Violations occurred in the University of Southern California football program when the program exceeded the allowable number of coaches over two academic years, according to an agreement released by the Division I Committee on Infractions. As a result of the violations, the parties also agreed that football head coach Lincoln Riley violated head coach responsibility rules.
The school and the enforcement staff agreed that the violations in this case occurred when eight analysts for the football program engaged in on- and off-field coaching activities during spring 2022, fall 2022 and spring 2023, resulting in the football program exceeding the permissible number of countable coaches by six for two academic years.
Violations occurred in the University of Southern California football program when the program exceeded the allowable number of coaches over two academic years, according to an agreement released by the Division I Committee on Infractions. As a result of the violations, the parties also agreed that football head coach Lincoln Riley violated head coach responsibility rules.
The school and the enforcement staff agreed that the violations in this case occurred when eight analysts for the football program engaged in on- and off-field coaching activities during spring 2022, fall 2022 and spring 2023, resulting in the football program exceeding the permissible number of countable coaches by six for two academic years.
Head coaches are presumed responsible for the actions of their staff, and as a result, Riley violated head coach responsibility rules. In this case, however, some of the violations occurred before rules changes effective in January 2023 that shifted head coach responsibility rules from a rebuttable presumption to automatic attachment. Because Riley was not personally involved in the violations and demonstrated that he promoted an atmosphere of compliance and monitored his staff, Riley rebutted his presumed responsibility for the violations occurring before the rules change. For the same reasons, the parties also agreed that a suspension penalty for Riley was not appropriate.
Finally, the enforcement staff and school agreed that the school promptly investigated the violations when notified and worked collaboratively with the enforcement staff to resolve the case. The parties also agreed that the school appropriately educated and monitored the football program and that the analysts were aware of the rules but occasionally exhibited lapses in judgment.
The parties used ranges identified by the Division I membership-approved infractions penalty guidelines to agree upon Level II-mitigated penalties for the university and Riley. The decision contains the full list of penalties as approved by the Committee on Infractions, including:
- One year of probation.Â
- A $50,000 fine.
- A restriction for the special teams analyst from practice and film review for six consecutive days during two weeks of the 2024-25 season.
- A restriction for the remaining analysts from practice and film review for six consecutive days during four weeks of the 2024-25 season.
- A reduction in countable athletically related activities for the football program by 24 hours during the 2023-24 season (self-imposed by the school).
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 Stephen Madva, attorney in private practice; Roderick Perry, chief hearing officer for the panel and former director of athletics at the school now known as Indiana University Indianapolis; and Steve Waterfield, director of athletics at Oakland.Â
