The NCAA Committee on Infractions (“Committee”) recently issued its findings and found that the Boise State University (“BSU”) committed major violations of NCAA legislation. The violations at issue occurred in the sports of football, men’s and women’s cross country and track and field, and men’s and women’s tennis. The violations found by the Committee in this case spanned a period from January 2005 through October 2010 and involved the provision of impermissible lodging, transportation, and practice sessions. In addition, the case included an impermissible financial aid award to a student-athlete, participation by a student-athlete after the student-athlete’s fourth year of intercollegiate competition, impermissible participation in intercollegiate athletics competition by a prospective student-athlete, cash payments to a prospective student-athlete and violations of the NCAA’s principles of ethical conduct involving a former assistant track and field coach and the former head women’s tennis coach. Finally, there was an attendant violation that BSU failed to monitor its athletics program adequately.

The Committee found that BSU committed the following violations of NCAA legislation:

1. Recruiting, Financial Aid, and Extra Benefit Violations in violation of NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1, 13.2.1.1-(b), 13.2.1.1-(h), 14.3.1, 14.3.2.1.1, 15.01.5, and 16.11.2.1

   a. From January through September 2005, a then men’s track and field student-athlete (student-athlete 1), received impermissible financial aid, housing, meals and clothing, and engaged in practice activities with the men’s track and field team at a time when he was not eligible to do so because of his status as a nonqualifier.

           i. In January 2005, on his arrival to BSU and both prior to and after his initial enrollment at BSU, student-athlete 1 was provided meals and clothing by three then men’s cross country and track and field student-athletes (student-athletes 2, 3, and 4).

          ii. From mid-January until February 1, 2005, student-athlete 1 resided in an apartment, at no cost to the young man, with student-athlete 2. The housing arrangement was made through the assistant of a then assistant men’s and women’s cross country and track and field coach (former assistant track coach B).

         iii. From January to May 2005, student-athlete 1 participated in practice activities with the men’s track and field team, which were arranged by former assistant track coach B.

         iv. On September 20, 2005, BSU provided student-athlete 1 with $5,701.00 in impermissible financial aid, an amount satisfying student-athlete 1’s unpaid tuition that had accrued during his enrollment at BSU. BSU believed the NCAA provided an interpretation that allowed it to forgive the amounts due and owing, but the Committee indicated that the NCAA staff did not have the full information necessary to provide an interpretation to that effect.

2. Recruiting Violations and Impermissible Housing and Transportation in violation of NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1, 13.2.1.1-(h), and 13.5.1

   a. During the summers of 2005 through 2009, assistant football coaches and football staff members arranged summer housing and transportation to Boise, Idaho for 63 then prospective student-athletes with then current student-athletes in order for the young men to participate in summer workouts.

       i. During the summers of 2005 through 2008, assistant football coaches and football staff members impermissibly arranged housing and transportation for 40 then prospective student-athletes prior to the young men’s initial enrollment at BSU.

      ii. During the summers of 2007 through 2009, assistant football coaches and football staff members impermissibly arranged housing and transportation for 23 prospective students prior to the young men’s initial enrollment at BSU.

     iii. The BSU football coaching staff would arrange for prospective student-athletes who were participating in voluntary workouts, but were not attending summer school, to live with a student-athlete at the same position. According to the Committee, the compliance staff and the football staff failed to monitor prospect lodging, transportation, and living expenses. Although the compliance staff had an “Athletic Participation Clearance Form,” it did not request information regarding summer living arrangements, housing or transportation. It would have been permissible for the prospective student-athlete to contact a student-athlete on his own initiative.

3. Recruiting Violations and Impermissible Housing, Meals, and Transportation in violation of NCAA Bylaw 13.2.1, 13.2.1.1-(h), 13.5.1, 13.5.4, and 16.11.2.1

    a. From the fall of 2005 through the spring of 2009, numerous then prospective student-athletes in the sports of women’s tennis and men’s and women’s track and field received impermissible housing, transportation and meals from coaches, then student-athletes and representatives of the institution’s athletic interests when the young men and women arrived in Boise, Idaho, for their initial enrollment. The impermissible housing and transportation were arranged with the assistance of men’s and women’s tennis and men’s and women’s track and field coaches.

       i. Rather than directing prospective international student-athletes to BSU’s student housing office or international programs office, the then head and assistant men’s and women’s cross country and track and field coaches, along with the head men’s and women’s tennis coaches, facilitated temporary housing arrangements between prospective student-athletes and current student-athletes when the prospects arrived before institutional housing was open. BSU’s compliance department was not monitoring international student-athlete housing arrangements.

      ii. BSU believed it could pay to house international student-athletes prior to student housing being open during the orientation time period, to save money in the athletics department budget, these prospective student-athletes could reside with current student-athletes. However, the NCAA confirmed that it would be impermissible for BSU to provide or arrange for rent-free off-campus housing with enrolled student-athletes.

4. Recruiting Violations and Impermissible Travel Expenses, Housing and Transportation in violation of NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1, 13.2.1.1-(h), and 13.5.1

    a. In February 2008, a then prospective student-athlete (prospect 1) received impermissible transportation, lodging, and travel expenses from a then student-athlete (student-athlete 5) and a then assistant men’s and women’s cross country and track and field coach (former assistant track coach C).

      i. On February 1, 2008, on her arrival in Boise, Idaho, for a recruiting visit, prospect 1 was provided transportation and two nights of lodging by student-athlete 5 at the request of former assistant track coach C.

      ii. On February 3, 2008, prospect 1 was provided impermissible transportation to the Boise Airport by former assistant track coach C.

     iii. In February 2008, on prospect 1’s return to Bend, Oregon, the young woman received a cashier’s check in the amount of $300 from former assistant track coach C. Former assistant track coach C used his personal funds to draw the check and explained that he reimbursed prospect 1 for a portion of her expenses because several days prior to her visit it was determined that the track and field program could not afford to provide her with an official visit as it had promised. He said “it felt like the right thing to do.”

5. Unethical Conduct in violation of NCAA Bylaws 10.01.1, 10.1, 10.1-(c), and 10.1-(d)

    a. In February 2008, former assistant track coach C acted contrary to the principle of ethical conduct inasmuch as he did not, on all occasions, deport himself in accordance with the generally recognized high standards of honesty and sportsmanship normally associated with the conduct and administration of intercollegiate athletics based on his involvement in the above-referenced violations. Additionally, when interviewed by BSU during the investigation, former assistant track coach C knowingly furnished BSU with false or misleading information on May 9, August 4, and September 17, 2009, regarding his involvement in these matters.

6. Ineligible competition in violation of NCAA Bylaw 14.2, 14.2.3.2.1, and 16.8.1.2

    a. During the 2008-09 academic year, BSU permitted a then women’s tennis student-athlete (student-athlete 6) to practice and represent BSU in intercollegiate competition and receive travel expenses after her fourth season of competition.

       i. Based on student-athlete 6’s age, prior participation, and application of NCAA legislation, she had only two years of collegiate eligibility remaining upon her enrollment at BSU in the spring of 2007. She competed at BSU during the 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09 seasons, one year beyond what is permissible under NCAA legislation.

7. Impermissible Recruiting Inducements in violation of NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1, 13.2.1.1-(b), 13.2.1.1-(e), 13.2.1.1-(h), 13.5.1, 13.7.2.1, 13.11.1, and 16.11.2.1

    a. From June to October 2010, the former head women’s tennis coach, a then assistant women’s tennis coach, and a then student assistant women’s tennis coach provided a prospective student athlete (prospect 2) with impermissible transportation, cash, lodging, and educational expenses and entertainment.

        i. On or about June 27, 2010, upon her arrival in Boise, Idaho, prospect 2 was provided automobile transportation by the former student assistant women’s tennis coach from the airport to the apartment of a student-athlete (student-athlete 7) who housed prospect 2 at the request of the former head women’s tennis coach, until approximately July 1, 2010. This lodging was provided to prospect 2 at no cost to the young woman.

       ii. On June 27, 2010, a former head women’s tennis coach provided student-athlete 7 with cash to purchase groceries for prospect 2.

      iii. On or about June 29 and 30, 2010, prospect 2 was provided local automobile transportation by the former head women’s tennis coach to a U.S. Bank branch where the former head women’s tennis coach assisted prospect 2 with opening a bank account and provided prospect 1 with $1,500.00, $1,420.00 of which prospect 2 used to pay the cost of attendance for BSU’s summer session of the Intensive English Program (IEP).

      iv. From approximately June 28 to October 2010, the former head women’s tennis coach provided prospect 2 access to a locker in BSU’s women’s tennis locker room located in the Appleton Tennis Center, BSU’s on-campus tennis facility, and also provided several items of apparel to her.

       v. On August 26, 2010, the former head women’s tennis coach provided prospect 2 with a U.S. Bank cashier’s check in the amount of $2,040.00 to pay the cost of attendance for BSU’s fall session of the IEP program.

      vi. On or about September 4 and 5, 2010, prospect 2 traveled by automobile with women’s tennis student-athletes for an overnight camping trip to the McCall, Idaho area.

     vii. On September 18, 2010, prospect 2 attended the Bronco Bash, a tennis fundraising event held by BSU athletics, wherein she received free admission, a complimentary meal, and participated in athletically related activities.

    viii. In October 2010, a former assistant women’s tennis coach arranged for prospect 2 to receive round-trip automobile transportation from Boise, Idaho to Portland, Oregon and one night of lodging at the Best Western Hotel in Portland to enable the young woman to take the International English Language Testing System, an English proficiency exam.

8. Impermissible Practice Sessions with Prospective Student-Athlete in violation of NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1, 13..11.1, 14.02.7, 14.1.7, 14.1.8.1, 14.1.8.2, and 14.2.2.1

    a. From July to October 2010, the former head women’s tennis coach and a former assistant women’s tennis coach conducted impermissible practice sessions with prospect 2 and permitted the young woman to represent BSU in intercollegiate athletics competition prior to her initial full-time enrollment.

       i. From approximately June 28 to July 31, 2010, prospect 2 participated in impermissible practices sessions with student-athlete 7 at the Appleton Tennis Center, BSU’s outdoor tennis facility. These sessions were conducted by the former head women’s tennis coach and a former assistant women’s tennis coach.

      ii. In July 2010, prospect 2 participated in two impermissible practice sessions with a former head women’s tennis coach at a local tennis curt near the locale of the institution, while the young woman was enrolled in the institution’s IEP program.

    iii. From August to October 2010, prospect 2 participated in scheduled one-hour practice sessions on Tuesdays and Thursday with a women’s tennis student-athlete (student-athlete 8). These sessions were arranged and observed by the former head women’s tennis coach and a former assistant women’s tennis coach. Additionally, prospect 2 periodically participated in regular women’s tennis practice sessions conducted by the former head tennis coach and assistants.

   iv. From October 1-3, 2010, prospect 2 represented BSU in intercollegiate athletics competition at the direction of the former head women’s tennis coach during the Jack Taylor Open, an event hosted by BSU.

9. Unethical Conduct in violation of NCAA Bylaws 10.01.1, 10.1, 10.1-(c), 10.1-(d), 19.01.3 and 32.1.4

   a. The former head women’s tennis coach acted contrary to the principle of ethical conduct inasmuch as he did not deport himself in accordance with the generally recognized high standards of honesty and sportsmanship normally associated with the conduct and administration of intercollegiate athletics by furnishing and influencing others to furnish the BSU with false or misleading information and failing to provide full and complete disclosure to BSU and NCAA enforcement staff regarding his knowledge of, and involvement in violations NCAA of legislation.

      i. The former head women’s tennis coach arranged for prospect 2 to reside with student-athlete 7, met prospect 2 at the Boise Airport and later at student-athlete 7’s apartment upon the young woman’s initial arrival in Boise. At that time, the former head women’s tennis coach provided student-athlete 7 with funds to purchase food for prospect 2. The next day, the former head women’s tennis coach transported prospect 2 to a local U.S. Bank where he assisted her with opening an account and provided her with $1,500.00, $1,420.00 of which was used to pay the cost of attendance for the institution’s summer IEP program. The former head women’s tennis coach also provided student-athlete 7 with locker room access and various items of apparel. Finally, after prospect 2 was unsuccessful in obtaining the necessary English equivalency score for admission into the institution, the former head women’s tennis coach provided her with a cashier’s check in the amount of $2,040.00 to pay the cost of attendance at the institution’s fall IEP program.

     ii. In June 2010, when questioned by the institution about prospect 2, the former head women’s tennis coach instructed student-athlete 7 not to provide the institution with information about prospect 2. In August 2010, the former head women’s tennis coach scheduled an official visit for prospect 2 on the institution’s campus, and during meetings with the compliance office, failed to provide truthful and complete information regarding prospect 2’s living arrangement and involvement with the tennis program. Further, in October 2010, when confronted by the institution with information about his involvement with prospect 2, he denied and failed to provide information regarding his provision of impermissible benefits and practice sessions to prospect 2 or information regarding his provision of impermissible benefits and practice sessions to prospect 2 or information regarding allowing the young woman to represent the institution in intercollegiate tennis competition. Finally, at the infractions hearing conducted on June 10, the former head women’s tennis coach attempted to change earlier testimony that he had provided to the institution.

10. Failure to Monitor and to Promote an Atmosphere for Compliance in violation of NCAA Bylaw 11.1.2.1

    a. The former head women’s tennis coach failed to promote an atmosphere for compliance within the women’s tennis program and failed to monitor the activities of a former assistant women’s tennis coach and the former student assistant women’s tennis coach.

         i. In September 2010, the former head women’s tennis coach knew or had reason to know that prospect 2 received impermissible automobile transportation from women’s tennis student-athletes to McCall, Idaho.

        ii. In October 2010, the former head women’s tennis coach knew or had reason to know that a former assistant women’s tennis coach arranged for prospect 2 to travel by automobile with a friend of a former assistant women’s tennis coach to Portland, Oregon, to enable prospect 2 to take the International English Language Testing System.

       iii. From June to October 2010, the former head women’s tennis coach arranged for prospect 1 to engage in impermissible tennis practice sessions, which he observed and conducted and also involved women’s tennis student-athletes, a former assistant women’s tennis coach and a former student assistant women’s tennis coach.

11. Impermissible Arrangements for Housing in violation of NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1 and 13.2.1.1-(h)

     a. In the fall of 2009, BSU’s head men’s tennis coach arranged for a prospective student-athlete (prospect 3) to reside with a family in the Boise, Idaho community for approximately four to five weeks on his initial arrival in Boise. Prospect 2 paid rent to the family during his stay in their home.

     b. The arrangements at issue were made by the head men’s tennis coach with a family who were his friends. The head men’s tennis coach’s arrangements to house prospect 3 occurred prior to the first day of classes on August 24, 2009, the date that prospect 3 triggered “student-athlete” status, thus a violation of recruiting legislation occurred.

12. Impermissible Transportation, Lodging, and Practice for a Prospective Student-Athlete in violation of NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1, 13.2.1.1-(h), and 13.11.1

     a. In September 2009, a then prospective student-athlete (prospect 4) received impermissible automobile transportation and lodging from a student-athlete (student-athlete 9). Additionally, prospect 3 participated in a practice session with a then volunteer assistant tennis coach and with a then student-athlete. The session with the student assistant men’s tennis coach was observed by the head men’s tennis coach.

         i. In September 2009, on his arrival in Boise, Idaho, prospect 4 was provided transportation and two nights’ lodging by student-athlete 9.

        ii. While in Boise, prospect 4 engaged in a one-hour practice session with a student assistant men’s tennis coach at the institution’s tennis facilities.

iii. While in Boise, prospect 4 attended men’s tennis practice sessions and participated in an approximately one-hour long practice session with the student assistant men’s tennis coach that was observed by the head men’s tennis coach.

13. Impermissible Activities and Benefits involving a Nonqualifier in violation of NCAA Bylaws 14.3.2.1, 14.3.2.2, 16.11.2.1, and 16.11.2.3-(a)

    a. From August to October 2010, a men’s tennis student-athlete (student-athlete 10) engaged in practice activities with the men’s tennis team and received free admissions to a men’s and women’s tennis fund-raising event at a time when he was not eligible to do so because he was a nonqualifier.

         i. On or about August 20, 2010, student-athlete 10 participated in practice activities with a then volunteer assistant men’s tennis coach at BSU’s tennis facilities.

        ii. From August to October 2010, student-athlete 10 attended and observed two to three men’s tennis practices per week at BSU’s tennis facilities and, on at least two or three occasions, participated in athletics activities at BSU’s tennis facilities during men’s tennis practice with the high school son of the head men’s tennis coach.

      iii. On September 18, 2010, student-athlete 10 attended the Bronco Bash, a men’s and women’s tennis fund-raising event, held at a local tennis and swim club, at no cost to the young man, wherein he received a complimentary meal and participated in athletically related activities with men’s and women’s tennis student-athletes and attendees of the event.

