Once an individual is identified as a representative of the institution's athletics interest, that person remains a Clemson University booster forever.

Contact with Prospective Student-Athletes

It is clear that much confusion exists about the NCAA and its role in regulating the activity between a booster and a prospect. A booster cannot contact or interact with a prospect or family for the purpose of persuading them to attend Clemson University.

Permissible Activities:

1. Identify outstanding potential student-athletes.

2. Provide employment and internship opportunities for student-athletes.

3. Report potential violations to compliance services.

4. Continue established friendships with friends and neighbors, even those with prospect-aged children.

Impermissible Activities:

1. Cannot contact prospects directly or contact high school coaches or guidance counselors to get information on prospects.

2. Cannot contact prospect's family or friends and promote Clemson's athletic program.

3. A prospect could not receive any room, board or living expenses from you at any time including the summer prior to enrollment at Clemson.

4. Cannot arrange financial assistance for prospects, their families and friends.

5. Cannot provide transportation to prospects, their families and friends.

Contact with Current Student-Athletes

An extra benefit is any award, gift, benefit or expense not allowed by NCAA rules. Generally, a student-athlete may not receive a benefit that is not available to other members of the student body. Examples of such benefits, which may not be provided by anyone other than student-athletes parents/ guardians, include but are not limited to: gifts or loans, clothing, stereo equipment, compact discs, food, beverages, transportation, ownership or use of automobiles, use of automatic cash machine, low interest or interest free loans, telephone credit cards and use of charge accounts.

To determine whether a benefit provided to a student-athlete would constitute a NCAA violation, the following four-question test must be answered:

1. Did your relationship or benefit provided to the student-athlete or student-athlete's parents develop as a result of the student-athletes athletics participation?

2. Did your relationship or benefit provided to the student-athlete or student-athlete's parents occur before the student-athlete became a prospect (grade nine through twelve)?

3. Did your relationship with the student-athlete or student-athlete's parents occur before the student-athlete's reputation as an athlete?

4. If you provided a benefit to a student-athlete or student-athlete's parents, was the benefit similar in nature today as it was before the student-athlete became an athlete?

If you answer "yes" to the first question and "no" to any of the other three, do not provide! If you have already provided, contact compliance services immediately.

The NCAA's goal is to limit extra benefits provided to prospects and student-athletes. If it is determined that you have an established relationship with a student-athlete, you may continue to provide occasional benefits, provided they are similar in nature as before the student-athlete became an athlete. The origin and duration of the relationship and the consistency of benefits provided by you are key factors in determining whether or not a violation occurs.

In addition, the individual who provides the benefits may not be an agent, IPTAY member, or Clemson booster who assisted in the student-athletes recruitment to Clemson.

Please understand that if you provide extra benefits, you may render the student-athlete ineligible and the team may have to forfeit contests in which the student-athlete participated. If you have provided or have offered to provide any extra benefit, please contact compliance services immediately at compliance-L@clemson.edu.

Q: May I attend a high school game where prospects are participating? May I speak with a prospects parent while at the game?
A: Yes, you may attend a high school game. However, it is not permissible to have contact with a prospects parent for the purposes of recruiting the prospect.

Q: What if I am a friend of the family, a relative or a neighbor of a prospect?
A: The rule does not prevent you from having normal contact with friends, relatives or neighbors. However, contact for the purpose of recruiting is not permissible.

Q: Can an IPTAY member be involved in any way when a prospect is on an official or unofficial visit?
A: NO, IPTAY members may not be involved with a prospect while the prospect is on their visit to Clemson's campus.

Q: Is it permissible for an IPTAY member to provide summer employment for student-athletes?
A: Yes, it is permissible. Please remember that all employment must be arranged through the compliance department. Also, once employment begins, compensation must be paid only for work actually performed and at a rate commensurate with the going rate in that locality.

Q: Is it permissible for a booster to reimburse the coach of a prospect for expenses incurred in transporting a prospect to visit the campus?
A: No, coaches may not be reimbursed or provided any benefit by Clemson or its boosters for bringing a prospect to campus.

Q: Is it permissible for an IPTAY member to pay in whole or in part registration fees associated with sport camps?
A: No, any assistance by a Clemson employee or booster would constitute an extra benefit and not permissible.

