Nebraska Admits Extra Benefits Violations

by Husker Mike on Jul 5, 2011 11:09 PM CDT in Nebraska Husker Football

Concluding an investigation that began last fall, Nebraska announced that they had reported the athletic department to the NCAA for violations of granting athletes benefits that were not permitted under NCAA rules. Nebraska will put themselves on probation for the next two years and will pay a fine.

What's the violation? Is it cars or selling of memorabilia? Nope. It was textbooks. Specifically, when students went to the bookstore to pick up their books, any books recommended by their professors were bundled with their required books. And while the NCAA allows schools to pay for required books, optional books are not allowed to be covered by scholarship money.

238 athletes in all were determined to have received the illegal book benefits. They will be required to make a donation to a charity in the amount of the optional book benefits; 181 athletes will owe under $100. The athletic department will also pay a $28,000 fine; roughly the amount of the illegal book benefits. Concerns about players turning around and selling the books are mitigated because players are not allowed to sell books back for cash.

In the end, you would think that this would be all that the NCAA would do on this case. Looking over the situation, it would appear to be a case of sloppy administration and misunderstanding the rules. Even so, it would be hard to come down too hard on Nebraska for this situation. After all, the extra benefits were not cars, sex, or money.

It was for textbooks. You know, education...the point of a University scholarship in the first place? Did Nebraska go too far? Yep. But in the grand scheme of things, this is probably about as benign of an NCAA extra benefits violation as you can find. Well, maybe Eric Crouch's ham sandwich was a little more benign.

Tweet Comment 18 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

With as stupid and arbitrary as the NCAA is

we could potentially be looking at the death penalty, fellas…

by Fake Pelini on Jul 5, 2011 11:16 PM CDT reply actions

/sarcasm

by Fake Pelini on Jul 5, 2011 11:17 PM CDT up reply actions

We can't have these kids receiving extra books!

Next thing you know they’ll be reading them. There’s no place for that sort of thing in Division I sports.

by alacy9513 on Jul 5, 2011 11:35 PM CDT reply actions 2 recs

first semester of last year

i was late to class trying to buy a book. the line was really long becasue the lady didnt believe niles paul was on scholarship so maybe she was right i guess he shouldnt have got it for free

Villa 'til i die!

by jgrimse on Jul 5, 2011 11:56 PM CDT reply actions

A violation

none the less. Report it and take care of it. The less you have the NCAA looking into your program even for extra books the better off you are. Tresselgate is a good lesson REPORT EVERYTHING EVEN IF IT IS A SMALL VIOLATION!!!!!

by Huzkerfan on Jul 6, 2011 8:15 AM CDT reply actions

Report the Violation? Terminate the NCAA?

We either report the violation or drop out of the NCAA’s control. I like the later of the two. The NCAA has become a thorn in the College’s side. Stupid stuff like this is what causes the NCAA to look really pethetic. Then they turn around and not do anything about true cheating, like the SEC does on a daily basis. It will never cease to amaze me.

by rickm02 on Jul 6, 2011 8:58 AM CDT reply actions

It was a SELF-reported incident

The rule is there so that again, the kids are getting unnecessary “things” on the University’s dime. It’s pretty simple, really. Most of the “recommended” books are books that the either the professor wrote and is trying to get their own “kickback” or they’re simply a related topic, but not in the cirriculum. It could be the equivalent to someone in a “golf class” being recommended to get Golf Digest. I know I know. Lamest argument ever, but that’s the reason the NCAA has this in place although this is a seriously MINOR situation and not a big deal at all and I think when the NCAA reviews it, they’ll drop it to 1 year probation as opposed to the 2 years the UNL self-imposed.

Skol!

by DM_Purp on Jul 6, 2011 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions

Heads need to roll

It is what it is and we are who we are.
Sober (again) since January 10th, 2011.
Not all those who wander are lost. /////// I dont mind stealing bread.

by nateforchiefs on Jul 6, 2011 9:17 AM CDT reply actions

It sounds like the ball got dropped when heads did roll.

by Albino Tornado on Jul 6, 2011 10:10 AM CDT up reply actions

Tressel knew about this Nebraska textbooks violation back in October.

Bloggin' at JoePasDoghouse.com

by J.Schnauzer on Jul 6, 2011 9:20 AM CDT reply actions 2 recs

What a dumb rule.

It doesn’t make much sense to list a book as recommended if you can’t use scholarship money to pay for it. In general, I don’t think students are allowed to deduct recommended books from their taxes either which is why I always list all books as required anyway. I would guess that roughly half of my students wait to buy books after the first week of class anyway because they’re trying to figure out which required books they’re actually going to need (personally, I find it irritating, but I understand it).

List all books as required. Spread the word among your professors.

by Trey Hillman's Chin on Jul 6, 2011 9:20 AM CDT reply actions

Sounds like someone in the know...

What would be an example of a “recommended” book as opposed to “required”

Skol!

by DM_Purp on Jul 6, 2011 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions

Study guides for one.

For instance, I took microeconomics as an elective. Its study guide discussed some of the math that they were dealing with in class. As an engineering undergrad, I had already knew the math, so the study guide wasn’t of much value. Also, sometimes professors will provide recommended books if you are interested in that topic in the future. Its not like an undergraduate textbook will go over everything in a field. Lastly, some professors provide very comprehensive notes, so while the notes are of primary importance, the book is secondary.

I see really nothing wrong with recommending vs. requiring books. I would say its better to broaden the rule to cover recommended books vs. making all of them required.

Google's homepage celebrates too much shit.

by meatybob on Jul 6, 2011 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions

Another example

would be a reference text for a particular technology used in class. I’ve had labs where I make a couple copies available during the lab, but if you want to go through anything outside of lab time, you need your own copy. I’ve had groups of students go in together and buy a shared copy for things like this.

Also, it could be something that is necessary, but maybe only for infrequent use. A professor might feel bad making you spring $100 for such a book, and so he or she might put a copy on reserve at the library. But, in this case, you have to put up with waiting for the communal copy to become available.

I know some professors who teach using public domain or open license material. If you don’t mind reading off of a computer screen, you can use a free electronic copy. But, they might put a printed copy as recommended so that the bookstore will stock them for those who prefer hard copies.

by Trey Hillman's Chin on Jul 6, 2011 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions