Sanction Against Syracuse

If you cheat, eventually you will get caught and the penalties might prove extremely costly to the individual and/or the school.

It was made official and the NCAA announced penalties against Syracuse’s Athletic programs for committing multiple violations.

The overall sanctions placed against the Syracuse basketball program is extremely harsh and reflect the nature of what happened.

The sanctions include:

• losing 12 scholarships (three for each of the next four seasons)
• vacating 108 wins (from the 2005, 2006, 2007, 2011 and 2012 seasons)
• probation for five years; fines; limits of off-campus recruiters
• Jim Boeheim being suspended for nine ACC games next season.

If you are wondering why the Syracuse School is being penalized, it is due to the fact that the NCAA found that from 2001-2009, Syracuse did not follow its written drug policy for violations.

In addition, they also found academic misconduct, extra benefits and impermissible booster activity.

Looking back it is noted that in 2007 the school took it upon itself and reported the academic violations in 2007.

Then, the School took the (self-imposed) postseason ban for the basketball team (this year) which seemed ironic only due to the significance of the program.

This significant loss of wins drops Boeheim from 34 victories away from 1,000 down to 858, which is ranked sixth on the all-time list.

Syracuse University did not control and monitor its athletics programs, and its head men’s basketball coach failed to monitor his program, according to a decision issued by a Division I Committee on Infractions panel.

Syracuse discovered and self-reported 10 violations in this case, which primarily involved men’s basketball but also football.

The self-reported violations, dating back to 2001, include academic misconduct, extra benefits, the failure to follow its drug testing policy and impermissible booster activity.

The other violations found included impermissible academic assistance and services, the head basketball coach’s failure to promote an atmosphere of compliance and monitor his staff, and the school’s lack of control over its athletics program.

In addition the panel accepted the school’s one-year postseason ban in men’s basketball that it self-imposed after the NCAA hearing.

From 2001-02 through 2011-12, the school failed to exercise proper control over the administration of its athletics program and used deficient monitoring systems.

This saw the school violate situations that occurred involving academics, compliance with its own drug testing policy as well as staff and student relationships with a booster