The California State University, Northridge, men's basketball program violated recruiting rules when the former head coach and two former assistant coaches had impermissible on- and off-campus contacts with prospects during the COVID-19 recruiting dead period and provided those prospects with impermissible recruiting inducements, according to a decision released by a Division I Committee on Infractions panel. Around the same time, a former assistant coach violated tampering rules by communicating with a student-athlete from another school.
As a result of his personal involvement in the violations and his failure to monitor his staff, the former head coach violated head coach responsibility rules.
In March 2020, the NCAA Division I Council adopted emergency rules establishing a temporary recruiting dead period intended to protect the health and safety of prospects, student-athletes and university staff amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The dead period prevented in-person recruiting contacts, including official and unofficial visits.
The school, coaches and enforcement staff agreed that the violations in this case occurred in April 2021, when the coaches arranged two impermissible visits, which resulted in impermissible recruiting contacts and the provision of inducements to two prospects.
During the first prospect's visit, the former head coach and one assistant coach arranged for a graduate manager to drive the prospect from his hotel to campus, where the prospect toured campus facilities and met with the head coach and the two assistant coaches. The head coach then drove the prospect to an off-campus restaurant, where he paid for the prospect's meal, and then drove the prospect back to his hotel. The next day, additional violations occurred. The graduate manager drove the prospect to a local establishment for breakfast, where they met with a then current men's basketball student-athlete. The graduate manager then drove the group to campus, where the prospect received a second campus tour and met again with the head coach and one assistant coach. The prospect later met the head coach at an off-campus basketball court, where the head coach watched him engage in an impermissible tryout. Finally, on the third day of the visit, the head coach met the prospect at an off-campus restaurant, where he purchased his meal and then arranged for a booster to drive the prospect to a religious service.
Because the visits occurred during the COVID-19 dead period, all in-person contacts between the prospect and coaching staff were impermissible. The meals constitute impermissible recruiting inducements. The prospect also was provided with athletic gear for his impermissible tryout, which he was not required to return — also an impermissible recruiting inducement.
During the second prospect's visit, a second assistant coach arranged for the prospect and his mother to impermissibly visit the campus, where they met with the head coach and both assistant coaches and then toured the campus facilities with an assistant coach and graduate manager. After the tour, the head coach and both assistant coaches met the prospect and his mother at an off-campus restaurant, where the head coach purchased their meals. Again, in addition to the impermissible in-person contacts, the meals constitute impermissible recruiting inducements.
The school, an assistant coach and the enforcement staff also agree that during that same month, one of the assistant coaches had impermissible contacts with a then current student-athlete at another school before that prospect had formally entered the Transfer Portal. The assistant coach continued to have contact with the prospect after he was informed by the compliance department that the student-athlete was not in the Transfer Portal and the communication violated NCAA rules.
Finally, the school, head coach and enforcement staff agree that due to his personal involvement in the violations, and his involvement of his staff and a graduate manager in the violations, the head coach violated head coach responsibility rules and failed to monitor his staff.
"This case involved intentional violations by coaches with decades of experience," the panel said in its decision. "The violations also occurred during the COVID-19 recruiting dead period, meaning that the coaches' actions endangered the health and safety of a number of individuals while, simultaneously, gaining a recruiting advantage over compliant (schools)."
The case was resolved through the summary disposition process, a cooperative effort in which the involved parties collectively submit the case to the Committee on Infractions in written form. The NCAA enforcement staff, university and involved parties must agree to the facts and overall level of the case to use this process instead of a formal in-person hearing. After the panel's approval of the summary disposition report, the school, head coach and an assistant coach challenged their penalties via an expedited penalty hearing. After the hearing, the panel adjusted some penalties while maintaining others.
The Committee on Infractions panel classified the case as Level II-Standard for the university and Level II-Aggravated for the head coach and both assistant coaches. The panel used the Division I membership-approved infractions penalty guidelines to prescribe the following measures:
- Three years of probation.
- A $5,000 fine, plus 1% of the men's basketball program budget.
- A prohibition against unofficial visits in men's basketball for one week during the 2022-23 academic year (self-imposed).
- A prohibition against recruiting communication in men's basketball for one week during the 2022-23 academic year (self-imposed).
- A three-year show-cause order for the former head coach, plus a suspension from 40% of the first season after the conclusion of his show-cause order should he be hired by another NCAA school.
- Two-year show-cause orders for both assistant coaches.
Members of the Committee on Infractions are drawn from the NCAA membership and members of the public. The members of the panel who reviewed this case are Tricia Turley Brandenburg, deputy director of athletics and senior woman administrator at Towson; Rich Ensor, commissioner of the Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference; Jason Leonard, executive director of athletics compliance at Oklahoma; Joel Maturi, former director of athletics at Minnesota; Kay Norton, president emerita of Northern Colorado and chief hearing officer for the panel; Joe Novak, former football head coach at Northern Illinois University; and Dave Roberts, special assistant to the athletics director at Southern California.
