(08-15-2017 06:12 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  In the revenue sports the nature of every single class is known by the academic advisors in the P-5. Every single class.

Academic advisors/couselors that are employed by academic departments know the details about every class in their respective departments. Of course. That's their job.

That's not at all the point. The point is that none of the employees of the athletic department at UNC knows the details about every class, nor should that be their job IMO. Their job is simply to monitor if the athletes are making satisfactory progress towards a degree, in the sense of earning credits with high enough GPA. That's it. Delving into the details of a course, especially a non-standard course as you describe, is far beyond the job duties of an athletic dept staffer.

(08-15-2017 06:12 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  The woman at the center is a "cut out" and it is not a coincidence that she has lived for years with a former UNC basketball player. The reason the frat boys could wedge their way into a few of these "classes" is because they could expose the scheme used to keep players eligible that otherwise would not make it the first year at UNC.

UNC-Ch is not easy for a real student. No it's not as rigorous as Duke, or as rigorous as a STEM program at NC State, but it's not a cake walk. The scheme evolved because these kids had no business in school at UNC. It was first done to help a few basketball players and keep Smiths' promise to the parents of these kids. That's the reason no basketball player has been ruled ineligible at UNC since Robert McAdoo in 1971.

After Smith retired and Doh was run off, the skirting of the standards escalated began to include football and culminated with astonishing things like a baseball player making 4 A's in Summer School at UNC while playing Legion ball in another state.

Again, no one -- me first and foremost -- is claiming that nothing wrong happened.

The question is if the wrongdoings fall under the NCAA's purview, and the more interesting discussion is if it should fall under the NCAA's purview. Some want to claim that the "institutional control" catch-all means there is no discussion, and want to stamp out any discussion on if the NCAA should have a say. I reject that, whole cloth.

(08-15-2017 06:12 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  The NCAA has the ability to punish UNC for this because it was perpetuated to keep players eligible.

This statement completely glosses over the fact that the NCAA's purview over what happens at a university ends somewhere. It can not, and should not, have purview over any and all aspects of a university.

So where is that line? And where should the line be?

Well, I reject that the line should be so large as to include anything and everything that happens at a university, simply because it involved a student-athlete. But if taken literally, that's what the "institutional control" catch-all says. So, for example, if a soccer player has a mental breakdown and shoots another student ... that's technically under the NCAA's purview, because the university "failed" to "maintain institutional control" of the situation. I reject that line of reasoning.

(08-16-2017 12:10 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-15-2017 06:12 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  In the revenue sports the nature of every single class is known by the academic advisors in the P-5. Every single class.

Academic advisors/couselors that are employed by academic departments know the details about every class in their respective departments. Of course. That's their job.

That's not at all the point. The point is that none of the employees of the athletic department at UNC knows the details about every class, nor should that be their job IMO. Their job is simply to monitor if the athletes are making satisfactory progress towards a degree, in the sense of earning credits with high enough GPA. That's it. Delving into the details of a course, especially a non-standard course as you describe, is far beyond the job duties of an athletic dept staffer.

(08-15-2017 06:12 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  The woman at the center is a "cut out" and it is not a coincidence that she has lived for years with a former UNC basketball player. The reason the frat boys could wedge their way into a few of these "classes" is because they could expose the scheme used to keep players eligible that otherwise would not make it the first year at UNC.

UNC-Ch is not easy for a real student. No it's not as rigorous as Duke, or as rigorous as a STEM program at NC State, but it's not a cake walk. The scheme evolved because these kids had no business in school at UNC. It was first done to help a few basketball players and keep Smiths' promise to the parents of these kids. That's the reason no basketball player has been ruled ineligible at UNC since Robert McAdoo in 1971.

After Smith retired and Doh was run off, the skirting of the standards escalated began to include football and culminated with astonishing things like a baseball player making 4 A's in Summer School at UNC while playing Legion ball in another state.