Q: Is it permissible for an IPTAY member to provide enrolled student-athletes a home cooked meal?
A: Yes, provided it is on an "occasional basis" and the meal is at the home not a restaurant. All requests must be received by compliance services prior to the event.

Q: Is Clemson's athletics department responsible for the acts of boosters and booster support groups?
A: Yes. IPTAY members must follow the same rules and regulations as those placed upon Clemson coaches and administration.

Q: Is it permissible for an IPTAY member to provide gifts or awards to a student-athlete for his or her performances?
A: No, all awards must conform to NCAA awards legislation and must be approved by Clemson's compliance department.

Q: As an IPTAY member, may I call or write a prospect to let him or her know they would be a good fit for Clemson?
A: No, only Clemson's coaches may call or write a prospect after specific dates established by the NCAA.

Q: What should I do if a prospect calls me about Clemson?
A: If that situation occurs, you may speak to the prospect about questions they may have about general university information. However, you may not answer any questions about athletics. Our recommendation is for you to inform the prospect to contact the sports' coach they are interested in participating.

Q: Is it permissible for an IPTAY member, independently or at the direction of a coach, to pick up a game film or transcript from the prospect's high school?
A: No, only Clemson coaches may visit a prospect's high school to obtain this information.

Q: Can an IPTAY member arrange for a prospect to work with them after high school graduation?
A: Yes, once the prospect signs an NLI with Clemson and graduates from high school, the prospect may work for an IPTAY member. Remember, first contact Clemson's compliance department for approval. The prospect must receive pay for work actually performed and at a rate commensurate with the rate of that locality.

Q: Can an IPTAY member provide anything to a prospect?
A: Outside of providing a coaches name for the prospect to contact, NCAA rules prohibit IPTAY members from providing any benefit to a prospect or the prospect's family or legal guardian.

Q: Can an IPTAY member provide transportation to a prospect to attend a home game on Clemson's campus?
A: Yes, if and only if the prospect is an established friend or neighbor. You may not transport a prospect to campus for the sole purpose of bringing the prospect to a Clemson game.

Q: Can an IPTAY member provide financial assistance to a prospect or student-athlete for educational or other expenses?
A: No, it is not permissible to directly or indirectly pay in whole or in part the costs of the prospects education or other expenses prior to enrollment or after he/she attends campus.

Q: Can an IPTAY member donate or provide funding to benefit a high school's athletic program?
A: Yes, provided:
1) The high school is located in the community in which the IPTAY member resides;
2) The IPTAY member acts independently of Clemson University;
3) The funds are distributed through established channels by the high school; and
4) The funds are not directed for a particular prospect

Q: Can an IPTAY member cosign a loan or loan money to a student-athlete?
A: No, this is an extra benefit and would not be permissible.

Q: Can an IPTAY member provide discounts or credits to student-athletes?
A: No, student-athletes may not receive discounts or credits on a purchase or service from IPTAY members.

Ask The Compliance Office A Question

May 31, 1990
Fact Summary:
- Impermissible Extra benefits
- Improper recruiting visit, contact, inducements and transportation
Violation Summary:
Extra Benefits - One football student-athlete received and distributed cash payments to another student-athlete on at least two occasions and received an additional cash payment ($50 to $70) from an athletics representative for his use. Several secondary violations.
Penalty Summary:
- Public reprimand
- Compliance reports
- Disassociation of athletics representative

November 22, 1982
Fact Summary:
- Improper entertainment, financial aid and transportation
- Impermissible Extra benefits - Improper recruiting contact, employment, entertainment, inducements, lodging and transportation
- Tryout
- Excessive number of official visits
- Unethical conduct
- Certification of compliance
Violation Summary:
- Prospect was offered cash and automobile to sign NLI with Clemson
- Representative of athletic interest offered to pay tuition of prospect's two sisters to attend Clemson and assisted in payment of telephone bills of prospect and family
- Prospect's mother was offered transportation to attend football games during son's enrollment
- Prospect attended camp at no cost to him
- Prospect was provided meals, local transportation on visit
- University athletics interest cosigned a promissory note for a loan so student-athlete could purchase a car
- Prospect was provided two official visits
- Prospect was timed by assistant coach running 40-yard dash
- Former assistant football coach did not deport himself within the standards associated with working in intercollegiate athletics. Willfully operated contrarily to NCAA requirements.
- Requested father of a recruit to provide false information to the NCAA regarding his son's recruitment
Penalty Summary:
- Maximum of 20 initial grants for 1983-1984 and 1984-1985
- Show cause why more penalties should not be impressed if institution does not prohibit off-campus recruiting, camp income and speaking events and freeze the salary of an assistant coach of three years
- Prohibit off-campus recruiting and camp income and freeze the salary of another assistant coach for two years and prohibit four representatives from recruiting