14. Recruiting Violations and Impermissible Housing and Transportation in violation of NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1, 13.2.1.1-(h), and 13.5.1

    a. In October 2006 and 2007, a then assistant men’s and women’s track and field coach (former assistant track coach D) and the former head track coach assisted in the arrangement of housing and transportation for four prospective student-athletes prior to the young men’s admission to BSU as regular, degree-seeking students.

        i. On or about October to November 2006, two prospective student-athletes (prospect 5 and 6) received impermissible automobile transportation from former assistant track coach D to the resident of student-athletes 4, 11, and 12 where former assistant track coach D had arranged for the young men to reside.

       ii. On or about October 16, 2006, a prospective student-athlete (prospect 7) received impermissible automobile transportation from a former student-athlete (student-athlete 14) to student-athlete 14’s apartment where prospect 7 resided.

      iii. On or about October 15, 2007, a prospective student-athlete (prospect 8) received impermissible automobile transportation from former assistant coach D to BSU’s campus. Prospect 8 subsequently traveled to the residence of a men’s track filed student-athlete (student-athlete 15) where the former head track coach had arranged for prospect 8 to reside.

15. Impermissible Practice Sessions and Transportation in violation of NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1, 13.5.1, and 13.11.1

      a. Between October 2005 and April 2008, former assistant track coach D and the former head track coach conducted impermissible practice sessions with prospects 7 and 8, in addition to a third prospective student-athlete (prospect 9) prior to their initial enrollment at the institution as regular, degree-seeking students. They also arranged for impermissible automobile transportation for prospect 9.

          i. From October 2005 to January 2006, prospect 9 participated in impermissible practice sessions with former assistant track coach D at the institution’s track and field facilities while she resided in the locale of the institution, prior to the young woman’s initial enrollment at the institution. The training sessions were valued by the institution at $350.00.

         ii. On or about October 2005 to January 2006, prospect 9 received impermissible automobile transportation from former assistant track coach D’s wife to the institution’s indoor practice facilities located in Nampa, Idaho. The benefit was valued by the institution at $227.00.

        iii. From January to May 2007, prospect 7 participated in impermissible practice sessions with former assistant track coach D at the institution’s track and field facilities while the young man was enrolled in the institution’s IEP program.

        iv. From October 2007 to April 2008, prospect 8 participated in impermissible practice sessions with the former head track coach at the institution’s track and field facilities while the young man was enrolled in the institution’s IEP program.

16. Impermissible Transportation, Lodging for a Prospective Student-Athlete in violation of NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1, 13.2.1.1-(h), 13.5.4, and 16.11.2.1

    a. In September 2006, a then prospective student-athlete (prospect 10) received impermissible housing and automobile transportation from a then men’s cross country and track and field student-athlete (student-athlete 16).

         i. In September 2006, on prospect 10’s arrival in Boise, Idaho, student-athlete 16 transported prospect 10 from the Boise airport to student-athlete 16’s home.

        ii. In September 2006, student-athlete 16 provided prospect 10 with impermissible housing. The housing was arranged with the aid of former assistant track coach B.

17. Impermissible Transportation, Housing, and Food for a Prospective Student-Athlete in violation of NCAA Bylaws 13.2.1, 13.2.1.1-(f), 13.2.1.1-(h), 13.5.1, and 13.11.1

    a. From August through November 2006, a then prospective student-athlete (prospect 11) received impermissible automobile transportation, groceries, and housing from former assistant track coach B and several men’s cross country and track and field student-athletes. Additionally, prospect 11 engaged in impermissible practice activities with then men’s cross country and track and field student-athletes.

        i. In August 2006, former assistant track coach B transported prospect 11 from the Boise Airport to the apartment of student-athlete 3 and another then men’s cross country track and field student-athlete (student-athlete 17) where prospect 11 initially resided.

       ii. In August 2006, the day after prospect 11’s arrival in Boise, student-athlete 16 purchased groceries for prospect 11.

      iii. In November 2006, prospect 10 resided cost free with student-athletes 3, 4, and 11 in addition to two other then men’s cross country and track and field student-athletes (student-athletes 18 and 19).

      iv. In November 2006, student-athlete 18 transported prospect 10 to the Boise Airport.

       v. From August through November 2006, prospect 10 participated in impermissible practice activities with student-athletes 3 and 17.

