The NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions has placed the University of Texas at Austin on two years of probation for violations of NCAA bylaws governing the standards of honesty by a former volunteer assistant coach and the responsibility to monitor by the university. The committee also reduced the number of equivalency grants in baseball by one for the 2003-04 academic year and limited the university to one assistant coach for recruiting off campus until July 31, 2003.

This case centered on impermissible compensation to a volunteer assistant baseball coach, out of which also arose violations of honesty and a failure to monitor. In its public report, the committee said that this case was unusual in that it did not involve any student-athletes, prospective student-athletes, the receipt of extra benefits, recruiting inducements or the academic improprieties typically seen in most infractions cases.

During the period of January through September 2001, the volunteer coach was employed and paid by a local beer distributorship, which was owned and operated by representatives of the university's athletics interests. However, the volunteer coach worked exclusively with the institution's baseball team and fulfilled none of his employment duties at the distributorship.

Specifically, in January 2001, shortly after accepting his position with the baseball team, the volunteer coach spoke with the president of the distributorship, who also was a representative of the university's athletics interests, about a position at the business. The contact between the president of the distributorship and the volunteer coach was initiated through arrangements made by the head baseball coach.

The volunteer coach was offered and accepted a position at the business, and was employed in the marketing department. However, the volunteer coach never reported for work nor performed any of the duties required of this position, though he was paid monthly at a rate of $40,000 per year. Instead, during his nine months of employment at the distributorship, the volunteer coach worked exclusively at baseball-related activities, particularly spending considerable time recruiting. The institution petitioned for and was granted permission for the volunteer coach to recruit off campus due to health problems experienced by the head coach.

In its public report, the committee said that the volunteer coach violated the standards of honesty when he failed to fulfill his job responsibilities at the beer distributorship during the time period of the violation, even though he was advised by the institution before accepting the position that he must earn his salary from the distributorship.

Although all parties agreed that the volunteer coach did not perform the duties expected of him at the distributorship so as to justify his salary, there was disagreement as to whether the circumstances warranted a violation of honesty and sportsmanship standards, whether they provided a competitive and/or recruiting advantage to the institution, and whether the case was "major" or "secondary."

The Committee on Infractions concluded that there were violations of honesty standards by the volunteer coach, that a competitive advantage had been gained and that the violations were major in nature.

The institution contended that the violations were secondary in nature primarily because only one student-athlete recruited by the volunteer coach signed a National Letter of Intent with the institution, and thus no recruiting advantage was gained.

The committee concluded that one signee attributed to the volunteer coach's recruitment was a significant recruiting advantage. The committee also noted that this would be in addition to the advantage of the volunteer coach being able to identify prospects that otherwise may have gone unnoticed, but for his ability to travel and recruit for long periods.

Furthermore, the volunteer coach could fulfill recruiting responsibilities normally unattended in the spring, while the head coach could focus on his team and travel either on other business or for pleasure, thus giving the university a distinct recruiting advantage and elevating this finding to the "major" category.

Although NCAA bylaws permit a staff member to earn outside income, the standards of the bylaw require that the work must actually be performed and that compensation must be at a rate commensurate with the rate for such work. The committee concluded that because the volunteer coach had continued to accept a salary for work that he did not perform, he had violated the Association's honesty standard.

The committee also found that from March through September 2001, the institution and the head coach failed to adequately monitor the employment arrangement between the volunteer coach and the distributorship. Neither the head coach nor the institution attempted to determine whether the volunteer coach's recruiting activities would interfere with his abilities to fulfill his employment responsibilities. As a result, the volunteer coach worked exclusively as a member of the baseball coaching staff.

There was no effort on the part of the institution in general, and the head coach in particular, to investigate the unusual circumstances that allowed the volunteer coach to spend all of his time with duties associated with the baseball team, while ignoring his responsibilities at the business from which he was being paid a salary.

The committee also found secondary violations with regard to recruiting, which included three assistant baseball coaches recruiting off campus simultaneously. NCAA bylaws limit the number of baseball coaches who can recruit at any one time to two.

In determining the appropriate penalties to impose, the committee considered the institution's self-imposed corrective actions. Among the actions:

The university asked the volunteer coach to relinquish his duties effective October 8, 2001.

The university will not allow the head coach to offer the position to any other volunteer coach until August 2003.

The head coach will not participate in off-campus recruiting. Only two coaches have engaged in off-campus recruiting. The university will not permit the head baseball coach to participate in off-campus recruiting until August 2003.

The university conducted a survey of all other volunteer coaches to ensure that each coach was fulfilling his or her outside employment obligations.

The university imposed a structured system for hiring volunteer coaches. This system will include a letter to each potential volunteer coach from the university's compliance coordinator outlining the duties to the university and key NCAA regulations. Further, each volunteer coach must acknowledge in writing that he or she understands these regulations and agrees to fulfill all obligations to the university and any outside employer.

The Committee on Infractions agreed with and approved of the corrective actions taken by the university. Because of the narrow scope of the violations committed, the committee imposed only a limited number of the presumptive penalties and disciplinary measures set forth in Bylaws 19.6.2.1 and 19.6.2.2. The additional penalties imposed by the committee are as follows:

The University of Texas at Austin shall be publicly reprimanded and censured.

The university shall be placed on two years of probation beginning November 6, 2002, and ending November 5, 2004.

The university shall reduce the number of equivalency grants in baseball by one, from 11.78 to 10.78, for the 2003-04 academic year.

The number of assistant baseball coaches permitted to recruit off campus at any one time shall be limited to one until July 31, 2003. The university shall document this restriction in its annual compliance report to the committee.

If the volunteer coach had still been employed by the institution, the university would have been required to show cause in accordance with Bylaw 19.6.2.2-(l) why it should not be subject to additional penalties if it had failed to take appropriate disciplinary action against him.

The committee considered imposing a one-year show-cause order under NCAA Bylaw 19.6.2.2-(1) against the volunteer coach, but decided not to, noting that he was released by the university October 8, 2001, and since that time has been out of college coaching, under what the committee considered to be a de facto show-cause order.

During this period of probation, the institution shall:

a. Continue to develop and implement a comprehensive educational program on NCAA legislation, including seminars and testing, to instruct the coaches, the faculty athletics representative, all athletics department personnel and all university staff members with responsibility for the certification of student-athletes for admission, retention, financial aid or competition;

b. Submit a preliminary report to the director of the committees on infractions by January 15, 2003, setting forth a schedule for establishing this compliance and educational program; and

c. File with the committee's director an annual compliance report indicating the progress made with this program by August 15, 2003. Particular emphasis should be placed on the proper supervision of volunteer coaches. The reports also must include documentation of the university's self-corrective actions and compliance with the penalties imposed by the committee.

At the end of the probationary period, the institution's president shall 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, Texas shall be subject to the provisions of NCAA Bylaw 19.6.2.3 concerning repeat violators for a five-year period beginning on the effective date of the penalties in this case (November 6, 2002).

The members of the Division I Committee on Infractions who heard this case are: Thomas Yeager, committee chair and commissioner, Colonial Athletic Association; Paul Dee, athletics director, University of Miami (Florida); Craig Littlepage, athletics director, University of Virginia; Frederick Lacey, attorney and retired judge; Gene Marsh, professor of law, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa; Andrea Myers, athletics director, Indiana State University; and James Park, Jr., attorney.

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