On October 25, 2012, the NCAA released a document discussing head coach responsibilities regarding compliance and violations of NCAA legislation. Specifically, the document highlighted the NCAA’s new language for Bylaw 11.2.1, the effects of Level I, II and III violations occurring in a head coach’s sport and actions a coach may take to promote an atmosphere of compliance within his or her program.
On October 31, 2012, ESPN.com reported on some of the reactions from various NCAA coaches across the country. Some highlights include:
- Vanderbilt’s Kevin Stallings: “I like the additional accountability. Now we can’t hide and say we didn’t know. It’s our job to know.”
- Cincinnati’s Mick Cronin: “It’s going to force head coaches to have compliance seminars and document meetings on compliance. You may have to pay for an outside attorney to document and sign affidavits from staff that the head coach is demanding compliance.”
- Notre Dame’s Mike Brey: “I totally agree with it. It will keep the heat on us, the head coaches, to manage things right.”
- Saint Joseph’s Phil Martelli: “The head coach can’t bury his head and say I didn’t know. Young assistants are taught there is a right and wrong way — the tweaking to me must be done on what is considered worthy of a suspension. It’s not clear to me.”
- Villanova’s Jay Wright: “I’m OK with it. If the process for determining a violation is fair.”
- Baylor’s Scott Drew: “It was a formality since the NCAA has already started to do this.”
- Texas Tech’s Chris Walker: “We are ultimately responsible for our decisions and those who work for us. We need to be clear about our expectations to staff members. I’m sure it will factor into the hiring process in the future.”
ESPN.com’s full article by Andy Katz can be found here.