INDIANAPOLIS---The NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions has penalized Prairie View A&M University for major violations in its women's basketball program. The case involves violations of NCAA rules in the areas of institutional control, out-of-season practice and observation, extra benefits, and eligibility.
Penalties for the violations include four years of probation, a reduction in the number of women's basketball scholarships for two academic years, and a decrease in the number of women's basketball recruiting contact opportunities.
The committee attributed the majority of violations to the hiring of a head coach with no NCAA experience in rules education and the university's failure to educate her regarding rules compliance. In addition, the committee concluded that an environment of noncompliance existed in the university's athletic department.
The university previously appeared in a major infractions hearing in 2001 during which time the committee mandated that the university develop and implement a comprehensive educational program on NCAA rules. The committee stated in this most recent case that it was apparent the institution had not implemented this mandate from the committee, which led to the lengthy probation period.
Regarding the violations of impermissible tryouts and out-of-season practice activities, it was found that members of the women's basketball coaching staff conducted basketball drills and provided skill instruction to a number of women's basketball student-athletes on several occasions during the summer of 2005.
Additionally, during the summer and fall of 2005, prior to the start of allowable preseason basketball practice, the head coach and assistant coaches observed prospective student-athletes, with members of the women's basketball team, participating in pickup basketball games for brief periods of time in the university's facilities.
Also, during the summer of 2005, the head coach had an improper telephone call and an improper in-person, off-campus contact with a prospective student-athlete prior to the coach being officially recognized by the university as an authorized staff member.
This case also involves the head coach's provision of impermissible extra benefits to women's basketball student-athletes during the summer of 2005 and the 2005-06 academic year. Specifically, the head coach provided small amounts of cash ranging from $10 to $30, and in one instance, a personal item to women's basketball student-athletes.
In addition, the head coach arranged for several student-athletes to receive impermissible complimentary admissions to professional basketball contests.
Regarding the eligibility violations, the university allowed an incoming freshman student who was not certified as a qualifier by the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse to attend basketball practice sessions and engage in basketball practice activities with the team at a time when she was not allowed to do so according to NCAA rules.
It was also found that prior to the 2006-07 academic year, the university failed to record countable hours of athletically related practice and competition activities on a daily basis for each student-athlete as an individual in any team sport.
Based on these violations, the committee found that the university demonstrated a lack of institutional control over its women's basketball program during the summer of 2005 and the 2005-06 academic year. This finding was based on the university's failure to adequately educate the newly-hired women's basketball coach with regard to basic NCAA rules, as well as the environment of noncompliance that existed in the athletic department.
This environment set the stage for violations to occur and be ignored, as manifested when assistant women's basketball coaches and an athletics administrator witnessed violations in the women's basketball program and decided neither to confront the head coach nor to report the information to the proper authorities.
In determining the penalties, the Committee on Infractions considered the university's self-imposed penalties and corrective actions. The penalties, some of which were self-imposed by the university and adopted by the committee, are as follows:
• Public reprimand and censure.
• Four years of probation (January 8, 2008, to January 7, 2012).
• Reduction in women's basketball scholarships by three from 15 to 12 total for each of the 2007-08 through the 2009-10 academic years.
• For the first three weeks of the practice and playing season in the fall semester of 2007, the women's basketball team reduced practice hours from the maximum 20 hours allowed to 10 hours per week. (Self-imposed by university.)
• For the 2007-08 academic year, official paid visits for women's basketball will be reduced from the four-year average of slightly over four visits to two visits. (Self-imposed by university).
The Committee on Infractions consists of conference and institutional athletics administrators, faculty and members of the public. The committee independently rules on cases investigated by the NCAA enforcement staff and determines appropriate penalties. The committee's findings may be appealed to the Infractions Appeals Committee.
The members of the Committee on Infractions who reviewed this case are Josephine Potuto, the Richard H. Larson Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Nebraska College of Law and chair of the committee; Paul Dee, director of athletics at the University of Miami, and formerly the university's general counsel; Eileen Jennings, general counsel at Central Michigan University; Gene Marsh, James M. Kidd Sr. Professor of Law at the University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa School of Law; Alfred Lechner, Jr., attorney; Thomas Yeager, commissioner of the Colonial Athletic Association; and Dennis Thomas, the commissioner of the Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference and formerly director of athletics at Hampton University.
-30-
