In a 194-page response obtained by The Associated Press, the university lays out a multifaceted argument against such a finding, called a “lack of institutional control.”
The response, requested by the NCAA, includes the university’s explanation of the circumstances that led to more than 550 impermissible telephone contacts with at least 17 recruits by basketball coach Kelvin Sampson and three assistant coaches between April 2000 and September 2004.
The university suggests that a lesser “failure in monitoring” finding would be more appropriate than an institutional control finding, which would suggest that Oklahoma’s administration was not committed to complying with NCAA rules. The monitoring finding would apply only to one part of the program.
“Lack of institutional control applies to systemic failures and significant/multiple breakdowns and is viewed as one of the most, if not the most, serious allegation a school can face,” Oklahoma writes in its response.
The finding is one of three criteria that are specifically mentioned in a portion of the NCAA bylaws regarding major infractions that can lead to a postseason ban. The others are if individuals involved in major infractions remain active in the program and if the violations resulted in a “significant competitive advantage.”
However, the NCAA has a broad range of penalties at its disposal based on a school’s violations, its cooperation in an investigation and its self-imposed penalties.
Oklahoma has already placed the men’s basketball program on probation for two years, cut its number of scholarships in that span, implemented limits it expects to eliminate more than 1,000 recruiting calls and reduced off-campus recruiting trips for Sampson and paid on-campus visits by recruits. The university also froze Sampson’s salary and will issue a reprimand against him after the investigation is resolved.
Still, the NCAA has summoned Oklahoma to attend a Committee on Infractions meeting April 21 in Utah for a final resolution.
Oklahoma’s associate athletic director for communications, Kenny Mossman, said in an e-mail Thursday that the university would make no further comment while the investigation process is ongoing.
The majority of the allegations from the NCAA’s investigation apply to the telephone calls. The other alleged violations are four improper in-person meetings and two instances where Sampson gave a T-shirt to a recruit and to another recruit’s mother. Oklahoma has also self-reported eight other secondary rule violations by the men’s basketball team and infractions for holding too many mandatory practices for men’s and women’s gymnastics.
Oklahoma hasn’t had a major infraction since December 1988, when the NCAA determined the football program broke recruiting rules and provided extra benefits. There were also findings of unethical conduct and the institutional control violation.
“Attaching a label of lack of institutional control to the University would not fairly reflect the systems that were engaged and functioning at the time the violations occurred or the compliance changes and improvements that have steadily occurred over the past two decades,” Oklahoma claims.
Oklahoma notes that it initially agreed reluctantly to accept a “limited finding of lack of institutional control” in an attempt to resolve the current investigation more quickly and avoid consequences including “extended negative recruiting by other institutions and protracted publicity regarding violations that occurred many years ago.”
Oklahoma does not argue with the substance of the NCAA’s allegations about the phone calls, although it suggests there are mitigating circumstances that should be taken into consideration.
The university contends that it would have had fewer impermissible calls if the NCAA’s investigation hadn’t taken three years or if investigators had alerted Oklahoma earlier that it’s calling practices were in question.
Oklahoma also believes it has satisfied the Committee on Infractions’ criteria for institutional control and that its violations don’t resemble those in previous cases where institutional control was deemed lacking.
The response also includes an acknowledgment by Oklahoma that an internal auditing system failed to detect the hundreds of impermissible calls.
“During the time period of the violations, the auditors reviewed recruiting documentation in men’s basketball, including telephone logs,” Oklahoma writes. “ ... The men’s basketball staff knew that all records were subject to review, and in fact were being reviewed. The reviews did not report any findings regarding men’s basketball.”
The university said the system failed because the written logs were never compared to telephone bills to see whether all calls had been logged.
“They were auditing us, and if something was wrong I figured somebody would say something to me,” Sampson said.
Post a Comment
