The NCAA Bribery Scandal Explained: A System Ripe for Exploitation

Despite the excitement surrounding events like March Madness, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) faces an uncertain future. Lawsuits challenging the NCAA's authority are becoming increasingly common. These legal actions, ranging from student-athletes seeking unionization to disputes over name, image, and likeness (NIL) compensation, threaten the very foundation of college sports. The Supreme Court's decision in NCAA v. Alston (2021) signaled a shift, suggesting that the NCAA's amateurism model is vulnerable to antitrust challenges.

In response, the NCAA introduced NIL policies, allowing student-athletes to profit from their personal brand. However, this move, intended to provide some measure of equity, may inadvertently exacerbate existing issues within the system.

The Marty Blazer Story: An Undercover Look at Corruption

Marty Blazer, a Pittsburgh businessman and former financial advisor to NFL players, provides a unique perspective on the issue. After being caught in a fraud scheme where he misappropriated over $2 million from his clients, Blazer became an undercover operative for the FBI, investigating corruption in college sports.

Blazer's mission involved offering bribes to college basketball coaches, incentivizing them to steer their top players toward his financial advisory services once they turned professional. This effectively turned coaches into recruiters for Blazer's business, with some of the leading basketball programs directly implicated. Coaches accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash to conspire to convince their top players to sign on as Blazer’s clients - in effect, trafficking the kids.

In 2019, Blazer shared his experiences with NCAA officials, candidly revealing the inner workings of corruption in college sports. He explained how he routinely slipped "hot dog money" - cash payments - to college athletes to secure their business. These payments, often delivered discreetly to family members, were intended to circumvent NCAA regulations.

Blazer warned the NCAA officials that NIL, if not carefully regulated, would only worsen the exploitation of student-athletes. He predicted that while top players would likely benefit from reputable endorsements, mid-level athletes would be vulnerable to predatory contracts and exploitation by boosters.

The NCAA's Response: Willful Ignorance?

Blazer claims that NCAA officials seemed uninterested in his warnings about NIL. He sensed that their lack of awareness wasn't due to naivety, but rather a deliberate choice. Blazer felt that the NCAA preferred "willful ignorance" or "plausible deniability" over addressing the systemic corruption he exposed.

The NCAA's failure to implement meaningful protections for student-athletes' NIL rights highlights the hypocrisy and greed that may contribute to the downfall of college sports as we know it.

Point-Shaving Scandals: A Century-Long Problem

The recent betting scandals are part of a larger pattern of organized crime interference in professional sports that has been going on for more than a century. Fixing matches has been a problem since the early 20th century. Charles McNeil introduced the "point-spread" system in the 1940s, which made sports betting more popular but also attracted the attention of mobsters. "Point shaving" is a subtle form of fixing that takes advantage of point-spread bets.

In 1951, one of the first major point-shaving scandals exposed how widely the issue had spread. The Genovese crime family associate was at the epicenter of the 1951 point-shaving scandal involving college basketball athletes. For decades to come, the Mob took this supposed moral loophole into locker rooms with a proposition: We’ll pay you to win the game, just not by too much.

Read also: Crafting Your NCAA Profile

In 1980, Lucchese crime family associate Henry Hill was arrested for trafficking narcotics. Hill flipped and became a government witness after receiving word that he was on the Mob’s hit list. One of Hill’s narcotics-trafficking associates, Paul Mazzei, brought Hill into a scheme involving bookmaker Tony Perla and Boston College basketball player Rick Kuhn. The scheme ended prematurely when pride prevailed over greed.

Many of the recent indictments have one name in common: Shane “Sugar” Hennen. The true extent of this new syndicate of fixers is currently unknown, but indictments are gradually revealing its nature.

The 2017 FBI Investigation: Unveiling Widespread Corruption

On September 27, 2017, the FBI announced the arrest of 10 individuals, including assistant coaches and an Adidas executive, on charges of bribery, money laundering, and wire fraud. The investigation implicated several prominent universities.

Key Figures and Allegations

Chuck Person (Auburn): Allegedly received over $90,000 in bribes from a former NBA referee.
Emanuel "Book" Richardson (Arizona): Arrested and indicted in 2017.
Tony Bland (USC): Charged with receiving benefits to influence student-athletes.
James Gatto (Adidas): Accused of funneling money to players' families.
Lamont Evans (Oklahoma State): Accused of taking bribes from financial advisors.

University Involvement

University of Louisville: Allegedly involved in a scheme where Adidas funneled $100,000 to a recruit's family. Coach Rick Pitino was placed on unpaid administrative leave.
University of Miami: Confirmed its involvement as "University-7" in court documents.
University of Arizona: Head coach Sean Miller allegedly discussed paying Deandre Ayton $100,000.
NC State: Allegations of payments to Dennis Smith Jr.'s family in exchange for signing with the school.
Kansas: Allegations of payments to a recruit's mother in exchange for the player's commitment.

The Role of Financial Advisors

Financial advisors played a central role in the scandal, offering bribes to coaches and players to secure their business. These advisors often targeted young, inexperienced athletes, exploiting their lack of financial knowledge.

The Aftermath

The scandal led to suspensions, firings, and internal investigations at numerous universities. Several recruits rescinded their commitments, and some players faced eligibility concerns.

Student-Athletes and Breach of Fiduciary Duty

The scandal raises the question of whether student-athletes who received bribes have legal recourse against the coaches who "steered" them into these schemes. A potential cause of action lies in the breach of fiduciary duty.

The player-coach relationship often involves unequal power dynamics, trust, and confidence. Coaches control playing time, determine roles, and influence players' decisions. This creates a fiduciary relationship where coaches have a duty to act in the best interests of their players.

Coaches who accept bribes and steer players into illegal dealings may be in breach of this duty. Players can argue that the coaches' actions caused them to lose scholarships and future earning potential.

tags: #ncaa #bribery #scandal #explained