South Carolina Gets A Slap On The Hand From The NCAA

South Carolina Gets A Slap On The Hand From The NCAA

NEW: Discuss this topic in the Google+ community for SEC fans.

US Presswire - Steve Spurrier

Yesterday, following an almost two-year investigation into the South Carolina program regarding allegations of student-athletes receiving impermissible benefits, the NCAA hit the program with failure to monitor.

South Carolina, however, self-imposed and self-reported the penalties after they happened, and the NCAA primarily kept what South Carolina submitted.

The NCAA found out that USC failed to monitor the program and did not recognize the ‘potential violations’ by boosters Steve Gordon and Kevin Lahn.

Here is the bottom line in the NCAA findings:

According to the facts of the case, twelve student-athletes lived in local hotel while paying a daily rate of less than $15 per person, an amount that was considerably less than what was available to the general student population. In addition, nine student-athletes received special loan arrangements by deferring rent payments through an agreement with the hotel. In total, the student-athletes received approximately $51,000 in impermissible extra benefits and preferential treatment.

In addition, two boosters provided more than $8,000 from their foundation for recruiting inducements and extra benefits to football prospects and student-athletes. These boosters also were involved in recruiting contacts. The committee noted that while some of the motivation and purpose for establishing the foundation were well-intentioned, it was clear that some efforts were aimed at assisting the university in its recruitment efforts. The benefits from the boosters included cash, gift cards, entertainment and funding of multiple unofficial visits.

The penalties in this case include:

  • Public reprimand and censure
  • Three years of probation from April 27, 2012, through April 26, 2015
  • Reduction of total football scholarships by three (from 85 maximum) during the 2013-14 and 2014-15 academic years
  • Reduction of initial football scholarships by three (from the 25 maximum) during the 2013-14 and 2014-15 academic years (self-imposed by the university)
  • $18,500 fine (self-imposed by the university)
  • Indefinite disassociation of both involved boosters and the local hotel (self-imposed by the university)
  • Limit of 30 official visits in football (from the 56 maximum) for the 2012-13 academic year (self-imposed by the university)
  • Limit of 50 official visits in men’s and women’s track and field (from unlimited maximum) for the 2012-13 academic year (self-imposed by the university)
  • Suspension of the head track coach during the 2012 Penn Relays (self-imposed by the university)
  • An assistant men’s basketball coach was withheld from recruiting in December 2011 (self-imposed by the university)
  • An assistant football coach was withheld from off campus recruiting during January 2012 (self-imposed by the university).

Stay connected

Comments 3

  1. What a Dumb A** title to this article. Had South Carolina NOT set it’s own punishment and the NCAA had imposed the same punishment, it would not be called a slap on the wrist. But I will give you that fact that every South Carolina and SEC hater would be crying fowl, pun intented, that the Gamecocks did not get a bowl banishment or loss of games won from last year!

  2. maybe it’s because i’m stoned, but I don’t think the article title is much to get upset about.

  3. James, I’m a Gamecock fan who writes for an ACC newspaper and I can tell you ALL Tar Heel fans are pissed about the NCAA’s decision to accept our self-imposed penalties.

    My boss, a huge Tar Heel, came to work mad.

    I, however, couldn’t be happier. I feared vacated wins and worse – bowl ban this season.