It has been nearly a full week since University of Tennessee officials, Southeastern Conference Commissioner Greg Sankey and disgraced former Vols head football coach Jeremy Pruitt met inside a Cincinnati hotel ballroom with representatives from the NCAA to negotiate/testify toward a final resolution in the more-than-two-year-old saga.
The focus has centered on what the NCAA has pointed to as approximately some $60,000 in disallowed cash and gifts to prospective student-athletes and family members specifically during the final two years of Pruitt’s time on Rocky Top.
Additional involved parties appeared via Zoom during both days’ testimony, which spanned nearly 20 hours, and among those long-distance participants were current Tennessee head coach Josh Heupel, as well as several former UT football employees.
Speaking to numerous sources with direct knowledge of the proceedings the past several days and throughout college football, FootballScoop has a comprehensive look into what is expected to be the final chapter in the matter before all final rulings are issued in the coming weeks.
Along those lines, multiple sources tell FootballScoop the timeline for UT, Pruitt and all others to learn the NCAA’s ultimate dispensation of punishment is expected to be six weeks from the conclusion of last week’s Infractions hearing in front of the NCAA panel; that timeline targets the very first days in June.
The hearing’s conclusion was exactly six weeks before June 1, but it ended later in the afternoon/early evening Thursday, April 20. It’s not unexpected to think the involved parties will be informed of the final rulings by Friday, June 2, per multiple sources with direct knowledge. It also mirrors that previous cases had news items delivered at week’s end.
While that’s one significant element of last week, perhaps the most other noteworthy item – as it pertained to UT’s defense – was not only the presence of Sankey in Cincinnati, but also what several sources described as Sankey’s “strong defense” of Tennessee and its “swift” response to the alleged renegade actions under Pruitt’s overwatch.
In addition to Sankey’s advocacy for the Vols, sources indicated to FootballScoop that Sankey, among others, also raised the hypothetical possibility that a student-athlete could potentially file lawsuit if he was denied a postseason opportunity to compete due to a school’s postseason ban from the NCAA. The logic, per sources, was that in the current Name, Image and Likeness marketplace, a student-athlete potentially could contend tortious interference.
Per Cornell Law School, tortious interference is defined as: “Tortious interference is a common law tort allowing a claim for damages against a defendant who wrongfully interferes with the plaintiff's contractual or business relationships.”
Sources also indicated that UT officials expressed that an additional legal figure in Tennessee also had indicated the Vols’ athletics department could be exposed to lawsuits if student-athletes were affected by a postseason ban that thus curtailed their NIL earnings opportunities.
Much of Pruitt’s defense, sources said, featured the former Alabama, Florida State and Georgia defensive coordinator, as well as the Vols’ head coach of three years, vehemently contending that UT acted rashly to dismiss him but showed inconsistencies in approach by standing behind Chancellor Donde Plowman, ex-athletics director Phillip Fulmer and former Compliance head Andrew Donovan.
Per sources, Pruitt’s attorney effectively asked, “If Donde Plowman is head of a department/school and had no idea, and Phillip Fulmer had no idea and Andrew Donovan had no idea, why can’t Jeremy Pruitt argue that he had no prior knowledge of the illicit behaviors?”. Multiple sources said that Pruitt’s overall defense went to great lengths to portray both former coaches and off-the-field staff as directly culpable while Pruitt contended his ignorance/innocence. He also noted his dismissal from UT had cost him approximately $12 million in salary from the Vols’ football program, sources with direct knowledge told FootballScoop in recent days.
Of course, Pruitt’s wife, Casey, also was part of last week’s proceedings in Cincinnati and has accusations of impermissible benefits provided levied against her. She’s a former NCAA compliance employee at Florida State.
Sources indicated ex-UT recruiting employee Bethany Gunn spoke at great length during the Wednesday-Thursday sessions last week.
While Vols athletics director Danny White advocated for his school’s flagship program and urged financial penalties, in addition to some recruiting and scholarship restrictions as opposed to the specter of a postseason ban, White’s focus was on the “culture change” at UT. He said, per sources, that it was his meetings with the Vols’ student-athletes after he accepted the job in January 2021 that had those student-athletes saying they wanted to compete to win immediately and not face a self-imposed bowl ban that factored heavily in his early approach and university guidance in the NCAA’s investigation.
UT officials were tight-lipped in any public comments after the hearings in Cincinnati, but Plowman did issue the following quote to Knoxville News Sentinel reporter Adam Sparks:
"We are really appreciative to the infractions committee panel for their time and attention. This was a lot of work. They are going to have to make a decision. We can't wait to get the decision, and move forward with our football program and athletics."
Indications are that Tennessee could face a financial penalty upwards of $8 million in lieu of a postseason ban, an approach that sources said UT officials strongly preferred to no postseason possibility.
The hearings also shed light on some other direct and indirect matters of the NCAA probe, which has now stretched for some 30 months.
Those included, per sources:
-- A closer inspection of Tennessee’s parking system for official visit weekends and whether or not some of those parking privileges extended beyond official visits into the category of impermissible benefits.
-- An outgoing student-athlete who transferred during the fallout from Pruitt’s firing who petitioned for a pass-fail grade in a course that was intended to be subjected to a letter-grade scale and whether or not the approach could have impacted the student-athlete’s eligibility at his transfer destination.
-- The parent of a former player testified that his/her son had received impermissible cash and benefits and also claimed direct knowledge of another player who had received similar enticements.
-- That the whistleblower at UT was a “full-time support staff member who worked in a specific non-coaching role” at the school. Further, sources said, that parties familiar with Tennessee’s situation said that, “Normally a whistleblower will go through a ‘normal’ order of operations and in this case the whistleblower went directly to the school’s Chancellor (Plowman).”
As FootballScoop previously reported earlier this year, UT also disassociated itself with two people who previously had oblique contact with the Vols’ football program.