Monday the first day that the University of Louisville and assistant football coach Clint Hurtt’s notice from the NCAA was made public. Many of the more important details in the letter had already been leaked to multiple media outlets, but for those of you that want to read the letter in its entirety, CLICK HERE.
Eric Crawford of WDRB has been doing a great job at covering the entire situation. Here is a breakdown of what Hurtt is accused of doing, courtesy of Crawford’s column at WDRB.com.
– Received $7,025 in impermissible benefits from then Miami booster Nevin Shapiro.
— Knew of Shapiro’s involvement in recruiting seven prospective football players to Miami between 2006 and ’09.
— Along with other assistants, provided impermissible benefits directly to five then-football recruits and three members of a recruit’s family. The approximate total value of benefits provided was at least $3,315. Included in those benefits were the following:
1) Provided impermissible transportation, meals and lodging to recruits.
2) During unofficial visits, allowed multiple football recruits to stay at his residence and provided meals, all at no cost, as well as provided them with local transportation.
3) During an unofficial visit, transported recruits from his home to Shapiro’s residence. While there, the recruits interacted with current Miami players, Hurtt, Shapiro and others, got rides in Shapiro’s Mercedes and played in a pool competition for which Shapiro provided prize money.
4) Had a meal at Grazie Italian Cuisine with football recruits and players, provided transportation and arranged in advance for Shapiro to pay for the meal. Total value of benefits provided was at least $529.
Hurtt also is alleged to have sent 41 impermissible text messages and made two impermissible phone calls between 2007 and ’09.
The notice alleges that Hurtt violated NCAA unethical conduct bylaws when he provided impermissible benefits to three recruits and arranged for impermissible benefits to be made. It also alleges that Hurtt provided “false and misleading information” to NCAA enforcement personnel during an interview with the NCAA with officials from Miami and U of L present on Nov. 3, 2011.
The NCAA alleges that Hurtt lied to investigators, “when he denied providing meals, transportation and some of the lodging to four then football prospective student-athletes. . . . Additionally, Hurtt denied arranging for Shapiro to pay for the meals of four then football prospective student-athletes and three then football student-athletes, as well as attending the meal, as detailed in Allegation No. 5-(d). Hurtt’s statements were in direct contradiction to information provided by the then football prospective student-athletes and some of the then football student-athletes involved.”
The unethical conduct charges — in violation of NCAA Bylaws 10.1c and 10.1d — could carry a “show cause” penalty which can, depending on the infraction committee’s judgment, make Hurtt’s current employer liable if he is hired or remains in its employ.
Hurtt’s three seasons at U of L without any NCAA problems could be a mitigating factor in his favor, as could ethical difficulties the NCAA has admitted in investigating the case.
Hurtt has not publicly commented on the situation and I highly doubt he will be doing so anytime soon. Tom Jurich spoke to the media late last week about the situation, but didn’t elaborate much, other than saying that he will let NCAA’s due process play out. Jurich also said that Hurtt planned on appealing the NCAA’s charges and has a defense prepared.
The good news for Louisville is that the NCAA made it clear that there is no institutional responsibility on the part of Louisville for possible violations involving Clint Hurt. Considering what was in Yahoo’s initial report in 2011, what Hurtt is being charged with is relatively minor. Taking a loan from a booster and sending too many text messages is the least of his worries in my opinion. The fact that he is being accused of lying/misleading the NCAA in their formal investigation could be his biggest mistake. Hurtt has 90 days to respond to the NCAA’s allegations in writing. Until then, I doubt we’ll hear much more.
February 26, 2013 at 11:06 am
Well, that’s quite a list.