Editor’s Note: This is the third part in a series of articles about the NCAA investigation. Parts one and two can be read in the archives section on www.thenichollsworth.com.University President Stephen Hulbert said the National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I Committee on Infractions hearing went better than expected Friday. Nicholls now waits for the NCAA to announce the punitive actions that will be taken against the athletic program and the University, which are expected in two to three months.
Hulbert and five other staff members traveled to San Diego to discuss academic fraud violations of the football and men’s basketball teams as well as other violations uncovered during the investigation initiated in August. The five-and-a-half-hour hearing consisted of a review of the NCAA allegations and Nicholls’ response.
“The committee was clearly respectful and appreciative for the cooperation the University has given the NCAA staff,” Hulbert said. “Enforcement staff and Nicholls personnel were in agreement on the major issues. The committee was also quite positive in its comments in regard to the manner in which we aggressively sought to respond to this case.”
The University submitted five volumes of material responding to allegations to the NCAA Jan.19. One volume was the University’s response to the allegations, which is available at http://www.nicholls.edu/ncaa. The other four volumes were exhibits supporting the primary response.
As part of the preparation of the response, Nicholls also developed a series of self-imposed penalties. The penalties include: no football and men’s basketball television appearances for a year, a reduction in the number of coaches’ on-site visits with potential football recruits, the loss of one men’s basketball scholarship and a one-week delay of fall football practice.
“The self-imposed penalties are Nicholls’ assessment of what we think is appropriate,” Hulbert said. “The Committee on Infractions has to make the determination whether they think that is an appropriate set of punitive actions or whether the circumstances of the actions by individuals warrant more.”
No penalties are in place at this time as the University awaits the final decision. It is difficult to determine what the final series of punitive actions will be at this time, he said.
Hulbert explained that the Committee on Infractions met Saturday morning after the departure of Nicholls representatives to determine the action to be taken. A committee member has been assigned to write a report of the decision on behalf of the NCAA. The committee member has five to seven weeks to complete the draft, Hulbert said. The committee will then regroup to examine the report and make necessary changes.
“I’m expecting that could be two or three months because of the coordination of completing the draft and having the committee come back together again, which is usually done in conjunction with the next set of hearings for another institution,” Hulbert said. “It could be longer for all we know.”
Hulbert said the University will be notified 48 hours before the report is released to the University administration and media. Nicholls can then request an appeal of any action it deems worthy of a review.
Hulbert said the final actions of the NCAA will be taken in response to the specific allegations, not to individual students. Decisions on eligibility of involved student-athletes have already been reached by other NCAA staff members. Hulbert said the involved students have been notified of the individual penalties but that information won’t be released to the public.
“The decisions are all individual documents that speak to the student and because of that they are all protected by federal privacy legislation,” he said. “The students know, but it’s not something that will be shared publicly.”
Hulbert said the penalties for the student-athletes “involve a series of years of lost eligibility,” but declined to discuss the penalties in more detail.
Overall, Hulbert said the hearing went quite well for Nicholls. “Because we were so collaborative with the Southland Conference and NCAA enforcement staff, when it came time for the hearing the enforcement staff and Nicholls were in agreement on the majority of issues,” he said. “Therefore, there was no combativeness.”
Hulbert said the University representatives spent hours previewing potential questions and preparing for the hearing.
“It was surprising on occasion,” he said. “Things that I was prepared for a question on didn’t come up. However, there was nothing that they asked that I wasn’t prepared for. To be honest, I didn’t expect to be surprised. The NCAA enforcement staff, Nicholls State staff involved and our legal counsel have been very thorough and collaborative in the review.”
Hulbert said nothing new was uncovered at the hearing, which tends to occur in some NCAA proceedings.
Staff members representing the University at the hearing with Hulbert were Glenn Antizzo, faculty athletics representative; Rob Bernardi, director of athletics; Deanna Falcon, coordinator of compliance for intercollegiate athletics; Kelly Rodrigue, University registrar; and Jay Thomas, head football coach. Men’s basketball head coach J.P. Piper was scheduled to attend but was excused because of a basketball game against Northwestern State the night before the hearing. Hulbert said none of the former staff members involved in the fraud were present.
Hulbert said although the Nicholls community has followed the NCAA allegations since August, the committee bases the decision on the University’s response and the hearing.
“Students may not have all the information but do know the staff that was affected for the most part because they left the University and a number of the students affected because of the comments made by either students and the fact that they may have left the University or didn’t play this fall,” Hulbert said. “For all of us this is a personal experience. It has hurt the intercollegiate athletic program, the institution and others. We understand the human cost as well as the cost to the program’s reputation and the University’s reputation.
