Alabama State Takes NCAA Penalty but Calls Out a Double Standard With Arizona
Alabama State University has accepted an NCAA ruling that puts its football program on probation for three years, fines it $30,000, and adds a penalty equal to 1% of the team's budget. But university leaders are not going quietly. They say the case exposes a troubling inconsistency in how the NCAA punishes schools, especially when comparing their fate to the University of Arizona's.
The core of the dispute: both schools dealt with the same student-athlete, but Alabama State received a Level I violation for altering his stats, while Arizona got only a Level III slap on the wrist and a $500 fine for playing him.
“This outcome reflects a significant disparity,” said Alabama State President Dr. Quinton T. Ross Jr. “The certifying institution received a minor infraction, while Alabama State was assigned one of the NCAA’s most serious classifications.”
What Did Alabama State Actually Do?
According to the NCAA, a former sports information director at Alabama State changed one football player’s participation stats on the athletics website during the 2019 season. The committee ruled this was intentional misconduct involving official competition records, even though the case was downgraded from Level I Aggravated to Level I Mitigated. Crucially, the NCAA did not find a lack of institutional control or failure to monitor, which often come with major infractions.
Alabama State officials argue that this distinction should have mattered more. “The underlying conduct simply does not justify placement among the most severe cases in collegiate athletics,” said Dr. Jason Cable, the university’s vice president and director of athletics.
How Did Arizona Get Involved?
The altered stats resurfaced years later when former Alabama State running back Jacory Croskey-Merritt transferred to New Mexico and then to Arizona for the 2024 season. After he ran for 106 yards and a touchdown in Arizona’s opener, questions arose about how many games he actually played in 2019. Arizona had certified his eligibility based on the records available at the time, and the NCAA gave them a Level III violation and a $500 fine.
For Alabama State, that contrast is the heart of the problem. “We believe the standards should be applied consistently across all institutions,” Ross said.
Why the Different Penalties?
The NCAA says the level of a violation depends on what happened, not on any competitive advantage. Intentionally altering an official record is considered far more serious than using incorrect information during eligibility checks. That explains the different classifications, but Alabama State argues the penalties are still wildly out of balance.
Alabama State’s penalties include three years of probation, yearly compliance reports, a $30,000 fine, and an additional 1% budget penalty. Arizona got a $500 fine.
“While today’s decision is a downgrade, we still believe the scope of penalty does not reflect the university’s involvement or non-participation in this matter,” Ross said.
What About the Former Coach?
Alabama State chose a summary disposition to resolve the case quickly. But the Committee on Infractions found insufficient evidence to determine that former head coach Donald Hill-Eley personally directed the statistical alteration. The university’s statement does not name him, but it accepts institutional responsibility based on the employee’s conduct, not the coach’s.
What Corrective Steps Has Alabama State Taken?
The university has already put several reforms in place, including:
- Enhanced statistical reporting procedures
- Expanded compliance education
- Additional postgame audits and verification processes
- Stronger internal oversight of athletics records
These measures will stay in effect through the probation period, which runs until 2029.
Is This About More Than One Case?
University leaders say yes. They argue the case raises bigger questions about NCAA consistency, especially for schools with fewer compliance resources. As HBCU leaders and conference commissioners talk with federal lawmakers about reforming college sports rules, how this case is viewed could shape future discussions about oversight and enforcement for FCS programs and HBCUs.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did Alabama State get a Level I violation while Arizona got a Level III?
The NCAA considers intentionally altering official competition records a far more serious offense than using incorrect information during eligibility certification, even when both involve the same student-athlete.
Did the former coach face any penalties?
No. The Committee on Infractions found insufficient evidence to determine that the former head coach personally directed the statistical alteration.
What does this mean for other HBCU programs?
Alabama State’s leaders say the case highlights potential disparities in how the NCAA treats schools with fewer compliance resources, which could influence ongoing discussions about reforming college sports oversight.