The NCAA Committee on Infractions (“Committee”) recently issued its findings and found that the Georgia Institute of Technology (“GT”) committed major violations of NCAA legislation. 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 violations of NCAA legislation.

At the time of the decision, GT was on probation for past infractions in its football and men’s basketball programs. The current case centers on impermissible telephone and text communications that occurred in a number of the GT’s athletics programs but predominately in football and men’s and women’s basketball. Specifically, for approximately one year, GT’s football and men’s basketball programs engaged in numerous impermissible telephone related communications. The football program staff placed 37 impermissible telephone calls and sent 221 impermissible text messages. Similarly, the men’s basketball program staff placed 209 impermissible telephone calls and sent 20 impermissible text messages. Additionally, over an 18-month period, the women’s basketball program staff engaged in a continuous pattern of telephone-related recruiting violations and failed to report some of those violations after becoming aware of them.

The Committee determined that the case should move forward under a Level II standard and found that GT committed the following violations of NCAA legislation:

Violations of NCAA Bylaws 13.1.3.1, 13.1.3.1.2, and 13.4.1.2.

The NCAA enforcement staff, GT, and the assistant football coach, agreed that between March 2011 and February 2012, the assistant football coach and other members of the football coaching staff violated NCAA recruiting communication legislation by sending 221 impermissible text messages and placing 37 impermissible telephone calls to 35 prospective student-athletes. The Committee found the following:

a. Between April 7, 2011, and January 8, 2012, the assistant football coach sent 217 impermissible text messages to 18 prospective student-athletes.

b. Between March 24, 2011, and January 4, 2012, four members of the football coaching staff sent a total of four impermissible text messages to three prospective student-athletes.

c. Between March 2011 and February 2012, eight members of the football coaching staff placed a total of 37 impermissible telephone calls to 17 prospective student-athletes. Of the 37 total impermissible telephone calls, 20 occurred due to calls placed after a member of the coaching staff already made one permissible call to the prospective student-athlete during the legislated time period. Some of the violations were due to systemic logging failures wherein a member of the football coaching staff placed an impermissible call after another coaching staff member placed an earlier permissible call but failed to log the prior call and/or document why a call should not be a countable recruiting call.   Of the 37 total impermissible telephone calls, 17 occurred due to calls placed prior to the permissible time to contact the prospective student-athlete.

Violations of NCAA Bylaw 13.1.3.1, 13.1.3.1.3, and 13.4.1.2.

The NCAA enforcement staff and GT agreed that between April 2011 and March 2012, members of the men’s basketball coaching staff violated NCAA recruiting communication legislation by sending 20 impermissible text messages and placing 209 impermissible telephone calls to 44 men’s basketball prospective student-athletes. The Committee found the following:

a. Between April 2011 and March 2012, four members of the men’s basketball staff sent a total of 20 impermissible text messages to 10 prospective student-athletes.

b. Between April 2011 and March 2012, four members of the men’s basketball staff placed a total of 209 impermissible telephone calls to 44 prospective student-athletes. Of the 209 total impermissible telephone calls, 204 occurred due to calls placed after a member of the coaching staff already made one permissible call to the prospective student-athlete during the legislated time period. Some of the violations were due to systemic logging failures wherein a member of the men’s basketball coaching staff placed an impermissible call after another coaching staff member placed an earlier permissible call but failed to log the prior call and/or document why a call should not be a countable recruiting call. Of the 209 total impermissible telephone calls, five occurred due to calls placed prior to the permissible time to contact the prospective student-athlete.

Violations of NCAA Constitution 2.8.1 and NCAA Bylaws 13.1.3.1, 13.1.3.1.4, and 13.4.1.2.

The NCAA enforcement staff and GT agreed that between March 2011 and September 2012, members of the women’s basketball staff violated NCAA recruiting communication legislation by sending 15 impermissible text messages and placing 215 impermissible telephone calls to 39 prospective student-athletes. Additionally, members of the women’s basketball staff became aware that some of those calls were impermissible and failed to report those violations. The Committee found the following:

a. Between March 2011 and March 2012, five members of the women’s basketball staff sent a total of 14 impermissible text messages to five prospective student-athletes.

b. Between March 2011 and March 2012, five members of the women’s basketball staff placed a total of 206 impermissible telephone calls to 31 prospective student-athletes. Of the 206 impermissible telephone calls, 70 occurred due to calls placed after a member of the coaching staff already made one permissible call to the prospective student-athlete during the legislated time period. Some of the violations were due to systemic logging failures wherein a member of the women’s basketball coaching staff placed an impermissible call after another coaching staff member placed an earlier permissible call but failed to log the prior call and/or document why a call should not be a countable recruiting call.  Of the 206 impermissible telephone calls, 128 occurred due to calls placed once per week during the months of April and May 2011, when the recruiting communication legislation permitted only one call per month. In May 2011, three assistant women’s basketball coaches became aware that they had violated recruiting communication legislation over this one-month period but failed to alert the head women’s basketball coach of the violations and/or report the matter to the compliance staff. The violations were not discovered by the institution until January 2012.  Of the 206 impermissible telephone calls, eight occurred due to calls placed prior to the permissible time to contact the prospective student-athlete.

c. Between March and September 2012, the violation pattern of the women’s basketball staff continued when, after the discovery of the previous year’s violations, four members of the women’s basketball staff sent one impermissible text message and placed nine impermissible telephone calls to seven prospective student-athletes. The impermissible calls occurred due to calls placed after a member of the coaching staff already made one permissible call to the prospective student-athlete during the legislated time period. Some of the violations were due to systemic logging failures wherein a member of the women’s basketball coaching staff placed an impermissible call after another coaching staff member placed an earlier permissible call but failed to log the prior call and/or document why a call should not be a countable recruiting call.

Violations of NCAA Bylaw 13.1.3.1 and 13.4.1.2 (Level III).

The NCAA enforcement staff and GT agreed that from 2010 through 2011, coaches from three different sport programs (sport programs not identified in above violations) violated NCAA recruiting communication legislation by sending 31 impermissible text messages and placing three impermissible telephone calls to three prospective student-athletes. The Committee found the following:

a. In March and September 2011, a men’s and women’s swimming and diving coach sent a total of 28 impermissible text messages to a prospective student-athlete.

b. In August 2010, an assistant women’s volleyball coach sent three impermissible text messages to a prospective student-athlete. In addition, the assistant women’s volleyball coach placed two impermissible telephone calls to the prospective student-athlete. The calls were placed after the coach had already placed one permissible call to the prospective student-athlete during the legislated time period.

c. In September 2010, an assistant baseball coach placed one impermissible telephone call to a prospective student-athlete. The call was placed after the coach had already placed one permissible call to the prospective student-athlete during the legislated time period.

Violations of NCAA Constitution 2.8.1.

The NCAA enforcement staff and GT agreed that the scope and nature of the violations detailed above demonstrated that GT failed to adequately monitor its sport programs to ensure compliance regarding telephone communication with prospective student-athletes from March 2011 through March 2012. The Committee found the following:

a. In 2011, a member of the compliance staff misadvised coaching staff members in that after GT received new electronic monitoring software and informed the coaches that they no longer were required to maintain contemporaneous records to document the placement of telephone calls. Partly as a result, the violations outlined above occurred. 

b.  From May 2011 to January 2011, GT failed to follow its established compliance system to monitor telephone calls.  Partly as a result, the violations outlined above occurred.

Violations of NCAA Bylaw 13.1.3.1, 13.1.3.1.1, 13.1.3.1.2, 13.1.3.1.3, and 13.4.1.2 (Level III).

The NCAA enforcement staff and GT agreed that between March 2012 and March 2013, coaches from five different sport programs violated NCAA recruiting communication legislation by sending 12 impermissible text messages and placing 12 impermissible telephone calls to 19 prospective student-athletes. The Committee found the following:

a. Four members of the football coaching staff sent a total of 10 impermissible text messages and placed five impermissible telephone calls to 12 prospective student-athletes.

b. Two members of the men’s basketball coaching staff placed a total of two impermissible telephone calls to two prospective student-athletes.

c. One member of the softball coaching staff placed one impermissible telephone call to a prospective student-athlete.

d. One member of the women’s tennis coaching staff sent one impermissible text message and placed three impermissible telephone calls to two prospective student-athletes.

e. Two members of the men’s and women’s swimming and diving coaching staff sent one impermissible text message and placed one impermissible telephone call to two prospective student-athletes.

Aggravating and Mitigating Factors in accordance with NCAA Bylaws 19.9.2 and 19.9.4.

Level II violations, representing an institution’s significant breach of conduct, includes one or more violations that provide or are intended to provide more than a minimal but less than a substantial or extensive recruiting, competitive or other advantage or impermissible benefit. Level II violations are more serious than Level III and yet do not rise to the level of Level I. They include systematic violations that do not amount to a lack of institutional control or collective Level III violations.

a. Aggravating factors were as follows: 1) GT had a major infractions case involving the men’s basketball and football programs in 2011 (NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(b)); 2) this case involves a significant number of text message and phone call violations in three sports (NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(g)); and 3) there was an intentional, willful, or blatant disregard for the NCAA constitution and bylaws whereby the assistant football coach and three women’s assistant basketball coaches knowingly sent numerous text messages in violation of NCAA legislation, but failed to report the violations to the head coach or compliance office (NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(m)).

b. Mitigating factors were as follows: 1) GT promptly acknowledged the violations, conducted an independent investigation, self-reported all violations, and implemented meaningful corrective measures and penalties (NCAA Bylaw 19.9.4-(b)); w) GT has a consistent history of self-reporting secondary violations in the past and reports approximately 15 violations each year (NCAA Bylaw 19.9.4-(d)); and 3) the assistant football coach promptly acknowledged his violations of NCAA legislation and accepted responsibility for his actions (NCAA Bylaw 19.9.4-(b)).

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

1. Public reprimand and censure.

2. Two additional years of probation extending the current probationary period to June 13, 2017.

3. The assistant football coach was given a one-year show cause penalty, one-month suspension from all spring recruiting duties (barred from in-person, telephonic, written, and electronic contact with prospects and their parents or legal guardians), required to attend monthly rules education meetings for a minimum of one year, and required attendance at the 2014 NCAA Regional Rules Seminar.

4. The Committee adopted GT’s “corrective and punitive actions” as follows:

            a. Football: 1) the entire football staff was prohibited from making any telephone calls to prospective student-athletes from September 1, 2012, to September 15, 2012; 2) the football head coach was prohibited from making telephone calls to prospective student-athletes for the entire month of September 2012; and 3) on January 13, 2012, GT placed the assistant football coach on administrative leave approximately three weeks before national signing day. GT decided to terminate his employment on January 20, 2013, but the assistant football coach resigned before this occurred.

            b. Men’s Basketball: 1) the men’s basketball staff was prohibited from initiating any telephone or text message contacts with any prospect from September 1, 2012, through September 15, 2012, (with the exception of telephone contact related to the logistics of previously scheduled official visits). The staff was prohibited from contact with any prospect via email or social media or indirectly via third parties such as high school or non-scholastic coaches during this period. These dates were selected, as opposed to dates after the 2012 early signing period, because they occurred during a critical time in the recruiting cycle. The ban on communication of any type during this period had a greater negative impact on the institution’s men’s basketball staff given that the NCAA legislation restricting telephone and text message contact was rescinded on June 15, 2012, allowing unlimited telephone and text message contacts; 2) the men’s basketball staff was limited to one phone call and one text per week to all prospects from September 16 through September 30. The staff was prohibited from contact with any prospect via email or social media during this period or indirectly via third parties such as high school or non-scholastic coaches during this period. As stated above, these limitations had a greater negative impact on the institution’s men’s basketball staff given that other institutions were allowed unlimited telephone and text message contact with prospective student-athletes during this time; 3) the number of evaluation and recruiting days for men’s basketball was reduced by 20 percent for the period from September 1, 2012, through May 31, 2013; 4) an assistant coach received a letter of admonishment and was suspended from all coaching activities for one conference game during the 2012-13 season; 5) an assistant coach received a letter of admonishment and was suspended from all coaching activities for one conference game during the 2012-13 season; 6) an assistant coach received a letter of reprimand and was suspended from all coaching activities for one conference game during the 2012-13 season; and 7) the head coach received a letter of reprimand.

            c. Women’s Basketball: 1) upon discovery of their failure to report potential telephone violations that occurred in April and May 2011, two assistant coaches were suspended from all recruiting activities in July and August of 2012; 2) the two assistant coaches received no salary increase for the 2012-13 academic year; 3) the two assistant coach’s employment contracts, which expired on June 30, 2012, were not renewed. They worked on a month-to-month basis thereafter. One of the assistant coaches resigned her employment on September 11, 2012. The other assistant coach worked on a month-to-month basis until his contract was renewed on August 31, 2012. He no longer works for the institution; 4) an assistant coach received a letter of admonishment and was suspended from all coaching activities for three conference games during the 2012-13 season; 5) an assistant coach received a letter of admonishment and would have been suspended from all coaching activities for three conference games during the 2012-13 season had she not resigned her employment; 6) the entire staff was prohibited from making any phone calls to prospective student-athletes from September 1, 2012, through September 15, 2012, and October 1, 2012, through October 15, 2012. These dates were selected, as opposed to dates after the 2012 early signing period, because they occurred during a critical time in the recruiting cycle; 7) the number of recruiting and evaluation days for women’s basketball was reduced by 20 percent for the period September 1, 2012, to May 31, 2013; and 8) the head coach received a letter of reprimand.

            d. Other Sports: 1) GT conducted extensive rules education sessions on NCAA recruiting contact legislation on February 22, 2012, and in September 2013 and October 2013; 2) in addition to the rules education above, the women’s tennis coach received a letter of admonishment and will be prohibited from initiating telephone calls or electronic message for one week (August 1-7, 2014) after NCAA legislation allowing unlimited calls and text messages takes effect; and 3) with regard to the October 26, 2012, text message violation, the entire swimming and diving staff was prohibited from having any recruiting contact with the prospective student-athlete for two weeks. The staff also received the rules education mentioned above.

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 .