What rule is Michigan accused of breaking? What are possible penalties? Explaining sign-stealing in CFB

By Nicole Auerbach, Austin Meek, David Ubben and Chris Vannini

Michigan football is under investigation by the NCAA for possible rules violations related to in-person scouting of opponents. On Friday, the program suspended a college football staffer identified as being central to the investigation.

But what are the rules in college football as it pertains to signaling and scouting? Here’s what you need to know.

What is the rule Michigan is accused of breaking?

Michigan is accused of physically sending people to games of its opponents with the intent of collecting strategic information that the Michigan football program would otherwise not have access to, such as signals and play calls that are not shown on the TV broadcast or in other game film.

The relevant NCAA rule is bylaw 11.6.1, which prohibits “off-campus, in-person scouting of future opponents (in the same season).” The rule was passed in 1994 as a cost-cutting measure designed to promote equity for programs that couldn’t afford to send scouts to other games. The bylaw also prohibits an institution from “employing or paying the expenses of someone else, including professional scouting services, to scout the opponent,” according to the NCAA’s legislative database.

One source who was briefed on the allegation said Michigan is accused of using a “vast network” to steal opposing teams’ signs. If true, that would be a potential violation of the NCAA rule against in-person scouting and would be adjudicated through the NCAA infractions process.

The NCAA’s 2023 football rule book prohibits “any attempt to record, either through audio or video means, any signals given by an opposing player, coach or other team personnel.” Using an electronic device to record signals would fall under the category of prohibited field equipment.

What comes next for Jim Harbaugh?

Naturally, everyone’s already wondering what this second NCAA investigation could mean for Harbaugh’s future at Michigan. He’s been the head coach of his alma mater since 2014, and he’s never had the program in a better place. He’s beaten Ohio State two consecutive years and he’s reached the College Football Playoff both seasons, too. His 2023 team is currently unbeaten and ranked No. 2 in the AP poll.

Prior to this week’s revelations, the school had been in the process of finalizing a massive contract extension for Harbaugh that would make him the highest-paid coach in the Big Ten, according to a source briefed on the negotiations. The hope had been to reach the finish line on the negotiations by the end of the month, as Michigan has an idle week the last weekend of October. That plan will be put on hold.

Harbaugh has flirted with NFL openings in recent offseasons, and there’s already rampant speculation among other coaches and agents that he will be more tempted than ever to leave college football — and his ongoing battles against the NCAA — behind.

What is “legal” in college football as it pertains to scouting?

Most things! On very little notice, coaches can acquire the All-22 film of any game they need. Every program subscribes to a paid service that provides these, and they can see the sidelines and every player on the field at all times.

That’s pretty standard film study, and sometimes that can capture some signals. But coaches often hold up barriers behind their signers to prevent the eye in the sky from recording those signals and allowing them to show up on the All-22 film.

But having a specialist on the sidelines to pick up signals coaches may have seen on TV copies of the game or on film is not illegal. It’s a somewhat complex issue that’s mostly frowned upon and wouldn’t be endorsed publicly by coaches, but it’s also a widespread practice.

Some coaches might raise their eyebrows at Michigan having a specialist in sign stealing roaming their sidelines and talking with the coaching staff, but there is no rule explicitly banning this.

What is “illegal” then?

At issue in Michigan’s case, no person from an opposing staff can scout an opponent in person. So if Michigan was sending someone from their program to future opponents’ games, that is explicitly illegal, whether or not they were there to record or document signals. In 2015, then-Baylor offensive coordinator Jeff Lebby was in hot water when he was spotted on the sidelines of Tulsa’s game at Oklahoma.

Lebby said he was in town for a wedding and catching up with Tulsa’s staff who had spent a long time on Baylor’s staff. It may have been innocuous, but it was explicitly against the rules.

So is having any technology on the sideline to record signals. So someone on the staff couldn’t be filming across the field with a camera or a phone and studying it on the sidelines, passing it on to coaches and deciphering signals in real time.

