I wanted to link this article from SI to hone the discussion down to what the NCAA should or should not be dealing with rather than whether or not they improperly handled the UNC case.
NCAA: North Carolina didn't violate academic fraud rules
Now, I don't necessarily agree with every assertion in this article, but I think it's inevitable that we discuss the purpose of the NCAA.
1. What is the NCAA supposed to do?
2. What authority should it have?
3. How deeply should it be involved in the workings of a member university?
I think these are all good questions, but the most important question at this point is this...is the NCAA obsolete?
All schools probably have "easy" classes in order to maintain eligibility for certain athletes. Some schools have probably committed academic fraud in order to get ahead. I doubt UNC is alone.
A very good point the above article raises is that this system is jacked up and that institutions dedicated to education should not be thought of primarily as athletic programs. So what is the solution? How can we get to a place where student athletes aren't just mercenaries?
And ultimately, what good is the NCAA if it has no authority to protect the academic integrity of its member institutions? Is not the point of the NCAA to ensure that athletics are a robust part of college life, but not the sole focus of these schools? That athletics are a means to an end rather than an end unto themselves? That the shared benefits of intercollegiate athletics empower schools rather than devalue their mission?
(10-13-2017 07:56 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]On a further note...
Some members of the SACS board wanted to drop UNC
And the President said she was surprised the NCAA didn't do more...
Interesting quotes:
Quote:However, after reading the NCAA's report on Friday, Whelan said every student who took the infamous classes "had an extra benefit."
The classes were taught by a secretary who had no teaching credentials and was an admitted fan of North Carolina basketball. The NCAA concluded there was no extra benefit to North Carolina athletics because the classes in question were available to regular students.
In the end, the probation by Whelan's organization was the most significant penalty against North Carolina in a case that reached back 18 years and was investigated by the NCAA for six years.
Quote:The head of an influential national accreditation agency that investigated North Carolina told CBS Sports she was surprised the NCAA didn't do more in the academic fraud case that concluded Friday.
"Our board debated," said Belle Whelan, president of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission, one of the two largest accreditation agencies in the country. "There were some that wanted to drop them."
That means ending North Carolina's accreditation as an institution of higher learning. Oklahoma assistant professor and NCAA reformer Gerald Gurney told CBS Sports in May 2016 that "students simply would not attend the university if it were not accredited."
I don't buy that the NCAA is obsolete in dealing with cheating, but they are more likely designed to handle athletic cheating, not academic. Heck, the NCAA allows individual schools to define academic fraud on their own.
Clearly the NAtional Collegiate ATHLETIC Association is not designed to handle this matter. Maybe it's time the accreditation board steps up to the plate.
Not to
but:
The initial assertions of Mary Willingham and writer Dan Kane that the classes were "fake" proved to be untrue. However like any lie, if it's told often enough people will believe it to be true.
The University was naive to believe that truth would win out over "fake" news and was slow to respond. So what you have now is that people don't care or believe the truth, they only believe and care about the rumors.
(10-14-2017 09:31 AM)murrdcu Wrote: [ -> ] (10-13-2017 07:56 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]On a further note...
Some members of the SACS board wanted to drop UNC
And the President said she was surprised the NCAA didn't do more...
Interesting quotes:
Quote:However, after reading the NCAA's report on Friday, Whelan said every student who took the infamous classes "had an extra benefit."
The classes were taught by a secretary who had no teaching credentials and was an admitted fan of North Carolina basketball. The NCAA concluded there was no extra benefit to North Carolina athletics because the classes in question were available to regular students.
In the end, the probation by Whelan's organization was the most significant penalty against North Carolina in a case that reached back 18 years and was investigated by the NCAA for six years.
Quote:The head of an influential national accreditation agency that investigated North Carolina told CBS Sports she was surprised the NCAA didn't do more in the academic fraud case that concluded Friday.
"Our board debated," said Belle Whelan, president of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission, one of the two largest accreditation agencies in the country. "There were some that wanted to drop them."
That means ending North Carolina's accreditation as an institution of higher learning. Oklahoma assistant professor and NCAA reformer Gerald Gurney told CBS Sports in May 2016 that "students simply would not attend the university if it were not accredited."
I don't buy that the NCAA is obsolete in dealing with cheating, but they are more likely designed to handle athletic cheating, not academic. Heck, the NCAA allows individual schools to define academic fraud on their own.
Clearly the NAtional Collegiate ATHLETIC Association is not designed to handle this matter. Maybe it's time the accreditation board steps up to the plate.
If SACS would have responded properly then the NCAA would have had a stronger case. In fact SACS could have delivered the "death penalty" themselves by declining NC accreditation. Without accreditation you can not be a member of the NCAA. It seems that both parties failed to act properly.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(10-15-2017 11:05 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote: [ -> ] (10-14-2017 09:31 AM)murrdcu Wrote: [ -> ] (10-13-2017 07:56 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]On a further note...
Some members of the SACS board wanted to drop UNC
And the President said she was surprised the NCAA didn't do more...
Interesting quotes:
Quote:However, after reading the NCAA's report on Friday, Whelan said every student who took the infamous classes "had an extra benefit."
The classes were taught by a secretary who had no teaching credentials and was an admitted fan of North Carolina basketball. The NCAA concluded there was no extra benefit to North Carolina athletics because the classes in question were available to regular students.
In the end, the probation by Whelan's organization was the most significant penalty against North Carolina in a case that reached back 18 years and was investigated by the NCAA for six years.
Quote:The head of an influential national accreditation agency that investigated North Carolina told CBS Sports she was surprised the NCAA didn't do more in the academic fraud case that concluded Friday.
"Our board debated," said Belle Whelan, president of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission, one of the two largest accreditation agencies in the country. "There were some that wanted to drop them."
That means ending North Carolina's accreditation as an institution of higher learning. Oklahoma assistant professor and NCAA reformer Gerald Gurney told CBS Sports in May 2016 that "students simply would not attend the university if it were not accredited."
I don't buy that the NCAA is obsolete in dealing with cheating, but they are more likely designed to handle athletic cheating, not academic. Heck, the NCAA allows individual schools to define academic fraud on their own.
Clearly the NAtional Collegiate ATHLETIC Association is not designed to handle this matter. Maybe it's time the accreditation board steps up to the plate.
If SACS would have responded properly then the NCAA would have had a stronger case. In fact SACS could have delivered the "death penalty" themselves by declining NC accreditation. Without accreditation you can not be a member of the NCAA. It seems that both parties failed to act properly.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
True in theory, but in practice SACS is no different than the NCAA. Removing the accreditation of major schools runs too great a risk of similar programs leaving to form another organization that will enforce the rules more favorably.
Once SACS balked I knew the NCAA wouldn't do anything