Auburn contact with prized recruit could rise to standard of major violation, experts say (UPDATED)

SCROLL DOWN FOR UPDATE

Yesterday, IBCR reported that Auburn University likely violated its agreement with the Southeastern Conference and NCAA regarding the school’s report and self-imposed sanctions after the 2010 Tiger Prowl affair.

As explained yesterday, Auburn released reams of documents regarding multiple secondary violations discovered over the last two years, including violations revealed during an investigation into the Tiger Prowl visits the football program used as a recruiting tool in Spring 2010.

The documents show that Auburn agreed to self-impose a 60 day restriction on staff contacts—both on- and off-campus—with prized Hueytown Quarterback Jameis Winston. The restriction was to begin the first week of November 2011 and run through January 2012. Both the SEC and the NCAA agreed to deal and the matter was dropped from further consideration.

However, as also reported here yesterday, the prospective student-athlete told recruiting analysts that Auburn coaching staff visited him in his home Sunday night, in apparent violation of the terms of that agreement:

Ms. McKeeman confirmed to us via email that Winston was her source for the report and that the report was accurate.

This would appear to violate the terms of the agreement reached between the school, the SEC, and the NCAA, and NCAA compliance experts believe that this could rise to the standard of a major violation, but that the SEC may seek to mitigate any potential penalties as a result.

“The standard of a major violation is nebulous—it is basically all other violations not secondary,” says Dr. David Ridpath, NCAA compliance expert and professor of Sports Administration at Ohio University. “A couple caveats are—was there a competitive advantage gained and was there intent to break the agreement, or was there a reckless disregard for the rules.”

“This could be considered major, but it is often in the eye of the beholder. If this visit took place—there appears to be intent to violate and a disregard for the rules. If this kid signs with Auburn—then there would be a competitive advantage. That does not mean it would automatically be a major violation because the NCAA is very inconsistent on application plus you can never underestimate the influence of the SEC in the mitigation of violations,” said Ridpath.

The SEC has so far declined comment. The NCAA has yet to return messages seeking comment and clarification. Auburn University cannot comment because the coaching staff cannot publicly discuss the prospective student-athletes it is pursuing.

“The best option for Auburn is to simply back off of Winston’s recruitment altogether and plead ignorance of the terms of the agreement in a report of a secondary violation,” said a college recruiting and compliance analyst. “If he never signs a letter of intent and never reaches the campus, it’s not that big of a deal, really. But if the school signs the prospect and it’s shown that they broke an agreement not to make contact with him, that would be a thumb in the eye of the NCAA. It sure wouldn’t go down well in Indianapolis.”

UPDATE: al.com’s Evan Woodbery has a published report in which the Antonor Winston acknowledges that Auburn coaches Gus Malzahn, Curtis Looper and Trooper Taylor visited the family Sunday night.

This confirms Laura McKeeman’s report Monday afternoon and reported here later that night.

Woodbery’s story also acknowledges the existence of self-imposed restrictions that limited the Auburn staff’s contact with Winston through January of 2012.

What remains unclear is what—if anything—has changed since November 4, when the school released the documents in response to media open records requests.

What is clear? At the time of the initial violation in 2010, Winston was a high school junior. NCAA rules state that the Auburn staff was prohibited from having off-campus contact until November of his senior year—2011. This is the reason why the self-imposed penalties for the staff’s contact with Winston are different from the dates of the other penalties described in the report.

If those restrictions haven’t been lifted, then the coaches’ visit last Sunday would represent a violation of a standing agreement. 

There’s nothing to be gained by pushing this story any further. The key information is now in the news stream and nothing sanitizes better than sunshine. Further, Auburn officials are at a disadvantage over this story because by rule they cannot publicly discuss recruits or recruiting activities.

We’ll continue to follow developments but at least for the time being, we’re calling this one CONFIRMED.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

Auburn may have violated agreement with SEC and NCAA in reported visit with prized recruit

On November 4, 2011, Auburn University released a ream of documents related to the NCAA and school investigation into the football program.

While most of the documentation was related to the highly publicized investigation into the recruitment of former Auburn Quarterback Cam Newton, a number of other documents were also released, including details on numerous secondary violations committed by the program over a two year period.

Part of the documentation of the secondary violations included the school’s report on the Tiger Prowl affair, in which the school admitted to a handful of violations regarding improper contact with prospective student-athletes. As a result of those violations, Auburn restricted its football staff from having any on- or off-campus contact with Jameis Winston, the highly regarded football and baseball prospect from Hueytown, Alabama.

 

Auburn also self-imposed a 60-day period of no off-campus contact from November 2011 through January 2012. However, recent reports indicate that the Auburn coaching staff may not be keeping up its end of the bargain.

On November 28, 2011, Fox Sports Recruiting Analyst Laura McKeeman sent the following tweet:

Ms. McKeeman has since confirmed to IBCR via email that her source was Jameis Winston himself, and that the prospect “told me point blank that AU was in his house last night.” The contact was also reported on at least one other Auburn related recruiting site.

It was not immediately clear which Auburn coaches were involved with the reported visit.

While the initial contact in 2010 resulted in a secondary violation and resulted in relatively light penalties, it is also unclear whether a violation of the self-imposed sanctions would be secondary in nature. IBCR has reached out to NCAA compliance experts and more reports are likely to follow.

Exit Question: This isn’t a nuclear detonation by any stretch. Even if this violation rises to the level of a major infraction, the likelihood of harsh penalties is slight. But given the fact that the school has just recently escaped the scrutiny of a major investigation into its recruiting practices, isn’t this somewhat embarrassing for “the best compliance department in the country?’ And, could this result in the program ceasing its recruitment of the prospect altogether?

Helmet tap to Brian Warwick on Twitter.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.