Could Michigan State be the next to face NCAA or Big Ten sanctions, following Penn State and Indiana?
In recent decades, the NCAA and the Big Ten Conference have been under intense pressure to maintain integrity, enforce regulations, and ensure student-athlete safety. Two of the most infamous examples of institutional failure in the Big Ten are Penn State and, to a lesser extent, Indiana University. These scandals, while distinct in nature, altered how collegiate sports are controlled and how accountability is expected of even the most legendary programs.
With an increasing emphasis on transparency and reform, many eyes are shifting to East Lansing, where Michigan State University has faced its own set of challenges. Given the university’s checkered recent past, the question is whether Michigan State is next in line for NCAA or Big Ten punishment.
Precedent: Penn State and Indiana
To grasp the scope of prospective sanctions against Michigan State, consider how the NCAA and Big Ten have handled previous crises.
Penn State’s demise occurred in the early 2010s, with the Jerry Sandusky child molestation scandal. The gravity of the situation resulted in significant institutional fines. The NCAA levied a $60 million fine, vacated wins, and issued a four-year postseason suspension. While many of the fines were later reduced or reversed, the consequences served as a watershed moment in collegiate athletics governance.
During the Kelvin Sampson period, Indiana University faced its own NCAA breaches controversy, albeit it was not nearly as serious. Improper recruiting calls resulted in self-imposed consequences, such as scholarship cutbacks and recruiting bans. Although less serious than Penn State’s predicament, Indiana’s case demonstrated how the NCAA scrutinises compliance in non-criminal circumstances.
Michigan State’s History: A Tipping Point?
Michigan State University is not new to controversy. The most notorious and terrible incident involves Larry Nassar, a former MSU and USA Gymnastics doctor who was found guilty of sexually abusing hundreds of women under the guise of medical treatment. While this incident was primarily about USA Gymnastics, MSU’s role in supporting Nassar through administrative negligence has left a stain on its reputation.
The university resolved legal litigation for hundreds of millions of dollars and underwent significant leadership changes, but NCAA punishment was never completely implemented. Critics claim that the NCAA’s response to MSU’s involvement in the Nassar issue was inadequate in comparison to the severe punishments applied against Penn State. NCAA President Mark Emmert even conceded that the organisation lacked “the tools” to effectively address matters that, while horrific, did not explicitly break athletic rules.
However, subsequent developments have reignited speculation.
Football Program Under Fire
Michigan State’s football program has likewise experienced instability in the post-Mark Dantonio era. A series of off-field events involving players, as well as the recent Mel Tucker sexual harassment case, have brought the university back into the national spotlight. Tucker, who signed a $95 million contract extension in 2021, was suspended and later fired for cause following claims of inappropriate behaviour with a sexual assault awareness advocate.
While the issue may not directly involve NCAA regulations, the optics and institutional management of the situation may prompt a re-evaluation by the Big Ten Conference, particularly under Commissioner Tony Petitti, who has taken a tougher stance on public accountability since taking office.
Furthermore, the football program has faced charges of a “toxic culture” and a lack of internal discipline, which, if proven, might lead to additional investigation. Although not yet to the degree of programmatic misconduct, the accumulation of off-field issues may indicate an institutional lack of control, which the NCAA has the jurisdiction to penalise.
Big Ten’s Changing Role
In recent years, the Big Ten Conference has become more involved in internal punishment, particularly with the rise of NIL (Name, Image, and Likeness) laws, gambling offences, and Title IX compliance. The conference’s reaction to the Michigan sign-stealing scandal in 2023, in which Coach Jim Harbaugh was banned for three games by the Big Ten, displayed a renewed willingness to act quickly and independently, even in the face of legal opposition.
This move may bode difficulties for Michigan State. The combination of public criticism, unresolved issues about institutional leadership, and enhanced conference supervision means MSU may face the same level of scrutiny as other Big Ten programs.
What Might Sanctions Look Like?
What type of sanctions may Michigan State face?
Fines for inappropriate behaviour or failing to oversee staff.
If NCAA recruiting infractions are discovered, scholarships may be reduced or recruiting limitations may be imposed.
Postseason suspensions in the event of a confirmed “lack of institutional control.”
The Big Ten or the NCAA imposed mandatory supervision or compliance reforms.
This move may bode difficulties for Michigan State. The combination of public criticism, unresolved issues about institutional leadership, and enhanced conference supervision means MSU may face the same level of scrutiny as other Big Ten programs.
What Might Sanctions Look Like?
What type of sanctions may Michigan State face?
Fines for inappropriate behaviour or failing to oversee staff.
If NCAA recruiting infractions are discovered, scholarships may be reduced or recruiting limitations may be imposed.
Postseason suspensions in the event of a confirmed “lack of institutional control.”
The Big Ten or the NCAA imposed mandatory supervision or compliance reforms.
Whether through self-imposed reforms, leadership changes, or broader NCAA or Big Ten demands, Michigan State must confront its recent history with honesty and decisiveness. Otherwise, it may find itself under the same disciplinary scrutiny that previously consumed Penn State and Indiana.