National Collegiate Athletic Association

The NCAA News - News and Features

May 11, 1998

UCLA men's basketball given three years of probation

The NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions placed the University of California, Los Angeles, on probation for three years for NCAA rules violations concerning violations of bylaws governing recruiting, extra benefits and ethical conduct in the sport of men's basketball.

In addition, the school's permissible official visits were reduced by six during each of the 1998-99 and 1999-2000 academic years.

For a period of two years from 1993 to 1995, the university's men's basketball coaching staff provided impermissible entertainment and a material benefit to a club basketball coach in the Los Angeles area whose teams included prospective student-athletes. Specifically, the club coach was provided with four complimentary tickets to several of the school's home basketball games and a 1995 Division I Men's Basketball Championship ring.

In addition, prospective student-athletes were provided with tickets to Los Angeles Lakers games and other prospective student-athletes received excessive telephone calls from the men's basketball offices. In other instances, improper transportation and free meals were provided to the parents of student-athletes or to student-athletes themselves.

The university's head men's basketball coach violated principles of ethical conduct by furnishing false and misleading information to institutional representatives while being questioned about a potential NCAA violation.

Although UCLA was placed on probation in May 1997 for three years for violations in the school's softball program, these violations do not fall under the repeat-violator provisions because they occurred before the starting date of the penalties in the softball case.

UCLA instituted an investigation of potential violations in October 1996 and reported its findings to the Pacific-10 Conference. In November 1996, the school terminated the employment of the head men's basketball coach.

The university, NCAA enforcement staff and the former head coach agreed to use the summary-disposition process and submitted a report to the Division I Committee on Infractions October 14, 1997. A summary-disposition process is used when the university, enforcement staff and coach agree that the violations occurred.

The committee notified the university and former head coach in December 1997 that it had accepted the findings and penalties in the summary-disposition report and had proposed additional penalties. The head coach, his attorney, representatives of the coach's current institution and the commissioner of the Atlantic 10 Conference appeared before the committee April 26, 1998, to discuss the procedures the institution has in place to prevent a recurrence of the violations that involved the coach.

The violations agreed to in this case were:

  • During the 1993-94 academic year and 1995, the university's men's basketball coaching staff provided improper entertainment and a material benefit to a club coach of prospective student-athletes.

  • During the 1995-96 academic year, two prospective student-athletes received entertainment on an official visit that was not included in the student-host allowance.

  • During the summer and fall of 1996, four prospective student-athletes received excessive telephone contacts from the men's basketball office.

  • During the 1992-93 academic year, the mother of a student-athlete received impermissible transportation from an athletics representative.

  • During the 1995-96 and 1996-97 academic years, 10 men's basketball student-athletes received free meals.

  • On October 11, 1996, two men's basketball student-athletes each received a free dinner during the official visit of three prospective student-athletes, even though neither student-athlete was a student host.

  • The head men's basketball coach involved in this case violated the NCAA standards of ethical conduct.

    In determining appropriate penalties, the committee considered UCLA's corrective actions, including:

  • As required by NCAA rules, limited the Los Angeles area club basketball coach involved in this case to two complimentary admissions to men's basketball games immediately after the institution received information in the fall of 1994 that he had coached prospective student-athletes during the 1993-94 academic year.

  • Revised the record-keeping process for recruiting telephone calls, including discussions during weekly coaches meetings, creation of a central recruiting telephone log, and periodic, unannounced reviews by the director of compliance.

  • Required the coaching staff to participate in a rules education seminar focused on recruiting telephone-call legislation.

  • Established a requirement for student-athletes and team managers during the 1996-97 academic year to participate in an annual rules education seminar regarding extra benefits.

    The committee adopted as its own the following disciplinary actions taken by UCLA and the conference:

  • The university terminated the employment of the head men's basketball coach on November 6, 1996, only one month after the initiation of the investigation and one week before the start of the basketball season and the National Letter of Intent early signing period.

  • The Pacific-10 Conference issued a private letter of reprimand to the institution.

  • All full-time members of the men's basketball coaching staff are required to attend an NCAA compliance seminar during the 1997-98 academic year.

  • The Pacific-10 Conference will conduct a compliance review of the men's basketball program during the 1997-98 academic year, with particular emphasis on extra benefits from athletics representatives.

  • The institution will expand its rules education program to include a component to educate student-athletes regarding extra benefit legislation.

  • The institution will provide copies of all reports required by the Committee on Infractions for the softball case to the Pacific-10 Conference.

    The committee decided not to impose all of the presumptive penalties because the violations were relatively limited and because of the swift and decisive actions taken by UCLA, including appropriate corrective measures and the termination of the head coach's employment.

    However, because of the potential recruiting advantage gained as a result of the violations and the involvement of the head coach, the committee imposed the following additional penalties:

  • Three years of probation.

  • Reduction by six in the number of permissible official visits in men's basketball during each of the 1998-99 and 1999-2000 academic years.

  • Recertification of current athletics policies and practices.

  • Requirement that the institution continue to develop a comprehensive athletics compliance education program and that it include representatives of its athletics interests, with annual reports to the committee during the period of probation.

  • Requirement that the former head men's basketball coach's current employer expand its monitoring of recruiting and submit a report to the committee by May 1, 1999.

    As required by NCAA legislation for any institution involved in a major infractions case, UCLA is subject to the NCAA's repeat-violator provisions for a five-year period beginning on the effective date of the penalties in this case, April 30, 1998.

    The members of the Division I Committee on Infractions who heard this case are:

    David Swank, chair, professor of law, University of Oklahoma; Alice Gresham Bullock, dean, Howard University School of Law; Frederick B. Lacey, attorney and retired judge, LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae, Newark, New Jersey; James Park Jr., attorney and retired judge, Brown, Todd & Heyburn, Lexington, Kentucky; Yvonne (Bonnie) L. Slatton, chair, department of physical education and sports studies, University of Iowa, and Thomas E. Yeager, commissioner, Colonial Athletic Association.

    The complete report from the Division I Committee on Infractions will be published in the June 1 issue of The NCAA Register.