re: Do not throw stones when you live in a glass house

quote:

---

What's the major with the assistant coach issue? Haven't heard about that.

---

quote:

---

In April 2015, the NCAA enforcement staff received information from confidential sources regarding potential violations in the institution's football program. On August 24, 2015, the enforcement staff issued a verbal notice of inquiry. From September 2015 to May 2016, the institution and the enforcement staff conducted a joint investigation. On April 27, 2016, the former assistant football coach resigned at the institution's request. In early October 2016, the representative of the institution's athletics interests (athletics representative) involved in this case submitted answers to written questions provided to her by the institution and enforcement staff in May 2016.3

The institution, a former assistant football coach (former assistant coach 1) and the
enforcement staff agree that between December 1, 2014, and May 21, 2015, former
assistant coach 1 violated NCAA recruiting legislation when he engaged in a prearranged,
impermissible off-campus contact at a high school in Houston, Texas (the high school)
with four football prospective student-athletes. It is further agreed that former assistant
coach 1 knew and/or should have known a representative of the institution's athletics
interests (the athletics representative) was assisting and/or participating in the recruitment
of the four prospects. Specifically:
a. Between December 1, 2014, and January 31, 2015, the athletics representative, who
was the mother of a then Alabama football student-athlete, contacted the head football
coach at the high school to arrange a meeting. Once the athletics representative arrived
at the high school, she asked to meet with four football prospective student-athletes
(prospects 1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively). The athletics representative initially met with
the four prospects for approximately 10 to 15 minutes and former assistant coach 1
later joined the meeting for approximately 15 to 20 minutes. The impermissible contact
lasted a total of 25 to 35 minutes, occurred at least six months prior to the permissible
timeframe for an off-campus contact with prospect 3 and at least 18 months prior to the permissible time frame for off-campus contacts with prospects 1, 2 and 4. [Bylaws
13.01.2, 13.1.1.1 and 13.1.2.1 (2014-15" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noreferrer">
b. Subsequently, on or about May 21, 2015, the athletics representative contacted the head
football coach at the high school to arrange a meeting with prospects 2, 3 and 4 to
follow up on the prior meeting with the prospects, as outlined in Violation No. 1-a. The
second impermissible contact lasted approximately 10 minutes. [Bylaws 13.01.2,
13.1.1.1 and 13.1.2.1 (2014-15" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noreferrer">
2. [NCAA Division I Manual Bylaws 10.01.1, 10.1 and 10.1-(d) (2015-16" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noreferrer"> (Level I)
The institution, former assistant coach 1 and the enforcement staff agree that between
September 23, 2015, and April 25, 2016, former assistant coach 1 violated the principles
of ethical conduct when he knowingly provided false or misleading information to the
enforcement staff and institution regarding his knowledge of a representative of the
institution's athletics interests assisting and/or participating in the recruitment of football
prospects and individual involvement in the impermissible off-campus recruiting contact
with four prospects. Specifically:
a. During his September 23, 2015, and April 25, 2016, interviews with the enforcement
staff and institution, former assistant coach 1 provided false or misleading information
when he denied knowledge of the athletics representative's involvement with and her
presence during former assistant coach 1's visit to the high school detailed in Violation
No. 1. In both interviews, former assistant coach 1 denied seeing the athletics
representative at the high school and denied that she had any involvement in his visit
outlined in Violation No. 1-a. Former assistant coach 1's statements are in direct
contradiction to information reported to the institution and enforcement staff by two
involved football prospects and the high school's head football coach, as well as some
of former assistant coach 1's own statements during his May 2, 2016, interview.
[Bylaws 10.01.1, 10.1 and 10.1-(d) (2015-16" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noreferrer">
b. During his September 23, 2015, and April 25, 2016, interviews with the enforcement
staff and institution, former assistant coach 1 provided false or misleading information
when he denied having in-person, off-campus recruiting contact with four football
prospects at the high school as detailed in Violation No. 1-a. Specifically, former
assistant coach 1 denied seeing or interacting with any prospects at the high school.
Former assistant coach 1's statements are in direct contradiction to the information
reported to the institution and enforcement staff by two involved football prospects and
the high school's head football coach, as well as some of former assistant coach 1's own
statements during his May 2, 2016, interview.
3. [NCAA Division I Manual Bylaws 13.02.5.2, 13.17.4.1 (2013-14); 13.01.2 (2013-14 and
2015-16); and 13.1.2.1 (2015-16" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noreferrer"> (Level III)
The institution and enforcement staff agree that between May 14, 2014, and December 9,
2015, members of the institution's football coaching staff violated NCAA recruiting
legislation on two occasions when they engaged in impermissible contacts and/or used an
impermissible recruiter during the recruitment of two football prospective student-athletes.
Specifically:
a. On May 14, 2014, a then assistant football coach (former assistant coach 2) had
impermissible off-campus contact during an evaluation period with a then football
prospective student-athlete (prospect 5) at prospect 5's Maryland high school.
Specifically, after conducting an evaluation of prospect 5, former assistant coach 2
engaged in a brief conversation with prospect 5. Further, former assistant coach 2
accompanied prospect 5 to his high school football head coach's office, where he
participated in three different photographs with prospect 5 in an effort to document
prospect 5's physical size. Former assistant coach 2's contacts with prospect 5 were
impermissible as they occurred outside of a permissible contact period and two months
prior to the permissible timeframe for an off-campus contact with prospect 5. [Bylaws
13.01.2, 13.02.5.2, 13.1.1.1, 13.17.4.1 (2013-14" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noreferrer">
b. On or around December 9, 2015, members of the football coaching staff permitted an
impermissible recruiter to attend a home visit with a then prospective student-athlete
(prospect 6). Specifically, the institution arranged for prospect 6's youth football coach
to provide a member of the coaching staff with transportation from the airport to
prospect 6's home. The youth football coach then entered the home and was present
for the duration of the recruiting visit, although not an active participant

---