The NCAA Committee on Infractions (“Committee”) recently issued its findings and found that Iowa State University (“ISU”) committed major violations of NCAA legislation. The case primarily involved impermissible telephone calls in all 18 of ISU’s sports programs. In addition, a former student men’s basketball coach sent impermissible text messages. Further the student men’s basketball coach, as well as a current women’s basketball noncoaching staff member, engaged in impermissible coaching activities involving nonscholastic basketball teams. After the investigation concluded the case was submitted to the Committee through the summary disposition process, which is an alternative to a formal hearing before the Committee that may be utilized when the NCAA enforcement staff, the member institution, and involved individuals agree to the facts of an infractions case and that those facts constitute major violations of NCAA legislation.

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

Numerous staff members in all of ISU’s sports programs engaged in impermissible telecommunications with prospective student-athletes in violation of NCAA Bylaws 13.1.3.1, 13.1.3.1.1, 13.1.3.1.2, 13.1.3.1.4, 13.1.3.4.1, and 13.4.1.2.

Between July 2008 and August 2011, staff members in all 18 of ISU’s sports programs placed 1,484 impermissible recruiting telephone calls. One coach placed 160 impermissible text messages to prospects.

A countable call occurs unless a log entry shows contemporaneous documentation indicating no contact was made on the call. The Committee has previously confirmed that there is no “three minute rule” for determining whether a call was a countable call. Contact is presumed unless coaches can demonstrate no contact through contemporaneous documents. The facts demonstrate that ISU coaches placed 1,259 recruiting telephone calls that were not properly documented, which were primarily the result of coaches failing to log when they left messages or did not make contact. The Committee indicated that any call after a permissible call was made to a prospect was presumably a violation even if made for “administrative” reasons as articulated by some of the coaches. Additionally, the Committee indicated if a coaching staff member is on the phone with a prospect and the call is dropped, the follow-up call to the prospect is presumed a violation unless the coaching staff member can demonstrate through contemporaneous documentation that the first call was dropped. Examining the actual phone records after-the-fact and noting where dropped calls occurred is not sufficient.

ISU coaches across 18 sports placed approximately 225 impermissible telephone calls and sent 160 impermissible text messages to prospects. The breakdown of the impermissible calls and text messages is as follows:

Football: The football staff placed 139 impermissible calls that directly violated NCAA rules. 79 of these calls were made after one permissible call had been made to a prospect during the legislated time period. An additional 19 calls were made either prior to April 15 of the prospect’s junior year or after May 31, but before September 1 of his junior year. 41 impermissible recruiting calls were placed by noncoaching football staff members.

Men’s Basketball: The men’s basketball staff members made 42 impermissible telephone calls and placed 160 impermissible text messages. 28 of the telephone calls were made after the permissible call(s) had already been made to a prospect. 14 impermissible calls were placed by three staff members who were not countable coaches. The student men’s basketball coach placed 160 text messages from August 2010 to August 2011.

Men’s and Women’s Track and Field and Cross Country (“Track”): The Track coaches placed 16 impermissible telephone calls, all of which were placed after one permissible call to a prospect had been made.

Women’s Basketball: The women’s basketball coaches placed 10 impermissible telephone calls. Three calls were made to a prospect prior to April of the prospect’s junior year of high school and seven were made to a prospect after a coach had already placed one permissible call to the prospect during the legislated time period.

Women’s Tennis: Women’s tennis coaches places eight impermissible telephone calls. Seven of the calls were placed after a coach had already placed the one permissible call to a prospect during the legislated time period, and one call was placed prior to July 1 following a prospect’s junior year of high school.

Wrestling, Women’s Soccer, Women’s Gymnastics, Women’s Swimming and Diving, Women’s Golf, and Women’s Volleyball: Coaches in these sports place 10 impermissible telephone calls. One call was placed prior to July 1 of a prospect’s junior year of high school and nine calls were placed after coaches had already placed one permissible call to a prospect during the legislated timer period.

Members of the men’s and women’s basketball staffs impermissibly participated in coaching activities involving nonscholastic-based basketball in violation of NCAA Bylaw 13.11.1.7.

One member of the men’s basketball staff and one member of the women’s basketball staff engaged in impermissible coaching activities with a nonscholastic team.   The student men’s basketball coach provided individual skill instruction to several women’s basketball prospects and the women’s basketball director of basketball operations participated in coaching activities involving a boys’ nonscholastic basketball team, which constitute violations of NCAA Bylaw 13.11.1.7 and, thus, forbid basketball staff members from engaging in coaching activity involving nonscholastic-based teams.

ISU failed to monitor its athletics programs in violation of NCAA Constitution 2.8.1.

