South Carolina assistant coach Lamont Evans talks with Sindarius Thornwell during the Memphis game in Columbia on Saturday, Jan. 2, 2016. (Travis Bell/SIDELINE CAROLINA)
Pat Forde of SI.com broke the story Thursday night that in late January USC received a Notice of Allegations from the NCAA related to the FBI’s recent investigation into college basketball. The NOA included a Level 1 violation. Later Thursday night USC released a statement from athletics director Ray Tanner as well as the content of the NOA.
Statement from Ray Tanner
“The University of South Carolina has received a Notice of Allegations from the NCAA related to a former men’s basketball assistant coach. As expected, this does not involve any institutional, current coaching staff or former or current student-athlete eligibility issues. We will continue to defend our program and institution in this process with the NCAA.”
Here’s the actual NOA from the NCAA sent to USC
NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS to the President of the University of South Carolina, Columbia A. Processing Level of Case. Based on the information contained within the following allegation, the NCAA enforcement staff believes this case should be reviewed by a hearing panel of the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions pursuant to procedures applicable to a severe breach of conduct (Level I violation). B. Allegation.
[NCAA Division I Manual Bylaws 10.01.1, 10.1, 10.1-(e), 11.1.3 and 11.3.2.2 (2015-16)] It is alleged that from at least August 2015 through March 2016, Lamont Evans (Evans), then assistant men’s basketball coach and lead recruiter, violated the NCAA principles of ethical conduct when he knowingly solicited and received benefits in order to influence a student-athlete and his family to meet with and retain ASM Sports, a professional athlete agency. Specifically, Evans accepted approximately $5,856 of supplemental pay in the form of bribes from Christian Dawkins (Dawkins), a runner for ASM Sports, in exchange for Evans’ agreement to arrange meetings with then men’s basketball student-athlete P.J. Dozier (Dozier) and his family and influence them to retain ASM Sports. Level of Allegation No. 1: The enforcement staff believes a hearing panel could conclude that Allegation No. 1 is a severe breach of conduct (Level I) because the violations (a) provided or were intended to provide a substantial or extensive impermissible benefit to a staff member, (b) involved unethical conduct, (c) were intentional or showed reckless indifference to the NCAA constitiution and bylaws, (d) seriously undermined or threatened the integrity of the NCAA Collegiate Model and (e) demonstrated egregious conduct inconsistent with the affirmative responsibility and behavioral expectations of college coaches. [NCAA Bylaws 19.01.5, 19.1.1, 19.1.1-(d) and 19.1.1-(h) (2019-20)] Involved Individual: The enforcement staff believes a hearing panel could enter a show-cause order pursuant to NCAA Bylaw 19.9.5.4 regarding Evans’ involvement in Allegation No. 1. NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS Case No. 01114 January 31, 2020 Page No. 2
C. Potential Aggravating and Mitigating Factors. Pursuant to Bylaw 19.7.1, the enforcement staff has identified the following potential aggravating and mitigating factors that a hearing panel may consider.
