RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

NCAA cites Georgia Tech for ‘failure to monitor’

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 5221



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/20/14 7:34 am    ::: NCAA cites Georgia Tech for ‘failure to monitor’ Reply Reply with quote

So I was reading this article which primarily is about Georgia Tech's football team but there is also a mention of the women's basketball program and NCAA violations. Doesn't it seem a little unfair for the women's team? It sounds like assistant coaches broke recruiting rules but the head coach never knew about it and all the assistant coaches left before they got in trouble. They made a conscious decision not to inform the head coach of their rules violation. So Georgia Tech and their new assistants face whatever punishment the NCAA doles out while the old assistants can get a fresh start elsewhere? Maybe NCAA violations should follow coaches no matter where they go.
http://www.ajc.com/news/sports/ncaa-cites-georgia-tech-for-failure-to-monitor/ng7dn/

The NCAA came down more harshly on three women’s basketball assistant coaches on the staff during the investigated time period — Octavia Blue, Janie Mitchell and Sam Purcell. While they also unknowingly made impermissible calls, once they became aware of the violations, they “made a conscious decision to not report the violations to the compliance staff or to inform (coach MaChelle) Joseph,” the report read. All three offered explanations, “but each generally admitted they knew not reporting the violations was wrong,” according to the report. All three have since taken jobs elsewhere.


LegoMyEggo



Joined: 02 Apr 2010
Posts: 284



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/20/14 7:45 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Purcell is at Louisville now. Not sure where the others are at this point. Guessing Purcell was a player in the Durr recruitment, given that he was in Atlanta.


Fighting Artichoke



Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/20/14 8:10 am    ::: Re: NCAA cites Georgia Tech for ‘failure to monitor’ Reply Reply with quote

Durantula wrote:
So I was reading this article which primarily is about Georgia Tech's football team but there is also a mention of the women's basketball program and NCAA violations. Doesn't it seem a little unfair for the women's team? It sounds like assistant coaches broke recruiting rules but the head coach never knew about it and all the assistant coaches left before they got in trouble. They made a conscious decision not to inform the head coach of their rules violation. So Georgia Tech and their new assistants face whatever punishment the NCAA doles out while the old assistants can get a fresh start elsewhere? Maybe NCAA violations should follow coaches no matter where they go.
http://www.ajc.com/news/sports/ncaa-cites-georgia-tech-for-failure-to-monitor/ng7dn/

The NCAA came down more harshly on three women’s basketball assistant coaches on the staff during the investigated time period — Octavia Blue, Janie Mitchell and Sam Purcell. While they also unknowingly made impermissible calls, once they became aware of the violations, they “made a conscious decision to not report the violations to the compliance staff or to inform (coach MaChelle) Joseph,” the report read. All three offered explanations, “but each generally admitted they knew not reporting the violations was wrong,” according to the report. All three have since taken jobs elsewhere.


If the head coach could use plausible deniability as a defense, then assistants could break all the rules they wanted, and as long a they never informed the head coach, the program and the head coach would escape repercussions. Doesn't that sound like a situation that would lead to rampant cheating? While it stinks to be MaChelle Joseph now, she (and her program) also benefitted from recruiting advantages while these assistants broke the rules. Additionally, a coach is responsible for hiring assistants that are ethical and trustworthy. Thus I don't feel this ruling is unjust.


Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 5221



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/20/14 8:19 am    ::: Re: NCAA cites Georgia Tech for ‘failure to monitor’ Reply Reply with quote

Fighting Artichoke wrote:
Durantula wrote:
So I was reading this article which primarily is about Georgia Tech's football team but there is also a mention of the women's basketball program and NCAA violations. Doesn't it seem a little unfair for the women's team? It sounds like assistant coaches broke recruiting rules but the head coach never knew about it and all the assistant coaches left before they got in trouble. They made a conscious decision not to inform the head coach of their rules violation. So Georgia Tech and their new assistants face whatever punishment the NCAA doles out while the old assistants can get a fresh start elsewhere? Maybe NCAA violations should follow coaches no matter where they go.
http://www.ajc.com/news/sports/ncaa-cites-georgia-tech-for-failure-to-monitor/ng7dn/

The NCAA came down more harshly on three women’s basketball assistant coaches on the staff during the investigated time period — Octavia Blue, Janie Mitchell and Sam Purcell. While they also unknowingly made impermissible calls, once they became aware of the violations, they “made a conscious decision to not report the violations to the compliance staff or to inform (coach MaChelle) Joseph,” the report read. All three offered explanations, “but each generally admitted they knew not reporting the violations was wrong,” according to the report. All three have since taken jobs elsewhere.


If the head coach could use plausible deniability as a defense, then assistants could break all the rules they wanted, and as long a they never informed the head coach, the program and the head coach would escape repercussions. Doesn't that sound like a situation that would lead to rampant cheating? While it stinks to be MaChelle Joseph now, she (and her program) also benefitted from recruiting advantages while these assistants broke the rules. Additionally, a coach is responsible for hiring assistants that are ethical and trustworthy. Thus I don't feel this ruling is unjust.


Good points, I see your side and now agree. I still think a coach who has a violation should have it stick, leaving is just an easy way out. Bruce Pearl and other coaches got in big trouble not necessarily for NCAA violations they broke, but for lying about it. Three coaches broke the rules and just left to face no consequence.


Fighting Artichoke



Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/20/14 8:59 am    ::: Re: NCAA cites Georgia Tech for ‘failure to monitor’ Reply Reply with quote

Durantula wrote:
Fighting Artichoke wrote:
Durantula wrote:
So I was reading this article which primarily is about Georgia Tech's football team but there is also a mention of the women's basketball program and NCAA violations. Doesn't it seem a little unfair for the women's team? It sounds like assistant coaches broke recruiting rules but the head coach never knew about it and all the assistant coaches left before they got in trouble. They made a conscious decision not to inform the head coach of their rules violation. So Georgia Tech and their new assistants face whatever punishment the NCAA doles out while the old assistants can get a fresh start elsewhere? Maybe NCAA violations should follow coaches no matter where they go.
http://www.ajc.com/news/sports/ncaa-cites-georgia-tech-for-failure-to-monitor/ng7dn/

The NCAA came down more harshly on three women’s basketball assistant coaches on the staff during the investigated time period — Octavia Blue, Janie Mitchell and Sam Purcell. While they also unknowingly made impermissible calls, once they became aware of the violations, they “made a conscious decision to not report the violations to the compliance staff or to inform (coach MaChelle) Joseph,” the report read. All three offered explanations, “but each generally admitted they knew not reporting the violations was wrong,” according to the report. All three have since taken jobs elsewhere.


If the head coach could use plausible deniability as a defense, then assistants could break all the rules they wanted, and as long a they never informed the head coach, the program and the head coach would escape repercussions. Doesn't that sound like a situation that would lead to rampant cheating? While it stinks to be MaChelle Joseph now, she (and her program) also benefitted from recruiting advantages while these assistants broke the rules. Additionally, a coach is responsible for hiring assistants that are ethical and trustworthy. Thus I don't feel this ruling is unjust.


Good points, I see your side and now agree. I still think a coach who has a violation should have it stick, leaving is just an easy way out. Bruce Pearl and other coaches got in big trouble not necessarily for NCAA violations they broke, but for lying about it. Three coaches broke the rules and just left to face no consequence.

I completely agree that coaches should have their punishments follow them. That's consistent with the concept of individual integrity. I also think that the institution where they committed the offense should also be punished, but we agree on that. So I think we completely agree on this situation!


LegoMyEggo



Joined: 02 Apr 2010
Posts: 284



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/20/14 11:49 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Seems fine to punish both assistants and head coach to the appropriate extent. It seems like the assistants may have gone rogue and conspired in this case. They should not escape punishment.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/20/14 3:41 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

They do punish coaches and issue show cause orders against them when the matter is serious. But the school is always responsible for the actions of its employees and representatives.

Heck, Notre Dame got sanctioned years ago because of the actions of an individual whose ONLY connection to the university was that she had paid $25 one time to attend a single weekly football luncheon. Not a student or alum, not a donor, never an employee, nothing else. So if that's the standard, sanctioning a school for the action of an asst coach isn't even a close call.


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin