http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...43132124=1

Quote:Stewart Mandel @slmandel
19s
If ND has to vacate 2 years' wins bc a few students committed fraud, shouldn't UNC have to vacate 17 years of wins?

Why yes, yes it should.

(11-22-2016 12:48 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

Quote:Stewart Mandel @slmandel
19s
If ND has to vacate 2 years' wins bc a few students committed fraud, shouldn't UNC have to vacate 17 years of wins?

Why yes, yes it should.

Yup!

ND self reported where many other schools would have covered it up and swept it under the rug, in my opinion.

Why did they self report? ND is overly concerned with its image.

The NCAA is coming down hard on a school with annual great grad rates across the board and a history of self booting anyone who is caught doing anything even in the ballpark of academic cheating. So it goes, I guess.

(11-22-2016 01:11 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(11-22-2016 12:48 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

Quote:Stewart Mandel @slmandel
19s
If ND has to vacate 2 years' wins bc a few students committed fraud, shouldn't UNC have to vacate 17 years of wins?

Why yes, yes it should.

Yup!

Personally I see it exactly the same way.

But all of Paterno's victories were eventually restored, and nothing ND is being accused of here is even in the same moral universe as what happened at Penn State.

So, bottom line, I'd be surprised if the W's are forfeited.

The disagreement between the NCAA and Notre Dame is that the NCAA said the trainer was part of the football staff, and thus the football players received an unpermitted benefit with the knowledge of a staff member. ND argued that the players were not ineligible (player ineligibility is what makes the wins forfeited) because this was just a group of students (including the trainer) cheating amongst themselves.

The problem for ND to overcome when they appeal is that if student staff members (every program has them) can provide unpermitted benefits such as academic work or money to athletes without the school being held responsible, that would be a giant loophole in the rules and a bad precedent to set.

(11-22-2016 01:22 PM)TerryD Wrote:  ND self reported where many other schools would have covered it up and swept it under the rug, in my opinion.

Why did they self report? ND is overly concerned with its image.

The NCAA is coming down hard on a school with annual great grad rates across the board and a history of self booting anyone who is caught doing anything even in the ballpark of academic cheating. So it goes, I guess.

Only 1 school has been proven to cover it up and not self report (and still not be punished for the academic stuff).

UNC stands on its own.

That being said...maybe Notre Dame should exit the All Cheaters Conference.

(11-22-2016 01:37 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(11-22-2016 01:11 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(11-22-2016 12:48 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

Quote:Stewart Mandel @slmandel
19s
If ND has to vacate 2 years' wins bc a few students committed fraud, shouldn't UNC have to vacate 17 years of wins?

Why yes, yes it should.

Yup!

Personally I see it exactly the same way.

But all of Paterno's victories were eventually restored, and nothing ND is being accused of here is even in the same moral universe as what happened at Penn State.

So, bottom line, I'd be surprised if the W's are forfeited.

Yes, but Notre Dame's directly affected football.

That said, I'm not a fan of vacating wins. The only time I would favor that would be someone who should have been academically ineligible and was a significant factor. Titles are a different matter. UNC should lose a couple of NCAA bb titles.

First, the NCAA should stop using grey and light blue text on a white background. 1994 was a long time ago.

I agree with TerryD. ND is facing this head on and not trying to cover up or hide anything. That should be a mitigating factor. I wouldn't be surprised if ND told those athletes they had to retake the courses or their degree would be rescinded.

As for forfeiting, it depends on who the players were. If they were starters, yes there should be some forfeit. If they were 4th string place kick holders/water boys with a combined 62 seconds of playing time - no.

IMO, it's your job to make sure the players on the field are eligible. You can't say "well we didn't know this kid wasn't eligible".

If they aren't, then you have to forfeit a victory. There's nothing more fundamental to fair competition than that the players on the field are actually eligible to play.

ND discovered this themselves and self reported to NCAA. They immediately held a news conference that was covered live by ESPN in the fall of 2014. It was a lead story on ESPN and other sportscasts. The Chicago Tribune made it the top story on their sports page.