Again, no one -- me first and foremost -- is claiming that nothing wrong happened.

The question is if the wrongdoings fall under the NCAA's purview, and the more interesting discussion is if it should fall under the NCAA's purview. Some want to claim that the "institutional control" catch-all means there is no discussion, and want to stamp out any discussion on if the NCAA should have a say. I reject that, whole cloth.

(08-15-2017 06:12 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  The NCAA has the ability to punish UNC for this because it was perpetuated to keep players eligible.

This statement completely glosses over the fact that the NCAA's purview over what happens at a university ends somewhere. It can not, and should not, have purview over any and all aspects of a university.

So where is that line? And where should the line be?

Well, I reject that the line should be so large as to include anything and everything that happens at a university, simply because it involved a student-athlete. But if taken literally, that's what the "institutional control" catch-all says. So, for example, if a soccer player has a mental breakdown and shoots another student ... that's technically under the NCAA's purview, because the university "failed" to "maintain institutional control" of the situation. I reject that line of reasoning.

Bison you continue to dissemble and set up as H1 would say straw man arguments. The introduction of the "if the soccer player shoots someone" is yet another moving of the argument. Stick to the case at hand. Furthermore, ignorance of events has never been a defense. It is the responsibility of the Institution to know if fraudulent classes are being offered to what is a preponderance of athletes who happen to remain eligible from said bogus class. And again, the Institution is bearer of responsibility and not the athletic department.

I know times are slow, but you have fallen back into the mode of simply maintaining an argument regardless of the relevance of the discussion. And it's not just in this thread.

You are the top poster in the first 12 threads of this board and in about 70% of those threads you have doubled the post total give or take a post of the next closest poster in total posts. And in every thread there is some kind of running argument over manipulated points where the target keeps getting moved. Give your best argument over the point of the OP and do not shift the focus through erroneous hypothetical situations. That way the argument stays on point.

The issue highlighted in the OP is that in this case either the NCAA or UNC is going to lose credibility. The argument therefore is which one will it be. The argument does not name the athletic department of UNC because the school is responsible for that department. The school is the governing entity of the A.D.. The A.D. is part of the school. Sanctions may be leveled against the A.D., but the school has to accept them first. Why? The school is ultimately responsible. As a member of the NCAA they have agreed to be compliant.

There are at least three possible outcomes here. The NCAA comes down hard and North Carolina is forced to either comply or rebel against the ruling. If they comply the NCAA gains strength. If they rebel the NCAA loses strength. The NCAA does nothing and loses strength because of it. In this case North Carolina and every other school grows more autonomous and we creep toward chaos among college athletic associations. The likeliest outcome is that the NCAA hits them with moderate sanctions and UNC agrees. In that scenario the NCAA doesn't lose ground, but doesn't gain any either where compliance is concerned. UNC accepts because it's better than getting hammered and cheaper than fight it. That's about it. The discussion in this thread should have moved in one of those directions. Instead it has turned into a never ending hair splitting over whether the athletic department can claim no knowledge or oversight over bogus classes. Argumentum absurdum. Why? Because there is an accountable entity, the school. This is why ignorance is no defense and in fact is the essence of the Lack of Institutional Control issues. Now I can break these kinds of arguments down thread by thread, but I'm old and would rather not spend the time to have to do it. But I will if I feel compelled to put an end to these kinds of disruptions.

Just stick to the intent of the OP.

I wonder if the NCAA and UNC would be able to settle this without going through the courts or risk either side tying this up in appeals. Obviously, UNC wants nothing to do with taking away championships, postseason accomplishments, upcoming scholarships or affecting the reputation and prestige of Roy Williams. Conversely, the NCAA - which may or may not have overstepped its bounds in investigations, but still has managed to find wrongdoings within the institution - would look to save face as well.

What would a fair compromise be to end this and have both parties save face?

(08-16-2017 01:45 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  I wonder if the NCAA and UNC would be able to settle this without going through the courts or risk either side tying this up in appeals. Obviously, UNC wants nothing to do with taking away championships, postseason accomplishments, upcoming scholarships or affecting the reputation and prestige of Roy Williams. Conversely, the NCAA - which may or may not have overstepped its bounds in investigations, but still has managed to find wrongdoings within the institution - would look to save face as well.

What would a fair compromise be to end this and have both parties save face?

That is an excellent question to debate. UNC has already been placed on probation by those in charge of accreditation. So in that regard a lack of institutional control has been implied. I think the duration of this going back 20 years and longer has to be addressed by the NCAA. Since others have been stripped of titles for less this may be a bigger sticking point than most of us would think.

By the end Thursday evening we should have a much better indication of what the NCAA may be seeking.

(08-16-2017 12:10 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-15-2017 06:12 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  In the revenue sports the nature of every single class is known by the academic advisors in the P-5. Every single class.

Academic advisors/couselors that are employed by academic departments know the details about every class in their respective departments. Of course. That's their job.

You idiot - I am talking about the Athletic departments advisors that are employed by the Athletic department and hired by the Athletic department. You have confused them with the people in regular academic advising because you know nothing of the system

That's not at all the point. The point is that none of the employees of the athletic department at UNC knows the details about every class, nor should that be their job IMO. Their job is simply to monitor if the athletes are making satisfactory progress towards a degree, in the sense of earning credits with high enough GPA. That's it. Delving into the details of a course, especially a non-standard course as you describe, is far beyond the job duties of an athletic dept staffer.

You are a fool if you believe that. Every revenue athlete at a P-5 has an academic handler in addition to an academic babysitter if they are not a legitimate student. I can assure you that the VT football program knew every class their kids were taking and the nature of the class. There were no "single paper, no work" classes at VT for what was advertised as a regular course. Nor at State, Nor at Duke, Nor at UNC back in the day.

An "Independent Study" course is the closest thing to that and those courses have specific numbers, are listed as such, and at all four places you had to sing a contract as to what you were doing unless you were assisting with real STEM or Bio research at the highest level.

(08-15-2017 06:12 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  The woman at the center is a "cut out" and it is not a coincidence that she has lived for years with a former UNC basketball player. The reason the frat boys could wedge their way into a few of these "classes" is because they could expose the scheme used to keep players eligible that otherwise would not make it the first year at UNC.

UNC-Ch is not easy for a real student. No it's not as rigorous as Duke, or as rigorous as a STEM program at NC State, but it's not a cake walk. The scheme evolved because these kids had no business in school at UNC. It was first done to help a few basketball players and keep Smiths' promise to the parents of these kids. That's the reason no basketball player has been ruled ineligible at UNC since Robert McAdoo in 1971.

After Smith retired and Doh was run off, the skirting of the standards escalated began to include football and culminated with astonishing things like a baseball player making 4 A's in Summer School at UNC while playing Legion ball in another state.

Again, no one -- me first and foremost -- is claiming that nothing wrong happened.

The question is if the wrongdoings fall under the NCAA's purview, and the more interesting discussion is if it should fall under the NCAA's purview. Some want to claim that the "institutional control" catch-all means there is no discussion, and want to stamp out any discussion on if the NCAA should have a say. I reject that, whole cloth.

Of course cheating to keep a player eligible is under the NCAA's control.

(08-15-2017 06:12 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  The NCAA has the ability to punish UNC for this because it was perpetuated to keep players eligible.

This statement completely glosses over the fact that the NCAA's purview over what happens at a university ends somewhere. It can not, and should not, have purview over any and all aspects of a university.

So where is that line? And where should the line be?

Well, I reject that the line should be so large as to include anything and everything that happens at a university, simply because it involved a student-athlete. But if taken literally, that's what the "institutional control" catch-all says. So, for example, if a soccer player has a mental breakdown and shoots another student ... that's technically under the NCAA's purview, because the university "failed" to "maintain institutional control" of the situation. I reject that line of reasoning.

