A couple weeks ago, Syracuse University announced and informed the NCAA of a self-imposed postseason ban for its men's basketball program. This self-imposed ban was timed as a response to an NCAA investigation. According to the article published by The Washington Post, Syracuse is under investigation for violations ranging from, improper benefits associated with players working at a local YMCA, academics and the school ignoring its own drug policies. No current student-athletes were involved in this speculated misconduct as the self-reported violations were reported in 2007.
Boeheim traveled to Chicago to meet with the NCAA infractions committee in October near the beginning of the basketball season. Here we are, February 8, 2015 and three quarters of the season is over and Syracuse now imposes a post-season ban. Conveniently timed, the Orange are struggling this season, posting a 15-7 record. With their slim chance of making the first round of the NCAA tournament and high hopes for next year’s squad and incoming recruiting class, this self-imposed ban comes at the right time for Syracuse.
The timing of this ban has received quite a bit of speculation in the sports world. Gerald Gurney, a former longtime college athletics administrator and current president of the Drake Group stated that, “the basketball program is obviously thinking that they are not likely to make the NCAA tournament, which gives them the biggest payout, so now is the time to self-impose the penalty, rather than let the NCAA do it” (Hobson, par. 10).
At some point the school needed to recognize the wrongdoing and apply some sort of penalty for the violations. The question becomes was this the right time? Is it a selfish decision on behalf of Syracuse to conveniently time this during a rough season? Do you think that it was okay for Syracuse University to announce this ban during a time where they wouldn’t be affected that much? Is this penalty even enough to account for all the violations or is it Syracuse's way of working the system and trying to sneak by?
Marissa Tashenberg
References:
Hobson, W. (2015, February 5). Syracuse basketball’s self-imposed postseason ban ‘is part of the dance’. Retrieved February 9, 2015, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2015/02/05/syracuse-basketballs-self-imposed-postseason-ban-is-part-of-the-dance/
Hobson, W. (2015, February 5). Syracuse basketball’s self-imposed postseason ban ‘is part of the dance’. Retrieved February 9, 2015, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2015/02/05/syracuse-basketballs-self-imposed-postseason-ban-is-part-of-the-dance/
Sports, U. (2015, February 4). Syracuse announces self-imposed postseason ban this year. Retrieved February 9, 2015, from http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/acc/2015/02/04/syracuse-orange-self-imposed-ban-jim-boeheim/22884099/
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting topic and one I have been able to discuss in other lectures during the fall semester. While it seems noble or honest for a program or university to punish themselves for any wrong doing, it can bring up certain issues like this one Marissa mentioned. How convenient that Syracuse banned any post-season play when their season was heading that direction anyway. It is a little suspicious that they would wait until now to take responsibility and inflict this ban on themselves. I think that it is makes sense for the university hold itself accountable for their misconduct but I also think it is important for the NCAA, the governing body, to determine the final decision on the punishment for the violations. That way it will be a more reasonable and hopefully unbiased decision on whether the penalty is enough to offset the program’s transgressions.
Allie McDavitt
Self-imposed post season ban is a harsh punishment for young men who work there buts off every day for a coach. I can only wonder if NCAA would have given the same or a stricter punishment. Syracuse is struggling to make the post season and these were infractions done in 2007. I think it’s a little fishy. To punish the group of guys for something they had nothing to do with is harsh. I think the way you stop these infractions is by hitting the coach in the pocket. It’s not fair to the program to go out sit in front of parents and then punish them for something they knew nothing about. Sitting in class and talking about ethics makes me wonder what is going on and if the right people are being held accountable. If Syracuse doesn’t make the post season this is a slap on the wrist. If they do it’s a punishment that does not fit the crime. What are you saying to the kids and walking into a parents house what are you saying to them? I don't know but I hope we are holding the right people accountable for these actions in the future.
ReplyDeleteVincent Marshall
Going off of what Vince said, why punish this current team for violations that occurred when players on this current team weren’t even in high school yet? Why put a post-season ban on this team? I would punish the head coach, Jim Boeheim, because he was also the head coach during the 2007 season. I would also go back and look at taking wins away from that 2007 season. Another thing to do is to fine the school. But why punish the players on this current team? I had this same issue with the Jerry Sandusky ruling and punishing the current players on the Penn State football team for actions that this man did a decade ago. I see how this is the easy thing to do, just give the team a post-season ban. But I do not believe that it is right to continue to punish current players for actions and violations that were made years ago.
ReplyDeleteFor Syracuse the ban does benefit the team. I would agree with Marissa that it is a bit selfish. Everyone knows the team is struggling and does not have the team to compete in the tournament like they have had in the past. I believe it is ok for the university to announce the ban at this time. They decided to take action on violations. Lucky for them it is occurring at a time when the team may not be impacted as a result. I think the punishment is legit. I agree with Ben and Vince that it may not be fair to those athletes playing at this time. It is interesting how programs always tend to get repercussions after the fact and it affects those who had nothing to do with it. The Penn State violations kind of blow my mind in that Sandusky and many of those in football are no longer there. What these punishments do is create a bad environment for those recruits coming in. If possible I think action should be taken immediately.
