NCAA News Archive - 2009

« back to 2009 | Back to NCAA News Archive Index

Alabama State probationary period reduced


Jul 1, 2009 8:46:06 AM


The NCAA News

The NCAA Division I Infractions Appeals Committee has reduced from five years to three the probation that the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions imposed on Alabama State University in 2008. The university’s probation will now end December 9, 2011.

In December 2008, the Division I Committee on Infractions issued a report for findings of violations in the football program at Alabama State. The case involved violations of NCAA rules for offer and inducement of prospective student-athletes, recruiting, financial aid, extra benefits, student-athlete eligibility for practice and competition, playing and practice seasons, academic fraud, supplemental fund for the coaching staff, failure to monitor by the former head coach and a lack of institutional control.

In its written appeal, the university asserted that the five-year probation imposed by the Committee on Infractions was “excessive and constituted an abuse of discretion,” the standard that must be met according to NCAA rules for a penalty to be set aside on appeal.

The Infractions Appeals Committee has determined that an abuse of discretion in the imposition of a penalty occurs if the penalty: (1) was not based on a correct legal standard or was based on a misapprehension of the underlying substantive legal principles; (2) was based on a clearly erroneous factual finding; (3) failed to consider and weigh material factors; (4) was based on a clear error of judgment, such that the imposition was arbitrary, capricious or irrational; or (5) was based in significant part on one or more irrelevant or improper factors.

In this case, when determining the penalties, the Committee on Infractions stated it considered the long period of time it took to complete the case and bring it before the committee, noting that for two and a half years there appeared to be little or no activity from the university to complete the case. However, the Infractions Appeals Committee found that the record did not support this conclusion and that substantial activity by the university occurred during this time, noting that the penalty was based on an erroneous factual determination.

The Infractions Appeals Committee further found that the Committee on Infractions did not directly address the substance or effect of the two-year probation self-imposed by the university. The Infractions Appeals Committee noted that there was widespread public knowledge of the self-imposed probation, its substantive elements were substantial and the institution reported the status of its compliance with those elements to the NCAA through the enforcement staff and to the Southwestern Athletic Conference. Thus, the self-imposed probation in this case carried with it the same operative elements and substantive deterrent effects as probation imposed by the NCAA. 

However, the Infractions Appeals Committee stated that the Committee on Infractions is not obliged to accord every institution credit for self-imposed probation. The specifics, objectives and impacts of self-imposed probation can vary widely from case to case and the Committee on Infractions can properly give probation and other self-imposed penalties the weight they deserve as it formulates its penalties from case to case.

As such, the Infractions Appeals Committee found the five-year probation imposed by the Committee on Infractions constituted an abuse of discretion and therefore reduced the penalty.

In considering the university’s appeal, the Infractions Appeals Committee reviewed the notice of appeal, the transcript of the university’s Committee on Infractions hearing and the submissions by the university and the Committee on Infractions.

The members of the Infractions Appeals Committee who heard the case were Christopher L. Griffin, Foley & Lardner LLP, chair; Susan Cross Lipnickey, Miami University (Ohio); Noel M. Ragsdale, University of Southern California; David Williams II, Vanderbilt University; and Allan A. Ryan Jr., Harvard University. Ryan is a former member of the Infractions Appeals Committee who participated in this case due to the recusal of Jack Friedenthal, George Washington University.


© 2010 The National Collegiate Athletic Association
Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy