Ole Miss football: Breaking down the NOA response

Today Ole Miss released their response and the NOA they received from the NCAA. How does this affect the Ole Miss football team? Here’s a breakdown.

Ole Miss released their response to the Notice of Allegations from the NCAA this morning. So I took the time to read the list of allegations linked to the football program this morning and break it down for everyone. Let’s jump right into it.

Where can I read the NOA and the response?

Level of violations

The NCAA rates each violation on a scale of one to four, with one being the most severe violations and four being the least severe. Here is how the NCAA defines these four levels of violations.

Level I: “Violations that seriously undermine or threaten the integrity of the NCAA collegiate model as set forth in the Constitution and bylaws, including any violation that provides or is intended to provide a substantial or extensive recruiting, competitive or other advantage, or a substantial or extensive impermissible benefit.”

More from Ole Hotty Toddy

Level II: “Violations that provide or are intended to provide more than a minimal but less than a substantial or extensive recruiting, competitive or other advantage; includes more than a minimal but less than a substantial or extensive impermissible benefit; or involves conduct that may compromise the integrity of the NCAA collegiate model as set forth in the Constitution and bylaws.”

Level III: “Violations that are isolated or limited in nature; provide no more than a minimal recruiting, competitive or other advantage; and do not include more than a minimal impermissible benefit. Multiple Level IV violations may collectively be considered a breech of conduct.”

Level IV: “Incidental infractions that are inadvertent and isolated, technical in nature and result in a negligible, if any, competitive advantage. Level IV infractions generally will not affect eligibility for intercollegiate athletics.”

Violation 1

The first violation is regarding a company with interest in the football team providing a loaner car to student athletes. Here is the official wording. “It is alleged that between August 2014 and August 2015, a representative of the institution’s athletics interests, provided football student athletes REDACTED and REDACTED with impermissible extra benefits in the form of complimentary vehicle use. Additionally, in June 2015, and owner of and representative of the institution’s athletics interests, provided with an impermissible loan. The total monetary value of these extra benefits was approximately $7,495.”

Chuck Cook-USA TODAY Sports /

Putting two and two together, one can most likely figure out who the redacted names are. This violation is a level one violation according the NCAA. Reading between the lines here, this violation is most likely about Cannon Motors providing a loaner vehicle to Laremy Tunsil and CJ Hampton. This violation was expounded on in the NOA.

“On at least two occasions in the summer of 2014, REDACTED took his personal vehicle to the REDACTED service department for repairs. During this time period, REDACTED loaned REDACTED a 2012 Nissan Titan at no cost pursuant to its loaner vehicle program available to service customers. On or around August 11, 2014, while was in possession of the Titan, REDACTED and REDACTED decided to forego further repairs on REDACTED’s vehicle, which ended REDACTED’s status as a service customer. However, REDACTED kept the Titan until October 28, 2014. REDACTED’s possession of the Titan from at least August 28 to October 28 was outside the scope of REDACTED’s loaner vehicle program. The value of the extra benefit was approximately $2,416. [NCAA Bylaws 16.11.2.1 and 16.11.2.2-(c) (2014-15)]”

“The NCAA enforcement staff believes a hearing panel of the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions could conclude that Allegation No. 1 is a severe breach of conduct (Level I) because the alleged violations (a) seriously undermine or threaten the integrity of the NCAA Collegiate Model, (b) provided substantial or extensive impermissible benefits and (c) were not isolated or limited. [NCAA Bylaw 19.1.1 (2015-16)]”

The University agrees that this violation occurred and was appropriately sanctioned. This is a level one violation.

Violation 2

The second of the thirteen football violations is the failure to monitor a booster. This violation is attributed to the school.

“The NCAA enforcement staff believes a hearing panel of the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions could conclude that Allegation No. 2 is a significant breech of conduct (Level II) because the alleged violation involves a failure to monitor, which is presumptively a Level II violation. [NCAA Bylaw 19.1.2 (2015-16)]”

This violation just tacks onto the first one. The booster in question was educated on the rules of the NCAA on multiple occasions according the NOA, yet still continued a breach of conduct.

The worst part of this violation is in the last line of the allegation.

