US Senate schedules first hearing in wake of Penn State scandal

The Associated Press is reporting that the US Senate has scheduled a congressional hearing in the wake of Penn State child sex abuse scandal:

---

 

WASHINGTON -- The Senate has scheduled the first congressional hearing in the wake of the Penn State child abuse scandal.

Three senators announced Monday that a Dec. 13 hearing will examine how well the nation is protecting children from abuse and neglect.

Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey requested the hearing by a panel of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. Maryland Sen. Barbara Mikulski says she hopes it will shed light on prevention and deterrence of child sexual abuse.

 

---

Two things of note, here. The first is that the hearing called by the Senate isn't specific to the Penn State case. That is, it's not likely that the same details from the state grand jury indictment and ensuing media coverage will be trotted out all over again. At least not to the detail we've seen crawling over our screens during the weekend's sporting events.

The second is that while this hearing isn't directly connected to the Penn State case, the hearing will almost certainly include officials from the school. 

Last of all, the hearing comes just three days before Penn State is to deliver its answers to the questions posed by NCAA President Mark Emmert in a letter last week. That letter informed the school president that the league was launching its own investigation into potential abuses of NCAA principles covering ethics and institutional control. And, the FBI appears poised to make a federal criminal case out of the allegations surrounding child abuse and an alleged coverup at the school.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

NCAA abandons policy and precedent with letter to Penn State

NCAA investigations into the actions of member schools have always followed the same path. But in an unprecedented scandal, league President Mark Emmert decided that unprecedented steps need to be taken.

Long-standing NCAA policy dictates the procedure. Credible allegations are received and reviewed. Information is collected. A Notice of Inquiry is transmitted from the VP of Enforcement to the school president. The NCAA staff conducts its investigation and if it finds violations of applicable by-laws, transmits a Notice of Allegations. The school appears before the Committee on Infractions and later hears what penance it must suffer as a result of its transgressions.

In the Penn State case, policy and procedure are gone. In his three-page letter to interim President Rodney Erickson, Emmert sternly warns the school that the league’s bedrock principles of ethical conduct, honesty, dignity are at stake as a result of potential inaction surrounding the Jerry Sandusky child abuse scandal.

The Emmert letter is unprecedented on two different levels. First is the fact that the letter informing Penn State of the pending probe comes from the NCAA president himself. In the modern era of NCAA investigations, never before has the president of the league written such a missive as this.  The official communication from the NCAA notifying a member school of a pending investigation has always come from the Vice President for Enforcement, the office currently held by Julie Roe Lach.

Also unprecedented is the fact that the NCAA has publicized the letter and publicly announced that it plans to launch an investigation. Having the letter originate from the office of the President is a big deal. Publicizing the matter is even bigger. The NCAA has vigorously guarded information regarding even the existence of investigations, steadfastly refusing to even acknowledge investigations that everyone knows are in progress.

So why make this one public? Emmert has said in interviews that this matter is not a traditional “enforcement” investigation and that ordinary rules aren’t in play here. He’s said that since the league doesn’t plan to send investigators to campus to interview coaches, officials or players, the policy governing enforcement procedure don’t fit in this case. But Emmert nonetheless cited specific by-laws that may have been violated, and violations of those by-laws in previous cases have brought harsh sanctions at the end of enforcement investigations.

There’s no doubt that the Sandusky scandal at Penn State is the worst, most-sickening stain on college athletics. Nothing even comes close. In an unprecedented case, Emmert is taking unprecedented steps. Some may cynically call it a PR ploy; accusing the league of trying to show that it is out in front of the story. There might be a mote of truth to that, but it’s much more likely that Emmert is finally getting the NCAA to do the right thing in the right way. If that means abandoning policy and breaking precedent, then so be it, says he.

But beware the law of unintended consequences. Abandoning precedent invites charges of arbitrary and capricious action, and provide the only good reason for judicial intervention.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

Kentucky fan site reveals access to NCAA documents

A user at Cat’s Illustrated—the Kentucky Wildcats’ Rivals.com fan site—discovered a link to the one of the NCAA’s Microsoft Sharepoint servers. You can visit that server (at least for now) by clicking here and browsing all sorts of information.

There are some interesting documents, including audited financial statements going back several years, President Mark Emmert’s resume’ and several hundred other miscellaneous files. A quick perusal of the documents don’t show anything sensitive or damaging, but having college athletics’ largest governing organization allowing public (even read only) access to its Sharepoint library is interesting, to say the least.

Via his Twitter account, NCAA Managing Director of Digital Communications Ronnie Ramos rather testily objected to suggestions that the NCAA financial records weren’t previously public knowledge. Indeed, the audited financials have been available for each of the years shown on the server.

It’s access to all the other stuff—like meeting agendas, meeting minutes, spreadsheets and such—seems highly irregular and just begging for a Wikileaks panty raid.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

Sheridan lawyer confirms contact by NCAA

The Mobile Press-Register reported today that Vince Kilborn, attorney for USA Today football analyst Danny Sheridan, confirms that the NCAA has contacted them and requested an interview. The report comes from the Press-Register Sports Editor Randy Kennedy.

"I can confirm that an NCAA representative called me Monday and asked to speak to my client about the whole Cam Newton matter," Kilborn said yesterday.

Two weeks ago today, Sheridan appeared on the Paul Finebaum Radio Network after saying that he’d discovered, through NCAA sources, that league investigators had identified a “bag man” who helped recruit former Auburn Quarterback Cam Newton. However, Sheridan famously failed to reveal the name of the individual, citing “advice of counsel.” The football analyst had twice appeared on the Finebaum show regarding the Newton case. The first was an interview during SEC Media Days in Birmingham, Ala. last July. The second was a week later, in which Sheridan made the claim regarding the alleged “bag man.”

His refusal to name the individual touched off a firestorm of criticism.

"I let them know that if they wished to talk to me, I will talk to them on or off the record about subjects of mutual interest."

While Kennedy says that the “NCAA has never implicated or even confirmed” that Auburn is a target of their investigation, anyone with more than a brick for a brain understands that the 2010 National Champion is squarely in their sights. The New York Times reported in July on a famous exchange between the Head Enforcer and Auburn Coach Gene Chizik, wherein the latter was told “ask not for whom the bell tolls” and we’ll let you know when we stop tollin’.

Still, it remains unclear what Sheridan could offer the NCAA that it doesn’t already have. Sheridan says his sources for the “bag man” are insiders at the league itself. Surely NCAA President Mark Emmert doesn’t expect Sheridan to out his source and cost someone their job—that was the very reason why he refused to reveal the name two weeks ago in the Finebaum interview.

As noted last week, this bizarre case gets even more bizarre with each turn.

Mark Emmert to Danny Sheridan: Gimme a call sometime

Scroll down for update.

On a Friday broadcast heard on SiriusXM 91, NCAA President Mark Emmert was asked about Danny Sheridan’s recent comments on the Paul Finebaum Radio Network. As you may have heard, Sheridan appeared on PFRN Wednesday to discuss the ongoing NCAA investigation into the recruitment of former Auburn Quarterback Cam Newton. Sheridan appeared on the show as scheduled but under advice of counsel, declined to reveal the name of “the bagman.” But Sheridan also claims that his source is inside the NCAA.

Sheridan made waves at SEC Media Days when he told PFRN that the NCAA had identified at least one key figure in the case—the much ballyhooed “bagman.”

Here’s the audio clip of the conversation between show host Jack Arute and President Emmert:

Arute brings up an important point echoed throughout mainstream sports journalism—how troubling is it, given the firewall that is supposed to exist between the gambling world and the governing body of college athletics, that someone with so many ties to sports wagering has an “inside source?” My sense is that Emmert either ignored that aspect of the matter or he doesn’t get it.

Another key takeaway—what does it say about the state of affairs in college sports if the President of the NCAA is asking a famous sports odds analyst to give him a call sometime? Does he expect Sheridan’s information to somehow corroborate what enforcement already has?

Exit question: Is it just me, or does Emmert sound like Newt Gingrich?

This bizarre story keeps getting more bizarre with every turn.

UPDATE: Danny Sheridan tweeted a statement in response to President Emmert’s comments.

“My response to NCAA president Mark Emmert comments today: I very much appreciate what President Emmert said today. I would be willing to meet with him at his convenience and discuss items of mutual importance.”

