Article: NCAA Charges Miami With Lack of Institutional Control

Dan E. Dangerously
Dan E. Dangerously
4 min read

Comments (1051)

NCAA's investigation into the university. (AP Photo/Caleb Jones)

By: TIM REYNOLDS (AP)CORAL GABLES, Fla.Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.25.6767-80.2495

CORAL GABLES, Fla. (AP) — The NCAA believes former Miami assistant coaches Clint Hurtt, Aubrey Hill and Jorge Fernandez provided false or misleading information during the probe into the Hurricanes' athletic department.

The NCAA said all three violated "principles of ethical conduct" as part of the notice of allegations served against the Hurricanes, according to a person who spoke to The Associated Press Wednesday on condition of anonymity because the allegations have not been released publicly.

Hurtt and Hill were members of Miami's football staff. Fernandez worked on the men's basketball staff.

Several other coaches are named or referenced in the allegations, including Missouri basketball coach Frank Haith. But only Hurtt, Hill and Fernandez are facing the ethical-conduct charge, commonly known as NCAA Rule 10.1.

Hurtt is currently on the staff at Louisville. Hill is not working as a coach at this time, and Fernandez spent last season as an assistant at Marshall, resigning last May.

The notice of allegations was delivered to Miami on Tuesday, and the university is facing the charge that it had a "lack of institutional control" — one of the worst things the NCAA can levy against a member school. The charge revolves around how the school allegedly failed to monitor conduct of Nevin Shapiro, a rogue booster and convicted felon who provided cash, gifts and other items to players on the football and men's basketball teams.

University President Donna Shalala said Tuesday night that the Hurricanes have suffered enough already through self-imposed sanctions. Through a university spokesman, she declined further comment Wednesday.

The NCAA said Hurtt and Hill committed the same violations, at least related to the ethical-conduct matter.

The NCAA alleged both provided meals, transportation and lodging to either recruits, current players, or both in either 2008 or 2009. Both were interviewed by the NCAA during the course of its probe and allegedly denied providing those extra benefits, statements the NCAA said were contradicted in each case by what players told them separately.

Hurtt also took a $2,500 personal loan from Shapiro, which was repaid. The NCAA also believes he sent about 40 impermissible text messages to recruits, which typically is a secondary, or minor, violation.

Fernandez, the NCAA alleged, "knowingly provided extra benefits" in the form of an air ticket. The NCAA said Fernandez denied using air miles for the tickets for a men's basketball player and a high school coach, despite evidence to the contrary.

In February 2012, Miami center Reggie Johnson was ruled ineligible by the school after an investigation revealed that members of his family accepted "impermissible travel benefits" from a member of the school's former coaching staff, without specifying Fernandez or anyone else by name. The university said Johnson was not aware of the benefits, personally accepted nothing and that his family had been told they were allowed.

Johnson was reinstated quickly last season, and remains a key part of this season's team — now ranked No. 2 in the nation and leading the Atlantic Coast Conference. The ongoing cloud of the scandal is not hurting the Hurricanes, basketball coach Jim Larranaga said Tuesday night.

"If it was overshadowing what we were doing, this room would not be packed," Larranaga said after his team beat Virginia. "We're getting so much exposure. We can only focus on the things we have control over. We have nothing to do with the investigation."

Several other former Miami coaches are named in the allegations as well, including one-time men's basketball assistant Jake Morton, who the NCAA said, among other things, accepted "supplemental income" of at least $6,000 from Shapiro. Morton is now on the staff at Western Kentucky.

Missouri coach Frank Haith is alleged of failing "to promote an atmosphere for compliance," a charge specific to how he handled things when Shapiro allegedly wanted money in exchange for not going public with accusations that he paid to help the Hurricanes recruit a player.

Some of the allegations are more than 10 years old, including a claim that Shapiro bought a suit for former Miami star running back Willis McGahee to wear to the Heisman Trophy ceremony in 2002.

