Former IU president breaks silence on Sampson

Former Indiana University president Adam Herbert, who served in the same position from 1989-98 at the University of North Florida, gave Times-Union sports columnist Gene Frenette an exclusive interview Monday about the fallout from the resignation of basketball coach Kelvin Sampson in the wake of five major NCAA allegations levied against his program.

Herbert, now a professor at the IU School of Public and Environmental Affairs, had not commented publicly on the coach he approved to be hired in March, 2006. The hire happened despite Sampson being put on NCAA probation for being found guilty of his Oklahoma staff making 577 improper phone calls to recruits. Sampson agreed to resign from his IU post on Friday, accepting a $750,000 buyout in exchange for not filing a lawsuit against the school.

In May, 2006, the NCAA banned Sampson from calling recruits or making recruiting trips for one year for what it called "deliberate noncompliance” when he was at Oklahoma. Last October, following Indiana's investigation, it documented over 100 phone calls that were in violation of NCAA restrictions placed on Sampson and his Indiana staff. Sampson had to forfeit a scheduled $500,000 raise.

After an NCAA follow-up investigation, IU was charged with five possible "major" violations as a result of alleged phone calls made by Sampson's staff at Indiana.

Herbert was president at IU until July, 2007. He signed off on Sampson's hire two years ago after athletic director Rick Greenspan recommended him following a six-hour interview with the AD, two school trustees and Herbert.

The following are some excerpts from Herbert's extensive interview with the Times-Union. Look for Gene Frenette's column on the subject in Tuesday's Times-Union.

Adam Herbert: "I am very disappointed regarding the recent situation in the Indiana men's basketball program. It's particularly unfortunate that responses from Coach Sampson and also the university to the NCAA allegations can't be discussed publicly at this time until they get in front of the Infractions Committee [scheduled for June 14]. There are multiple sides to every story. I believe everyone is innocent until proven guilty.”

On what led to Sampson's hiring: "Historically, I have felt very strongly about rules compliance. I have insisted that coaches be fired for violating rules. Some people have asked about the selection process [of hiring Sampson]. What role did I play in the selection process? Did I tell the athletic director [Rick Greenspan] to hire this guy? The process does speak to the level of attention we addressed to it. The university has always used essentially the same decision-making process. The AD has responsibility for the selection and evaluation of coaches, along with raises and firing.

"In this case, the AD developed the list of candidates to be considered. He initiated the appropriate background checks [of the candidates]. He hired a consultant to help us. No one knew who was on our final list of candidates. The AD went through the process of narrowing the list to three or four people, with the help of a consultant. Because of the significance of basketball in this state and the issue raised about NCAA sanctions [in Sampson's case], I asked two members of the Board of Trustees to review the process.

"Once it became clear Coach Sampson was one we'd look at in greater deth, I knew it was an issue that would raise eyebrows. The AD held briefings for me and the two trustees, reporting back to us on everything he was able to find out. He talked with Sampson, the Oklahoma athletic director and the attorneys [for Oklahoma], so when we got down to the final discussions of what we might do, I thought we had a pretty good sense of what the issues were. We invited Coach Sampson to meet with Rick [Greenspan], me and the two trustees. We met for six hours. We had detailed questions about the phone calls [at Oklahoma].

"We came away from that feeling like [Sampson] was someone who understood what he went through and wasn't likely to make that same mistake again. He cared about the young men that played for him. All his players loved him. The parents were appreciative of what he did for their children. All of us wanted to feel comfortable that [NCAA charges against him] was an aberration.

"What I asked the [IU] general counsel to do was develop clear wording [in the contract] with our expectations. It says that violations of NCAA rules can be a basis for termination. There's very little wiggle room. It was to assure our expectations [of compliance with NCAA rules] were very clear.

"[Greenspan] recommended [Sampson] to the president, and I concurred with that, and the belief that we had every confidence that the letter and spirit of this agreement would be met. We had to have a pretty high comfort level [to hire him].”

On how bad the charges look for Sampson and the potential consequences for the rest of his career: "We don't know his side of the story. There may be some extenuating circumstances. He has to be given the opportunity to state his case. It's important to have the opportunity to speak to all of the allegations.”

On the possibility that Sampson may have betrayed the faith that Indiana University placed in him: "The reality is no president or athletic director wants to be put in this position. When you make decisions like these [to hire a coach], you take them very seriously. You certainly don't want to make a decision that creates problems in the future."

On what he expects the outcome will be of Sampson's appearance before the NCAA Infractions Committee on June 14: "All of us who were involved in the [hiring] process felt what happened previously was an aberration. I hope that turns out to be the case. I've talked with [Sampson] about it. I won't characterize [the conversation]. My hope is when he makes his presentation to the Infractions Committee, he'll be able to demonstrate the confidence in him was well-founded. I'm disappointed with the whole situation. We're all innocent until proven guilty. I know there are more facts to come out than have come out.

"He has a chance to prove that all of this is not true, and I hope he can.”

On the blow to Indiana University's solid track record of following NCAA regulations: "This is not an institution that sanctions violation of rules. That's not what we've been about. Every university will have secondary [NCAA] violations. It's virtually impossible to comply with all of them. The interesting question in this case is if the original violations [at Oklahoma] had not been there, would be these be major [allegations]? Probably not, but we are where we are.”

On Sampson electing to resign instead of trying to fight to stay on in the face of NCAA charges: "He didn't have to submit his resignation, but he chose to do so and encouraged his players to continue to compete, even though he feels his side of the story hasn't been told."

On why Indiana decided to hire Sampson despite the previous violations at Oklahoma: "He's been so well-respected over time. The only violations we were able to get were about telephone calls. It wasn't about providing financial assistance to players or getting jobs in which they were paid for not working. Nothing like that. The due diligence we did was about phone calls [to recruits]. There are a whole host of cases involving a lot worse allegations than phone calls.

"When you're looking at someone who is one of the best coaches in America and had 20-win seasons for a decade, this became a value hire for us. My view at the time, and still is, was that when you have a chance to hire someone with his track record and whose only offense was telephone calls, and we took a look at all of them. . . . When you look in the broader scheme of things, it was worth giving him a second chance."

Read Gene's column in Tuesday's Times-Union or on Jacksonville.com.