“Additionally, in October 2014, the institution’s athletics compliance office learned that REDACTED loaned a 2012 Nissan Titan to REDACTED during the fall of 2014. However, the compliance office failed to adequately inquire into the circumstances surrounding REDACTED’s acquisition and use of the vehicle, including the impact to REDACTED’s eligibility. As a result, REDACTED competed while ineligible in six contests during the 2014 season.”

More from Ole Miss Football

This could mean the Rebels face some retroactive punishment due to playing this unnamed player while he was ineligible.

Violation 2 is a level two violation.

The result of the first two violations is the dissociation to booster #1.

The University disputes this allegation that they did not monitor the situation.

“This allegation poses two questions. First, did the University’s monitoring program with respect to student athlete vehicles fulfill its institutional obligations under NCAA legislation The University’s monitoring program identified Student Athlete 1’s first loaner car (the Titan) in late October 2014, and the University’s initial review concluded it did not constitute a violation. That conclusion was wrong, which leads to the second question. Did the University’s October 2014 inquiry or the error that flowed from it fall short of the University’s obligations under the monitoring Bylaws? The University and the enforcement staff agree on the facts at the heart of both questions, but the University does not agree that these underlying facts constitute a violation of NCAA legislation and therefore denies Allegation No.2.”

Violation 3

“It is alleged that on or around August 22, 2014, REDACTED a representative of the institution’s athletics interests, provided an impermissible extra benefit in the form of $800 cash to REDACTED, REDACTED to football student-athlete REDACTED .”

This violation is a level one violation in the eyes of the NCAA. This violation is Lindsey Miller demanding $800 from a booster. The result of this violation was the dissociation with booster #7. This violation is a level one violation in the eyes of the NCAA.

The University agrees that this violation occurred and was handled appropriately.

Derick E. Hingle-USA TODAY Sports /

Violation 4

“It is alleged that on 12 occasions between June 7, 2013, and May 27, 2014, REDACTED a representative of the institution’s athletics interests, provided impermissible extra benefits in the form of free lodging in Oxford, Mississippi, to football student-athlete ‘s REDACTED, REDACTED, and, REDACTED. The total monetary value of the extra benefits was approximately $2,253.”

This violation is a level one violation. This is Lindsey Miller and family staying in Oxford for free on multiple occasions for nearly a year. This violation resulted in the dissociation to booster #8

The University agrees that this violation occurred and was handled appropriately.

Violation 5

“It is alleged that in the summer of 2013, Chris Kiffin, assistant football coach, provided football student-athlete REDACTED with two nights’ lodging at his residence. The monetary value of the extra benefit was approximately $33.”

This is a level three violation and the University agrees that it took place and is appropriately classified as a level three violation.

To put this violation in every day terms, Kiffin allowed Tunsil to spend two nights at his house.

Violation 6

“It is alleged that between January 25 and 27, 2013, Chris Kiffin (Kiffin), assistant football coach, arranged for three family members who were not parents or legal guardians of then football prospective student-athlete REDACTED to receive impermissible recruiting inducements during his official paid visit. The total monetary value of the inducements was approximately $1,027.”

must read: More Ole Miss Rebels to go in 1st round of 2017 NFL Draft

Chris Kiffin provided food for the Tunsil family and extended family while he was visiting the University. According to the response, Kiffin fed Tunsil’s half brother’s father, two other family members, a family member’s wife, and Lindsey Miller. The total monetary value of the meals is $709.

Kiffin also arranged for two family members to lodge at The Inn at Ole Miss free of charge for two nights during Tunsil’s paid official visit. The monetary value of this violation was $318.

The University agrees that a violation occurred, but that the violations are more appropriate for a level three violation, instead of a level two violation.

This violation was due to a miscommunication between Kiffin and Branden Wenzel. Wenzel was responsible for the lodging and meals provided to family members on an official visit, which is not a violation.

The problem here is Kiffin told Wenzel that Miller was Tunsil’s biological father, despite Kiffin knowing that Miller was his step-father.

This miscommunication resulted in Wenzel violating NCAA rules

This miscommunication resulted in Wenzel violating NCAA rules and providing a room and meals for Miller and his then girlfriend, Tunsil’s mother.