It is not clear at this time who was allegedly attending games to acquire information. Athletic department officials and other staffers would, presumably, be at Michigan games on Saturdays. It would also be rather brazen and fairly obvious for someone directly employed by Michigan to do such a thing. Could it be former staffers? Family members? Fans? At this point, sources briefed on the investigation are not sure.

Why doesn’t CFB have helmet communication like the NFL?

It comes down to three factors: liability, cost and sign-stealing coaches who don’t want it.

The NFL has had in-helmet microphones since way back in 1994. It expanded in 2008 to add a defensive player. College football still uses bedsheets to hide sign-stealing and giant posterboards to signal in plays.

The in-helmet communication technology is already there for college football. CoachComm, which provides the coaching headset technology for almost all of Division I, developed a helmet device years ago. Grambling and Southern even tested it out for their game in November 2021 without a hitch. Both teams loved it. Many college teams use helmet or wristband communication in practice with the scout team. It’s just not allowed in games.

National coordinator of officials Steve Shaw has said the biggest hurdle is liability. By tweaking a helmet to add a communication device, the warranty with the manufacturer could be voided, opening up liability to lawsuits over head injuries. That scares away conferences. In the NFL, players bargain over these things through the union. NFL teams also use fewer helmets compared to many college teams.

“The barrier right now is the helmet manufacturers,” CoachComm owner Pete Amos told The Athletic last year. “They are rightfully concerned about liability when you change the helmet. At the end of the day, they’re worried about who’s going to court.”

The second issue is cost, with 133 teams in FBS and the wide variety of helmets different teams sometimes use.

But a path is there if any conference wants to take it. Shaw has said if any conference applies for a waiver to use it, the NCAA will grant it. Grambling and Southern got a waiver for their game. Former LSU coach Ed Orgeron was a big proponent of bringing it to the SEC, believing everyone else would follow, like when the Big Ten added instant replay in 2004.

That brings the third issue: Some coaches don’t want it, especially the defensive coaches who rely on stealing signals.

“You’ve got so many teams that attempt to steal signals and do things on game day,” Illinois coach Bret Bielema told The Athletic last year. “The communication through headsets would clear up any of that issue and get back to, let’s have the best team win the game.”

This summer, the Big Ten and ACC proposed rule changes to the Football Oversight Committee to allow sideline technology. The proposals didn’t pass but are expected to be revisited in 2024.

So how long will the investigation take, and what repercussions could Michigan face?

It may take some time to reach a final resolution. NCAA investigations tend to move slowly; look no further than Michigan’s initial NCAA investigation into COVID-era violations … which is still being adjudicated years later. The Kansas basketball infractions case just reached its resolution six years after initial allegations were made. The NCAA has tried to speed up its processes in this area, but there’s no way to snap a finger and be done with a case like this, especially with Michigan already under investigation for other NCAA rule-breaking.

There are two important tracks for the investigation to follow. If the issue identified is a playing rules issue — such as using technology to record signals — the NCAA defers to the conference office, or it will be addressed by the secretary rules editor. If the issue identified is a bylaw issue, the case would likely proceed through the traditional infractions process. That’s the route that takes time, no matter which way you slice it.

It’s not yet clear how a second NCAA investigation into the Michigan football program would impact the first — and, more importantly, the severity of the punishments to come. But it won’t help. Schools are punished more severely for violations that occur while under investigation and while on probation. This could be an issue for Harbaugh specifically, regardless of what he knew about the alleged in-person scouting scheme.

In January, the NCAA tightened its rules regarding the responsibility of a head coach for what goes on inside his or her program. The head coach is “presumed to have knowledge of what is occurring in his program and therefore, can be responsible for the actions of his staff and individuals associated with the program,” according to NCAA Bylaw 11.1.2.1. Whether or not a head coach promoted compliance and/or monitored his program is relevant to penalty determinations only.

Basically, the NCAA will start from the presumption that Harbaugh knew of the rule-breaking, and he will need to prove otherwise to lessen the associated penalties.

Required reading

(Photo: Norm Hall / Getty Images)