NCAA Ruling on UCONN

PENALTIES.


For the reasons set forth in Parts A and B of this report, the Committee on Infractions found that this case involved major violations of NCAA legislation. In determining the appropriate penalties to impose, the committee considered the institution's self-imposed penalties and corrective actions. [Note: The institution's corrective actions are contained in Appendix Two.]

The committee also considered the institution's cooperation in the processing of this case. Cooperation during the infractions process is addressed in Bylaw 19.01.3 - Responsibility to Cooperate, which states in relevant part that, "All representatives of member institutions shall cooperate fully with the NCAA enforcement staff, Committee on Infractions, Infractions Appeals Committee and Board of Directors. The enforcement policies and procedures require full and complete disclosure by all institutional representatives of any relevant information requested by the NCAA Enforcement Staff, Committee on Infractions or Infractions Appeals Committee during the course of an inquiry." Further, NCAA Bylaw 32.1.4 – Cooperative Principle, also addresses institutional responsibility to fully cooperate during infractions investigations, stating, in relevant part, "The cooperative principle imposes an affirmative obligation on each institution to assist the enforcement staff in developing full information, to determine whether a possible violation of NCAA legislation has occurred and the details thereof." The committee determined that the cooperation exhibited by the institution met its obligation under Bylaws 19.01.3.3 and 32.1.4 but did not rise to a level of "extraordinary." The cooperation the institution demonstrated in this case must be weighed against the conduct and failures of the institution and its personnel as set forth in Section B above. The committee concluded that in light of the serious nature of the violations and the failure of the institution to detect and/or prevent them, the institution's cooperation did not warrant relief in the penalties imposed by the committee in this case:

1. Public reprimand and censure.

2. Three years of probation from February 22, 2011, through
 
Read More on UCONN's penalty