Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Seriously UNC?
Author Message
opossum Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 381
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 22
I Root For: Duke
Location: DC area
Post: #21
RE: Seriously UNC?
(08-23-2015 10:37 AM)esayem Wrote:  If they were ineligible, then yes, that is the rule.

To address your second point, I don't believe the NCAA has the best interests of college athletes and I don't believe in banning current players from the postseason that may be going into their senior year. Losing scholarships is one thing, but punishing innocent kids is not the way to handle old violations.

That's an absolutely fair point, and I agree completely.

Prospective sanctions such as postseason bans and scholarship losses should never be imposed mid season by the NCAA (I believe Syracuse self-imposed last fall but correct me if I'm wrong). Nobody should be stuck on a team with a postseason ban without the legitimate opportunity to transfer and play immediately somewhere else, which could only really occur in spring semester or summer for the following year. I would think if the NCAA's ruling on UNC-CH comes down in, say, February 2016, that postseason bans and scholarship penalties if any would only apply to the 16-17 season and beyond, not the 15-16 season.

I was talking about the class of 2019 (this year's freshmen if I did the math right). The ones hearing Roy and Larry tell them that there is nothing to worry about, according to the lawyers. They face the possibility of trying to find a place to transfer for 2016-17 (and possibly having to sit out a year) if a postseason ban for their sophomore year at UNC-CH is imposed.

For their sake, I hope if prospective sanctions are part of the outcome, this year's freshmen are afforded the opportunity to transfer for the 2016-17 season and play immediately somewhere else. If they want to stay, that's certainly their choice -- maybe someday they'll be UNC-CH's answer to the legendary Farmer, Feldhaus, Pelphrey and Woods.

The class of 2020 will hopefully (way beyond hopefully) have a final outcome by the time they need to commit, unless UNC-CH drags this mess out further.
08-23-2015 10:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Marge Schott Offline
Banned

Posts: 5,989
Joined: Dec 2012
I Root For: YouAreButtHurt
Location: OnTopOfDwarfMountain
Post: #22
RE: Seriously UNC?
esayem, how do you suggest the NCAA sanction UNC for nearly 2 decades of cheating involving over 1,000 student athletes in seemingly every scholarship sport?

Scholarship reductions? Doesn't THAT hurt current players by limiting depth and decreasing the odds of a good season that a team may have otherwise had (UNC football notwithstanding, of course)?
08-24-2015 03:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,458
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #23
Seriously UNC?
If the kids don't want to be "punished" for the actions of others then simply don't sign to play somewhere that is under investigation. These investigations usually takes over a year to resolve which gives the incoming freshmen time to make a decision on whether it's worth the risk.

I do agree that if an investigation starts after the kids have signed & doesn't involve them that they should be able to transfer without penalty if there is a postseason ban, scholarship reductions, etc.

Postseason bans & such are the best ways to punish cheaters because it's what they care about most. Stripping away past bowl or tournament wins doesn't do enough, they have already played them & benefited from them in ways that can't be undone. Calipari had a couple Final 4 stripped but everyone knows that he did it.
08-24-2015 08:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 16,264
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 1205
I Root For: Olde Ironclad
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #24
RE: Seriously UNC?
How should I know how the program should be punished? The investigation isn't over. I don't think it's fair to basically take away a kid's dream and force them to transfer if they want to play for a title. Funny an FSU fan is talking smack. Do they even punish anybody there?
08-25-2015 12:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Marge Schott Offline
Banned

Posts: 5,989
Joined: Dec 2012
I Root For: YouAreButtHurt
Location: OnTopOfDwarfMountain
Post: #25
RE: Seriously UNC?
You said they shouldn't do postseason bans because it hurts current players. Then you said they should take away scholarships. I said that still hurts current players' postseason odds by limiting depth. Then you try to change the subject. Go figure.
08-25-2015 12:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,727
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 1392
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #26
RE: Seriously UNC?
If the goal is putting a stop to this sort of behavior, reducing scholarships and banning coaches for a few years is the only way to accomplish that. Post-season bans just punish the innocent. I hear Marge's argument about depth, but I've never met a player who complained about playing time...
08-25-2015 09:50 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 16,264
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 1205
I Root For: Olde Ironclad
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #27
RE: Seriously UNC?
(08-25-2015 09:50 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  If the goal is putting a stop to this sort of behavior, reducing scholarships and banning coaches for a few years is the only way to accomplish that. Post-season bans just punish the innocent. I hear Marge's argument about depth, but I've never met a player who complained about playing time...

Exactly. The depth argument is overrated, in football there are too many scholarships to begin with and in basketball teams have made it all the way with a limited rotation. It does hinder an ideal building of the team over the years, which is the true punishment.
08-25-2015 10:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kaplony Offline
Palmetto State Deplorable

Posts: 25,393
Joined: Apr 2013
I Root For: Newberry
Location: SC
Post: #28
RE: Seriously UNC?
IMO whatever penalty the NCAA hands out the ACC should add an additional year to the punishment to show that the ACC is a hallowed collection of academic institutions that shouldn’t be sullied by the rule-breaking of one member institution interested only in winning.

