Skip to content

Kentucky Sports Radio

University of Kentucky Basketball, Football, and Recruiting news brought to you in the most ridiculous manner possible.

Notre Dame football forced to vacate two of its best seasons

Like Manti Te’o’s girlfriend, Notre Dame’s 2012-13 and 2013-14 seasons don’t exist.

The NCAA vacated those two seasons today in an academic misconduct case involving a student-trainer. The Committee on Infractions ruled the trainer violated ethical conduct rules when she committed academic misconduct for two players and provided six others with impermissible academic extra benefits.

Notre Dame went 12-1 in that 2012-13 season and made an appearance in the BCS Championship game, where it lost to Alabama, 42-14.

There is no word on whether or not Louisville will keep its 2013 NCAA basketball title, not that that has anything to do with this story.

Article written by Drew Franklin

I can recite every line from Forrest Gump, blindfolded. Follow me on Twitter: @DrewFranklinKSR

31 Comments for Notre Dame football forced to vacate two of its best seasons

  1. tlwood43
    1:00 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    Meanwhile, in North Carolina…

  2. Realme
    1:00 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    BUT WHAT UNC DID IS OKAY?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!??

  3. secrick
    1:06 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    North Carolina had classes for all students not just sports, so they are not guilty of anything and if you believe that then you are as dumb as the NCAA infractions comm. Cards that banner may be coming down.

  4. randy381
    1:13 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    I really don’t understand why the infractions verified at North Carolina (huge number of students/atheletes) have gone so untalked about, much less any demand for results. Amazing!!!

    • Bluebloodtoo
      1:30 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

      I can’t see a difference between UNC and Notre dame from a financial standpoint. Maybe Notre Dame has a “problem” with truthfulness from their internal management that UNC doesn’t have?

  5. rickwhitetx
    1:27 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    A female student trainer helps 6 football players with classwork and that is treated with more severity than North Carolina, Louisville, Syracuse, et. al. The female student trainer was given a 2 year show cause order and can have nothing to do with Notre Dame athletics for 2 years. Jim Boeheim sat out 9 games. Rick Pitino didn’t know nothin’, and Roy Williams is not culpable. Good God Gertie!

    • Bluebloodtoo
      1:31 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

      See my comment above…

  6. kvltclassic
    1:33 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    I work in this field. For most of the posters on here: Under NCAA rules, extra benefits are anything that student-athletes are provided with outside of the NCAA rules that other (regular) students do not have access to. So when a student trainer does someone’s classwork, then they are getting a benefit not available to the general student body. In the case of UNC, those bogus classes were available to every student, not just the athletes. So technically it is not an extra benefit, like what secrick said. What they did was wrong, but it is unprecedented for the NCAA to come in and tell a university that it’s classes are fake, they technically only have jurisdiction over academics as far as it infringes into the student-athlete realm. That’s how they punish other schools but have been incapable of punishing UNC to this point. You don’t want the NCAA to take the stand that they have the ability to decide what is and is not a legitimate class, that’s a Pandora’s Box nobody wants to open.

    • kvltclassic
      1:34 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

      Just like if Louisville offered escorts to all of their student body, then they would have been fine (except where recruits are involved).

    • meeksfor3
      2:31 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

      Again…what about the rental cars, dental mouth guards, etc? Were other students given sports cars to drive around? Were other students parents given jobs and allowed to travel to watch games?

    • rickwhitetx
      2:48 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

      Oh, okay, so UNC gets away with it and Penn State gets hit for stuff that the NCAA had no jurisdiction over. I get it. Sure. Perfectly understandable.

    • kvltclassic
      3:35 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

      meeksfor3 – dental mouth guards are part of player safety. Who was getting rental cars there?
      rickwhitetx – surely you can see the difference between the two sets of facts right?

    • J-Dub421
      3:50 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

      I would agree with you Kvlt, except for the eligibility issue. UNC kept their athletes eligible to play academically by steering them into fake classes. They played players who would have had to sit due to their poor academic standing, but stayed eligible only through the fake classes.

    • kvltclassic
      4:20 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

      J-Dub, I agree with the fact that they kept them eligible potentially by having them in the fake classes. But then you have to decide where you draw the line because every school will steer kids who may be questionable academically into majors that they know are easier, though not fake (like in the UNC case). The NCAA only says that they have to meet certain progress toward degree bench marks, and pass certain amounts of credits but they don’t measure the validity or difficulty of particular programs or degrees. I mean there should be some sort of punishment for UNC because what they did is not good, I just don’t know how the NCAA gets to a punishment without severely questionable interpretations of their rules that could open up the floodgates for other issues. Not that they haven’t done that before haha

  7. meeksfor3
    1:41 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    Lost in the shuffle of UNC’s academic scandal is the fact that they also received impermissible benefits in the form of rental cars, etc.

    • J-Dub421
      3:55 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

      Don’t forget the kerfluffle with Tyler Hansbrough’s mom dating UNC’s AD and the two of them using university funds to take private planes to go see her other son Ben play at Notre Dame.

    • J-Dub421
      4:02 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

      My bad, it wasn’t the AD at UNC, he was the chief fundraiser and he created a high paying job for Hansbrough’s mom because he was dating her, then they misappropriated university funds.

  8. kycats13
    1:43 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    Are there any Kentucky boys at Notre Dame that would want to come home to the Bluegrass State?

    • DACats86
      2:35 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

      No, but UK and ND are both heavily recruiting Joshua Paschal and he is thought to be a ND lean…

  9. Look Out Fireworks
    1:43 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    Simple solution:

    Show that she also helped a non student athlete with homework and it is no longer an athletics issue.

    A la North Carolina

  10. Look Out Fireworks
    1:50 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    Is the difference the fact that a student was helping other students cheat instead of an accredited university helping students cheat?

  11. david8577
    2:10 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    I don’t get why UL fans cry UNC when people talk about punishments. Sure, what UNC did was shady and unethical, but the players were eligible. Really the beef with UNC should be that players were promised an education and didn’t get one. It’s a players vs. the University deal. However, UL is different. UL “won” a championship and went to another final four with ineligible players. It’s very simple; those two season’s (and really two more season’s) wins should be taken away. Banner should come down, sold in an auction, and the proceeds given to a charity that fights the exploitation of children.

  12. FatSparxxx
    2:10 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    Brian Kelly is the devil and he deserves much worse

  13. Bluebloodtoo
    2:52 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    Let’s be real here… UNC had a fake class that was most likely specifically there for athlete’s benefit, but because it was available to all students, then it doesn’t fall under the jurisdiction of the NCAA athletics enforcement. That’s seem awfully convenient when the vast majority of students in the class were in the athletic program. They got off on a technicality….

    • RealCatsFan
      3:44 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

      Apparently, whoever at UNC who set it up that way is a genius. Evil genius, but genius, nonetheless.

      UK should have sent out Emory packages of money to the regular joe schmo’s in the dorms – then everything would have been fine! 😉

  14. Sentient Third Eye
    3:06 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    Apparently, a steady stream of wrongdoing is against the rules, but an ocean of the same is okay? So Notre Dame just didn’t cheat enough?

  15. jonthes
    3:51 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    Meanwhile in Chapel Hill they’re sipping tea.

  16. Catcasey1
    4:01 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    Who really cares about n.d football

    • kvltclassic
      4:28 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

      Manti Ta’o’s dead girlfriend’s family.

  17. Sunshinesbright
    4:47 pm November 22, 2016 Permalink

    The new academic misconduct guidelines were, in large part, established due to the UNC case. It showed a massive hole in NCAA rules as it wasn’t something NCAA rules specifically addressed. Expect several more cases to come out in the next 12-18 months as the NCAA is processing numerous cases. See link for an easy to follow graphic which explains how something like ND is a major violation while UNC may not be.

    Question No. 14: Are student trainers, student managers and/or graduate student assistant
    coaches considered “institutional staff members”?

    Answer: Provided that student trainers, student managers and graduate assistant
    coaches do not have institutional responsibilities to provide academic services
    to student-athletes, a student trainer, student manager and student graduate
    assistant coach would only be an institutional staff member for purposes of
    the academic misconduct and impermissible academic assistance legislation if
    the student engages in academic misconduct or provides impermissible
    academic assistance at the direction of a nonstudent employee, a student
    employee who has institutional responsibilities to provide academic services
    to student-athletes, or a representative of the institution’s athletics interests