| Abstrakt: |
When college coaches violate National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) legislation, it can lead to extreme consequences for both their universities and the coaches. Universities can face long-term reputational damage, decreased enrollment applications, less donations, and NCAA sanctions, including the inability to compete in postseason competitions and/or on television. Coaches likewise face NCAA penalties, not only on their sport programs but potentially on themselves, which can inhibit their ability to maintain or obtain employment in college athletics. Additionally, committing significant NCAA violations may allow the university to terminate the coach's employment with cause and, thus, without severance. Yet college coaches continue to violate NCAA rules, placing themselves and their universities at risk of these severe ramifications. In some recent cases, coaches failed to work effectively with their athletics departments' compliance staff members, whose job generally is to mitigate the likelihood of NCAA violations on their campuses. In these cases, the coaches' unwillingness to work with the compliance staff led to additional violations and, thus, additional sanctions. This Article examines the harm that universities and coaches face due to NCAA rules violations and how effective working relations between sport and compliance staff members can mitigate the likelihood that universities and coaches will face potentially devastating consequences. To do so, Part II examines both the NCAA infractions procedure through which the Committee on Infractions processes NCAA rules violations and their consequences for universities and their coaches. Part III describes the roles that athletics department compliance staff members play in mitigating the likelihood of NCAA rules violations on their campuses. Part IV evidences the crucial role that compliance staff members play in college athletics by scrutinizing recent infractions cases where coaches failed to maintain effective working relations with them, resulting in additional violations and consequences for the involved universities and coaches. A brief conclusion follows. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