Institution: a. Aggravating factors. [NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3] (1) A history of Level I, Level II or major violations by the institution. [NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(b)]1 October 22, 2019 – An assistant football coach violated NCAA recruiting contact and communication rules. December 20, 2017 – The [football] assistant coaches conducted impermissible tryouts and had impermissible recruiting contacts with prospects at a high school. April 27, 2012 – The violations in this case were limited and centered on two separate, unrelated set of circumstances, which resulted in NCAA violations: (1) student-athletes living in a local hotel at what proved to be a discounted rate; and (2) the impermissible involvement of two representatives of the institution’s athletics interests in the institution’s football and men’s basketball recruiting efforts and the provision of extra benefits by the two athletics representatives. November 16, 2005 – This case was processed as a summary disposition. Violations of NCAA legislation [in football program] concerning impermissible tutoring assistance, extra benefits, unethical conduct, failure to monitor and a lack of institutional control. February 3, 1991 – Institutional control [stemming from men’s basketball]. March 3, 1987 – Improper entertainment and transportation; extra benefits; out-of-season practice; complimentary tickets; improper recruiting employment, entertainment, lodging and transportation; tryouts; questionable practice [in men’s basketball]. 1 The dates of previous Level I, II or major infractions violations and the accompanying descriptions are provided directly from the Legislative Services Database for the Internet (LSDBi). NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS Case No. 01114 January 31, 2020 Page No. 3
January 8, 1967 – Improper financial aid; extra benefits; improper recruiting entertainment, lodging and transportation; tryouts; eligibility; improper administration of financial aid; outside fund [in football and men’s basketball]. (2) Persons of authority condoned, participated in or negligently disregarded the violation or related wrongful conduct. [NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(h)] As outlined in Allegation No. 1, Evans, as the then assistant men’s basketball coach and lead recruiter, was a person of authority and personally involved in the violations. b. Mitigating factor. [NCAA Bylaw 19.9.4] (1) An established history of self-reporting Level III or secondary violations. [NCAA Bylaw 19.9.4-(d)] The institution has self-reported 87 Level III violations over the last five years for an average of 17 Level III violations per year.
Involved Individual [Evans]: a. Aggravating factors. [NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3] (1) Unethical conduct. [NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(e)] As detailed in Allegation No. 1, Evans engaged in unethical conduct when he knowingly accepted benefits from a runner for an agency for the purpose of influencing a student-athlete to sign with the agency. (2) Persons of authority condoned, participated in or negligently disregarded the violation or related wrongful conduct. [NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(h)] As outlined in Allegation No. 1, Evans, as the then assistant men’s basketball coach and lead recruiter, was a person of authority and personally involved in the violations. (3) Conduct or circumstances demonstrating an abuse of a position of trust. [NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(j)] As detailed in Allegation No. 1, Evans abused his position as an assistant men’s basketball coach when he accepted bribes for the purpose of influencing a student-athlete to sign with AMS Sports. NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS Case No. 01114 January 31, 2020 Page No. 4
(4) Conduct intended to generate pecuniary gain for the involved individual. [NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(l)] As detailed in Allegation No. 1, Evans accepted at least $5,856 in bribes in order to influence a student-athlete and his family to retain ASM Sports. (5) Intentional, willful or blatant disregard for the NCAA constitution bylaws. [NCAA Bylaw 19.9.3-(m)] As detailed in Allegation No. 1, Evans engaged in unethical conduct when he knowingly accepted benefits from a runner for an agency for the purpose of influencing a student-athlete to sign with the agency. b. Mitigating factor. [NCAA Bylaw 19.9.4] (1) The absence of prior conclusions of Level I, Level II or major violations committed by the institution or involved individual. [NCAA Bylaw 19.9.4-(h)] Evans has no prior history of Level I, Level II or major violations, in his eight-year NCAA coaching career. D. Hearing Attendance. In addition to the involved individuals and institutional representatives as outlined in Bylaw 19.7.7.5.2, the hearing panel may benefit from asking the following individual(s) to attend the hearing pursuant to Bylaw 19.7.7.5: None. E. Factual Information. The attached exhibit details the factual information on which the enforcement staff relies for Allegation No. 1. The enforcement staff incorporates the factual information referenced throughout this document, its exhibits and all other documents in the secure filing system. F. Response to Allegations.
Please indicate whether the information contained within these allegations is substantially correct and whether the institution and involved individuals identified in these allegations believe violations of NCAA legislation occurred. Submit materials to support your response. NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS Case No. 01114 January 31, 2020 Page No. 5
If the institution and involved individuals believe NCAA violations occurred, please indicate whether there is substantial agreement on the level of the violation. Submit materials to support your response.
Please indicate whether the factual information is substantially correct and whether the institution and involved individuals have additional pertinent information and/or facts. Submit facts in support of your response.
In accordance with Bylaw 19.7.8.3.4, the hearing panel may view the failure by an institution or involved individual to submit a timely response to a notice of allegations an admission that an alleged violation, for which the party may be subject to penalty pursuant to Bylaw 19.9, occurred. G. Request for Supplemental Information.
Provide mailing and email addresses for all necessary parties to receive communications from the hearing panel related to this matter.
Indicate how the violations were discovered.
Provide a detailed description of any corrective or punitive actions implemented by the institution as a result of the violations acknowledged in this inquiry. In that regard, explain the reasons the institution believes these actions to be appropriate and identify the violations on which the actions were based. Additionally, indicate the date that any corrective or punitive actions were implemented.
Provide a detailed description of all disciplinary actions taken against any current or former athletics department staff members as a result of violations acknowledged in this inquiry. In that regard, explain the reasons the institution believes these actions to be appropriate and identify the violations on which the actions were based. Additionally, indicate the date that any disciplinary actions were taken and submit copies of all correspondence from the institution to each individual describing these disciplinary actions.
Provide a short summary of every past Level I, Level II or major infractions case involving the institution or individuals named in this notice. In this summary, provide the date of the infractions report(s), a description of the violations found by the hearing panel, the individuals involved, and the penalties and corrective actions. Additionally, provide a copy of any major infractions reports involving the institution or individuals named in this notice that were issued by the hearing panel within the last 10 years. NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS Case No. 01114 January 31, 2020 Page No. 6
Provide a chart depicting the institution’s reporting history of Level III and secondary violations for the past five years. In this chart, please indicate for each academic year the number of total Level III and secondary violations reported involving the institution or individuals named in this notice. Also include the applicable bylaws for each violation, and then indicate the number of Level III and secondary violations involving just the sports team(s) named in this notice for the same five-year time period.
Provide the institution’s overall conference affiliation, as well as the total enrollment on campus and the number of men’s and women’s sports sponsored.
Provide a statement describing the general organization and structure of the institution’s intercollegiate athletics department, including the identities of those individuals in the athletics department who were responsible for the supervision of all sport programs during the previous four years.
State when the institution has conducted systematic reviews of NCAA and institutional regulations for its athletics department employees. Also, identify the agencies, individuals or committees responsible for these reviews and describe their responsibilities and functions.
Provide the following information concerning the sports program(s) identified in this inquiry: • The average number of initial and total grants-in-aid awarded during the past four academic years. • The number of initial and total grants-in-aid in effect for the current academic year (or upcoming academic year if the regular academic year is not in session) and the number anticipated for the following academic year. • The average number of official paid visits provided by the institution to prospective student-athletes during the past four years. • Copies of the institution’s squad lists for the past four academic years. • Copies of the institution’s media guides, either in hard copy or through electronic links, for the past four academic years. • A statement indicating whether the provisions of NCAA Bylaws 31.2.2.3 and 31.2.2.4 apply to the institution as a result of the involvement of student-athletes in violations noted in this inquiry. NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS Case No. 01114 January 31, 2020 Page No. 7
• A statement indicating whether the provisions of Bylaw 19.9.7-(g) apply to the institution as a result of the involvement of student-athletes in violations noted in this inquiry.
Consistent with the Committee on Infractions Interal Operating Procedures 4-16-2-1 (Total Budget for Sport Program) and 4-16-2-2 (Submission of Total Budget for Sport Program), please submit the three previous fiscal years’ total budgets for all involved sport programs. At a minimum, a sport program’s total budget shall include: (a) all contractual compensation including salaries, benefits and bonuses paid by the institution or related entities for coaching, operations, administrative and support staff tied to the sport program; (b) all recruiting expenses; (c) all team travel, entertainment and meals; (d) all expenses associated with equipment, uniforms and supplies; (e) game expenses and (f) any guarantees paid associated with the sport program. Any additional information or comments regarding this case are welcome.