(08-16-2017 01:45 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  I wonder if the NCAA and UNC would be able to settle this without going through the courts or risk either side tying this up in appeals. Obviously, UNC wants nothing to do with taking away championships, postseason accomplishments, upcoming scholarships or affecting the reputation and prestige of Roy Williams. Conversely, the NCAA - which may or may not have overstepped its bounds in investigations, but still has managed to find wrongdoings within the institution - would look to save face as well.

What would a fair compromise be to end this and have both parties save face?

UNC will turn this into an all-out battle if any current UNC coach is hit with a show-cause penalty or any national titles are taken away. On the other hand, the NCAA would be the one that loses face if there are no penalties whatsoever. So I suppose that if there is going to be an outcome that avoids a messy battle, the sanctions have to be more than nothing but the NCAA will have to stop short of vacating national titles or issuing show-cause penalties.

(08-16-2017 02:13 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-16-2017 01:45 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  I wonder if the NCAA and UNC would be able to settle this without going through the courts or risk either side tying this up in appeals. Obviously, UNC wants nothing to do with taking away championships, postseason accomplishments, upcoming scholarships or affecting the reputation and prestige of Roy Williams. Conversely, the NCAA - which may or may not have overstepped its bounds in investigations, but still has managed to find wrongdoings within the institution - would look to save face as well.

What would a fair compromise be to end this and have both parties save face?

UNC will turn this into an all-out battle if any current UNC coach is hit with a show-cause penalty or any national titles are taken away. On the other hand, the NCAA would be the one that loses face if there are no penalties whatsoever. So I suppose that if there is going to be an outcome that avoids a messy battle, the sanctions have to be more than nothing but the NCAA will have to stop short of vacating national titles or issuing show-cause penalties.

The wheels in the ED Foundation were told that UNC would sue to string this out in the late spring. There is no avoiding a messy battle. UNC will sue on process because they can;'t sue on the facts and can't take disclosures and depositions on the facts. They hope to gain 2 years with litigation.

A number of institutions including Penn State, Syracuse, Louisville, Maryland, Southern Cal, Clemson, FSU, and most of the SEC are watching closely. That's an aberration from most infractions cases because UNC has spent 5 decades claiming it was holier than thou. Claiming to be morally superior to others and then hanging on to that after being caught drives much of the animus.

lumberpack - taking it to PM, to avoid going further off topic

Update from the NCAA UNC hearing:

Amazingly, UNC Cheat managed to limit the scope of this infractions committee, despite admitting to ACADEMIC FRAUD (their actual words, not mine) in a reply to the accrediting agency, and publicly, recently, by their Athletic Department. They successfully limited the scope to the people and departments that they couldn't hide due to electronically transmitted evidence. Yet it still implicated them for 18 years of a shadow curriculum of fake AND (not OR) bifurcated courses created for the SOLE PURPOSE of maintaining athlete eligibility. They deserve the death penalty because this is the most egregious case in contravention of the NCAAs purpose in the history of the organization. The NCAA, should they fail to act, will by implication, show that they have absolutely no purpose. This will not happen. Nor will UNC Cheat take this to court on any factual matter (they will do their darndest to keep it procedural only, because discovery would uncover all the skeletons they have spent the better part of $20 Million and years trying to keep buried). The chair of the COI is quite frankly sick of their obfuscation and delays (he made that abundantly clear). I suspect there will be meaningful sanctions and vacation of wins and titles, but I cannot predict if either side will be satisfied.

What I am stunned by is the continued appearance of apologists. I have followed this story for at least 5 years. The mountain of evidence that has been accumulated is staggering and absolutely unprecedented. If there were ever a case of academic fraud for athletic advantage, this is it. The requisite cognitive dissonance of anyone who has seen this evidence in attempts to deny these facts is absolutely absurd. I understand the emotional need to defray and decry the obvious, but logically, you have absolutely no ground to stand on. None.

(08-16-2017 04:11 PM)Artifice Wrote:  Amazingly, UNC Cheat managed to limit the scope of this infractions committee, despite admitting to ACADEMIC FRAUD (their actual words, not mine) in a reply to the accrediting agency, and publicly, recently, by their Athletic Department. They successfully limited the scope to the people and departments that they couldn't hide due to electronically transmitted evidence. Yet it still implicated them for 18 years of a shadow curriculum of fake AND (not OR) bifurcated courses created for the SOLE PURPOSE of maintaining athlete eligibility. They deserve the death penalty because this is the most egregious case in contravention of the NCAAs purpose in the history of the organization. The NCAA, should they fail to act, will by implication, show that they have absolutely no purpose. This will not happen. Nor will UNC Cheat take this to court on any factual matter (they will do their darndest to keep it procedural only, because discovery would uncover all the skeletons they have spent the better part of $20 Million and years trying to keep buried). The chair of the COI is quite frankly sick of their obfuscation and delays (he made that abundantly clear). I suspect there will be meaningful sanctions and vacation of wins and titles, but I cannot predict if either side will be satisfied.

What I am stunned by is the continued appearance of apologists. I have followed this story for at least 5 years. The mountain of evidence that has been accumulated is staggering and absolutely unprecedented. If there were ever a case of academic fraud for athletic advantage, this is it. The requisite cognitive dissonance of anyone who has seen this evidence in attempts to deny these facts is absolutely absurd. I understand the emotional need to defray and decry the obvious, but logically, you have absolutely no ground to stand on. None.

That's a powerful statement, Artifice. While I have been in the camp that thinks UNC was incredibly unethical in its administration of student-athletes in sham courses, I also fear that assigning guilt and consequence to them (and them alone) - when it would undoubtedly be uncovered that other institutions follow a similar (if not identical) frame of academic misconduct - would open Pandora's Box, so to speak.

In essence, if UNC goes down - hard as you say - what's to stop UNC from lighting a match to the powder keg and bringing the entire collegiate athletics establishment down? Would it be more of a "well, you got caught-type argument", then?

In either case, we are looking at one of the most important decisions in collegiate sports history. One side will definitely be irrefutably damaged as a result.

(08-16-2017 05:05 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(08-16-2017 04:11 PM)Artifice Wrote:  Amazingly, UNC Cheat managed to limit the scope of this infractions committee, despite admitting to ACADEMIC FRAUD (their actual words, not mine) in a reply to the accrediting agency, and publicly, recently, by their Athletic Department. They successfully limited the scope to the people and departments that they couldn't hide due to electronically transmitted evidence. Yet it still implicated them for 18 years of a shadow curriculum of fake AND (not OR) bifurcated courses created for the SOLE PURPOSE of maintaining athlete eligibility. They deserve the death penalty because this is the most egregious case in contravention of the NCAAs purpose in the history of the organization. The NCAA, should they fail to act, will by implication, show that they have absolutely no purpose. This will not happen. Nor will UNC Cheat take this to court on any factual matter (they will do their darndest to keep it procedural only, because discovery would uncover all the skeletons they have spent the better part of $20 Million and years trying to keep buried). The chair of the COI is quite frankly sick of their obfuscation and delays (he made that abundantly clear). I suspect there will be meaningful sanctions and vacation of wins and titles, but I cannot predict if either side will be satisfied.

What I am stunned by is the continued appearance of apologists. I have followed this story for at least 5 years. The mountain of evidence that has been accumulated is staggering and absolutely unprecedented. If there were ever a case of academic fraud for athletic advantage, this is it. The requisite cognitive dissonance of anyone who has seen this evidence in attempts to deny these facts is absolutely absurd. I understand the emotional need to defray and decry the obvious, but logically, you have absolutely no ground to stand on. None.

