UCLA, Pac 10 cooperating in investigation

Thursday, October 10, 1996

By Brent Boyd

Daily Bruin Senior Staff

According to some Pacific 10 officials, UCLA men’s basketball
coach Jim Harrick’s truck sale to the sister of a prized recruit
may be less incriminating than earlier reports indicated.

A Chevy Blazer, registered to Harrick but reportedly cared for
and driven primarily by his son Glenn, was sold to Lisa Hodoh, the
sister of recruit Baron Davis for $5,000 ­ an amount that by
some accounts, was far below market value. But according to several
Southland auto dealers, the Blazer’s market value may not be far
off the $5,000 charged to Hodoh. If in fact the truck was sold for
an amount near its actual worth, it’s likely that no NCAA
regulations were violated.

"I would not be surprised one little bit if there were no
violations," University of Arizona NCAA compliance official Bill
Morgan said. (Most schools employ a compliance officer whose
responsibility it is to know the NCAA rule book and keep the
programs alert to potential violations)

The truck, originally reported by the Los Angeles Times to be
worth between $12,000 and $16,000, may actually be valued much
closer to the $5,000 charged to Davis’ sister. Used car dealers
contacted by the Daily Bruin revealed the actual value of the truck
is more likely to be between $4,000 and $8,000.

"As long as the person pays the going rate, I would say that
there would not be a violation," Morgan said.

However, when approached by the Daily Bruin, UCLA athletic
director Peter Dalis and numerous other members of the athletic
department still declined to comment.

"The athletic department … sent out a general message to
everybody telling us all not to say anything," UCLA assistant
basketball coach Steve Lavin said. "Just until the interviews
(between the Pac-10 officials and all involved in the incident) are
over."

According to NCAA bylaws, recruits can make purchases from
members of the university assuming the deal is at market value and
is not intended to lure the recruit to the program. For example,
schools often provide luncheons for recruits during unofficial
visits, as long as the athletes pay the market rate for the
meal.

It is the school’s responsibility to prove the deal was made
with no intentions of swaying Davis’ decision, a task that may be
very difficult to prove.

With no hard evidence to prove otherwise, it will be the Pac
10’s responsibility to determine whether or not the parties
involved are speaking the truth.

According to media reports, Glenn Harrick claims to have been
trying to sell the Blazer by word of mouth, and struck a deal with
Hodoh on Sept. 20 without even considering whether any NCAA
regulations would be broken.

Some believe Davis decided on UCLA long before this even became
an issue. "He’s told me since the beginning of summer that he
wanted to go there," fellow recruit and close friend Chris Burgess
said.

Harrick and Davis both refused to comment.

The actual investigation into the allegations began yesterday
with the arrival of David Price, the head of the Pac 10’s
infractions committee. Price was unavailable to comment.

UCLA notified the Pac 10 after becoming aware of the
allegations.

"The school was very wise in calling in David as soon as
possible," Morgan said. "If you get someone from the outside to
come in, take a look and say it’s clean, then someone can’t say
that you’re hiding something."

If Price concludes, after interviewing all parties involved,
there was no wrongdoing, the school and conference will report
their findings to the NCAA. The NCAA will then decide whether or
not they want to begin their own investigation of the school.

If a violation is revealed, however, it must be determined
whether it is a major infraction, blatant breaking of the rules, or
a secondary violation, where the program was unaware the action was
illegal.

According to John Parks, the Arizona State compliance officer, a
minor infraction could take anywhere from one day to several weeks
to determine the punishment, whereas an investigation into a major
infraction could last up to three years.

At that point, the conference and school make a proposal to the
NCAA, which in turns decides whether or not to continue
investigating.

When a violation occurs during recruitment, the school is
expected to report the infraction to the NCAA and declare the
recruit ineligible to compete for the university. Simultaneously,
the school would appeal to the NCAA to restore the eligibility.

If the initial investigation continues without delays, the whole
process could be concluded by next week. However, the reality is
that it will probably take much longer than that.

"Even though there is 500 pages in the (NCAA) manual there are a
whole lot more interpretations," Morgan said. "I have over 5,000
different interpretations on my computer. So you’ve got to filter
through all that."