Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

And it seems to me, if you're cheating, you should at least be winning.

Once again your logic is seriously flawed.

How is it that Geneseo had an advantage over Potsdam in recruiting Canadian hockey players just because Potsdam also happen to recruit more Canadian non-athletes? It's not the coaches job to recruit non-athletes.

Both schools had the exact same advantage trying to recruit Canadian hockey players. Thus, Geneseo had no more or less expectation of winning than Potsdam.

Unless you explain how you came to a different conclusion, just because Geneseo did not do a good enough job recruiting Canadian non-athletes, it does not mean "if you're cheating, you should at least be winning."

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

Here's kind of the theoretical aspect of it.

Clearly it would be a violation if this program were "available to everybody," but the only people who were told about it were hockey players. I'm not saying that was the case, but looking at the data one might think so.

Just making up numbers here, to describe a situation that the NCAA would investigate, and put in the context of a fictitious sport, so that nobody thinks I'm casting stones at either school.

Suppose that the NCAA sanctioned cricket as an intercollegiate sport, and Mid-Nebraska tech had an international scholarship program that allowed free tuition for all British citizens. Further suppose that of the 200 students on campus, there were 16 British citizens, and of the 20 man cricket roster, there were 15 British citizens.

Here's what the NCAA would see:

Campus percentage on this aid package 8%
Cricket team percentage on this aid package 75%

This means that you could examine a random student's financial aid package and predict with some certainty whether of not a student was a cricket play. Hence - violation (because that is the standard).

I don't think they are looking at the numbers this way. But you do bring up an interesting question -- how are they looking at the numbers?

I believe they are looking at the total population of Canadian students, and then looking at how many of them are athletes and how many of them are non-athletes.

If they are looking at the numbers they way you propose, then the situation in Buffalo State where ONE women lacrosse player from Canada is affected would contradict your example.

However, your conclusion is correct -- essentially the NCAA is making sure that these programs are not defacto athletic scholarships.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

So here's my question: Shouldn't some level of review have taken place some time between 2001 and 2010 where somebody at Geneseo said "Hey, you know, this program that we have trying to entice Canadians students, some of whom live just two hours from us, isn't really working.

Note the quotes in my article. I'm pretty sure that the NCAA did not start reconsidering how they looked at these programs till 2006. Thus, before that the NCAA considered everything to be okay, and therefore did not go back before that time to look into programs (nor did it prompt schools to be concerned about looking at themselves before that time.)

 

[NUProf]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

I don't think they are looking at the numbers this way. But you do bring up an interesting question -- how are they looking at the numbers?

I believe they are looking at the total population of Canadian students, and then looking at how many of them are athletes and how many of them are non-athletes.

If they are looking at the numbers they way you propose, then the situation in Buffalo State where ONE women lacrosse player from Canada is affected would contradict your example.

However, your conclusion is correct -- essentially the NCAA is making sure that these programs are not defacto athletic scholarships.

My example was extreme, and I believe what they are looking at is based on all athletes vs. student body aggregate and the test is what I said. Once they find a violation, then they are going to look at where it occurs - that's my understanding, which is based on reading the rules.

Interesting to me that the NCAA rarely punishes DI programs this severely, unless either 1. The violation are egregious or 2. The program is not one of the big name programs.

A technical violation like this from, say a Nebraska football team, or Notre Dame football would generate a "letter of reprimand" or "censure", but if it happened at say, Eastern Washington basketball, or Northern Iowa track and field, they might get the gate for a year.

 

[Josh Carey]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

Once again your logic is seriously flawed.

How is it that Geneseo had an advantage over Potsdam in recruiting Canadian hockey players just because Potsdam also happen to recruit more Canadian non-athletes? It's not the coaches job to recruit non-athletes.

Warning: There's math.

Let's assume that roughly equal sized state institutions get roughly the same amount of total budget size. As a school, you then have to make a determination where you want to specifically spend your dollars.

Let's say School A and School B each decide to fund a Canadian Financial Aid Program at level $X, which is equal for both schools. If School A only has hockey players in the program, they can offer each hockey player 1/20th $X. If the other school has hockey players and a decent number of non-athletes in the program, they can only offer 1/50th (or less) $X. That gives School A a financial advantage, which results in better players and an athletic advantage.

Now it's possible that School A and School B might fund the program in such a way that they give each player $Y, which is a fixed amount of aid that's equal at both schools. School A once again only has hockey players in their program, School B has a representative portion of the student body. That means School A is only paying $(20)(Y) into the program, whereas School B is paying $(50)(Y) into the program. Operating on our relative similar budget assumption, that means that School B has $(30)(Y) less to spend on things like the student union, weight room, or other amenities that might entice athletes to come to their school over a comparatively priced institution. Those amenities then allow School A to recruit better hockey players, which generates an athletic advantage.

Note the quotes in my article. I'm pretty sure that the NCAA did not start reconsidering how they looked at these programs till 2006. Thus, before that the NCAA considered everything to be okay, and therefore did not go back before that time to look into programs (nor did it prompt schools to be concerned about looking at themselves before that time.)

Fair enough, though it seems like as an institution looking to maximize your best allocation of funding, you'd want to be constantly reviewing programs like this independent of any NCAA issues.

 

[NUProf]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

Warning: There's math.

Let's assume that roughly equal sized state institutions get roughly the same amount of total budget size. As a school, you then have to make a determination where you want to specifically spend your dollars.

Let's say School A and School B each decide to fund a Canadian Financial Aid Program at level $X, which is equal for both schools. If School A only has hockey players in the program, they can offer each hockey player 1/20th $X. If the other school has hockey players and a decent number of non-athletes in the program, they can only offer 1/50th (or less) $X. That gives School A a financial advantage, which results in better players and an athletic advantage.

Now it's possible that School A and School B might fund the program in such a way that they give each player $Y, which is a fixed amount of aid that's equal at both schools. School A once again only has hockey players in their program, School B has a representative portion of the student body. That means School A is only paying $(20)(Y) into the program, whereas School B is paying $(50)(Y) into the program. Operating on our relative similar budget assumption, that means that School B has $(30)(Y) less to spend on things like the student union, weight room, or other amenities that might entice athletes to come to their school over a comparatively priced institution. Those amenities then allow School A to recruit better hockey players, which generates an athletic advantage.

Josh the NCAA's test is whether or not one can improve the ability to predict if a student is an athlete by examining their FA package. It's whether FA is statistically independent of athletic status

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

Warning: There's math.

Let's assume that roughly equal sized state institutions get roughly the same amount of total budget size. As a school, you then have to make a determination where you want to specifically spend your dollars.

Let's say School A and School B each decide to fund a Canadian Financial Aid Program at level $X, which is equal for both schools. If School A only has hockey players in the program, they can offer each hockey player 1/20th $X. If the other school has hockey players and a decent number of non-athletes in the program, they can only offer 1/50th (or less) $X. That gives School A a financial advantage, which results in better players and an athletic advantage.

Now it's possible that School A and School B might fund the program in such a way that they give each player $Y, which is a fixed amount of aid that's equal at both schools. School A once again only has hockey players in their program, School B has a representative portion of the student body. That means School A is only paying $(20)(Y) into the program, whereas School B is paying $(50)(Y) into the program. Operating on our relative similar budget assumption, that means that School B has $(30)(Y) less to spend on things like the student union, weight room, or other amenities that might entice athletes to come to their school over a comparatively priced institution. Those amenities then allow School A to recruit better hockey players, which generates an athletic advantage.

I buy this argument to a point, and on the surface it makes sense -- but first you have to show that it is costing Geneseo less money to run their Canadian program than it is costing Potsdam to run theirs. We don't know that because we don't know the exact benefits each is providing their Canadian students. For all we know it could actually cost more.

Also, by saying that this could leave School B with more money to spend on other amenities, well, unfortunately, it's far from simple once you get to that point of your argument. There's is no way to prove how the money School B may be saving is used, where it is used, etc. And then you would have to factor out various budgets and how they play into the equation, endowment funds, donations specific to certain purchases, etc., etc.,

Just way too many financial factors in place to make a direct correlation that because Geneseo did not follow the same ratio rules as Potsdam, they should be winning more than Potsdam or any other school.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

Fair enough, though it seems like as an institution looking to maximize your best allocation of funding, you'd want to be constantly reviewing programs like this independent of any NCAA issues.

For all we know, they may have been. It's just that they may never have reviewed it with this situation in mind, because they never thought they had to.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

Josh the NCAA's test is whether or not one can improve the ability to predict if a student is an athlete by examining their FA package. It's whether FA is statistically independent of athletic status

That's not what Josh was responding to.

 

[Josh Carey]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

Josh the NCAA's test is whether or not one can improve the ability to predict if a student is an athlete by examining their FA package. It's whether FA is statistically independent of athletic status

Yes, and I was attempting to answer Russel's question of how being able to see a FA package is favorable to athletes could result in a recruiting advantage over other schools even with similar financial aid packages. You have to go to my second example for that, but I've interviewed many Geneseo hockey players over the years who have spoken about the atmosphere/amenities being what drew them to the school.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

Interesting to me that the NCAA rarely punishes DI programs this severely, unless either 1. The violation are egregious or 2. The program is not one of the big name programs.

I can answer this and actually can accept the answer.

D3 is not allowed any athletic scholarships at all. Nada. Zip. Nothing. This is essentially one of the Holy Grail rules of D3 that D1 does not have to contend with.

Thus, the NCAA has to come down hard if they perceive a D3 institution is providing athletic scholarships. The violation, within the D3 philosophy, is an egregious one.

A technical violation like this from, say a Nebraska football team, or Notre Dame football would generate a "letter of reprimand" or "censure", but if it happened at say, Eastern Washington basketball, or Northern Iowa track and field, they might get the gate for a year.

Unfortunately, this argument is no different than getting a speeding ticket because you drive a Porsche when the family sedan next to you was going faster... It may suck, but it doesn't take away from the fact that you were still speeding. And may get a bigger fine than that family sedan.

 

[norm1909]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

In order to meet NCAA requirements, the admission decisions must be made blindly to athletic abilities, and I seen nothing in the NCAA rulings to indicate otherwise. Essentially, what happened is the two schools had programs that were not being actively exploited by any campus administrative program other than the athletic departments. As Russell mentions, Potsdam has “an approved teacher education registered with the Ontario Ministry of Education” and I noted, Plattsburgh has its International Student Services (ISS) and Admissions and Center for Diversity, Pluralism and Inclusion (CDPI) programs. This is, IMO, a heads up to all the DIII programs, find ways to make sure your International Aid programs are being marketed effectively enough to ensure they don’t become “de-facto” athletic scholarships. Plain and Simple.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

In order to meet NCAA requirements, the admission decisions must be made blindly to athletic abilities, and I seen nothing in the NCAA rulings to indicate otherwise. Essentially, what happened is the two schools had programs that were not being actively exploited by any campus administrative program other than the athletic departments. As Russell mentions, Potsdam has “an approved teacher education registered with the Ontario Ministry of Education” and I noted, Plattsburgh has its International Student Services (ISS) and Admissions and Center for Diversity, Pluralism and Inclusion (CDPI) programs. This is, IMO, a heads up to all the DIII programs, find ways to make sure your International Aid programs are being marketed effectively enough to ensure they don’t become “de-facto” athletic scholarships. Plain and Simple.

It's not just that. It appears you can no longer view it as an "international" pool, but a per country pool.

If you have a soccer team full of foreigners, you better hope the particular countries they come from are also represented by a fair amount of non-athlete students.

This is how the hockey teams got caught out with the Canadians.

 

[norm1909]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

It's not just that. It appears you can no longer view it as an "international" pool, but a per country pool...

IMO, that “targeted country” program was certainly the Achilles’ Heel of Geneseo’s “The Canadian Student Initiative Grants” and Buffalo State’s “Canadian Incentive Grant”, had the schools created a more diverse “International Canadian Student Initiative Grants” and “International Incentive Grant”, they would have much more likely to have created “de-facto” athletic scholarships. But merely the "name" of the grant program wouldn't be enough, without a pro-active program, like Potsdam's & Plattsburgh's to get NON-athletes to apply, as certainly the athletic programs owe it to their potential recruits to accentuate all of their respective institutions benefits.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

IMO, that “targeted country” program was certainly the Achilles’ Heel of Geneseo’s “The Canadian Student Initiative Grants” and Buffalo State’s “Canadian Incentive Grant”, had the schools created a more diverse “International Canadian Student Initiative Grants” and “International Incentive Grant”, they would have much more likely to have created “de-facto” athletic scholarships. But merely the "name" of the grant program wouldn't be enough, without a pro-active program, like Potsdam's & Plattsburgh's to get NON-athletes to apply, as certainly the athletic programs owe it to their potential recruits to accentuate all of their respective institutions benefits.

Perhaps. I wonder though if a soccer team brought in six Brazilians under an international aid program like you describe, but there were no other Brazilians at the school the NCAA might say hey, you are not doing anything to recruit Brazilian students except to get soccer players. Ergo, you are using this aid program to give Brazilian soccer players a de facto scholarship.

Based on what Dahl told me after I asked him why didn't this all fit within your overall international aid program and the overall international student base, I lean towards that assumption.

 

[norm1909]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

Perhaps. I wonder though if a soccer team brought in six Brazilians under an international aid program like you describe, but there were no other Brazilians at the school the NCAA might say hey, you are not doing anything to recruit Brazilian students except to get soccer players. Ergo, you are using this aid program to give Brazilian soccer players a de facto scholarship.

Based on what Dahl told me after I asked him why didn't this all fit within your overall international aid program and the overall international student base, I lean towards that assumption.

The potential for "highly effective" recruiting by the athletic department does exist, but I believe that if a significant audit trail of non-athletic department recruiting exists, the lopsided results noted above shouldn't repeatedly exist. Someone has to be overseeing all the accepted students and needs to pro-actively notify the NCAA of unintended abnormalities (i.e. unbalanced admissions), common sense indicates that certain countries, such as Canadian hockey, Brazilian soccer, American baseball, etc. excel disproportionately than others, so some variation is within the norm. How can a school avoid the de-facto scholarship issue? Certainly not by abandoning diversity and inclusion programs, but simply coordination athletic recruiting with non-athletic recruiting, and when necessary (following internal monitoring – after the fact – specific country/athletic admissions, such as Canada), devise a plan to increase non-athletic enrollment. Programs in addition to those mentioned above, such as this program at Plattsburgh is also likely to make the school more attractive to potential Canadian students - and respectively simular programs for other countries may be warranted.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

common sense indicates that certain countries, such as Canadian hockey, Brazilian soccer, American baseball, etc. excel disproportionately than others, so some variation is within the norm.

Common sense? NCAA?

Come on, you know better than that.

 

[norm1909]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

Common sense? NCAA?

Come on, you know better than that.

He shoots - he scores!!! You got me there (NCAA Administrative Performance Award).

 

[Matt Rennell]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

Russell, based on your understanding of the policy, what would be your opinion about the following school's numbers. *Note, these number were pulled from either the college's own website or www.collegedata.com if the college's site did not provide the information.

College A
Total enrollment: 7,971
International Students: 1.1% from 12 countries, or 88 students.
Number of Canadian hockey players (men and women): 31
35.2% of the International student body plays hockey.

College B
Total Enrollment: 5,736
International Students: 6.9% from 50 countries or 395 students.
Number of Canadian hockey players (men and women): 25
6.3% of the International student body plays hockey.

College C
Total Enrollment: 1,387
International Students: 10% from 31 countries or 139 students.
Number of Canadian hockey players (men and women): 24
17.2% of the International student body plays hockey.

College D
Total Enrollment: 1,469
International Students: 4% from 3 countries or 59 students.
Number of Canadian hockey players (men and women): 26
44% of the International student body plays hockey.

Now, I realize there is certain information missing here, such as how many of these students are accepting financial aid, that obviously is not found on the web, so it is merely speculation. That said, it is interesting to see how it breaks down. If we were to go through each and every D-III hockey school I am curious to know what the norm would look like.

 

[one_to7]

Re: Buffalo State, SUNY Geneseo penalized for aid violations

The potential for "highly effective" recruiting by the athletic department does exist, but I believe that if a significant audit trail of non-athletic department recruiting exists, the lopsided results noted above shouldn't repeatedly exist. Someone has to be overseeing all the accepted students and needs to pro-actively notify the NCAA of unintended abnormalities (i.e. unbalanced admissions), common sense indicates that certain countries, such as Canadian hockey, Brazilian soccer, American baseball, etc. excel disproportionately than others, so some variation is within the norm. How can a school avoid the de-facto scholarship issue? Certainly not by abandoning diversity and inclusion programs, but simply coordination athletic recruiting with non-athletic recruiting, and when necessary (following internal monitoring – after the fact – specific country/athletic admissions, such as Canada), devise a plan to increase non-athletic enrollment. Programs in addition to those mentioned above, such as this program at Plattsburgh is also likely to make the school more attractive to potential Canadian students - and respectively simular programs for other countries may be warranted.

The way you worded this (going after foreign athletes, then after the fact recruiting non-athletes to 'balance it out'), I believe that would be classified as a major NCAA violation. It'd probabliy get a harsher penalty than buff state and geneseo recieved, since intent is involved.