Jack Bauerle “Gives Extra Benefit, Doesn’t Promote Compliance,” Will Return To Coaching This Season

Braden Keith
by Braden Keith 33

December 16th, 2014 College, News, SEC

The fate of embattled Georgia coach Jack Bauerle was announced on Tuesday, including a fine of $5,000, a public remand and censure, suspension from 9 regular season competitions during the 2014-2015 season, and a “one-year show-cause” order through April 3rd, 2015. That show-cause order means that Bauerle’s punishment will follow him if he were to go to another institution before April 3rd, 2015.

The suspension means that Bauerle will miss 9 regular season events this season, and won’t be able to participate in any recruiting activities until April 3rd, 2015.

According to the decision, Bauerle has served 6 of the NCAA’s definition of 9 regular season competitions, meaning that he will miss at least the upcoming South Carolina and Texas dual meets in January, and possibly the Tennessee dual meet as well (depending on whether or not the NCAA defines the earlier Tennessee Diving Invite as a regular season meet).

See the full infractions decision here.

Bauerle was suspended almost a year ago after accusations that he helped two-time defending NCAA 400 IM Champion Chase Kalisz receive special academic treatment. Kalisz was reinstated shortly after that suspension, but Bauerle remained suspended to varying degrees ever since, including not being allowed on deck as his women’s team won the 2014 NCAA Championship.

The NCAA reported that Kalisz was fully truthful when questioned about the incident, so his eligibility is not affected.

SwimSwam’s Troy Gennaro is currently participating in the conference call with the NCAA discussing the decision. More details will follow the completion of that call.

The full NCAA press release is below:

The University of Georgia head swimming and diving coach did not promote an atmosphere for compliance when he made special arrangements for a student-athlete to enroll in an independent study course to maintain eligibility, according to a decision issued by a Division I Committee on Infractions panel.

Penalties include a $5,000 fine, a nine competition suspension for the head coach and a one-year recruiting restriction for the head coach.

During the fall 2013 semester, the head coach was concerned that a student-athlete might not meet progress-toward-degree requirements and would not be eligible for competition the following semester. The head coach reached out to athletics administrators to discuss options, including adding an independent study class to ensure eligibility. The senior associate athletics director told the coach that adding the course was not recommended because classes for the current semester had ended.

After told not to get involved and not to proceed with the independent study course, the head coach asked a professor in the psychology department to admit the student-athlete into a pass/fail independent study course. The professor agreed and it was determined the student-athlete would complete the work the following semester. The student-athlete did not meet the prerequisites for the course, so the professor agreed to waive those requirements. Because the head coach created the special arrangement, the student-athlete received a benefit not available to the general student body and not allowed by NCAA rules.

The head coach failed to promote an atmosphere for compliance when he set up the special academic arrangement for the student-athlete. The head coach received clear instruction not to contact professors about student-athletes. Despite the instruction, he moved forward with contacting the professor multiple times about the independent study course. The head coach acted contrary to university policy and to the advice and caution provided by the staff responsible for athletic academic services and athletics eligibility certification. The coach also did not consult with the compliance office.

Penalties and corrective measures include:

  • Public reprimand and censure.
  • A fine of $5,000.
  • A one-year show-cause order for the head coach from April 4, 2014 through April 3, 2015. The panel adopted the university’s suspension of the head coach beginning in 2014 and continued the suspension until 2015. The head coach is restricted from all recruiting duties during that period. Additionally, the head coach will be suspended for nine regular season competitions during the 2014-15 season. The public report contains additional details.

Members of the Committee on Infractions are drawn from NCAA membership and members of the public. The members of the panel who reviewed this case are Carol Cartwright, president emeritus at Kent State University; Greg Christopher, chief hearing officer and athletics director at Xavier University; Thomas Hill, senior vice president for student affairs at Iowa State University; Roscoe Howard, Jr., attorney; Joel Maturi, former University of Minnesota athletics director; Sankar Suryanarayan, university counsel, Princeton University; and Rodney Uphoff, law professor at the University of Missouri, Columbia.

Leave a Reply

18 Comment threads
15 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
28 Comment authors
newest oldest most voted

we Gucci!


you know I see flyguy and think to myself who is using my name?! but then I see NOTflyguy..


I like how they said that he can’t participate in any recruiting activities. If I’m a prospective athlete looking at going to Georgia, in my mind he doesn’t need to. Coach Bauerle has showed that he has his athletes’ backs and is willing to go the extra mile for them. For me, that says more than anything he personally could show me on a recruiting trip.




Do you think he would do this for an average member of his team or just superstar Chase Kalisz? Personally, I don’t think this should be a selling point to recruits. It’s not loyalty, it’s lack of integrity.


As an athlete you rely on a system that is far from fool proof to keep you in the correct classes to be eligible. When the system didn’t work, he backed his athlete up and made it right. In my opinion that means everything.


Or your superstar athlete is about to be ineligible and you find a way around it to keep him eligible.


1. The athletic director told him not to do it.
2. He talked a psych professor into getting his star swimmer into a class that he wasn’t academically qualified for.

That is not going to bat for your athletes, that’s circumventing NCAA regulations to ensure championship season eligibility for your golden boy.


There are many things athletes should like in Bauerle but this should really not be the reason.. Going the extra mile would have been taking the time to make sure his athletes are eligible and keeping updated on their progress academically. These universities want to help their student athletes as much as they can. They have tutors for the athletes and other resources.

What Bauerle did was taking the short cut.

Another Dan

If you rely on the athletic department to get you into classes, you are taking no ownership of your own education. I swam at a school that was more academically focused (swim team was barely division 1 then, much better now). I put in a lot of time making sure I took the right classes in the right order, so that I could graduate on time. If I failed to stay eligible, in no way would it have been my coach’s or anybody else fault.


As a STUDENT athlete, you should be able to look for yourself and know your courses you should be taking. and just as a person that should be looking out for their own future if there is a system that is far from fool proof you shouldn’t be relying on it.


^^ Jamo or Conor….?

About Braden Keith

Braden Keith

Braden Keith is the Editor-in-Chief and a co-founder of SwimSwam.com. He first got his feet wet by building The Swimmers' Circle beginning in January 2010, and now comes to SwimSwam to use that experience and help build a new leader in the sport of swimming. Aside from his life on the InterWet, …

Read More »