NCAA show-cause penalties have been imposed on two former assistant men's basketball coaches at the University of South Alabama for unethical conduct resulting from an incident in which impermissible recruiting inducements were provided to two prospective student-athletes. The university accepted the resignations of the coaches in April 1999.

South Alabama also was placed on probation for two years by the Division I Committee on Infractions and will be required to reduce grants-in-aid in men's basketball during the 2002-03 and 2003-04 academic years.

A show-cause penalty requires any NCAA institution that employs or seeks to employ the involved individual to demonstrate to the Committee on Infractions why a penalty should not be imposed upon the institution if it does not limit the individual's athletically related duties for a specified time.

The committee, university, NCAA enforcement staff, former coaches and student-athletes all agreed on the facts of the case. During an official paid visit to the campus, the two assistant coaches purchased clothing items and shoes for two prospective student-athletes while at a local mall. The cost of the items totaled $559.

There was disagreement among those involved about whether the violations were major violations or secondary violations. The former assistant coaches contended the violations were secondary. One former assistant coach argued that the violations were inadvertent, isolated and did not result in a recruiting advantage. The university said it regarded the violations as serious but believed they were borderline in assessing secondary or major status.

The Committee on Infractions concluded that the violations were major. "The committee concluded that when a coach provides several hundred dollars worth of apparel to a prospective student-athlete on an official paid visit to the institution, the coach has engaged in a deliberate and intentional violation of NCAA rules," the group said in its report.

The Committee on Infractions considered self-imposed actions and penalties taken by the university. Among actions that have or will be taken are:

The two prospective student-athletes were informed of the violations associated with their recruitment and notified that the university had declared them ineligible and ceased recruiting activities. One prospect was informed that the National Letter of Intent he had signed was invalid and he was free to enroll at any institution he wished without penalty. He indicated he wanted to enroll at South Alabama and his eligibility was restored after being withheld from one game and after restitution was made. The second prospect enrolled at another NCAA member institution.

The university requested and received the resignations of two assistant basketball coaches. The resignations were effective on April 25, 1999.

The university reduced the number of official visits from 12 to 10 for the 1999-00 and 2000-01 seasons.

The head men's basketball coach was reprimanded for his failure to monitor and supervise the actions of his assistant coaches and to create and maintain an atmosphere of compliance of NCAA rules.

The men's basketball staff will be required to attend a NCAA regional compliance seminar and to attend all sessions required by the institution.

The institution has implemented additional compliance procedures to monitor activities during official and unofficial visits by prospects to the institution's campus. These additional steps include an itinerary for the visit on file before the visit and post-visit financial accountability.

The committee noted that the university took strong action by terminating the coaches involved in the recruiting violations. However, the committee imposed the following additional penalties because of the serious nature of the violations:

Public reprimand and censure.

Two years of probation beginning December 19, 2001.

The university will reduce grants-in-aid in men's basketball by one for the 2002-03 and 2003-04 academic years. The university will be limited to 12 grants-in-aid during those years.

One assistant coach will be informed in writing by the NCAA that because of his involvement in the violations in this case, he and any member institution that intends to employ him in athletically related positions are subject to show-cause provisions of Bylaw 19.6.2.2-(1). The penalty is in effect during a two-year period starting December 19, 2001, and ending December 18, 2003.

The current employer of another assistant coach, pursuant to the provisions of Bylaw 19.6.2.2-(1), will be required to show-cause why it should not be penalized if it does not restrict the coach's duties. The current employer will submit a letter to the committee specifying how it intends to restrict the assistant coach's duties. The letter is due no later than January 16, 2002. The restrictions are subject to approval by the committee. The institution also will be required to submit a compliance report to the committee by September 1, 2002. The report should emphasize the institution's monitoring of and rules education sessions for the assistant coach, with particular emphasis on proper recruiting practices and ethical conduct expectations of staff members employed at NCAA member institutions. The aforementioned restrictions imposed upon the assistant and the reporting requirements will be in effect for a period starting December 19, 2001, and ending December 18, 2003. Should the assistant become employed by any other member institution before the end of the two-year period specified, the restrictions and reporting requirements set forth will remain in effect at the new institution for the balance of the two-year period.

During the probationary period, the university will continue to develop and implement a comprehensive education program on NCAA legislation and submit periodic reports to the NCAA. At the end of the probationary period, the university's president will provide a letter to the committee affirming that the university's current athletics policies and practices conform to all requirements of NCAA regulations.

As required by NCAA legislation for any institution involved in a major infractions case, South Alabama 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 (December 19, 2001).

The members of the Division I Committee on Infractions who heard this case are: Thomas E. Yeager, committee chair and commissioner, Colonial Athletic Association; Paul Dee, director of athletics, University of Miami (Florida); Fred Lacey, attorney and retired judge, LeBoeuf, Lamb, Green and MacRae, Newark, New Jersey; Andrea Myers, athletics director at Indiana State University; James Park Jr., attorney and retired judge, Frost Brown Todd, Lexington, Kentucky; and Josephine Potuto, professor of law, University of Nebraska, Lincoln.

A copy of the complete report from the Division I Committee on Infractions is available on NCAA Online at www.ncaa.org.