Alabama State University has announced that it has received the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions’ public decision regarding its infractions case, which was classified as Level I-Mitigated.
Under the NCAA’s infractions process, a Level I violation represents the most serious category of rules violations, typically involving significant breaches that undermine the integrity of collegiate athletics. The “mitigated” designation means the NCAA determined there were substantial factors that reduced the severity of the case, such as the institution’s cooperation during the investigation, corrective actions taken, or other mitigating circumstances. While the case remains classified as Level I, the mitigating factors generally result in less severe penalties than would otherwise be imposed.
In a statement released Monday, the university said it accepts the Committee’s decision, with remarks from President Dr. Quinton T. Ross Jr. and Vice President for Intercollegiate Athletics Dr. Jason Cable included in the official release.
The Committee’s reduction confirms what we have maintained from the outset — this case was improperly elevated,” said Alabama State University Vice President and Director of Athletics Dr. Jason Cable “The underlying conduct, tied to the former Sports Information Director and head coach, simply does not justify placement among the most severe cases in collegiate athletics. While we recognize the adjustment, we firmly believe the record supports a further reduction.
“While today’s decision is a downgrade from the Level I aggravated classification, we still believe that the scope of penalty does not reflect the university involvement or non-participation in this matter,” said President Dr. Quinton T. Ross Jr.”
According to a university “ The University of Arizona, the institution responsible for certifying the student-athlete’s eligibility, and the entity that received the competitive benefit was issued a Level III violation and a $500 fine. In contrast, Alabama State University, which neither certified the student-athlete nor received any competitive advantage, was assigned a Level I violation”
This outcome reflects a significant disparity,” said Ross. The certifying institution received a minor infraction, while Alabama State was assigned one of the NCAA’s most serious classifications. We believe the standards should be applied consistently across all institutions, and this case underscores the importance of fairness and accountability throughout the NCAA governance process.
I want to thank our Vice President of Intercollegiate Athletics and ASU’s General Counsel for their dedication and diligence in helping secure a reduction to what could have been far more detrimental penalties for our athletics program. As part of its effort to resolve this matter expediently using a summary disposition agreement, ASU accepted responsibility for what occurred based on the facts as understood by the University at the time. Following a contested hearing, the Committee concluded that the evidentiary record was insufficient to hold the former head coach personally responsible for directing the alteration, and ASU respects that determination. The University’s acceptance of institutional responsibility rests on the conduct of its employee, not on any finding regarding the former coach, and reflects ASU’s continued commitment to accountability and full NCAA compliance.”
The case stems from the NCAA’s investigation into sports wagering and game manipulation involving former Alabama State men’s basketball student-athletes. According to the NCAA’s negotiated resolution released in June, four former players were found to have participated in a scheme involving outside bettors during the 2024-25 season. The NCAA ruled the involved former student-athletes permanently ineligible, while the institution’s case was processed separately.
Alabama State emphasized that it accepts the Committee on Infractions’ findings and directed supporters to the university’s full statement, which includes comments from university leadership regarding the decision and the institution’s path forward.
Alabama Statenhas indicated that it does not intend to appeal the NCAA’s ruling.
Additionally, the NCAA levied the maximum financial penalty against Alabama State of $30,000 plus 1% of the school football budget , as well as three years probation.
