The NCAA Committee on Infractions (“Committee” or “Panel”) recently issued its findings and found that the University of Notre Dame (“ND” or “Institution”) committed violations of NCAA legislation. This case involved academic violations in the ND football program. 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). The Panel proposed further penalties to the Institution, including vacation of team records. The Institution challenged the appropriateness of the proposed vacation of team records at an expedited penalty hearing. The Institution has the opportunity to appeal that penalty.

The agreed-upon violations in this case centered on multiple years of academic violations by a former student athletic trainer and football student-athletes. Regarding the former student athletic trainer, she completed academic course work for two football student-athletes over a three-year period. Specifically, the former student athletic trainer and two football student-athletes committed academic misconduct during the 2011-12 through 2012-13 academic years. The academic misconduct violated NCAA legislation because the Institution’s academic honesty and integrity policies were violated which led the Institution to erroneously certify the eligibility of the two football student-athletes. She also provided six other football student-athletes with impermissible academic extra benefits across eighteen academic courses. These violations also occurred over two academic years. Specifically, the former student athletic trainer partially or wholly completed numerous academic assignments for football student-athletes in numerous courses. Two of these student-athletes were still enrolled at the Institution when the violations were discovered and the Institution subsequently sought reinstatement of the student-athletes’ athletics eligibility through the NCAA Student-Athlete Reinstatement process. The other four student-athletes were no longer enrolled at the Institution when the violations were discovered and were not subject to the Institution’s academic honesty and integrity policies. Because the student athletic trainer knew or should have known that her conduct violated NCAA legislation, her conduct was unethical. The parties agreed the violations are Level II. Further, another football student-athlete committed academic misconduct over two academic years without the involvement of an institutional staff member. The parties agreed and the Panel concludes that these violations are Level II.

The Committee concluded that ND committed the following violations:

Violations of NCAA Division I Manual Bylaws 10.01.1, 10.1, 10.1-(b), 14.4.3.1-(b), 14.4.3.1.63 and 14.4.3.3 (2011-12 through 2013-14); 16.8.1.2 (2012-13); and 16.8.1 (2013-14)

The NCAA enforcement staff, the Institution and a then student athletic trainer (former student athletic trainer), agreed that during the 2011-12 through 2012-13 academic years, the former student athletic trainer committed academic misconduct with two football student-athletes. Additionally, the two student-athletes committed academic misconduct without the involvement of institutional personnel. As a result of the academic misconduct, the football student-athletes competed while academically ineligible during the 2012-13 or 2013-14 academic years.

Then football student-athlete (student-athlete 1) committed academic misconduct in one course in the 2012 fall semester and one course in the 2013 spring semester. Student-athlete 1 acted without the involvement of institutional personnel when he violated institutional academic honesty and integrity policies in the 2012 fall semester course. Further, student-athlete 1 violated institutional academic honesty and integrity policies with the assistance of the former student athletic trainer for the 2013 spring semester course (THEO 10001). The Institution subsequently reduced student-athlete 1’s grades for the two courses and as a result, he completed only 16 credit hours during the 2012-13 regular academic year. Consequently, the Institution’s declaration of student-athlete 1’s academic eligibility was retroactively rendered erroneous, and he competed in 12 contests and a postseason bowl contest during the 2013-14 academic year. NCAA Bylaws 10.01.1, 10.1, 10.1-(b) and 14.4.3.1-(b) (2012-13 and 2013-14); and 16.8.1 (2013-14).

Football student-athlete (student-athlete 2) committed academic misconduct in a total of eight courses: one course in the 2011 spring semester, one course in the 2011 summer term, two courses in the 2011 fall semester, three courses in the 2012 spring semester and one course in 2012 fall semester. Student-athlete 2 acted without the involvement of institutional personnel when he violated institutional academic honesty and integrity policies in five courses during the 2011 spring, summer and fall and 2012 spring semesters. Further, student-athlete 2 violated institutional academic honesty and integrity policies with the assistance of the former student athletic trainer in three courses (CSEM 23102, IIPS 30101, PHIL 20401) during the 2012 spring and fall semesters. The Institution subsequently reduced student-athlete 2’s grades for the eight courses and as a result, he: (1) did not have the required cumulative minimum grade-point average prior to the 2012 fall semester, (2) completed only 15 credit hours during the 2011 fall and 2012 spring and fall semesters; and (3) completed only six credit hours during the 2011 fall semester. Consequently, the Institution’s declaration of student-athlete 2’s academic eligibility was retroactively rendered erroneous, and he competed in 12 contests and the postseason bowl contest during the 2012-13 academic year. NCAA Bylaws 10.01.1, 10.1, 10.1-(b), 14.4.3.1-(b), 14.4.3.1.6 and 14.4.3.3 (2011-12 and 2012-13); and 16.8.1.2 and 14.11.1 (2012-13).

