Four possible scenarios facing UNC football

With the NCAA investigation of North Carolina football underway, the University and the program have decisions to make.

At least two rising senior football players had improper involvement with sports agents, according to multiple news outlets.

The involvement could stretch to players making improper deals with the agents while still juniors in college.

There are four possible scenarios that might play out with this investigation, which is being led by the NCAA’s director of agent, gambling and amateurism activities alongside three investigators.

1. The investigators find that no NCAA regulations were broken after their inquiry with the program.

2. The investigators find that the players received improper benefits or made improper deals with agents while they were juniors but find that the football program had no involvement in such dealings.

There would be no penalty for the University or the football program, but the penalty for the players would mean a loss of collegiate eligibility.

Per NCAA bylaw 12.3.1.1, a player would be ineligible for intercollegiate play if, “he or she enters into a verbal or written agreement with an agent for representation in future professional sports negotiations that are to take place after the individual has completed his or her eligibility in that sport.”

This agreement can be either oral or written, regardless of the legal enforceability of the agreement, according to bylaw 12.2.5.

This investigation, if it proves that only the players were involved, would be a streamlined process of the normal protocol and would likely be finished well before the type of investigation in Scenario 3.

3. The investigators find UNC football staff and players were involved in these improper deals with agents. Bylaw 10.1 states that a staff member “facilitating or arranging a meeting between a student-athlete and an agent” is unethical conduct.

Both the UNC athletic department and the NCAA have been mum on the investigation, with UNC athletic director Dick Baddour saying only that investigators have interviewed student-athletes.

Bylaw 32.1.5 states that involved individuals are “former or current student-athletes and former or current institutional staff members who have received notice of significant involvement in alleged violations.”

This scenario would punish both the players and the UNC football program. The involved players would likely lose eligibility and the program would face also face a punishment.

As reported earlier in the Daily Tar Heel, the NCAA’s goal is to finish investigations within 12 months. Should this investigation go into the 2010 football season and the players involved participate during the season, it is possible based upon precedent that the Tar Heels would be stripped of any wins that occurred while they played.

Not only that, UNC could receive the future punishment of being stripped of scholarships, like in the case of Florida State last year, or even a postseason ban like the University of Southern California’s two-year ban beginning this season.

This is the worst of the scenarios for the program, which leads to the final scenario — the best if it is proven that regulations were broken.

4. UNC does its own internal investigation alongside the NCAA investigation. Should the program find that the players had these improper deals, it could rule the players ineligible for competition before the NCAA investigation is complete.

Blowing the whistle on itself may save the program wins, scholarships, bowl games and most importantly, respect. By cutting ties with these players, the football program would likely face no punishment by the NCAA if it is found that no current or former staff members had knowledge of these improper deals.

This approach is similar to the route Oklahoma State took last season when it declared wide receiver Dez Bryant ineligible for competition. Bryant violated an NCAA bylaw when he lied to investigators about his involvement with former NFL player Deion Sanders.

OSU, through its own internal investigation, ruled Bryant ineligible rather than the NCAA, thus saving face and potential punishment for the entire program.