October 6, 1975
Fact Summary:
- Improper financial aid and transportation
- Extra Benefits
- Out of season practice
- Complimentary Tickets
- Improper recruiting entertainment, inducements, lodging and transportation
- Tryout
- Unethical Conduct
- Institutional control
Violation Summary:
- Former head coach provided cash to student-athletes to spend for their personal use, paid off two bank loans for student-athletes using own personal money and assisted in paying student-athletes utility bill
- Former head coach provided at no cost this student-athlete a round-trip commercial airline ticket to go home
- Former head coach failed to cooperate in managing his basketball team within NCAA guidelines. Provided false and misleading information to university and NCAA officials.
- Prospect participated in a workout while coach and assistant coach were in attendance and coaches requested current student-athletes to participate
- University's President with full knowledge of basketball coaches violations, erroneously certified the University's compliance with NCAA legislation.
- Clemson University failed to provide adequate control of its representatives of athletics interest

Penalty Summary:
- Public reprimand
- Loss of athletic grants - 2 for 1976-1977 and 3 for 1977-1978
- Show cause if university should not be imposed if institution does not disassociate several athletic representatives
- Three year probation, three year postseason ban, three year television ban

Violation Summary: A representative of the university's athletics interests made impermissible in-person and telephone recruiting contacts with a prospective student-athlete. Further, the representative provided cash to the prospect on numerous occasions totaling approximately $5,600. A representative of the university's athletics interests provided cash payments to a prospective student-athlete and an enrolled men's basketball student-athlete. An assistant men's basketball coach and a men's basketball manager provided improper recruiting inducements to a prospective student-athlete. The assistant coach also provided the use of rented moving truck free of cost to two prospective student-athletes. Unethical conduct found against a student-athlete. Failure to monitor concerning a representative of the university's athletics interests.

1997 - CASE I

Violation Summary: IMPROPER RECRUITING: improper recruiting contacts made by and inducements provided by an athletics representative when he obtained high-school transcripts for university coaches, made improper in-person or telephone contact with prospective student-athletes, provided cash and meals to prospective student-athletes on numerous occasions, and paid for or provided cash to prospective student-athletes to attend the university's football camp and to visit the institution's campus; and football student-athletes had improper recruiting contact with a prospective student-athlete at the direction of a coaching staff member. EXTRA BENEFITS: an athletics representative paid at least $7,000 for tutition, room, board and spending money to a walk-on student-athlete.

1996 - CASE I

Violation Summary: EXTRA BENEFITS, IMPERMISSIBLE RECRUITING: coaching staff members assisted student-athlete with his enrollment in and helped pay for correspondence courses. IMPERMISSIBLE RECRUITING: coaching staff permitted two athletics representatives to have recruiting contacts with a prospective student-athlete; head coach assisted the prospective student-athlete with tuition costs for correspondence courses and arranged a tutor at no cost; coaches arranged for a proctor and assisted with obtaining and returning course materials; head coach allowed prospective student-athlete to stay in his home for one or two days; head coach arranged for two prospective student-athletes to have recruiting contact with an athletics representative; assistant coach mailed papers for a correspondence course on behalf of a student-athlete; head coach provided host money to prospective student-athlete, which was used to post bail for student-athlete; employment of prospective student-athlete in summer camp. ACADEMIC ELIGIBILITY: improper certification of and awarding of financial aid to ineligible student-athletes. UNETHICAL CONDUCT. LACK OF INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL. SECONDARY VIOLATIONS.

