USC basketball gets two years probation as NCAA investigation concludes
The USC basketball program avoided major penalties as the NCAA concluded its three-and-a-half-year investigation into violations committed by former assistant coach Tony Bland.
The Trojans receive two years of probation and a modest $5,000 fine plus 1% of the men’s basketball program budget, on top of self-imposed punishments from the 2018-19, 19-20 recruiting seasons.
There was a news conference Thursday morning with Vincent Nicastro, chief hearing officer and deputy commissioner and chief operating officer for the Big East Conference, who discussed how USC's cooperation in the investigation the limited severity of the ruling.
"The panel gives a great deal of deference to the enforcement staff's recommendation with regard to the mitigating factor of exemplary cooperation. As you know, the enforcement staff works directly with the school for many months as they go through the investigation together. It's a very high bar, in my experience, in order to get that recommendation from the NCAA enforcement staff -- the school has to really perform at a very high level in terms of their cooperation and participation. ... In this case, we accepted their recommendation," Nicastro said.
"I can tell you, as a panelist in this case, having that cooperation from the institution and the individual involved really aided us in our ability to make a more informed decision."
Meanwhile, USC athletic director Mike Bohn and basketball coach Andy Enfield issued comments:
Bohn: "I'm proud of our university, athletics department and men's basketball program for our management of this matter. Since my arrival at the end of 2019, I have been focused on continuing and enhancing our already-robust compliance program. The NCAA's findings, comments and acceptance of our self-imposed penalties are a reflection of our commitment to accountability, integrity and transparency. I'm grateful to President Carol L. Folt for her guidance, and I commend our compliance staff and legal team for their outstanding efforts navigating us through this challenge. We are thrilled this matter is now behind us, and our focus remains on being the most student-athlete centered program in the country."
Enfield: "Our men's basketball program is pleased the NCAA has come to a resolution on this case. This was a comprehensive process, and we are looking forward to moving on. We are grateful for all the support provided by our university leadership, especially President Carol L. Folt and Athletic Director Mike Bohn, as well as our compliance and legal teams. We remain committed to winning with integrity and dedicated to providing the best possible experience for all of our student-athletes."
Here is the full news release the NCAA put out Thursday morning:
A former Southern California men’s basketball associate head coach violated NCAA ethical conduct rules when he accepted a $4,100 bribe from a business management company to influence student-athletes, according to a decision released by the Division I Committee on Infractions.
The conduct at issue in this case was related to a broader scheme that involved money and influence at the intersection of college and professional basketball. The scheme resulted in the arrest and prosecution of multiple individuals — including college basketball coaches — on conspiracy and bribery charges, and it led to significant NCAA reforms.
This case originated Sept. 26, 2017, when FBI agents arrested the men’s basketball associate head coach in connection with an indictment and federal criminal complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleged that the associate head coach accepted cash bribes from a professional sports agent in exchange for influencing student-athletes to retain the services of the agent’s management company when the student-athletes entered the NBA.
As part of his plea deal for federal proceedings, the former associate head coach acknowledged that he had accepted a bribe during a July 2017 meeting with financial advisors and business managers in exchange for directing basketball players to retain their services.
Government recordings from that meeting and a second meeting in August 2017 — which were evidence in federal court — revealed the associate head coach had touted his ability to connect the company with current or prospective student-athletes, noting that he had heavy influence over players’ decisions.
The meetings violated NCAA rules because athletics department staff members are prohibited from receiving benefits for facilitating or arranging a meeting between a student-athlete and an agent, financial advisor, or representative of an agent or advisor. Athletics staff members also are prohibited from representing, directly or indirectly, any individual in the marketing of their athletics ability or reputation to an agency and from accepting compensation for the representation.
The committee specifically noted, “The associate head coach demonstrated a recurring lack of judgment that resulted in unethical conduct and representation violations for both himself and USC.” The committee added, “Although (the associate head coach’s) behavior may have originated out of friendship with the agent associate, it waded into murky ethical waters and ultimately intersected with the agent associate’s corruption scheme within college basketball.”
Despite the former associate head coach’s underlying violations, the committee noted that unlike other individuals in similar cases, he met his obligation when he participated in the NCAA investigation and provided information relevant to the investigation. The committee also noted that the school displayed exemplary cooperation and self-imposed significant and meaningful penalties in line with the NCAA membership’s penalty guidelines.
The committee classified the case as Level I-mitigated for the school and Level I-standard for the former associate head coach. The committee used the Division I membership-approved infractions penalty guidelines to prescribe the following measures:
Two years of probation. A $5,000 fine plus 1% of the men’s basketball program budget. A reduction of men’s basketball scholarships by a total of two during the 2018-19 academic year (self-imposed by the university). A reduction of men’s basketball official visits to 20 during the 2018-19/2019-20 rolling two-year period (self-imposed by the university). A reduction in the number of men’s basketball recruiting person days by 20 during the 2018-19 academic year (self-imposed by the university). A three-year show-cause order for the former associate head coach. During that period, any NCAA member school employing him must restrict him from any athletically related duties unless it shows cause why the restrictions should not apply.
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 Carol Cartwright, president emeritus at Bowling Green and Kent State; Stephen Madva, attorney in private practice; Vincent Nicastro, chief hearing officer and deputy commissioner and chief operating officer for the Big East Conference; Kay Norton, president emeritus at Northern Colorado; Joe Novak, former head football coach at Northern Illinois; Roderick Perry, director of athletics at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis; and Sankar Suryanarayan, university counsel at Princeton.