UH’s sins not of commission but intentional omission

We got our first actual look at the Notice of Allegations from the NCAA on Saturday, the result of its lengthy probe of the University of Hawaii men’s basketball program. And, as expected, the biggest sins were not breaking the rules but the lying about breaking the rules that helped make the investigation take so long.

The tone of the 42-page document — especially toward the end — is actually encouraging for UH, the institution … well, as positive as something of this nature can be.

The NCAA is big on aggravating factors and mitigating factors. More of the former apply to the fired coaches, Gib Arnold and Brandyn Akana. It is alleged they "knowingly provided false or misleading information to the institution and NCAA enforcement staff …" Yes, that could be quite aggravating.

Now, is there anyone still wondering why they were fired? There you go, it’s right there in black and white. Yes, these are still just allegations. But is anyone still delusional enough to not see the evidence as overwhelming?

Yes, a lot of these alleged violations seem manini. UH definitely isn’t the only program where operations staff members coach, against the rules. However, when you get caught for these things it’s just dumb to cover up instead of ‘fess up.

Regarding those mitigating factors: In the NCAA letter, it is clearly addressed that UH — other than Arnold and Akana — did everything it could to cooperate with the investigation. And it gets brownie points for firing them. If you still think that move was unfair consider the alternative, in regards to potential NCAA sanctions.

Maybe the timing of the firings was less than ideal. But would it have been better to wait until after the current season started?

Arnold and Akana will have their day in court … perhaps against both the NCAA and UH.

While the notice of allegations hints that things could go relatively easy for UH, this is far from a done deal.

UH still has to figure out if firing the coaches and improving its compliance system (as noted by the NCAA) is enough, or if it should self-impose sanctions as part of its response to the allegations.

Unless the words of the Notice of Allegations mean nothing, UH shouldn’t fear the dreaded "lack of institutional control." This is, however, the NCAA, and you never know when a curveball is on its way.

For example, take a look at page 35. Could "a history of major violations by the institution" really be used against UH as an aggravating factor? We’re talking about the findings of the NCAA investigation in 1976 and 1977.

Using that as a barometer would make even less sense than punishing future UH basketball teams severely for what was done by coaches who have been fired and players who are gone under the watch of an athletic director who is also no longer here.

You can only hope that common sense and fairness prevail when this gets to the committee on infractions in a few weeks. And that there isn’t someone on that committee who for whatever reason wants to stick it to UH.

Reach Dave Reardon at dreardon@staradvertiser.com or 529-4783. His blog is at hawaiiwarriorworld.com/quick-reads.