18. Lack of Institutional Control in violation of NCAA Constitution 2.1.1, 2.8.1, and 6.01

   a. The scope and nature of the violations demonstrated a lack of institutional control. In critical areas of NCAA compliance, BSU failed to (a) implement and monitor certain policies and procedures to ensure compliance with NCAA housing, transportation, and impermissible benefits; (b) provide adequate rules education and training to institutional staff members to ensure that the athletics program operated in compliance with NCAA legislation; and (c) monitor and evaluate its athletics program to detect, deter, and report instances of NCAA violations.

   b. The Committee concluded that the scope and nature of the violations in five sports over a lengthy period of time, five years, in combination with a continuous pattern of violations in the men’s and women’s tennis programs, demonstrate a lack of institutional control. The Committee acknowledged the difficult circumstances presented by the illness of a member of the institution’s compliance staff, but also notes that the institution did not take prompt and proactive measures to address the problem this created for its compliance operation.

   c. The Committee also concluded that BSU failed to take adequate steps to make changes to its compliance program when there were indications that the system was inadequate. Specifically, when BSU became aware of the issues regarding football coaches arranging housing for prospects rather than seeking guidance from the WAC or NCAA office, it continued the same practice during the summer of 2009, namely permitting football coaches to arrange housing for prospective student-athletes to enable the young men to participate in summer workouts.

   d. Despite becoming aware that prospect 2 was enrolled in BSU’s IEP program on or about July 23, 2010, the athletics compliance staff failed to follow up adequately in order to prevent some of the violations of NCAA regulations involving her.

  e. The Committee concluded that BSU failed to establish an effective compliance education program for personnel engaged in athletically related operations or to require timely communication among the various institutional offices regarding determinations that affect compliance with NCAA rules. The athletics compliance office failed to educate coaches effectively over a five-year period regarding permissible activities with prospective student-athletes

As a result of the aforementioned violations, the Committee penalized BSU as follows:

1. Public reprimand and censure.

2. Three years of probation from September 13, 2011 through September 12, 2014.

3. BSU’s women’s tennis team shall end its 2011-12 season without postseason competition.

4. Reduce total grants-in-aid in the sport of football to 82 for the 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2013-14 academic years.

5. Reduce grants-in-aid in the sport of men’s track and field and cross country by 1.5 equivalencies during the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years.

6. Reduce grants-in-aid in the sport of women’s track and field and cross country by 1.5 equivalencies during the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years.

7. Reduce grants-in-aid in the sport of women’s tennis by 3 during the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years.

8. Reduce practice opportunities as follows:

   a. In football, reduce by 3 the number of practice opportunities permitted prior to the first game for the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years. Further, during the 2012, 2013, and 2014 spring practice periods, the football team will reduce the number of sessions during which contact is allowed from 12 to 9.

   b. In men’s tennis, reduce by 3 the number of practice opportunities permitted prior to the first game for the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years. Reduce from 20 to 18 the number of countable athletically-related activity hours during the 20-hour segments of 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years. Reduce from 8 to 6, the number of permitted countable athletically-related activity hours during the remaining 8-hour segments of the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years.

   c. In women’s tennis, reduce from 20 to 18 the number of countable athletically-related activity hours during the 20-hour segments of 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years. Reduce from 8 to 6, the number of permitted countable athletically-related activity hours during the remaining 8-hour segments of the 2011-12 academic year.

9. Limit official expense paid visits as follows:

   a. In men’s tennis, 6 each during the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years.

   b. In men’s track and field and cross country, 16 each during the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years.

   c. In women’s track and field and cross country, 21 each during the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years.

10. Reduced recruiting opportunities as follows:

   a. In men’s track and field and cross country, reduced from 2 to 1 the number of recruiters permitted to recruit off-campus for six months during the 2011-12 and 2012-13 years. Reduce by 2 the number of recruiting opportunities from 7 to 5 for all prospective student-athletes during the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years.

   b. In women’s track and field and cross country, reduced from 2 to 1 the number of recruiters permitted to recruit off-campus for six months during the 2011-12 and 2012-13 years. Reduce by 2 the number of recruiting opportunities from 7 to 5 for all prospective student-athletes during the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years.

11. For a period of 2 years, a prohibition in the recruitment of international prospective student-athletes in the sports of men’s and women’s cross country and track and field.

12. For a period of 2 years, a prohibition in the recruitment of international prospective student-athletes in the sport of women’s tennis.

13. BSU will pay a $5,000.00 financial penalty as a result of student-athlete 6’s ineligible participation.

14. BSU shall vacate all wins in which student-athlete 6 competed while ineligible during the 2008-09 women’s tennis season.

15. The former head women’s tennis coach received a 4-year show cause penalty.

16. Former assistant track coach C received a 2-year show cause penalty.

For any questions, feel free to contact Christian Dennie at cdennie@bgsfirm.com.