Other allegations include that he paid for dinners at Benihana, televisions, sneakers, Miami Heat tickets, bowling parties, one player's engagement ring, a used washer-dryer set for current New England Patriots lineman Vince Wilfork, and that he directed his girlfriend to give two former Hurricanes no-show jobs for a couple of months.

___
 
Technically it would be a libel case. I posted it in another thread but essentially to be successful, the person must prove: 1) that the statement was false, 2) caused harm, and 3) was made without adequate research. For an institution like Miami (considered a public figure) to sue, they must prove all that and 4) that the statement was made with the intent to do harm or with reckless disregard for the truth (proving malicious intent - which is extremely hard to do).

That's it in a nutshell. I don't think it would be wise but that's just IMHO.

Thanks. Libel, exactly. Is it that far off base? Can you take issue with parts of a report as libel?

Let's take the abortion claim, for starters.

Isn't taking a ponzi-schemer at his word in this case a reckless disregard for the truth? Could you prove the claim as false? Maybe not, but could it ever be proven true? I don't think it's debatable that it caused hard and was made without adequate research, but I'm sure a lawyer would take issue.

Esf - Good point. How does The Enquirer get away with running a headline stating that Tom Cruise is a space alien, or that Rhianna is actually a demon?

Quite easily. THey're public figures, so the standard is 'actual malice.' And the Enquirer doesn't claim truth, just that someone said so. They have a person they quote who says this. And their headline generally reads something like: Witness: Tom Cruise eats penises for breakfast.
 
Are they not in the same boat as UM? Shouldn't they also make a stance and demand that the NCAA prove it? I know that we all dislike those guys but in my book, I don't trust that the NCAA will place the blame on those guys as opposed to the players and UM. I would think that we want them to get off as well, no?
 
Biscuits: understand that civil proceedings sometimes take years to finish. There's just no need to keep this story alive for several more years once the stuff with the NCAA is finished. Why would you want to give more fodder to coaches/schools recruiting against us? (They're already going to do that, but this story needs to die, sooner rather than later.)

This is the truth.
 
"Hurtt also took a $2,500 personal loan from Shapiro, which was repaid. The NCAA also believes he sent about 40 impermissible text messages to recruits, which typically is a secondary, or minor, violation."

That is what they have on Hurtt

You gotta be ****ting me
 
Advertisement
If UM were hanging its hopes on Emmert carrying the bucket for them on a deal, then you can be 100% certain that Shalala would not have gone ballistic on Emmert, which she basically did.

UM doesn't have to be hanging its hopes on anything, and would be idiotic to be doing so.

You prepare for the worst, even if you've been given indications you're not getting the worst. UM showing its teeth doesn't mean they haven't been told anything, or that the NCAA has decided to hammer Miami. There are lots of reasons to rattle a saber. A rattlesnake has a rattle in part to remind would-be preadators not to **** with it. Even those who wouldn't anyway.

I disagree. If they thought they would benefit from Emmert's favorable disposition towards an acceptable settlement, they would not be excoriating him in the press. That they did so is a clear indication that there is nothing expected or promised from him.
 
"Hurtt also took a $2,500 personal loan from Shapiro, which was repaid. The NCAA also believes he sent about 40 impermissible text messages to recruits, which typically is a secondary, or minor, violation."

That's it? Lmaooooo
 
That's certainly one way to interpret it. It's not the only way, by any stretch.

It's not politically or legally expedient for the NCAA to just let Miami off with time served at this point. That's been a well-documented opinion by several takes I've read on the situation, and I agree with it. Since the process pretty much has to be followed, this NOA has to be issued, and it has to have teeth, given the extent of the investigation and the media attention on the case. Harsh language in the NOA does not directly signal that Miami would get hammered moving forward by the COI. Specifically, I'd be interested to read the NOAs for Boise, UCF, and Ohio State. Their penalties were all relatively light.

My opinion is that Donna's issuing this statement is a public shot across the bow of the NCAA. But it does not mean that she hasn't been given back-channel assurnaces that Miami will getting time-served, at the end of the formal process. As I mentioned earlier, a statement like this in the press by Miami gives the COI and *** Boy Emmert (I'd apply to have his name legally changed, if I could) the cover they need to throw Enforcement under the bus. Everyone knows that Enforcement was way off the reservation in this investigation, and who knows how many others? The head of the deparment has been fired, along with others. There's no one left on the Enforcement side to **** when they get bus-tossed and Miami gets times served.

There's blood on both sides. We've been muck-raked for over two years; NCAA has been severly undermined.

There's no reason for either side to pursue this further.

Reason be damned when it comes to one's own survival -- Emmert feels cornered and he is fighting.

DS' statements shows she is rallying public support to influence the outcome. Therefore, I doubt deals have been worked out. DS is also pushing to face the COI this weekend. Striking while strong public opinion is on our side for once. If Emmert allows UM to face the COI this weekend, then it is likely we will get off with time served. I am skeptical that they will allow it so soon though. More likely they will push it back until the public's attention is focused elsewhere.

Where did this come from? I haven't read it anywhere but I may have missed it.

I read so many articles since yesterday I don't even remember where. It's one of the earlier ones. Got to go to work now. Will do some research this evening.
 
Alright. Curiousity satisfied.

Thanks all.
 
Advertisement
That's certainly one way to interpret it. It's not the only way, by any stretch.

It's not politically or legally expedient for the NCAA to just let Miami off with time served at this point. That's been a well-documented opinion by several takes I've read on the situation, and I agree with it. Since the process pretty much has to be followed, this NOA has to be issued, and it has to have teeth, given the extent of the investigation and the media attention on the case. Harsh language in the NOA does not directly signal that Miami would get hammered moving forward by the COI. Specifically, I'd be interested to read the NOAs for Boise, UCF, and Ohio State. Their penalties were all relatively light.

My opinion is that Donna's issuing this statement is a public shot across the bow of the NCAA. But it does not mean that she hasn't been given back-channel assurnaces that Miami will getting time-served, at the end of the formal process. As I mentioned earlier, a statement like this in the press by Miami gives the COI and *** Boy Emmert (I'd apply to have his name legally changed, if I could) the cover they need to throw Enforcement under the bus. Everyone knows that Enforcement was way off the reservation in this investigation, and who knows how many others? The head of the deparment has been fired, along with others. There's no one left on the Enforcement side to **** when they get bus-tossed and Miami gets times served.

There's blood on both sides. We've been muck-raked for over two years; NCAA has been severly undermined.

There's no reason for either side to pursue this further.

Reason be damned when it comes to one's own survival -- Emmert feels cornered and he is fighting.

DS' statements shows she is rallying public support to influence the outcome. Therefore, I doubt deals have been worked out. DS is also pushing to face the COI this weekend. Striking while strong public opinion is on our side for once. If Emmert allows UM to face the COI this weekend, then it is likely we will get off with time served. I am skeptical that they will allow it so soon though. More likely they will push it back until the public's attention is focused elsewhere.

Where did this come from? I haven't read it anywhere but I may have missed it.

Barry Jackson reported it in the Herald last night
 
If UM were hanging its hopes on Emmert carrying the bucket for them on a deal, then you can be 100% certain that Shalala would not have gone ballistic on Emmert, which she basically did.

UM doesn't have to be hanging its hopes on anything, and would be idiotic to be doing so.

You prepare for the worst, even if you've been given indications you're not getting the worst. UM showing its teeth doesn't mean they haven't been told anything, or that the NCAA has decided to hammer Miami. There are lots of reasons to rattle a saber. A rattlesnake has a rattle in part to remind would-be preadators not to **** with it. Even those who wouldn't anyway.

I disagree. If they thought they would benefit from Emmert's favorable disposition towards an acceptable settlement, they would not be excoriating him in the press. That they did so is a clear indication that there is nothing expected or promised from him.

Certainly a possibility. I hope you're wrong. I fear you're right.
 
Plain and simple, this was a 2.5 year NCAA witch hunt of UM to put on their mantle. All the while, they refuse to actually investigate the ****t going on in the SEC. Fuuck you NCAA.
 
Plain and simple, this was a 2.5 year NCAA witch hunt of UM to put on their mantle. All the while, they refuse to actually investigate the ****t going on in the SEC. Fuuck you NCAA.

Yep. Longest investigation and they really have nothing
 
Advertisement
It's odd, players could come outright and admit they took some type of benefits. Maurice Clarrett stated that he was "paid more at OSU than in UFL." The NCAA does nothing about it.

But then, they take the word from Shapiro- a convicted felon and liar- and still go after Miami. Even with our self-imposed penalties, our forthcoming cooperation during the investigation, and NCAA's Mark Emmert's admission of botching the investigation (that resulted in throwing out only 20% of the evidence), I bet The U will still get crucified.
 
A few points that particularly grind my gears:

### Shapiro gave the NCAA four boxes of evidence, including credit card receipts and bank statements.
The **** he did. He gave them four boxes of documents. Not evidence. I have a pile of receipts sitting in front of me right now. Guess what? According to me, LaMichael James and De'Anthony Thomas were at the bar with me back in 2010. I HAVE EVIDENCE!!!

I. AM. STEAMED. I can only imagine how UM brass feels.

The NCAA will not corroborate this unless you say it twice.

And are a convicted felon.
 
CORAL GABLES, Fla. -- The NCAA believes that former Miami assistant coaches Clint Hurtt, Aubrey Hill and Jorge Fernandez provided false or misleading information during the probe into the Hurricanes' athletic department.
The NCAA said all three violated "principles of ethical conduct" as part of the notice of allegations served against the Hurricanes, according to a person who spoke to The Associated Press on Wednesday on condition of anonymity because the allegations have not been released publicly.


Hurtt and Hill were members of Miami's football staff. Fernandez worked on the men's basketball staff.
Several other coaches are named or referenced in the allegations, including Missouri basketball coach Frank Haith. But only Hurtt, Hill and Fernandez are facing the ethical-conduct charge, commonly known as NCAA Rule 10.1.
Hurtt is currently on the staff at Louisville. Hill is not working as a coach at this time, and Fernandez spent last season as an assistant at Marshall, resigning last May.
The notice of allegations was delivered to Miami on Tuesday, and the university is facing the charge that it had a "lack of institutional control" -- one of the worst things the NCAA can levy against a member school. The charge revolves around how the school allegedly failed to monitor conduct of Nevin Shapiro, a rogue booster and convicted felon who provided cash, gifts and other items to players on the football and men's basketball teams.
University president Donna Shalala said Tuesday night that the Hurricanes have suffered enough already through self-imposed sanctions. Through a university spokesman, she declined further comment Wednesday.
Shapiro is serving a 20-year prison term for masterminding a $930 million Ponzi scheme.
"Many of the charges brought forth are based on the word of a man who made a fortune by lying," Shalala wrote. "The NCAA enforcement staff acknowledged to the University that if Nevin Shapiro, a convicted con man, said something more than once, it considered the allegation 'corroborated' -- an argument which is both ludicrous and counter to legal practice."
The NCAA said Hurtt and Hill committed the same violations, at least related to the ethical-conduct matter.
The NCAA alleged that both provided meals, transportation and lodging to recruits, current players or both in either 2008 or 2009. Both were interviewed by the NCAA during the course of its probe and allegedly denied providing those extra benefits, statements the NCAA said were contradicted in each case by what players told them separately.
Hurtt also took a $2,500 personal loan from Shapiro, which was repaid. The NCAA also believes he sent about 40 impermissible text messages to recruits, which typically is a secondary, or minor, violation.
Fernandez, the NCAA alleged, "knowingly provided extra benefits" in the form of airline tickets. The NCAA said Fernandez denied using air miles for the tickets for a men's basketball player and a high school coach despite evidence to the contrary.
In February 2012, Miami center Reggie Johnson was ruled ineligible by the school after an investigation revealed that members of his family accepted "impermissible travel benefits" from a member of the school's former coaching staff, without specifying Fernandez or anyone else by name. The university said Johnson was not aware of the benefits, personally accepted nothing and that his family had been told it was allowed.
Johnson was reinstated quickly last season and remains a key part of this season's team -- now ranked No. 2 in the nation and leading the Atlantic Coast Conference. The ongoing cloud of the scandal is not hurting the Hurricanes, basketball coach Jim Larranaga said Tuesday night.
"If it was overshadowing what we were doing, this room would not be packed," Larranaga said after his team beat Virginia. "We're getting so much exposure. We can only focus on the things we have control over. We have nothing to do with the investigation."
Several other former Miami coaches are named in the allegations as well, including onetime men's basketball assistant Jake Morton, who the NCAA said, among other things, accepted "supplemental income" of at least $6,000 from Shapiro. Morton is now on the staff at Western Kentucky.
Haith is alleged of failing "to promote an atmosphere for compliance," a charge specific to how he handled things when Shapiro allegedly wanted money in exchange for not going public with accusations that he paid to help the Hurricanes recruit a player.
Some of the allegations are more than 10 years old, including a claim that Shapiro bought a suit for former Miami star running back Willis McGahee to wear to the Heisman Trophy ceremony in 2002.
Other allegations include that he paid for dinners at Benihana, televisions, sneakers, Miami Heat tickets, bowling parties, one player's engagement ring and a used washer-dryer set for current New England Patriots lineman Vince Wilfork, and that he directed his girlfriend to give two former Hurricanes no-show jobs for a couple of months.
 
Advertisement
"Hurtt also took a $2,500 personal loan from Shapiro, which was repaid. The NCAA also believes he sent about 40 impermissible text messages to recruits, which typically is a secondary, or minor, violation."

That is what they have on Hurtt

You gotta be ****ting me

No. They have a lot on Hurtt. He let Dye and Armstrong stay at his house on a unofficial visit for starters.
 
One thing I've gleaned from this is that we finally have a local reporter that is pro-UM and on our side instead of constantly trying to f#ck us--Tim Reynolds. Tim Reynolds is a champion. This dude should do a major expose' on this debacle, bury the NCAA and win a Pulitzer Prize in the process.

Gotta disagree with you here. I dont think Tim Reynolds has any intention to be "Pro-UM", i just think he's the only local reporter that is coherant enough to see this for exactly what it is, a crock of ****. He doesnt really have a history of picking sides, he just seems to be a very good writer that can justify his worht through thorough investigative journalism and by putting out a quality product, not by creating attention through publishing unfounded garbage(like the Herald and Yahoo).

I've read most of what he's written lately, and he's going out of his way to stand up for UM and to clown viciously the NCAA. Therefore, I'm confident in my position that he's pro-UM. I appreciate his work, and he could parlay this into a monster story on the corruption of the NCAA, get himself on 60 Minutes and win a Pulitzer. There's a GIANT story there for someone to get super famous off.

i've been on this paranoid kick for a while that the $EC has been behind this or its boosters. Simply: when USC or UM have their isht together they are juggernauts because they sit in these incredible talent pools more than even Alabama or LSU sit in. So what better way to pave the way to constant NCAA titles then to eliminate your competition which is to use the NCAA to get USC and Miami out of the way. NCAA has got to be influenced by $EC people or else they'd have crucified half that conference by now.

So yes, I think there's a monster story here but one as to the WHY of this witch hunt.

As was said in the Godfather so to speak: "Our true enemy has not revealed himself yet."

paranoid rant done
 
Back
Top