The NCAA Committee on Infractions (“Committee”) recently issued its findings and found that the University of South Carolina (“USC”) committed major violations of NCAA legislation.  The infractions in this case were limited and centered on two separate, unrelated set of circumstances, which resulted in NCAA violations: 1) student-athletes living in a local hotel at what proved to be a discounted rate; and 2) the impermissible involvement of two representatives of the institution’s athletics interests in the institution’s football and men’s basketball recruiting efforts and the provision of extra benefits by the two athletics representatives.  There was also a concomitant failure to monitor by the institution relating to the involvement of the two athletics representatives.

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

1.         Preferential Treatment and Impermissible Extra Benefits – Discounted Lodging in Violation of NCAA Bylaws 12.1.2.1.6, 16.02.3, 16.11.2.1, and 16.11.2.3-(a)

From May 2009 through October 2010, a local hotel provided preferential treatment and extra benefits with an estimated value of $50,886.80 to 12  student-athletes in the form of reduced rent that generally was not available to the regular student population for off-campus housing.  Additionally, the local hotel made special arrangements with nine student-athletes to pay their rent at later dates, thereby providing an impermissible loan to the student-athletes.

Specifically, the following student-athletes received reduced rent and made arrangements with the local hotel to defer rent payments until a later date:

1.         Student-athlete 1 received reduced rent at a reduced daily rate of $14.59 for 459 days totaling an extra benefit in the amount of $19,466.19.

2.         Student-athlete 2 received reduced rent at a reduced daily rate of $14.59 for 418 days totaling an extra benefit in the amount of $16,940.00.

3.         Student-athlete 3 received reduced rent at a reduced daily rate of $14.59 for 268 days totaling an extra benefit in the amount of $5,626.39.

4.         Student-athlete 4 received reduced rent at a reduced daily rate of $14.59 for 188 days totaling an extra benefit in the amount of $3,929.99.

5.         Student-athlete 5 received reduced rent at a reduced daily rate of $14.59 for 103 days totaling an extra benefit in the amount of $2,184.12.

6.         Student-athlete 6 received reduced rent at a reduced daily rate of $14.59 for 106 days totaling an extra benefit in the amount of $2,247.73.

7.         Student-athlete 7 received reduced rent at a reduced daily rate of $14.59 for 121 days totaling an extra benefit in the amount of $5,131.61.

8.         Student-athlete 9 received reduced rent at a reduced daily rate of $14.59 for 19 days totaling an extra benefit in the amount of $402.90.

9.         Student-athlete 10 received reduced rent at a reduced daily rate of $14.59 for 19 days totaling an extra benefit in the amount of $402.90.

The following student-athletes received reduced rent:

1.         Student-athlete 8 received reduced rent at a reduced daily rate of $14.59 for 24 days totaling an extra benefit in the amount of $509.00.

2.         Student-athlete 11 received reduced rent at a reduced daily rate of $14.59 for 37 days totaling an extra benefit in the amount of $792.54.

3.         Student-athlete 12 received reduced rent at a reduced daily rate of $14.59 for 37 days totaling an extra benefit in the amount of $792.54.

According to the Committee report, USC’s compliance office attempted to determine whether the amounts being charged were adequate by looking at the rates charged by local apartments.  The Committee, however, indicated the appropriate analysis would have been to compare the rates which the hotel charged to student-athletes to the rates charged to other extended stay guests.

2.         Impermissible Recruiting Activity and Extra Benefits in Violation of NCAA Bylaws 13.01.3, 13.01.4, 13.1.1.1, 13.1.2.1, and 16.11.2.1

From the spring of 2009 through February 2011, representatives 1 and 2 made impermissible recruiting contacts with, and provided recruiting inducements to, representative student-athletes; and provided extra benefits to student-athletes through a foundation which those representatives had previously established. 

From the fall of 2009 through February 2011, representative 1 had impermissible recruiting contacts with and provided inducements to then prospective football and men’s track student-athletes including paying for unofficial visits, meals, entertainment, and providing transportation totaling over $2,700.00.

During the spring of 2009, representative 1 and representative 2 made impermissible recruiting contacts with, and provided recruiting inducements to a then prospective football student-athlete including introducing the prospect to an assistant football coach and financing unofficial visits totaling $400.00.

In June 2010, representatives 1 and 2 brought prospect 3 and other student-athletes to USC’s campus for a football camp and tournament.  Additionally, representative 1 paid for a dinner boat cruise and subsequently financial an unofficial visit to attend junior day.

In spring and summer 2010, representatives 1 and 2 brought prospect 4 and his father to USC’s campus for a football camp and tournament.  Additionally, representative 1 paid for a dinner boat cruise.

During fall 2009, representative 2 contacted an assistant men’s basketball coach on behalf of prospect 5 to gauge USC’s interest in the prospect.  Representative 1 then financed two unofficial visits to USC for prospect 5 and his girlfriend.

During the weekend of June 5-7, 2010, approximately 30 foundation prospective student-athletes attended institutional football camps.  During the trip, representative 1 financed a dinner cruise and permitted the men’s and women’s track team and their head coach to go on the cruise.

3.         Failure to Monitor in Violation of NCAA Constitution 2.8.1.

USC violated the principles of rules compliance in that it failed to monitor and investigate the impermissible activities of representatives 1 and 2.  During the 2008-09 through 2010-11 academic years, USC became aware of the recruiting activities.  Yet, these matters were neither adequately pursued nor sufficiently investigated for potential NCAA rules violations.  Specifically, USC was aware of such activity according to the following:

1.         An assistant men’s basketball coach was aware that representative 1 accompanied prospect 5 on an unofficial visit.

2.         Representative 2 introduced an assistant football coach to prospect 2 during an unofficial visit and subsequently emailed the same assistant coach about prospect 3.

3.         Representative 1 invited the men’s and women’s track team on a dinner cruise and 16 student-athletes attended as well as the head track coach.

4.         Representative 1 sent an email to USC’s director of development and asked if the president of USC could meet with representative 1 and prospect 1’s mother at a football game so the president could persuade prospect 1’s mother that her son should attend USC. USC did not investigate further, but only informed representative 1 not to engage in this type of activity.

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

1.   Public reprimand and censure.

2.   Three years of probation from April 27, 2012 through April 26, 2015.

3.   The number of initial athletically related financial aid awards in football that are countable under Bylaw 15.02.3 shall be reduced by three from the maximum allowed (25) during both the 2013-14 and 2014-15 academic years.

4.   The number of total athletically related financial aid awards in football shall be reduced by three from the maximum allowed (85) during both the 2013-14 and 2014-15 academic years.  This limits the institution to 82 total scholarships those two years under current rules.

5.   A fine of $18,500.00 payable to the NCAA.

6.   Official visits in football will be limited to 30 (maximum=56) for the 2012-13 academic year.

7.   Official visits in men’s and women’s track and field will be limited to 50 (maximum=unlimited) for the 2012-13 academic year.

8.   The head track coach will be suspended from coaching the men’s and women’s track teams during the 2012 Penn Relays.  The SEC previously suspended the head track coach from off-campus recruiting activities and prohibited him from having telephone contact with any prospects for a period of 120 days.

9.   An assistant men’s basketball coach was withheld from recruiting during the period of December 1, 2011 through December 31, 2011.

10.  The institution disassociated from its athletics programs representative 1, representative 2, and the manager of the local hotel.

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