was during Cap'n Jack's tenure?

Yep. It was Periloux's senior season.

[catamount man]

Hate to hear the Samford lose their 2013 share of the SoCon title. That's gotta hurt some pride. GO CATS!!!

[Thumper 76]

Hate to hear the Samford lose their 2013 share of the SoCon title. That's gotta hurt some pride. GO CATS!!!

Personally if this happened to my school my pride would be much more hurt by the fact that the violations actually happened rather than being forced to "forfeit" games that were played. Honestly it's not like the results didn't happen, all the NCAA did was wave a magic wand and say, POOF, those don't count anymore. I'm a fan for the excitement of the game and to support my team, not to look back and go, "HA HA, look what we did." Even though that is handy to be able to say when on a message board :D

[chattownmocs]

I love these "they won the game on the field" yeah, that's why people cheat, to win, why in the world do people act like they aren't related.

It's not news to anyone at samford that their athletes have to meet certain requirements in order to be eligible. It's ridiculous for them to plead ignorance.

[Cocky]

Maybe yes maybe no on the assault. However, after an investigation, an arrest WAS made for physical violence. This, however, has been discussed in previous threads, and no need to beat a dead horse. I guess when you're on top(at least 2nd), as the Gamecocks are, it is fun to kick others who are down or at least having difficulties.

Because you are arrested for physical violence doesnt mean you are guilty of the charge. Must have when to the "highly rated" Cumberland School of Law?

With your wins gone, your sports programs and law school can view the world from the bottom up.

[SU DOG]

Not up to par for the normally very good "Cocky" post. The Cumberland School of Law specializes in Trial Advocacy and is ranked as one of the top 10 IN THE NATION in this category, and also has a pass bar record of about 83%. The overall ranking of #163 out of over 200 schools is, I suppose what you are calling out, but I didn't know that JSU had added a law school to compare to.

http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2014/03/cumberland_school_of_law_ties.html

[Cocky]

83% must not talking about the recent Alabama pass rate? Only been above they mark a few times recently while being the lowest accredited school in state several times over the last few years. I will give one period Cumberland was the highest. 163 out of 200 is the bottom quartile?

We do not have a law school. As you know UAT would not allow it if we desired to have one.

https://admissions.alabar.org/exam-statistics

[SU DOG]

The 83% and #163 was from this source: http://law-schools.startclass.com/
I have no idea, however, why this discussion is at all relative to anything. I don't think JSU would really want to compare academic standards with Samford. On the other hand, as a citizen of this state, and someone who has made many trips north to Burgess-Snow, I am proud of the JSU run in the FCS Playoffs. I would also love to see us have games with the Gamecocks in the future. Unfortunately, that is not my decision.

[Cocky]

I wish we would play too and I will be more than happy to compare academics between the universities. Plus your not guilty of a crime because someone filed a complaint. Personally I have no idea of what happen, but I will wait and let the good lawyers fight it out.

[SU DOG]

You would be more than happy to compare JSU academics with those of Samford University? xlolx xlolx When exuberance is so strong it overcomes rational thought, then a logical discussion is not possible. Therefore, I will let you have the last word. Good luck to your Gamecocks this year.

[MR. CHICKEN]

I love these "they won the game on the field" yeah, that's why people cheat, to win, why in the world do people act like they aren't related.

It's not news to anyone at samford that their athletes have to meet certain requirements in order to be eligible. It's ridiculous for them to plead ignorance.

......YEAH......DERE ARE.....COMPLIANCE OFFICERS......WHOSE...JOB IT IS.....IS TO COMPLY.........REMOVE DUH SOLITARE.....FROM DUH 'PUTERS.........BRAWK!

[Cocky]

You would be more than happy to compare JSU academics with those of Samford University? xlolx xlolx When exuberance is so strong it overcomes rational thought, then a logical discussion is not possible. Therefore, I will let you have the last word. Good luck to your Gamecocks this year.
Really hard to compete with the bottom quartile in academics cant get much lower. Good luck to your Bulldogs, too.