• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

Cause for Cause



I was looking at The Scott Frost contract and on page 6 and 7 it details what a NCAA investigation is and how they treat it. The contract seems to convey that even a fart of an Investigation is a serious matter. on the very next page it talks about cause and what and how cause would be handled.

My question to the board is this. Is a NCAA investigation even a small one serious enough for the University to seek removal with cause.
Last edited:

Red Dead Redemption

Baba Yaga
10 Year Member
If any business wants to remove someone, but its not clear if their reason is "allowed", then of course they will seek to exploit any of the "allowed" reasons/circumstances that are available to them.

If they DON'T want to remove someone, but a reason/circumstance arises that gives them that opportunity, then of course they will choose to not pursue it.


10 Year Member
I missed the words "fart of an investigation" in the contract.

It appears the rule is actually in Appendix C, 4 a 2. on page 15, and indicates "breach", which means not only investigation, but a determination by the NCAA that the violation did occur. It may well be that NCAA does determine there was a violation, in which case the contract says it must be "material" or "significant". That will most likely depend on the wording and penalties applied in any determination by the NCAA. If their penalties are light, the University would likely not be able to claim "for cause". How light is light is subject to litigation, but most likely if it is very close, the University would choose not to claim "for cause" for reputational reasons.

I haven't read much about the NCAA's investigation beyond the summary of the violation in a press article, but from what I did read, I don't think the university is likely to claim "for cause" because of the nature of the allegation, the exceptional context (Covid), and what I guess likely penalties would be. But of course I could be wrong.
Last edited: