NCAA

NCAA Documents Against Haith Released By Missouri

View Comments
COLUMBIA, MO - DECEMBER 15: Head coach Frank Haith of the Missouri Tigers gestures during the game against the Kennesaw State Owls on December 15, 2011 at Mizzou Arena in Columbia, Missouri. (Photo by Jamie Squire/Getty Images)

COLUMBIA, MO – DECEMBER 15: Head coach Frank Haith of the Missouri Tigers gestures during the game against the Kennesaw State Owls on December 15, 2011 at Mizzou Arena in Columbia, Missouri. (Photo by Jamie Squire/Getty Images)

UM

MIAMI (CBSMiami) – While the initial reports on the University of Miami scandal involving Nevin Shapiro painted the convicted Ponzi schemer as a whistleblower first; documents released to CBSMiami.com from the University of Missouri reveal that Shapiro, at least when dealing with former basketball coach Frank Haith, was threatening to bring down Miami if he wasn’t paid by coaches not to talk.

In the NCAA’s Notice of Allegations to Missouri Head Basketball Coach Haith, the NCAA alleged that Haith was aware of a scheme of Shapiro’s and that the coach “failed to promote an atmosphere of compliance within the men’s basketball program.”

Specifically, the NCAA laid out the following event to justify its charge: “Haith was aware that Nevin Shapiro, a representative of the institution’s athletics interests, threatened that unless Jake Morton, then assistant men’s basketball coach, or Haith provided money to Shapiro, Shapiro would make public a claim that Shapiro provided money to assist in the recruitment of a men’s basketball prospective student-athlete.”

Read The NCAA’s Allegations Against Haith

The NCAA continued, “After learning of the threat, Haith failed to alert anyone in the athletics department administration about Shapiro’s threat, ask reasonable questions of Morton to ensure Shapiro’s claim lacked merit or disclose the fact that Morton engaged in financial dealings with Shapiro. Rather, Haith gave Morton funds that Morton then provided to Shapiro.”

The notice of allegation is especially damaging to Haith and his future at the University of Missouri. While Haith escaped more serious charges in the UM case, if the Committee on Infractions agrees that Haith arranged payments to Shapiro to avoid other claims of recruiting wrongdoing, Haith may not survive at Mizzou.

In addition, the fact Haith agreed to pay Morton to pay Shapiro to avoid Shapiro spilling his guts on the potential of paying a recruit makes Haith look guilty, regardless of whether he ultimately was or not.

Missouri was informed by the NCAA in a letter to Chancellor Brady Deaton that sanctions could be coming for Haith due to his involvement in Shapiro’s schemes, however, the University of Missouri was in the clear.

“Although there is no institutional responsibility on the part of Missouri for possible violations involving Mr. Haith, please be advised that action could be taken that would limit Mr. Haith’s athletically related duties at Missouri for a designated period if he is found in violation by the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions of the NCAA Infractions Appeal Committee,” the NCAA said in its letter to Deaton.

The NCAA’s letter to Haith gave some insight into the overall case against Miami as Haith wasn’t named until “Allegation Number 14” by the NCAA, meaning Miami is facing at least 14 separate allegations, if not more, in regards to the Shapiro case.

The NCAA requested in its letter to Haith that all responses are due to the Committee on Infractions by May 20, 2013. After that, Haith will “have the opportunity to appear before the Committee on Infractions at the time the case is considered.”

If Haith, who can be represented by legal counsel, or others aren’t going to attend the COI hearing, they have to notify the COI at least two weeks before the scheduled hearing or run the risk of being hit with a show-cause penalty.

The NCAA did open up the investigation to scrutiny in the letter to Haith, informing him of the problems in the overall investigation.

“Also, if you believe that enforcement staff has acted contrary to the provisions of the enforcement procedures (Bylaw 32), you are requested to adise the Committee on Infractions of this concern in your response; otherwise you may forfeit the opportunity to raise this issue on appeal.”

The NCAA continued, “In that regard, and as you know, the enforcement staff’s investigation included actions not consistent with the policies and procedures governing the NCAA
enforcement program…Please note that the enforcement staff will send a letter under separate cover to the Committee on Infractions (and copy all involved parties) that addressed the specific procedural issue.”

The Committee on Infractions has a scheduled hearing date of June 14-15, 2013. However, that date “is unlikely due to the response date of May 20, unless all parties, the enforcement staff, and Committee on Infractions agree to a shortened response time.”

According to the NCAA’s letter, Miami, Haith, and others involved will face the Committee on Infractions in July 2013 at a location to be determined. Once all parties have appeared before the COI, the group will determine if major or secondary violations occurred and what penalties are appropriate.

Haith, Miami, and other parties involved would also have a chance to appeal the decision to a separate appeals committee inside the NCAA. Once the appeals committee ruled on the case, the case would be considered closed, at least from the NCAA’s side.

View Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 13,688 other followers