NCAA Declares Florida DT Shariff Floyd Ineligible for a Second Week in a Row

The NCAA strikes again—this time in an incident involving Shariff Floyd, defensive tackle for the University of Florida. According to an article by the Associated Press, Floyd was forced to sit out UF’s home opener against Florida Atlantic Owis, and will now be sidelined for a second week in a row. Additionally, he must make arrangements to pay close to $2,500 to local charity. The NCAA applied these penalties after evidence was received that Floyd was given “impermissible benefits” during recruiting trips prior to his enrollment at Florida. These benefits include transportation and lodging during unofficial visits, as well as $2,500 financial support from the Student Athlete Mentoring Foundation in Delaware.

While the NCAA’s response to the evidence surrounding Floyd seems quite typical, the reality of the matter is that the situation surrounding Shariff Floyd is not so typical at all. Floyd grew up in an extreme state of poverty. He vividly recalls wearing the same clothes to school every day for months at a time, and not knowing where his next meal would come from. His father died when he was only three years old, and the father figure who took over “didn’t treat him right”. Floyd’s adverse lifestyle continued straight through his high school years—years when football became his safe haven, and recruiting trips each weekend became a common occurrence. Because he had no money to spare, Floyd was given places to stay, transportation, and financial support while traveling to and from recruiting events. The support that Floyd received was a result of the kindness in people’s hearts, and by no means a result of selfish individuals hoping to snag one of the nation’s top recruits. Still, the NCAA will hardly budge. Will Muschamp, head football coach at Florida, stated that he is “…angered, disgusted, and extremely disappointed that Shariff will have to miss two games…” and that in his opinion, “…Shariff is getting lumped into what is bad about college athletics…Shariff is what is good about college athletics—his life is about survival, struggle, disappointment, and adversity…”

The article reports that the NCAA carefully analyzed Floyd’s circumstances and thus shortened the number of games he must miss from four to two. But was this the right move by the NCAA? Most people linked to this case say that Floyd should not have to miss any games because he did nothing wrong. Consequently, the NCAA has once again been placed in the hot seat and will once again have to evaluate the enforcement of its rules. Floyd, a seemingly innocent victim of wrongness, must sit back and watch his football team—his haven—play another game without him. Additionally, those wholesome individuals who helped Floyd along his journey to collegiate athletics must now wonder why they are being reprimanded for essentially doing the right thing. Will they ever want to help someone out again? In essence, the NCAA has now taken away from a person’s ability to help out a financially struggling individual. Muschamp goes on to say, “…Sharrif’s life is also about triumph, honesty, integrity, determination, perseverance and character. The NCAA stated that he received preferential treatment. There is nothing preferential about his life…”

Because reports from both the NCAA and the parties affected by the NCAA’s penalties are cited in this article, one can safely assume no important facts are disregarded. However, this article does, in fact, spark a debate. Were the actions carried out by the NCAA regarding Shariff Floyd fair or unfair? Do Floyd’s circumstances exempt him from penalties enforced by the NCAA? You know the facts. Now you decide.

 

Lindsay Lastinger