The NCAA News - News and Features

April 21, 1997

Penalties reduced in Alabama A&M infractions case

The NCAA Division II Steering Committee reduced the penalties imposed by the NCAA Committee on Infractions in a major infractions case involving Alabama A&M University.

The university's probationary period was reduced from five years to four and a ban on scholarships to international student-athletes was limited to men's soccer, men's and women's track and field, and men's and women's cross country.

In a separate decision, the penalty concerning the former head women's track and field and cross country coach was upheld.

Alabama A&M did not appeal the committee's findings but did propose reduction of four penalties, including a reduction in the probationary period, the postseason-competition ban in women's track and field and cross country, and the ban on initial scholarships for international student-athletes.

The original decision concerning Alabama A&M was issued by the Committee on Infractions July 9, 1996. The university filed a timely notice of appeal, as did the former head women's track and field coach. The Division II Steering Committee heard the appeal December 11, 1996. It also heard the appeal of the former head women's track and field coach on that day.

The Division II Steering Committee considered whether the penalties imposed on Alabama A&M were inappropriate or excessive based on the facts and circumstances of the case. They reviewed the nature, number and seriousness of the violations; the conduct and motives of the individuals involved; and what the institution has done to correct the problem. The committee also compared the penalties to those imposed in other cases with similar characteristics.

The Division II Steering Committee, on reviewing the record, voted to reduce the probationary period from five years to four. The committee noted that five years was the maximum number imposed in any previous infractions case. While the steering committee agreed that the violations involved were serious, it also noted that the violations did not include a finding of unethical conduct.

In reducing the probationary period, the steering committee also acknowledged the university's considerable efforts to strengthen institutional control and its replacement of staff. The committee recognized that a new president, director of athletics and compliance director are all in place. The committee agreed that the university cooperated in the investigation.

The committee determined that applying the ban on initial athletics scholarships for international student-athletes to all sports was excessive. It noted that there was no evidence in the findings that indicated a need to apply sanctions on sports other than men's and women's track and field, men's and women's cross country, and men's soccer.

The committee examined the precedent and noted that in previous cases, restrictions on recruitment of particular populations of student-athletes were issued only to the sports involved in the violations. Since most of the international student-athletes were recruited for the particular sports cited, the committee decided to limit the ban to those sports.

The former head women's track and field coach appealed the findings of the Committee on Infractions on the grounds that the findings were clearly contrary to the evidence presented to the committee. He also appealed the penalty on grounds that it is excessive and inappropriate based on the evidence. That penalty states if the former head women's track and field coach seeks employment in an athletically related position at an NCAA member college or university before January 16, 1999, he and the involved institution must appear before the Committee on Infractions to determine whether his athletically related duties should be limited at the new institution. If the institution agrees to prohibit him from recruiting international student-athletes before that time and from recruiting off campus until January 16, 1998, the institution will not have to appear before the committee.

The Division II Steering Committee reviewed the evidence presented to the Committee on Infractions and concluded that there was sufficient evidence to make all findings related to the women's track and field program. It also noted that the former head women's track and field coach did not show information existed that might have supported a different result and that clearly outweighed the information the Committee on Infractions used to base its findings. Therefore, the steering committee upheld the findings.

In reviewing the penalty, the steering committee noted that the Committee on Infractions did not find the allegation regarding unethical conduct but did find a failure to monitor the women's track and field and cross country programs. The steering committee agreed the penalty was appropriate due to his failure to monitor the program when he was or should have been aware that violations might be occurring. The steering committee found the penalty was not excessive.

The members of the Division II Steering Committee who heard this case were Robert T. Becker, Saginaw Valley State University; C. Donald Cook, Sacred Heart University; Timothy J. Dillon, University of Alaska Anchorage; Lynn L. Dorn, North Dakota State University (chair); David O'Toole, Bellarmine College; Shirley Green Reese, Albany State University; Barbara Schroeder, Regis University (Colorado); and Wil B. Shaw, Morehouse College.

The full reports of the Division II Steering Committee will be published in the May 5 issue of The NCAA Register.