Due to this violation, Kiffin was reprimanded and was required to take a NCAA Rules course in 2015.

Violation 7

“It is alleged that on May 8, 2014, Chris Kiffin (Kiffin), assistant football coach, made impermissible, off-campus recruiting contact with then football prospective student-athletes REDACTED and REDACTED at REDACTED in REDACTED. Specifically, Kiffin had a 10-minute recruiting conversation with REDACTED and in a private office at during the spring of 2014 evaluation period.”

This violation is a level three violation and the University agrees that it is appropriate.

This violation is due to Kiffin holding a private conversation with two recruits on a visit, which is a violation according the NCAA.

The University self-imposed a punishment of:

No visits off-campus for 30 days for Kiffin.
The University prohibited the football staff from contacting student athlete 3 and student athlete 4 for 30 days.
The University limited the staff to one off campus contact with student athlete 3 and student athlete 4.

Neither student athlete 3 or student athlete 4 signed a scholarship with the University or attended the University.

Violation 8

“It is alleged that during the 2012-13 academic year, REDACTED a then representative of the institution’s athletics interests, assisted the institution in its recruitment of four then football prospective student-athletes by engaging in recruiting activities that promoted the institution’s football program. This included providing the prospects with various recruiting inducements. The total monetary value of the inducements REDACTED provided was approximately $2,250.”

“Additionally, Maurice Harris (Harris), assistant football coach, knew of REDACTED association with the prospects and, at times, facilitated REDACTED’s involvement in their recruitment. Between January 18 and February 3, 2013, Harris arranged for two of the four prospects to receive impermissible recruiting inducements from the institution. The total monetary value of inducements in which Harris arranged was approximately $485.”

Spruce Derden-USA TODAY Sports /

This is a level one violation and the University agrees with that ranking.

This violation occurred due to Harris arranging a round trip to an away football game for multiple potential student athletes. The value of the trip provided for the recruits totaled out at $38, and the meal that was provided for one of the recruits was $5.

After the trip, the individual who was named in the violation informed Head Coach Hugh Freeze, Offensive Line coach Matt Luke, and Tight End coach Maurice Harris that he had provided transportation for the recruits. This happened on three different occasions.

On November 28-30, 2012, Individual 2 made contact with a recruits mother to set up communication with Luke.

On an in-home recruiting visit for a recruit, Individual 2 accompanied Coach Harris and Coach Freeze, who both had contact with the Individual. Individual 2 provided the food for the occasion, totaling in $60 for the event.

Individual 2 paid one student athletes phone bill, which totaled $67. He also paid a student athlete’s mother’s phone bill which totaled $167.

Individual 2 also helped arrange transportation for recruits and their families nine different times.

One transportation was from The Inn in Oxford to Freeze’s home, 11 miles away. This trip totaled $12.

Justin Ford-USA TODAY Sports /

One recruit and his family attended a breakfast at Coach Freeze’s home. The value of this breakfast was $102. The recruit was in contact with coaches while at the breakfast.

While the University agrees these violations occurred, they believe it would normally receive a level two or three grade, and believe it could be a level two violation.

The University notes that despite Individual 2 was classified as a booster, they never made a donation to the school and stopped purchasing season tickets in 2009.

The University has punished Harris by requiring him to attend a NCAA Rules refresher and limited him from off-campus recruiting for the spring of 2015 evaluation period. Harris has received a letter of admonishment.

Violation 9

“It is alleged that during the weekends of January 18, January 25 and February 1, 2013, the institution’s football program produced and/or played three personalized recruiting videos to numerous then football prospective student-athletes who were visiting the institution.”

This a minor infraction and received a level three rating. The University agrees that it is appropriate.

Violation 10

This where we get into the heavy stuff.

“It is alleged that between May and June 2010, David Saunders (Saunders), then administrative operations coordinator for football, and Chris Vaughn (Vaughn), then assistant football coach, violated the NCAA principles of ethical conduct when they engaged in fraudulence or misconduct in connection with the ACT exams of three then football prospective student-athletes. The fraudulent exam scores allowed the prospects to satisfy NCAA initial eligibility academic requirements.”

