The unsubstantiated claims made by the Michael L. Buckner Law Firm are based upon an inadequate examination of the facts. Specifically, its “research” is reliant on a very small sample size of a handful of institutions and a methodology that fails to tests the claims against standard statistical criteria.

A core principle of the NCAA is to ensure a level playing field for all of its members. Victory should be earned fairly and no team or individual participant should be allowed an unfair competitive advantage. The Committee on Infractions, an independent body of representatives from member schools and legal experts, reviews each major infractions case and determines the appropriate penalties. Each case has a unique set of facts and circumstances. Because of this, the committee must consider the specifics of each case individually to maintain fairness throughout the process. Attempts by others to compare cases without consideration of the details of the violations involved are misleading and lead to erroneous assumptions.

It should be noted that probation is simply a period of time in which the involved institution is monitored by the committee to ensure that its compliance systems are functioning properly and that other penalties imposed by the committee are being carried out. Probationary periods are not designed to be punitive, but rather remedial in nature.

Further, probation is only one of numerous penalties the Committee on Infractions may place upon a school, including scholarship reductions, recruiting restrictions, loss of post-season competition, financial penalty or vacation of records, among others. These penalties are determined based on the scope and type of violations in the case. Assertions that the NCAA makes these determinations based on any other factor, such as the financial status or size of the schools, are baseless and flat-out wrong.