ND did not try to cover this up (like I think that a number of schools might have done?) but acted immediately and decisively.

Notre Dame immediately suspended the players involved and after the investigation was completed, some were expelled from school and others lost credit hours and had their GPA lowered. I think ND did everything that the NCAA wished all their member schools would do. Yet they get hammered.

(11-23-2016 09:37 AM)TerryD Wrote:  ND discovered this themselves and self reported to NCAA. They immediately held a news conference that was covered live by ESPN in the fall of 2014. It was a lead story on ESPN and other sportscasts. The Chicago Tribune made it the top story on their sports page.

ND did not try to cover this up (like I think that a number of schools might have done?) but acted immediately and decisively.

Notre Dame immediately suspended the players involved and after the investigation was completed, some were expelled from school and others lost credit hours and had their GPA lowered. I think ND did everything that the NCAA wished all their member schools would do. Yet they get hammered.

I agree ND got hammered. But IMO that just means schools like UNC should be hammered harder, not that ND should have gotten let off.

In the past 10 years, the NCAA has come down pretty hard on Alabama, USC, Penn State, and now Notre Dame. So nobody can say they let the elite programs slide, can they?

(11-23-2016 09:37 AM)TerryD Wrote:  ND discovered this themselves and self reported to NCAA. They immediately held a news conference that was covered live by ESPN in the fall of 2014. It was a lead story on ESPN and other sportscasts. The Chicago Tribune made it the top story on their sports page.

ND did not try to cover this up (like I think that a number of schools might have done?) but acted immediately and decisively.

Notre Dame immediately suspended the players involved and after the investigation was completed, some were expelled from school and others lost credit hours and had their GPA lowered. I think ND did everything that the NCAA wished all their member schools would do. Yet they get hammered.

Personally, I don't consider vacating wins as much of a punishment. I mean, people remember who won the games.

But it's very troubling that the NCAA would go beyond the self-imposed punishments when Notre Dame handled the incident exactly by the book. I mean, if this is what you (the NCAA) want your members to do, it's potentially damaging to act like this, because next time Notre Dame may decide to just sweep it all under the rug and hope nobody finds out. Especially when another school with a much worse offense gets less punishment by not cooperating.

(11-23-2016 09:44 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  In the past 10 years, the NCAA has come down pretty hard on Alabama, USC, Penn State, and now Notre Dame. So nobody can say they let the elite programs slide, can they?

They just don't have enough time and resources to equally enforce the rules, which is another reason they should not pile on when ND handles an issue cleanly.

I feel icky for defending Notre Dame, lol.

Was Penn State really hammered though? The NCAA reinstated all of their scholarships three years earlier than originally given, and only two years into their probation. They also rescinded the postseason bowl ban in 2015, just three years after given probation. Then, they gave back all of the rescinded wins under Paterno and Bradley, all 112 of them.

They were given a slap and the wrist, and then allowed to come back and play.

Every coach, every AD, every university president has to be asking himself today, “Should we self-report any violations and/or infractions in the future? Or, should we cover up any violations and then stall and drag out the process over many years if we do get caught?"

What incentive now exists to self-report when the punishment greatly exceeds the offense?

ND acted promptly when they found out what was going on. IIRC some said that they overreacted. They didn't knowingly play any ineligible players. ND record is spotless. Restore the W's & take away a couple scholies for 1 or 2 years with probation.

(11-23-2016 11:04 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  ND acted promptly when they found out what was going on. IIRC some said that they overreacted. They didn't knowingly play any ineligible players. ND record is spotless. Restore the W's & take away a couple scholies for 1 or 2 years with probation.

Yes, that would be fair.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using CSNbbs mobile app

(11-23-2016 09:44 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  In the past 10 years, the NCAA has come down pretty hard on Alabama, USC, Penn State, and now Notre Dame. So nobody can say they let the elite programs slide, can they?

Maybe. Remind me what the NCAA did to Alabama.