That's a powerful statement, Artifice. While I have been in the camp that thinks UNC was incredibly unethical in its administration of student-athletes in sham courses, I also fear that assigning guilt and consequence to them (and them alone) - when it would undoubtedly be uncovered that other institutions follow a similar (if not identical) frame of academic misconduct - would open Pandora's Box, so to speak.

In essence, if UNC goes down - hard as you say - what's to stop UNC from lighting a match to the powder keg and bringing the entire collegiate athletics establishment down? Would it be more of a "well, you got caught-type argument", then?

In either case, we are looking at one of the most important decisions in collegiate sports history. One side will definitely be irrefutably damaged as a result.

They could do that if....they had direct factual knowledge of other institutions doing the same, and not mere hearsay. If UNC gets nailed then it is a shot across the bow of any other member institution that they had better get their affairs in order and quite frankly that is what enforcement should be about.

If the NCAA gave UNC the death penalty, then I'd look for UNC to leave the NCAA.

(08-16-2017 12:10 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-15-2017 06:12 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  In the revenue sports the nature of every single class is known by the academic advisors in the P-5. Every single class.

Academic advisors/couselors that are employed by academic departments know the details about every class in their respective departments. Of course. That's their job.

That's not at all the point. The point is that none of the employees of the athletic department at UNC knows the details about every class, nor should that be their job IMO. Their job is simply to monitor if the athletes are making satisfactory progress towards a degree, in the sense of earning credits with high enough GPA. That's it. Delving into the details of a course, especially a non-standard course as you describe, is far beyond the job duties of an athletic dept staffer.

Perhaps the way you are talking about it is how things are done at small-time schools like NDSU and Minnesota but at big time programs like Clemson there are people employed by the athletic department who track these things. Clemson even has an entire division within the Athletic Department that has as it's sole concern the academic performance of the student-athletes.

(08-16-2017 06:09 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If the NCAA gave UNC the death penalty, then I'd look for UNC to leave the NCAA.

and so would all the others big schools. There is waaaay too much money to be made (and lost).

(08-16-2017 06:09 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If the NCAA gave UNC the death penalty, then I'd look for UNC to leave the NCAA.

That's an interesting scenario. If they threatened to leave they would need schools that would choose to leave with them to have a major impact. Otherwise there would be no NCAA tournament invitations for the future years beyond the 3 year death penalty rule. And in the case of North Carolina and probably a Texas you would have to find a group of like minded sympathetic universities to make it happen. In other words they would have to have friends.

Do they have many, or any friends?

Duke would use their 3 year absence to garner deeper recruits, N.C. State would probably pick up enough extra talent to see a big boost, and Kentucky would be in heaven.

I think the whole ACC would silently enjoy the benefits of having UNC zombied so that they could finally showcase the things they love. It might be the best renaissance the ACC could ever have.

The death penalty really isn't appropriate for them.

I haven't seen anything were the NCAA said "these courses were not good enough." UNC admitted the courses were fraudulent. They offered refunds and free courses to make up the credit so people would not lose their degrees.

The fact that another department is involved is not relevant. It is all UNC.

Knowingly or not, athletes broke the rules too. They accepted fraudulent grades. It doesn't matter if they knew, if the advisor knew or if the coach new. The rules were broken. If I give a tax deposit to an employee from another department and he takes the money, my company still has to pay the taxes and fines.

It's not like this went on for a few weeks. It was going on for decades.

Today is Thursday... wonder where the suspense shall take us...

(08-17-2017 07:53 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Today is Thursday... wonder where the suspense shall take us...

Repped for that gif. That was perfect.

To clarify, I said that they deserve the death penalty. I do not believe they will receive it.

One thing to add, because it does not seem to be common knowledge, is that the COI has the transcripts of the players involved, which were not released to the public, for obvious reasons. Not that the committee needed another smoking gun, but there it is anyway.