The NCAA's rules & bylaws are on Michigan's side

Copied from Erik_in_Dayton's diary above because when I tried to access this critical information on my phone I couldn't find the Diary Section but navigating the Message Board was easy.  Someone please make sure Erik's excellent interpretation of the NCAA's bylaws is known by the UM athletic department / compliance office today before their meeting.  Well done Erik!

 

1. Introduction/High-Level Takeaways

The NCAA might not be on Michigan’s side when it comes to the current allegations about sign stealing, but its rules and bylaws are.  This diary is about to get long, so here are the high-level takeaways:

• There is no rule against sign stealing as such.
• The rule that forbids recording an opponent’s signals only applies to a team when it’s on a field for a game.
• A football program can hire third parties to scout future opponents in person.
• Seth and the poster who goes by Ghost of Fritz Crisler found the most important points below.

Okay, let’s go through Michigan’s supposed rules violations.

2. The Rule that Categorically Prohibits Sign Stealing

There is no such rule.  You can steal signs in at least some circumstances. 

3. Rule 1-11-h of the NCAA Football 2023 Rules Book

It says this:

Any attempt to record, either through audio or video means, any signals given by an opposing player, coach or other team personnel is prohibited.

That seems cut and dried, but it cannot be read alone.  As a preliminary matter, it’s worth noting that Rule 1-11-h is part of Rule 1, which is titled The Game, Field, Players, and Equipment.  Next, per Rule 1-6-b, the Rules Book—the entire thing—applies to the following:

Everyone in the team area, players, substitutes, replaced players, coaches, athletics trainers, cheerleaders, band members, mascots [!], public-address announcers, audio/video/lighting system operators, and other persons affiliated with the teams or institutions.

In case there is any confusion about what the above means by “the teams,” Rule 1-1-1-a tells us that “(t)he game shall be played between two teams of not more than 11 players each…”  So, we’re talking about the two teams that are playing a given game, not all D-1 football teams everywhere. And, for the rules to apply to a person, that person must be affiliated with the teams playing the game and in the “team area.”

What is the “team area”? Rule 1-2-4-a defines it as being “(o)n each side of the field” in the back of a “limit line” (I won’t subject you to that definition) and between the 20-yard lines.  The major point is that it is to the sides of a football field where the two teams play.  Thus, to be subject to Rule 1-11-h, you have to be on the side of a field.  People who are watching games from the stands are not that. 

4. 2022-2023 NCAA Division 1 Manual Bylaw 11.6.1

Okay, let’s move onto the big one.  Bylaw 11.6.1 says this:

Off-campus, in-person scouting of future opponents (in the same season) is prohibited, except as provided in Bylaws 11.6.1.1 and 11.6.1.2 [these two exceptions aren’t relevant].

We don’t have the nice, clean explanation of whom the Bylaws apply to that we had in the Football Rules Book.  But Article 11 of the Bylaws, of which 11.6.1 is a part, is titled Conduct and Employment of Athletics Personnel.  More, in Bylaw 11.1.1, we’re told that “Institutional staff members found in violation of NCAA regulations shall be subject to disciplinary or corrective action…”  Also, we have common sense to tell us that the NCAA cannot mean 11.6.1 to apply to all humans everywhere.  If nothing else, the average fan does not have “future opponents.”  It seems safe to say, then, that the rule applies on its face to employees of athletic departments (or schools, if you like).  If you think there is ambiguity there, however, we go to our next point.

And here is where we encounter what Ghost of Fritz found and the biggest point of confusion: typically, we’d be correct to think that you cannot absolve yourself of punishment for a prohibited act by paying someone else to do it.  Agency liability and criminal conspiracy charges come to mind.  But that logic just doesn’t seem to apply here. 

Prior to August 2013, Bylaw 11.6.1 prohibited schools from off-campus, in-person scouting of opponents for football, basketball, and women’s volleyball—but not for other sports.  This was balanced out to some extent thanks to then-Bylaw 11.6.2, which said that football, basketball, and women’s volleyball enjoyed a carve-out from the following prohibition:

…a member institution shall not pay or permit the payment of expenses incurred by its athletics department staff members or representatives (including professional scouting services) to scout its opponents or individuals who represent its opponents…

In other words, you couldn’t scout an opponent in person for your football, basketball, and women’s volleyball teams, but you could pay “representatives” to scout opponents for those sports. 

Then, in August 2013, the NCAA changed the rule and prohibited off-campus, in-person scouting of future opponents (in the same season) for all sports but balanced that by completely discarding the prohibition against paying for scouting.  In doing so, it published the following rationale:

In the interest of simplicity and consistency, it is appropriate for one rule regarding scouting to apply to all sports. In most cases, video of future opponents is readily available either through institutional exchange, subscription to a recording/dubbing service or internet sites accessible to the general public.

There is only one reasonable interpretation of what happened in August 2013 when the rule was changed: schools could pay for scouting services for football before the rule changed and can still do so now (the rule hasn’t been amended since).  It would make absolutely no sense to repeal the rule that banned payment for scouting for most non-football sports as a way of banning payment for scouting for football.  The explicit rationale for the rule change also wouldn’t make sense.  Accordingly, schools can pay third parties to scout opponents. 

Let me say this in a different way: there is only ambiguity in 11.6.1 if you’re not convinced by its text that it only applies to school employees.  And the legislative history of the rule makes clear that you should be convinced of that.  As seen in 11.6.1 prior to August 2013, the NCAA knew what to say to ban third-party scouting.  And, rather than applying that to football, the NCAA did away with that ban for all sports. 

5. The Rule Against Hiring Third Parties to Scout & Record Opponents in Person to Steal Signs

You can steal signs.  You can hire third parties to scout opponents in person.  You can record opponents’ signals if you’re not on a football field playing against them.  There is no rule suggesting that combining these things makes them a collective rules violation.