1996 - CASE II

Violation Summary: PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT: student-athlete received extensive personal use of automobile and cost for removing stereo system from summer employer. EXTRA BENEFITS: athletics representative provided an automobile, insurance and payment of parking tickets; athletics representative cosigned credit application and provided transportation and meal; improper cash payment to student-athlete by a coach. IMPERMISSIBLE RECRUITING: improper telephone and in-person recruiting contacts by athletics representative with knowledge of members of the coaching staff; impermissible telephone calls to prospective student-athletes.

1996 - CASE III

Violation Summary: UNETHICAL CONDUCT: athletics student advisor assisted student-athletes in obtaining academic credit. EXTRA BENEFITS: athletics representatives provided cash, employment at a higher wage, meals, travel arrangements for family member, use of an automobile and assistance with an automobile rental. IMPROPER RECRUITING: athletics representatives provided transportation, cash, tickets to football game, lodging, meals; improper recruiting contacts; two official visits to a prospective student-athlete. LACK OF INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL. SECONDARY VIOLATIONS.

1994 - CASE I

Violation Summary: IMPERMISSIBLE RECRUITING: improper contacts by athletics representatives; transportation, lodging, clothing and entertainment provided by athletics representatives during official visits; offer of automobile, money and airline tickets; entertainment outside 30-mile radius during official visit; impermissible comments regarding prospective student-athlete. EXTRA BENEFITS: clothing valued at $200-300; impermissible loan; use of staff member's automobile. UNETHICAL CONDUCT. LACK OF INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL. [UPHELD ON APPEAL.]

1994 - CASE II

Violation Summary: AMATEURISM, EXTRA BENEFITS: athletics representatives overcompensated numerous student-athletes by at least $30,000 in summer wages; meals. IMPERMISSIBLE RECRUITING: athletics representative provided meals and excessive compensation for employment; athletics representative made improper offer of extra benefits for signing with the institution; impermissible recruiting contacts by athletics representatives; extra hotel amenities on official visits. FINANCIAL AID: excessive financial aid awarded as a result of employment. LACK OF INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL.

1994 - CASE III

Violation Summary: IMPERMISSIBLE RECRUITING: improper recruiting contacts and assistance by athletics representative on numerous occasions; provision of transportation, lodging, meals, telephone, clothing and financial arrangements by athletics representative; tryouts; excessive official visits.

1994 - CASE IV

Violation Summary: AMATEURISM, IMPERMISSIBLE RECRUITING and EXTRA BENEFITS: athletics representative provided $17,920 in unearned wages to nine student-athletes. LACK OF INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL. REPEAT VIOLATOR.

1993 - CASE I

Violation Summary: IMPERMISSIBLE RECRUITING: athletics representative involved in recruiting. EXTRA BENEFITS: transportation to student-athlete's father; free long distance telephone; use of graduate assistant's home for entertainment. IMPERMISSIBLE CONDITIONING ACTIVITIES: out-of-season practice. UNETHICAL CONDUCT.

1991 - CASE I

Violation Summary: BASKETBALL -- IMPERMISSIBLE RECRUITING: offer to assist in obtain automobile loan; improper and excessive recruiting contacts; contacts by athletics representatives; meals for high-school coach; gift and offer of employment to family members. UNETHICAL CONDUCT. EXCEEDING COACHING LIMITATIONS. TENNIS -- EXTRA BENEFITS: transportation, lodging and meals to family members; cash loans; use of automobile. UNETHICAL CONDUCT. ERRONEOUS CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE.

1991 - CASE II

Violation Summary: IMPERMISSIBLE RECRUITING: free lodging, transportation and meals during prospective student-athlete's official visit provided to athletics representative and arranged by head coach; free transportation to prospective student-athlete; allowing athletics representative to recruit prospective student-athletes on numerous occasions; cash loan to prospective student-athlete. UNETHICAL CONDUCT. REPEAT VIOLATOR.

1991 - CASE III

Violation Summary: EXTRA BENEFITS: athletics representative provided loans, lodging and meals to a student-athlete.

1990 - CASE IV

Violation Summary: EXTRA BENEFITS: athletics representative paid monthly payments on a loan and cosigned promissory note for student-athlete; ineligible student-athlete received meal money. IMPROPER FINANCIAL AID: exceeded the maximum amount of grants-in-aid. IMPROPER ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION: permitted competition by ineligble student-athlete. LACK OF INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL.