Former Arizona State football associate head coach Antonio Pierce and former non-coaching staffer Anthony Garnett engaged in a program-wide effort to engage in improper recruiting activities during the COVID-19 dead period, according to a committee decision for Division I violations. Because of his personal involvement in aspects of the violations – namely, the provision of recruiting incentives to prospects and their families – Pierce violated the principles of ethical conduct.

In April, the Division I Violations Committee approved a negotiated settlement in which the school and four others agreed to the violations and penalties in the case. Three other parties did not participate in the handling of the case and their violations and penalties were included in the agreement. The Division I Committee on Infractions publicly announced the agreement, allowing the school to immediately begin serving penalties while awaiting the committee's final decision. The case for Pierce and Garnett was resolved through a written hearing.

Most of the violations in the case stemmed from a scheme in which Pierce, other members of the football team and a sponsor arranged unofficial visits to the school during the COVID-19 dead period for about a year. During these visits, which spanned 15 weekends, employees had improper recruiting contacts – including tryouts, tours of soccer facilities and entertainment venues – with 35 prospects and their families. Pierce personally arranged or provided free meals, clothing, airfare and/or lodging for 27 prospects, often in conjunction with the sponsor, who was the parent of a football student-athlete in the program at the time. In addition to violating the dead time rules, the meals, entertainment – including a trip with a prospect's parents to a gentlemen's club – and travel expenses associated with the unofficial visits also constituted impermissible promotional incentives. Due to the impermissible benefits the prospects received eight who eventually enrolled at Arizona State competed in 19 competitions despite being ineligible.

Several members of the coaching staff stated during their interviews with law enforcement personnel that Pierce was “running the show” within the Arizona State football program, and they feared that failure to follow Pierce's instructions would result in the loss of their jobs.

As part of the program, Garnett facilitated tryouts, arranged unauthorized transportation, and maintained personal recruiting contacts with prospects and their families.

Further violations of the deadline occurred when Pierce and Garnett traveled out of state to observe prospects training or competing, including meetings with prospects and their families.

Eventually, Pierce directed an assistant coach to tamper by texting and calling an athlete who was enrolled at another school and not in the transfer portal. The assistant coach sent the student-athlete 46 text messages and called him at least once, but the student-athlete ultimately did not transfer to Arizona State.

Pierce violated ethical codes of conduct because of his personal involvement in knowingly organizing or providing recruiting incentives to prospects and their families.

After parting ways with Arizona State, Pierce repeatedly failed to fulfill his obligation to work together. Although he participated in an interview with law enforcement personnel and acknowledged some facts surrounding the unofficial visits, he consistently denied planning or arranging any part of the visits, providing recruitment incentives, or participating in the out-of-state contacts and evaluations . Additionally, Pierce failed to provide relevant financial documents as requested by law enforcement personnel.

Garnett acknowledged his role in conducting a tryout with a prospect and participating in other recruiting contacts during the unofficial visits. However, he failed to cooperate when he denied other aspects of his conduct despite substantial information to the contrary.

The panel rated the case as Level I aggravated for both Pierce and Garnett. In addition to the penalties approved by the Division I Infractions Committee in April, the Committee utilized the Division I membership-approved infraction penalty guidelines to mandate:

• An eight-year show commission for Pierce. If he is hired by an NCAA member school during this time, he will be suspended from all athletic activities for 100% of the first season of his employment.
• A five-year show gig for Garnett. If he is hired by an NCAA member school during this time, he will be suspended from all athletic activities for 100% of the first season of his employment.

The Infractions Committee membership is comprised of members of the NCAA and the public. The panel members who reviewed this case are Cassandra Kirk, chief judge in Atlanta; Jason Leonard, Oklahoma executive director of athletics compliance and the board's chief hearing officer; Kay Norton, President Emeritus of Northern Colorado; Stephen Madva, attorney in private practice; and Roderick Perry, former athletics director at IUPUI.