Violations of NCAA Bylaw 16.8.1.2 and 16.11.2.1 (2011-12 and 2012-13) and 16.8.1 (2013-14)

The NCAA enforcement staff, Institution and the former student athletic trainer, agreed that during the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years, the former student athletic trainer provided academic extra benefits to six football student-athletes. All six student-athletes subsequently competed after receiving the benefits.

Two football student-athletes violated institutional academic honesty and integrity policies and received academic extra benefits from the former student athletic trainer by the committing the following acts: (1) then football student-athlete (student-athlete 3) violated institutional academic honesty and integrity policies regarding one course (ANTH 30592) during the 2012 fall semester when he received an academic extra benefit from the former student athletic trainer ( NCAA Bylaws 16.8.1.2 and 16.11.2.1 (2012-13)); and (2) football student-athlete (student-athlete 4) violated institutional academic honesty and integrity policies regarding one course (HIST 13184) during the 2013 spring semester when he received an academic extra benefit from the former student athletic trainer (NCAA Bylaws 16.8.1.2 and 16.11.2.1 (2012-13)).

Four football student-athletes received academic extra benefits from the former student athletic trainer while enrolled but were not subject to institutional academic honesty and integrity policies by committing the following acts: (1) then football student-athlete (student-athlete 5) received an academic extra benefit from the former student athletic trainer in one course (ANTH 45871) during the 2012 fall semester (NCAA Bylaws 16.8.1.2 and 16.11.2.1 (2012-13)); (2) then football student-athlete (student-athlete 6) received an academic extra benefit from the former student athletic trainer in two courses (FTT 30461, FTT 30465) during the 2012 fall semester (NCAA Bylaws 16.8.1.2 and 16.11.2.1 (2012-13)); (3) then football student-athlete (student-athlete 7) received academic extra benefits from the former student athletic trainer in one course (FTT 40496) during the 2012 spring semester and in three courses (CAPP 40150, POLS 30042, THEO 20606) during the 2012 fall semester (NCAA Bylaws 16.8.1.2 and 16.11.2.1 (2011-12 and 2012-13)); and (4) then football student-athlete (student-athlete 8) received academic extra benefits from the former student athletic trainer in a total of nine courses: three courses (CAPP 30510, FTT 30465, PHIL 20201) during the 2011 fall semester; two courses (FTT 30461, FTT 30463) during the 2012 spring semester; one course (ENGL 20323) during the 2012 summer term; one course (HIST 30050) during the 2012 fall semester; and two courses (FTT 40101, FTT 40495) during the 2013 spring semester (NCAA Bylaws 16.11.2.1 (2011-12 and 2012-13) and 16.8.1 (2013-14)).

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

Aggravating Factors for the Institution

19.9.3-(a): A history of Level I, Level II or major violations by the institution, sport program(s) or involved individual.

19.9.3-(g): Multiple Level II violations.

Aggravating Factors for the Former Student Athletic Trainer

None.

Mitigating Factors for the Institution

19.9.4-(a): Prompt self-disclosure of the violation(s).

19.9.4-(c): Affirmative steps to expedite final resolution of the matter.

19.9.4-(d): Established history of self-reporting Level III or secondary violations.

Mitigating Factors for the Former Student Athletic Trainer

None.

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

1. Public reprimand and censure.

2. One year of probation from November 22, 2016, to November 21, 2017.

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

4. The former student athletic trainer received a two-year show cause penalty.

5. The Institution shall vacate all regular season and postseason records and participation, including bowl contests, from the time football student-athletes became ineligible through the time they were reinstated as eligible for competition during the 2012-13 and 2013-14 football seasons.

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 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .