An analysis of the NCAA appeals process and the new 'abuse of discretion' standard for appealing a penalty.

摘要

This study examined LSDBi data for Division I Institutions who appealed NCAA investigations initiated between 2008 and 2013. Seventeen appealed investigations were compared with fifty one investigations that did not result in appeal. Appeals upheld by the NCAA were compared against those overturned in any way. This study furthers research conducted by Wong, Skillman and Deubert (2009) which reviewed twenty one public reports of appealed NCAA investigations between 2001 and 2008. This study advances the field because prior to 2008 an institution needed to show that penalties were "excessive and inappropriate" to successfully appeal. The current standard requires proving that penalties are "excessive such that it constitutes an abuse of discretion." The NCAA defines four ways to prove this: the ruling was clearly contrary to the evidence; the individual or school did not actually break NCAA rules; there was a procedural error; or the penalty was excessive (NCAA Manual 2011-2012, p.405).