National Collegiate Athletic Association

The NCAA News - News and Features

February 24, 1997

Committee denies infractions penalty appeal by Maine

The NCAA Infractions Appeals Committee upheld the penalties imposed by the NCAA Committee on Infractions in a major infractions case involving the University of Maine, Orono.

Maine appealed two penalties: a two-year ban on postseason competition for the men's ice hockey program and a reduction of 13 scholarships in football for the 1997-98 academic year. Both penalties will remain in effect, which means that Maine will not be eligible for postseason competition in men's ice hockey this year.

Maine alleged that the two penalties were inappropriate and excessive, based on the evidence, when compared with previous decisions. The Infractions Appeals Committee addressed the appropriateness of the penalties.

The decision concerning Maine was issued by the Committee on Infractions July 31, 1996. Maine filed a notice of appeal August 15, 1996, followed by additional information September 25, 1996. The Infractions Appeals Committee heard the appeal at its December 3, 1996, meeting.

The Infractions Appeals Committee, on reviewing the record, determined that the penalties imposed by the Committee on Infractions were supported by the evidence. It noted that there were 36 numbered violations. Those violations included lack of institutional control over a long period of time in which the head ice hockey coach played a significant role; recruiting violations; and the use of ineligible student-athletes in intercollegiate competition.

The Infractions Appeals Committee stated that the evidence in the case supported the Committee on Infractions' findings. The original infractions report noted that the head ice hockey coach failed to "exercise appropriate control and monitoring in the administration of the men's ice hockey program" and "demonstrated an appalling lack of knowledge of NCAA recruiting and extra-benefit rules."

The Infractions Appeals Committee also considered the conduct and motives of the individuals involved in the violation. It noted that the head men's ice hockey coach was involved in a number of violations both before and during the investigation. Some of the violations involved basic NCAA principles, including lack of institutional control and the NCAA principle of cooperation regarding enforcement issues.

Maine properly asserted that the university deserves considerable credit for its investigation, self-reporting of violations and its corrective measures. In considering the case, the Infractions Appeals Committee credited the institution's full cooperation in the processing of the case. It applauded the cooperation of the institution, its thorough investigation and immediate implementation of a comprehensive compliance program. It also noted the importance of ensuring that penalties recognize institutions that go the extra mile to determine the truth. In weighing the cooperation of the institution against the conduct of the head men's ice hockey coach, the Infractions Appeals Committee concluded that the head men's ice hockey coach's failure to exercise proper control over his program and his involvement in significant violations offset the good work of the institution.

With regard to the reduction of football scholarships, Maine asserted that the penalty was excessive based on the findings of rules violations in that sport, the lack of culpability of the student-athletes and the coach and the efforts of the institution to address the cause.

The Committee on Infractions noted that the institution had averaged 55.43 scholarships over the last three years. Thus, a reduction in the maximum number of scholarships Maine could grant from 63 to 50 actually would result in a reduction of only 5.43 scholarships for 1997-98. That is equivalent to the five ineligible student-athletes who competed for the football team in 1993-94. That "one for one" reduction often is imposed by the Committee on Infractions in cases where ineligible student-athletes compete.

The Infractions Appeals Committee determined that the reduction of football scholarships, under the facts and circumstances of the case, was not excessive.

The members of the Infractions Appeals Committee who heard this case were Katherine E. Noble, assistant commissioner, Big Sky Conference; David Price, associate commissioner, Pacific-10 Conference; Michael L. Slive (chair), commissioner, Conference USA; and John W. Stoepler, dean of law, emeritus, University of Toledo.

The complete report of the Infractions Appeals Committee will appear in the March 3 issue of The NCAA Register.