Both Vaughn and Saunders told potential student athletes to take the ACT at the Wayne County testing area, where their test supervisor would then fill in the answers that the test taker did not fill in.

This is a major violation and is classified as a level one infraction.

This occurred in 2010, during the Houston Nutt era of Ole Miss.

“The University concludes that this fraud was an isolated occurrence planned, directed, and / or carried out by two rogue staff members long since separated from the University.”

None of the players involved played while ineligible at Ole Miss.

Violation 11

“It is alleged that during the summer of 2010, David Saunders (Saunders), then administrative operations coordinator for football, and Chris Vaughn (Vaughn), then assistant football coach, violated the NCAA principles of ethical conduct when they knowingly arranged for REDACTED, a representative of the institution’s athletics interests, to provide impermissible recruiting inducements in the form of housing, meals and/or transportation to five then football prospective student-athletes. Additionally, Saunders knowingly arranged for REDACTED to provide housing, meals and/or transportation to a sixth then football prospective student-athlete. REDACTED became a representative of the institution’s athletics interests due to Saunders and Vaughn arranging for him to provide recruiting inducements to the prospects. Further, Derrick Nix (Nix), assistant football coach, was involved in arranging for the sixth prospect to receive housing, meals and/or transportation.”

The University does not agree that this should be a level one violation because of the impermissible benefits were such a low number. The players only received $333, and one of them received $133 in impermissible benefits.

The University also disputes the claim that Derrick Nix was involved in this. Claiming Nix did not know who the person was that was staying with Individual 1.

Violation 12

“It is alleged that between August 14 and 31, 2013, Chris Vaughn (Vaughn), former assistant football coach, violated the NCAA cooperative principle when he communicated with witnesses of an NCAA enforcement investigation after being admonished on multiple occasions to refrain from having such communications. Additionally, on December 17, 2013, Vaughn violated the NCAA principles of ethical conduct when he knowingly provided false or misleading information to the institution and enforcement staff regarding his knowledge of and/or involvement in violations of NCAA legislation.”

Basically, Vaughn lied about his part in the ACT fraud. He denied telling potential student athletes to take the ACT at the Waynesboro testing site in June 2010.

This is a level one violation. Vaughn was no longer an employee of the University at the time, so the University has no comment on this violation.

Violation 13

“It is alleged that on December 16, 2013, and February 25, 2014, (Saunders), former administrative operations coordinator for football, violated the NCAA principles of ethical conduct when he knowingly provided false or misleading information regarding his knowledge of and/or involvement in violations of NCAA legislation”

Same thing as the last violation. Saunders lied about his role in the ACT fraud.

This is a level one violation. Saunders was no longer an employee at the University when this took place, so the University has no comment on this violation.

Proposed Punishment

These self-imposed sanctions have yet to be accepted by the NCAA, but here is what Ole Miss is proposing as their sanctions for these violations. I fully expect the NCAA to agree to these terms.

Dissociation of one organization and four individuals for at least three years.
Additional rules education for involved staff.
Recruiting suspension for two assistant coaches.
Reduction of scholarships and initial grants of aid.
Reduction of recruiting evaluation dates, official and unofficial visits, and contact with recruits.
$159,325 fine.
Three year probation.

The scholarship losses are defined here by Chase Parham of RebelGrove.com.

#OleMiss’ self-imposed recruiting sanctions. pic.twitter.com/kIOGhbJPDB
— Chase Parham (@ChaseParham) May 27, 2016

Basically, 9 scholarships over 3 seasons. With the overall reduction being 11 over 4 seasons.

Is this a bad thing?

Well any sanction is a bad thing, but this is no new news to most Ole Miss insiders and fans. These violations do not spell out the death penalty for Ole Miss, but it is a slight blow to the recruiting machine Coach Freeze has running. I fully expect this to not affect recruiting this year.

Next: 5-star RB Cam Akers puts Ole Miss in top 10

But what about Tunsil’s draft night extravaganza?

That is not in this letter, but according to the University, the draft night incident was new to them and the NCAA. So this thing is still not over just yet.

Home/Ole Miss Football