There is a precedent of doing just that.
08-25-2015 04:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cuseroc Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,262
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 546
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: Rochester/Sarasota

Donators
Post: #29
RE: Seriously UNC?
(08-25-2015 04:27 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  IMO whatever penalty the NCAA hands out the ACC should add an additional year to the punishment to show that the ACC is a hallowed collection of academic institutions that shouldn’t be sullied by the rule-breaking of one member institution interested only in winning.

There is a precedent of doing just that.

That's actually not a bad idea for a situation as egregious as what UNC is accused of. But only if the substantial allegations are true.
08-25-2015 05:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Marge Schott Offline
Banned

Posts: 5,989
Joined: Dec 2012
I Root For: YouAreButtHurt
Location: OnTopOfDwarfMountain
Post: #30
RE: Seriously UNC?
If taking away scholarships "hinders the building of a team" then it must also hinder the ability of that team making the postseason. You cannot have the former without the latter.

Every sanction you could impose will wind up "hurting" the current athletes on the team.

I think schools should be fined; seven-figure fines. I don't have anything wrong with postseason bans or lengthy coaching suspensions, either.
08-25-2015 08:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Marge Schott Offline
Banned

Posts: 5,989
Joined: Dec 2012
I Root For: YouAreButtHurt
Location: OnTopOfDwarfMountain
Post: #31
RE: Seriously UNC?
(08-25-2015 05:00 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  
(08-25-2015 04:27 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  IMO whatever penalty the NCAA hands out the ACC should add an additional year to the punishment to show that the ACC is a hallowed collection of academic institutions that shouldn’t be sullied by the rule-breaking of one member institution interested only in winning.

There is a precedent of doing just that.

That's actually not a bad idea for a situation as egregious as what UNC is accused of. But only if the substantial allegations are true.

Hasn't UNC admitted them already? They even self-reported these most recent ones.
08-25-2015 08:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cuseroc Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,262
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 546
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: Rochester/Sarasota

Donators
Post: #32
RE: Seriously UNC?
(08-25-2015 08:40 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  
(08-25-2015 05:00 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  
(08-25-2015 04:27 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  IMO whatever penalty the NCAA hands out the ACC should add an additional year to the punishment to show that the ACC is a hallowed collection of academic institutions that shouldn’t be sullied by the rule-breaking of one member institution interested only in winning.

There is a precedent of doing just that.

That's actually not a bad idea for a situation as egregious as what UNC is accused of. But only if the substantial allegations are true.

Hasn't UNC admitted them already? They even self-reported these most recent ones.

Maybe they did, but I haven't kept up with this situation enough to know for sure.
08-25-2015 08:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Marge Schott Offline
Banned

Posts: 5,989
Joined: Dec 2012
I Root For: YouAreButtHurt
Location: OnTopOfDwarfMountain
Post: #33
RE: Seriously UNC?
Thought the 2 decades and 3,000 students (over 1,000 athletes) figures came from some investigator's report.
(This post was last modified: 08-25-2015 08:56 PM by Marge Schott.)
08-25-2015 08:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lucy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,524
Joined: Apr 2002
Reputation: 70
I Root For: Wake Forest
Location: Raleigh, NC

DonatorsCrappies
Post: #34
RE: Seriously UNC?
(08-25-2015 08:56 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Thought the 2 decades and 3,000 students (over 1,000 athletes) figures came from some investigator's report.

Those are the stats from the Wainstein report.

Despite the data, UNC has not admitted that football & men's basketball are the 2 programs that were most involved & benefited most. They are trying to throw women's basketball under the bus as the only team that the fake classes & academic fraud were meant for. 01-wingedeagle
08-26-2015 01:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Marge Schott Offline
Banned

Posts: 5,989
Joined: Dec 2012
I Root For: YouAreButtHurt
Location: OnTopOfDwarfMountain
Post: #35
RE: Seriously UNC?
(08-26-2015 01:37 PM)Lucy Wrote:  
(08-25-2015 08:56 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Thought the 2 decades and 3,000 students (over 1,000 athletes) figures came from some investigator's report.

Those are the stats from the Wainstein report.

Despite the data, UNC has not admitted that football & men's basketball are the 2 programs that were most involved & benefited most. They are trying to throw women's basketball under the bus as the only team that the fake classes & academic fraud were meant for. 01-wingedeagle

Carolina Way, yo.

I've repeatedly used the investigation's facts against UNC and repeatedly had UNC fans ignore them and avoid responding directly to them. If they weren't accurate, SOMEBODY would be saying so. Heck, even when they ARE accurate, some dummy still says they're wrong. We are seeing NONE of that with these UNC fans. They know they're in the wrong. And they're praying they can shovel enough dirt on it and run enough other folks over to get away with it. It's blatantly obvious based on what we know.
08-26-2015 11:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.