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

NCAA Enforcement under the spotlight

Another good job by USA Today’s Steve Wieberg, who is in San Antonio covering the annual NCAA Convention being held there this week. In today’s story, Wieberg applauds the NCAA Enforcement staff’s progress in working with the NFL to round up the bad apples in the sports agent community. The applause is the kind you’d hear at the 18th fairway at Augusta, but at least he’s giving them some props, right?

But on the other hand, he notes the struggles that the division faces in increasing scrutiny of college athletics and exposing rules violators. Wieberg notes the difference in impressions gotten for the two efforts by the league, but he misses the real reason for the chaotic nature of the NCAA’s deliberation and decision-making process in the 2010 football season:

---

At the behest of president Mark Emmert, the NCAA will work in the next three months to tighten the guidelines and interpretations that controversially gave Auburn quarterback Cam Newton and five Ohio State football players room to finish out their seasons despite findings of wrongdoing. Emmert also has called for a crackdown on academic fraud, which surfaced at North Carolina last year and was another issue tainting Newton's Heisman Trophy and national championship season.

"There is an incredible amount of attention on enforcement issues, for good reason, from our membership and from the media," said Julie Roe Lach, new NCAA vice president of enforcement. "So many issues are coming to light at the same, people think, 'Oh, they're finally doing something.' Actually, we've been working a long time on these issues. It's not a crossroads."

Schools and conferences nonetheless are taking notice.

"Mark is sending the right message," Atlantic Coast associate commissioner Shane Lyons said of the tone set by Emmert at the annual NCAA convention, which ended Saturday. "That's what the membership really needs at this point from the leadership of the NCAA … understanding there's going to be accountability out there."

The Newton and Ohio State decisions have dominated much of the recent conversation, drawing backlash from outside and inside the NCAA. And officials worked through the convention to explain them.

---

Of course, unless you’ve been living under a rock or simply not following these cases very closely (either is a sin, mind you), the problem is not that the NCAA doesn’t have enough authority in its rule books to punish violators. It’s their patent inability to follow their own damned rules and treat similar cases similarly.

As I pointed out in this space about a month ago, the NCAA’s treatment of the cases  it investigates and how it decides punishment for violations is fatally flawed. That flaw is expressed by Emmert himself, and in virtually every statement, press release or public comments from NCAA officials:

"All these situations are case-specific, so you can't easily or appropriately generalize.”

The NCAA’s “all cases are different” approach is the diametric opposite of order and predictability. In fact, if there’s one thing that’s consistent with the NCAA’s investigative and punitive procedures, it’s that there’s no consistency whatsoever.  It lets offenders develop loopholes where none exist and lets rules get enforced arbitrarily. It’s also opened up a whole new loophole the size of an SEC lineman—the ignorance defense, used by both Newton and the Pryor Gang.

The result is chaos.

Imagine if the criminal justice system were modeled like this, where no two cases are ever treated similarly. No two serial killers would be given life in prison without parole or the death penalty. What about two mob bosses convicted of extortion, money laundering, illegal gambling and drug trafficking? Don’t they both get life in the federal lockup?

Not in the NCAA model. Until the NCAA learns to treat similar cases similarly, the chaos will continue and lead to more WTF moments like the ones that followed the Auburn and Ohio State decisions.

Now granted, the Auburn and Ohio State decisions were both rendered by the Reinstatement Division of the NCAA. The Enforcement Division, which is a completely separate arm of the governing body, handles matters related to institutional wrongdoing. Reinstatement investigated facts provided by Auburn and Ohio State and made eligibility determinations regarding student-athletes based on that information. Whether those decisions led to your own personal WTF moment is irrelevant to this fact: Enforcement conducts a separate investigation into whether the institutions themselves committed rules violations.

Wieberg and most other national sports journalists acknowledge that while Reinstatement might have ruled, Enforcement isn’t through yet. Not by a long shot, and it’s looking more and more like the federal cases winding through the system in Alabama might make this a long, painful process for some fans. Unfortunately, as I pointed out here yesterday, the media in the state of Alabama can’t wrap their heads around that fact yet.

The best step forward that Emmert, Roch and the rest of the NCAA Enforcement gurus can do is develop a set of standard guidelines by which all cases that fall under them are treated similarly. It’s time to install order and predictability, and end the WTF moments produced by the reigning chaos.