Um Puts Final Touches On A New Drug Policy

The University of Miami will have a new drug policy - possibly tougher - by the time football practice resumes in August.

A committee that includes UM trainer Todd Toriscelli, compliance director Craig Angelos and Dr. Clyde McCoy, the director of UM’s Comprehensive Drug Research Center, has worked on the new policy - at the behest of athletic director Paul Dee - since February. The new policy was given to Dee in March and is awaiting approval. McCoy says the new policy will be “state of the art” but would not disclose details.

The old policy called for a three-strikes-and-you’re-out punishment. One positive test resulted in counseling; two brought a one-game suspension. For three, the player was supposed to miss a full season.

“It’s conceivable (the new policy) will be harsher than that,” says coach Butch Davis, who talked to McCoy while the policy was being formulated. “One of the gray areas that a lot of schools struggle with is time restrictions and limitations. We’re trying to find out what is the most appropriate way to try to help kids after they have received counseling and education.”

One thing that seems certain: There is no way results can be kept from Dee under the new policy. Dee has said he was not informed of at least one positive drug test and that former coach Dennis Erickson was the one responsible for telling him.

“I really don’t know what the chain of command was in the past,” Davis said. “I think it’s appropriate, anytime you deal with things like this, there has to be an enormous amount of sensitivity and confidentiality. The number of people who need to know has to be limited. The head coach will know. The trainer will know. The athletic director will know. The individual will know. The parents will know.”

Dee has not returned repeated calls in the past two days. But in a statement Monday, he said UM has not yet received five years of drug testing results it requested and wants to review. So why create a new policy rather than keep the old one?

“There were a number of issues with respect to the implementation of that policy that concerned me a great deal,” Dee said.

The implementation of the policy became muddled, in part, because of Dee’s concerns over legal questions arising about what constitutes a positive test. That caused Dee to suspend some of the mandatory penalties of the policy.