The NCAA Committee on Infractions Has Spoken: East Tennessee State University

The NCAA Committee on Infractions (“Committee” or “Panel”) recently issued its findings and found that East Tennessee State University (“ETSU” or “Institution”) committed violations of NCAA legislation. This case involved ineligible participation and violations of extra benefit legislation in the men’s tennis program at ETSU. The Panel considered this case through the cooperative summary disposition process, in which all parties agreed to the primary facts and violations as fully set forth in the summary disposition report (“SDR”). ETSU self-imposed corrective actions and penalties, which the Panel adopted. However, the Panel proposed additional penalties to the Institution and two involved coaches. One of the coaches, the former head men’s tennis coach, failed to cooperate and did not participate in the processing of the case. The remaining parties accepted the additional penalties. Therefore, none of the parties have the opportunity to appeal.

The Committee concluded that ETSU committed the following violations:

Violations of NCAA Division I Manual Bylaws 14.3.1, 14.3.2.1, 14.3.2.1.1, 14.3.2.2, 16.8.1 and 16.11.2.1 (2016-17) (Level II)

ETSU and the NCAA enforcement staff agreed that between January 30, 2017, and March 10, 2017, the head coach knowingly permitted a nonqualifier student-athlete (the ineligible student-athlete) to engage in practice activities with members of the men’s tennis team and receive transportation, lodging and meals while the student-athlete was otherwise ineligible.

Between January 30 and March 2, 2017, the head coach directed men’s tennis student-athletes to practice with the ineligible student-athlete on at least 10 to 15 occasions despite having been informed by the Institution that the ineligible student-athlete was a nonqualifier and not eligible for practice. NCAA Bylaws 14.3.1, 14.3.2.1, 14.3.2.1.1 and 14.3.2.2.

From March 3 through March 10, 2017, the head coach knowingly permitted the ineligible student-athlete to accompany the men’s tennis team for away competitions during the Institution’s spring break despite having been informed by the Institution that the ineligible student-athlete was a nonqualifier and not eligible to travel. As a result, the ineligible student-athlete received approximately $674.00 in improper financial aid in the form of transportation ($45.00), lodging ($384.00) and meals ($245.00). NCAA Bylaws 14.3.1, 14.3.2.1, 14.3.2.1.1, 16.8.1 and 16.11.2.1.

Violations of NCAA Division I Manual Bylaws 14.10.1 (2013-14), 16.8.1 and 16.11.2.1 (2013-14 through 2017-18) and 12.11.1 (2014-15 through 2017-18) (Level II)

ETSU and the NCAA enforcement staff agreed that from at least the 2013-14 through 2017-18 academic years, the head coach and a representative (booster) provided approximately 14 men’s tennis student-athletes with approximately $9,937.00 in impermissible benefits. As a result, approximately 12 men’s tennis student-athletes competed in 295 contests and received actual and necessary expenses while ineligible.

From at least the 2013-14 through 2017-18 academic years, a booster, who owned rental properties in the locale of the Institution, provided impermissible benefits to approximately 14 men’s tennis student-athletes when he did not require each men’s tennis student-athlete to: (1) pay a $325 security deposit, (2) pay the properties’ utilities and (3) sign a lease agreement. The total value of the impermissible benefits was approximately $9,548.00. NCAA Bylaw 16.11.2.1 (2013-14 through 2017-18).

During the 2014-15 through 2016-17 academic years, the head coach provided five men’s tennis student-athletes with birthday gifts such as t-shirts, hats, wrist bands and/or casual shoes. The total value of the impermissible benefits was approximately $260.00. NCAA Bylaw 16.11.2.1 (2014-15 through 2016-17).

During the 2015-16 and 2016-17 academic years, the head coach provided approximately $15.00 in cash on two occasions (total of $30.00) to a men’s tennis student-athlete as reimbursement for providing other men’s tennis student-athletes transportation to and from off-campus practice sites. NCAA Bylaw 16.11.2.1 (2015-16 and 2016-17).

In September 2016, the head coach provided lodging in his home to a men’s tennis student-athlete and his parents for approximately three nights. The total value of the impermissible benefit was approximately $99.00. NCAA Bylaw 16.11.2.1 (2016-17).

During the 2016 fall semester, the head coach and/or the assistant coach arranged to pay two men’s tennis student-athletes in cash, contrary to the Institution’s policy, to restring tennis racquets for approximately five weeks. NCAA Bylaw 16.11.2.1 (2016-17).

In January 2017, the head coach cosigned paperwork with a men’s tennis student-athlete to open a bank account for the student-athlete. NCAA Bylaw 16.11.2.1 (2016-17).

Violations of NCAA Division I Constitution 2.8.1 (2016-17 and 2017-18) (Level II)

ETSU, the assistant coach and the NCAA enforcement staff agreed that from January 30, 2017, through September 27, 2017, the assistant coach failed to report information to the Institution related to NCAA violations that occurred in the men’s tennis program. Specifically, the assistant coach observed the ineligible student-athlete, a nonqualifier, with current men’s tennis student-athletes on more than one occasion and assumed they were practicing. Additionally, the assistant coach was present on the spring break trip, detailed above, and knew the head coach provided the ineligible student-athlete with transportation, lodging and meals. Despite knowing that the ineligible student-athlete was a nonqualifier and could not practice or travel with the men’s tennis team, the assistant coach failed to report these violations to the Institution.

Violations of NCAA Division I Manual Bylaws 11.1.1.1 (2014-15 through 2016-17) (Level II)

During the 2017 spring semester, the head coach did not demonstrate that he promoted an atmosphere for compliance within the men’s tennis program due to his personal involvement in knowingly providing the impermissible benefits and permitting a nonqualifier men’s tennis student-athlete to practice with the men’s tennis team as detailed above. NCAA Bylaw 11.1.1.1 (2016-17).

During the 2014-15 through the 2016-17 academic years, the head coach violated head coach responsibility and did not demonstrate that he promoted an atmosphere for compliance within the men’s tennis program due to his personal involvement in providing the impermissible benefits to at least 14 men’s tennis student-athletes as outlined above. NCAA Bylaw 11.1.1.1 (2014-15 through 2016-17).

Violations of NCAA Division I Manual Bylaws 10.01.1, 10.1, 10.1-(a), 19.2.3 and 19.2.3.2 (2017-18) (Level I)

Beginning November 15, 2017, which was after his employment with ETSU ended, and continuing to the present, the head coach violated the principles of ethical conduct and failed to cooperate with the NCAA enforcement staff and Institution when he refused to participate in an interview regarding his knowledge of or involvement in violations of NCAA legislation despite being requested to do so on multiple occasions. NCAA Bylaws 10.01.1, 10.1, 10.1-(a), 19.2.3 and 19.2.3.2 (2017-18).

Aggravating and Mitigating Factors in accordance with NCAA Bylaws 19.9.3 and 19.9.4

Aggravating Factors for the Institution
(a) Multiple Level II violations by the institution. NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(g).

(b) Persons of authority condoned, participated in or negligently disregarded the violation(s) or related wrongful conduct. NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(h).

Mitigating Factors for the Institution
(a) Prompt acknowledgement of the violations, acceptance of responsibility and imposition of meaningful corrective measures and/or penalties. NCAA Bylaw 19.9.4-(b).

(b) Affirmative steps to expedite final resolution of the matter. NCAA Bylaw 19.9.4-(c).

(c) An established history of self-reporting Level III or secondary violations. NCAA Bylaw 19.9.4-(d).

Aggravating Factors for the Head Coach
(a) Unethical conduct – failure to cooperate. NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(e).

(b) Violations were deliberate. NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(f).

(c) Multiple Level II violations. NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(g).

(d) Persons of authority condoned, participated in or negligently disregarded the violation or related wrongful conduct. NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(h).

(e) Intentional, willful or blatant disregard for the NCAA constitution and bylaws. NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(m).

Mitigating Factors for the Head Coach
(a) The absence of prior conclusions of Level I, Level II or major violations.

Aggravating Factors for the Assistant Coach
(a) Persons of authority condoned, participated in the violations or related conduct. NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(h).

Mitigating Factors for the Assistant Coach
(a) The absence of prior conclusions of Level I, Level II or major violations.

As a result of the foregoing, the Committee penalized ETSU as follows:

1. Public reprimand and censure.

2. Two years of probation from September 26, 2018 through September 25, 2020.

3. The Institution shall pay a $5,000 fine to the NCAA.

4. Based on the facts and violations in this case, the Panel prescribed a show-cause order for the assistant coach that includes recruiting restrictions and a suspension during the 2018-19 academic year. This case involved the assistant coach’s agreed-upon failure to report knowledge of violations. Specifically, the assistant coach did not report his knowledge of assumed impermissible practice activity and the receipt of impermissible travel expenses and benefits by a nonqualifier student-athlete. Consequently, ETSU suspended the assistant coach from all recruiting activity, including recruiting communications, for a three-week period during the 2018-19 academic year. The three weeks shall be at the Institution’s discretion and the plan for implementing the recruiting prohibition shall be included in the Institution’s preliminary compliance report. In addition to the recruiting restrictions self-imposed by ETSU, and pursuant to Bylaw 19.9.5.4, the assistant coach shall be suspended from all head coaching duties for two dates of competition during the 2018-19 academic year. See Bylaws 17.02.6 and 17.22.7.1. ETSU and any other employing institutions shall adhere to these restrictions and report compliance with the requirements.

5. ETSU shall have no official and unofficial visits during the three weeks of the assistant coach’s recruiting suspension.

6. Based on the facts and violations in this case, the Panel prescribed a five-year show-cause order for the head coach restricting him from all athletically related duties. Among other violations, the head coach failed to cooperate. As a person of authority, the head coach should be held to a high standard. The head coach violated that standard and engaged in unethical conduct when he did not cooperate with the enforcement staff. Therefore, the Panel prescribed a five-year show-cause order pursuant to Bylaw 19.9.5.4. The show-cause period shall run from September 26, 2018 to September 25, 2023. Any NCAA member institution employing the head coach during the five-year period shall restrict him from holding any athletically related duties.

7. Pursuant to Bylaw 19.9.7-(i) and COI IOP 5-15-5, the Institution shall disassociate relations with the booster during the two-year period of probation.

8. ETSU shall vacate all regular season and conference tournament records and participation in which the ineligible student-athletes competed from the time they became ineligible through the time they were reinstated as eligible for competition.

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