Despite having a monitoring system in place, ISU failed to follow those procedures in that telephone calls were not adequately monitored, especially in the sport of football from July 2008 to May 2011. In addition, with regard to all sports, ISU did not consistently cross-check the coaches’ telephone logs with their telephone records. Finally, the lack of adequate NCAA rules education contributed to the violations because ISU coaches did not know that they were required to log all telephone calls.

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

Institution’s General Administrative Penalties

1. Public reprimand and censure.

2. Two years of probation from September 6, 2013, through September 5, 2015. (Note: The institution placed itself on a two-year probationary period effective November 13, 2011)

Football Program’s Penalties

3. Program-wide one-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects February 5-11, 2012. An additional four-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with all prospects from February 12 – March 10, 2012. (Institution imposed)

4. An additional three-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects from September 1-21, 2013.

5. Decreased the number of recruiting contacts by one for all prospects during the 2011-12 academic year. (Institution imposed)

6. Reduced official visits by 20 percent from the previous four-year average for the 2011-12 academic year. (Institution imposed)

7. Decreased the number of permissible off-campus recruiters by two for the spring 2012 evaluation period. (Institution imposed)

8. Ten assistant football coaches were restricted from initiating telephone recruiting contacts for periods of time ranging from one week to 10 weeks in 2012. One of these assistant coaches was not allowed to have off-campus contact in December 2011. All of these assistant coaches received letters of reprimand. (Institution imposed)

Men’s Basketball Program’s Penalties

9. Program-wide one-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects November 13-19, 2011. An additional two-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with all prospects the weeks of November 20-26 and November 27 – December 3, 2011. (Institution imposed)

10. An additional three-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects September 1-21, 2013.

11. Decreased the number of recruiting opportunities by one for all prospects during the 2011-12 academic year. (Institution imposed)

12. Ceased recruiting any of the prospects with whom the student assistant coach had impermissible telephone or text contact. (Institution imposed)

13. Reduce official visits by 20 percent from the previous four-year average for 2011-12. (Institution imposed)

14. An assistant coach was restricted from initiating telephone contact with all prospects the week of December 4 – 10, 2011 and he received a letter of admonishment. (Institution imposed)

Women’s Basketball Program’s Penalties

15. One-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects November 13-19, 2011. An additional one-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with all prospects the week of November 20-26, 2011. (Institution imposed)

16. An additional two-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects September 1-14, 2013.

Women’s Gymnastics Program’s Penalties

17. One-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects November 13-19, 2011. (Institution imposed)

18. An additional one-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects September 1-7, 2013.

Men’s Golf Program’s Penalties

19. One-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects November 13-19, 2011. (Institution imposed)

20. An additional one-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects September 1-7, 2013.

Women’s Golf Program’s Penalties

21. One-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects November 13-19, 2011. (Institution imposed)

22. An additional one-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects September 1-7, 2013.

Women’s Swimming and Diving Program’s Penalties

23. One-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects November 13-19, 2011. (Institution imposed)

24. An additional one-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects September 1-7, 2013.

Women’s Soccer Program’s Penalties

25. One-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects November 13-19, 2011. (Institution imposed)

26. An additional one-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects September 1-7, 2013.

Softball Program’s Penalties

27. One-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects November 13-19, 2011. (Institution imposed)

28. An additional one-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects September 1-7, 2013.

Tennis Program’s Penalties

29. One-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects from November 13-19, 2011. An additional one-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with all prospects the weeks of November 20-26. (Institution imposed)

30. An assistant coach received an additional one-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with all prospects the week of November 27 – December 3, 2011 and received a letter of reprimand. (Institution imposed)

31. An additional two-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects September 1-14, 2013.

Men’s and Women’s Track and Cross Country Programs’ Penalties

32. One-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects November 13-19, 2011. (Institution imposed)

33. Serve an additional two-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with all prospects the weeks of November 20-26 and November 27 – December 3, 2011. (Institution imposed)

34. An additional three-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects September 1-21, 2013

35. Decrease the number of recruiting opportunities by one for all prospects during the 2011-12 academic year. (Institution imposed)

36. An assistant coach received an additional three-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with all prospects from December 4 – 24, 2011 and a letter of admonishment. (Institution imposed)

Women’s Volleyball Program’s Penalties

37. One-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects November 13-19, 2011. (Institution imposed)

38. An additional one-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects September 1-7, 2013.

Wrestling Program’s Penalties

39. One-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects November 20-26, 2011. An additional one-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with all prospects the week of November 27 – December 3, 2011. (Institution imposed)

40. An additional two-week restriction from initiating telephone contact with prospects September 1-14, 2013.

For any questions, feel free to contact Christian Dennie at cdennie@bgsfirm.comThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .