Did U of L break any rules with Wake leaks?

One of the first questions many likely had upon Louisville's acknowledgement on Wednesday that co-offensive coordinator Lonnie Galloway got a call and accepted information about Wake Forest's plays from Wake radio analyst Tommy Elrod was this: Can the Cardinals get in trouble for this?

There appears to be no NCAA rule that explicitly applies to the circumstances of the U of L-Wake Forest situation, and it would be open to interpretation and judgment if the incident in some way violates the NCAA's more abstract abiding principles of sportsmanship and ethical conduct.

Article 2.4 of the NCAA manual states: "For intercollegiate athletics to promote the character development of participants, to enhance the integrity of higher education and to promote civility in society, student-athletes, coaches, and all others associated with these athletics programs and events should adhere to such fundamental values as respect, fairness, civility, honesty and responsibility. These values should be manifest not only in athletics participation, but also in the broad spectrum of activities affecting the athletics program."

As part of that, the NCAA manual states schools should "establish policies for sportsmanship and ethical conduct in intercollegiate athletics consistent with the educational mission and goals of the institution."

Later, Article 10, which relates to ethical conduct, mandates that "individuals employed by (or associated with) a member institution to administer, conduct or coach intercollegiate athletics ... shall act with honesty and sportsmanship at all times so that intercollegiate athletics as a whole, their institutions and they, as individuals, shall represent the honor and dignity of fair play and the generally recognized high standards associated with wholesome competitive sports."

NCAA manual includes some specific examples of unethical conduct - failing to cooperate with an NCAA investigation, providing or accepting impermissible benefits, providing banned substances, etc. - but none would be applicable to the circumstances of the U of L situation.

READ MORE

►Jurich acknowledges Cards got Wake's plays

►Dad of Wake QB feels leaks put son in danger

►Cards taking a beating nationally over Wake scandal

► Sullivan: Jurich tone-deaf in response

►​SI: Petrino, U of L 'cheated to win a game'

However, the manual also states unethical conduct "is not limited to" those examples, so could anything Galloway or U of L did fall into that subjective category? Who knows at this point?

It would seem more likely that any disciplinary action against U of L or its staff members would be either self-imposed or come from the Atlantic Coast Conference.

Nothing in U of L athletic director Tom Jurich's statement from Wednesday explaining U of L's part in the Wake Forest investigation would suggest the Cards are punishing themselves.

Though Jurich hasn't explicitly admitted or denied wrongdoing on the part of anyone associated with Louisville, he made no mention of any disciplinary action in his statement, and, in fact, he described the Wake Forest issue as having brought "undue attention to our football staff."

As for the ACC, commissioner John Swofford could presumably make a ruling on a disciplinary matter the way the league does when it fines a coach for criticizing an official.

ACC spokeswoman Amy Yakola said Thursday that the conference's statement from Wednesday night on the matter still stands. In it, the ACC said "protecting competitive integrity is fundamental" to the conference and that the ACC office was in the process of obtaining the internal findings from Wake Forest.

"Based on the information provided, and any other information obtained, the league office will perform its due diligence, and as necessary, additional discussions and actions will occur," the statement said.

The ACC is not an investigative body, so it might not be realistic to think the conference would conduct an exhaustive investigation of witness interviews and the collection of evidence like phone and email records the way the NCAA would in an infractions case.

It's still unclear how pervasive Elrod's leaks were, though it's looking like only a handful of Wake opponents received them since they began in 2014.

So far, Army and Virginia Tech have also acknowledged being notified by Wake Forest as having been contacted by Elrod.

According to Joe Giglio of The (Raleigh, N.C.) News and Oberver, as of Thursday afternoon, every other team Wake Forest has played the past three years, except Indiana, which hadn't responded, has said it was not involved in the Wake Forest leaks.

Wake Forest said Elrod "provided or attempted to provide" confidential information about Wake Forest's game plans on "multiple occasions" since 2014, but the Demon Deacons are not disclosing which opposing teams he communicated with. Wake did say it has notified the schools involved in its findings.

On the question of whether the acceptance of Elrod's information could be construed as a violation of ethical conduct, it's interesting to contrast Jurich's statement on Wednesday with that of Virginia Tech AD Whit Babcock on Thursday as he acknowledged a former Wake staff member provided a former VT assistant with game-plan information in 2014.

"We are disappointed and embarrassed that this type of information was distributed to, and apparently received by one of our former assistant coaches," Babcock said. "The distribution of this type of information among peers or rivals is wrong and not in the vein of sportsmanship and integrity that we demand and expect.

Babcock also apologized to the coaches, players, administrators, alumni, students and fans of Wake Forest. Jurich didn't apologize.