NCAA Sanctions Should Have More Teeth

Abstract

This article argues that the NCAA’s penalties often affect innocent people more than the actual transgressors because the transgressors frequently have left the school before the NCAA announces its sanctions.1 This article seeks to address this problem by viewing NCAA sanctions through a criminal law lens, resulting in a stronger enforcement model for the NCAA that also minimizes the effect on those innocent of any wrongdoing.Specifically, this article proposes a revision to the NCAA’s enforcement model to ensure that its sanctions not only attempt to deter future violations but also penalize the actual transgressors, rather than the innocents. Punishing transgressors with the goal of deterrence alone does not work if persons contemplating a transgression realize that they can escape punishment by leaving the school, and, therefore, the punishment affects only those remaining in the program at the school. The proposed new enforcement model would add penalties to its current structure, such as financial penalties on coaches and student-athletes whose behavior leads to NCAA sanctions. The new model would also limit the institutional penalties to probation, public reprimand and censure, and/or severe financial penalties.Part I of this article addresses a flaw in the current NCAA enforcement model whereby the NCAA often punishes the wrong people. Part II views the NCAA enforcement model through a criminal law lens, discussing the theories of punishment and the NCAA’s focus with its sanctions. Part III proposes a revision to the NCAA enforcement model to include retributive punishment, which has the added benefit of deterrence when potential transgressors realize that the penalties will hit them where it hurts the most. Part IV discusses how the revised enforcement model can improve outcomes for the NCAA, institutions, and innocent individuals.