ReplyDeleteCourtney Cox
From an ethical standpoint, I think, the actions taken by SU are highly questionable. They sacrifice their season, knowing that their chances to make the NCAA tournament are rather small, similar to professional teams that “tank” their season in order to increase their chances in the draft. The consequences for such teams should be more drastically, in that they are either suspended from any competition or have to move to a lower division, as it is the case in many European sport leagues. Even though penalties like the latter would be difficult to impose in the US sport system, I think they might be efficient and daunting to copycats. Furthermore, the decision about penalties should be left to superior instances and not being self-imposed as it was the case with Syracuse University.
ReplyDeleteby Andreas Khuny
DeleteThis is a classic case of what college athletics has become. The "win at all cost" mentality is evident all over the country and especially in this particular case. If Syracuse met with the NCAA in October, why were the sanctions not self-imposed in October? It is obvious that Syracuse wanted to wait until they were out of tournament contention before they put the sanctions on themselves.
ReplyDeleteWith all this being said, this particular case is an example of what is unfair with the NCAA. The players that are usually always affected in these cases are players that had nothing to do with the cause of the penalty. In 2007, some of the current players on the team were in Middle School and even Grade School. There has to be a better way to penalize programs without affecting the players, and sometimes coaches, that were not involved.
Derek Shay
If we are talking about Syracuse basketball… then yes this was the right time for them to apply the penalty. This is obviously a loophole that Boeheim and the rest of the Basketball administration is taking full advantage of. It does create a negative image on behalf of the University. Along the lines of what others have stated towards punishing current players on behalf of mistakes from previous players, I agree with these statements. I do not like to see current players who are punished from the wrong doings of previous athletes in the same program. If anything punishments should only affect the coaching staff. The NCAA should tighten down on the current players to re-assure proper behavior, but they should not punish these athletes for acts that they did not commit.
ReplyDeleteMy concern with this system is, if schools have the opportunity to implement their own punishment then it needs to be done in accordance with punishing the current athletes. The University should have taken immediate action, and part of the blame falls on the NCAA as they should have forced the University to make an immediate decision.
Matthias E. Reiber
This is an interesting post Marissa. This is my first time hearing about this situation. Syracuse is definitely facing an ethical issue. I’m trying to look at it from both sides. On one side it looks like Syracuse is trying to “work the system” because of the timing, and on another side we don’t know rather or not the timing was a coincidence. From the outside looking in, I believe Syracuse knows what they are doing. I think they are trying to mitigate the damages. If all these accusations of academic dishonesty, illegal benefits to student-athletes, and drug violations are true, I believe the NCAA will come down harder on Syracuse than a 1 year tournament ban. The NCAA has been scrutinized a lot over the years on these same issues, and they obviously want them to stop because the violations do not correlate with the NCAA code of ethics.
ReplyDeleteI don’t think it is selfish for the timing of Syracuse’s announcement; I think it’s more strategic. I have to give them some credit for at least admitting fault. I think the timing was a conscious effort to try to put their selves in a less troublesome position. You mentioned that Syracuse has high hopes for next season; I think this is an attempt to cover up wrong doing, but I don’t think it is going to play out they way that they want. It sucks that players on the team will be punished for activities that they did not indulge in. Suppose someone commits murder and goes to the police station and says that they are going to sit in jail for a week for their actions. It might be a good effort, but ultimately it is not up to the rule violator to determine their punishment. At the end of the day the NCAA will govern this issue. I’m interested to see how the NCAA reacts. Good post!
-David Sims
Marissa,
ReplyDeleteThe way that I see this situation, Syracuse is basically trying to exploit a loophole in the NCAA's procedures for this type of violation. The NCAA allows schools to impose punishments on themselves, and schools do so in order to curb the punishment the NCAA might eventually hand down, or occasionally avoid any NCAA sanctions altogether. That, in my opinion, is the biggest fault in this story.
The NCAA allowing schools to self-impose, and then being lenient on further punishments, seems to sound a little like "bending the rules" to me. There needs to be a protocol that is followed in every similar case, and there should be no deviance in the punishments. Then, schools would be unable to jockey for lenient punishments and convenience won't be a factor. It is clearly convenient for Syracuse to be "banned" from the NCAA tournament because they are already on track to miss it because of their poor performance this year. This was in 2007, hasn't been brought up until recently when the school began to lose some of their high profile players, and now that the team is actually "struggling" it has been brought up and they have banned themselves. It is most definitely convenient and selfish for Syracuse, and I think they probably deserve a larger punishment anyway.
Joey Durant