http://www.katu.com/sports/ducks/NCAA-do...35931.html

An Oregon news station has acquired a copy of the draft summary disposition report that Oregon had submitted to the NCAA. The report outlines those violations that Oregon and the NCAA apparently agreed upon at the time. The NCAA ruled that the violations were too severe to be considered for a summary disposition in December and the case will go to the COI in the next month or two.

But in any event, here's what Oregon is at least admitting to as far as NCAA violations:

1 - Will Lyles had impermissible contact with recruits
2 - Oregon paid $35K for scouting services that did not conform to NCAA rules. Note: Oregon said this should be a secondary violation, while the NCAA concluded there was an established pattern here of willful misconduct and it should be considered a major violation.
3 - An undisclosed major violation that involved several redacted names, but both the NCAA and Oregon agreed it was a "major violation."
4 - 730 impermissible phone calls.
5 - Too many coaches out recruiting at the same time
6 - [Chip Kelly?] failed to promote an atmosphere of compliance.
7 - Failure to Monitor recruiting activities and phone calls

Quote:The report also outlines two crucial points for the Ducks. First, NCAA enforcement staff said they had “no finding of lack of institutional control and no finding of unethical conduct.” That could prove critical when it comes time to dish out punishment.

Second, the report says the school could face penalties under the “repeat violator” clause of the NCAA rules. The UO last had a major infraction in 2004; since some of the alleged violations happened within five years of that date, the NCAA could impose stiffer penalties.

From this cursory review of a document that was months old and drafted prior to the conclusion that Oregon had to submit to a hearing, it looks as if Oregon is looking at Failure to Monitor and could have the repeat violator status tagged to them as well. That usually means a postseason ban and a loss of scholarships. The failure to promote an atmosphere of compliance charge is typically levied to an individual and typically results in a show cause order. If that is to be given to Chip Kelly, it could mean nothing as he is now in the NFL and has no responsibility to the NCAA. It could keep him from pulling a Bobby Petrino/Nick Saban, though.

great find -thanks for the update. Sounds like Kelly got out just in time!

Another article on this from The Oregonian:

http://www.oregonlive.com/ducks/index.ss...commi.html

And yet again, someone trying to use the "I didn't know it was against the rules" defense:

Quote:"The enforcement staff, institutions and involved individuals agree that the findings constitute a major infractions case," according to a summary disposition overview dated Oct. 30, 2012. "Football staff members were not aware that the manner in which they were using scouting/recruiting services was impermissible. Nonetheless, the recruiting advantage that was gained via the oral reports from scouting services personnel was more than the minimal."

Yeah, right.

I know that no school would have the balls to try this, but after the Carroll/Kelly example I would love to see one make a contract where a percentage of the coach's pay is deferred for a period of years and only paid in the absence of NCAA investigations/infractions.

The NCAA will give them a slap on the wrist with a couple reduced scholarships and a short probationary period. That's it. Until the NCAA decides to come down hard on the "big" schools they're not going to stop doing this type of stuff to get an advantage over everyone else.