ACC Discussion

[lv20gt]

They snuck this ruling in right after which is equally egregious

http://collegebasketball.nbcsports....by-ncaa-ruled-ineligible-in-transfer-dispute/

When going to class is a worse crime to the NCAA than not going to class.

What a ****ing joke.

 

[dtm1997]

Agree. I don't think this will happen in my lifetime, but college sports needs a tectonic shift. Radical overhaul. Call it whatever they want to, but the myth of the amateur student athlete is over and they need to acknowledge it and move forward in a different mode

This reminds me. I need to go back to another board and continue my argument in favor of paying student athletes.

 

[lauraee]

Wow the NCAA really must hate state. I mean bagley is cleared for duke in less than a week and ncheats can have fake classes for their "student" athletes to keep them eligible. Guess they ignored that whole Mccants testimony. What bull$hit. Can't say I'm suprised, thought this might be the outcome, but was hoping they'd prove me wrong.

 

[okiemon]

As UNC is a state school, then the state and its taxpayers were defrauded by the school. The state should cut funding to the school by, say, 20% for 3 years. Make em lay off 20% of the faculty and staff, including 20% of all coaches and athletic administration, and cut all scholarships, both athletic and otherwise, by 20%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[awbuzz]

NCAA = Feckless way too often.

Truely sad for those that know some UNC AFAM classes and others were a farce.

---

 

[Peacone36]

 

[RamblinRed]

I think my fav look at the UNC scandal is from Dan Wetzel.

https://sports.yahoo.com/north-caro...rassing-academic-fraud-defense-010926838.html

I think the most damming part is this:

In perhaps the most outlandish defense in NCAA infractions history, the school acknowledged that the classes that were taken were essentially bankrupt of any kind of teaching, learning or supervision … but that was perfectly OK with them
To defend the basketball team, the university had to claim it wasn’t really a university.

UNC was playing chess against the NCAA’s checkers. That was damn impressive, true Tark-level trolling.

Carolina even changed its argument for the NCAA. When the school was in front of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, which accredits it as an actual university, it declared that no-show, no-professor, no-work classes were wrong.

“UNC reported to its accreditor that what occurred for nearly 18 years on its campus was academic fraud,” the NCAA report stated. ” … Specifically, UNC admitted [it] demonstrated that, ‘the academic fraud was long-standing.'”

Now, though, the classes weren’t fraud. They were fine. The NCAA was astounded. The Committee on Infractions asked how this was possible.

“UNC [told] the panel that it was merely a ‘typo’ or oversight,” the NCAA wrote.

A typo? At this point the case had become a “My Cousin Vinny” punchline … “I’m not Jerry Gallo … I’m Jerry Callo.”

What exactly was the typo that caused the school to write the term “academic fraud.” If you replace one letter do you get some other phrase? Maybe whomever does the typing in Chapel Hill is so inept it typo’d an entire phrase which, coincidentally, spelled out “academic fraud” in a case that wasn’t at all “academic fraud.”

Heck of a coincidence, dadgummit.


Also, this article by Dennis Dodd is also very interesting. It is about how close UNC came to losing their accreditation.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-b...on-agency-considered-dropping-north-carolina/

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."

 

[Peacone36]

I think my fav look at the UNC scandal is from Dan Wetzel.

https://sports.yahoo.com/north-caro...rassing-academic-fraud-defense-010926838.html

I think the most damming part is this:

In perhaps the most outlandish defense in NCAA infractions history, the school acknowledged that the classes that were taken were essentially bankrupt of any kind of teaching, learning or supervision … but that was perfectly OK with them
To defend the basketball team, the university had to claim it wasn’t really a university.

UNC was playing chess against the NCAA’s checkers. That was damn impressive, true Tark-level trolling.

Carolina even changed its argument for the NCAA. When the school was in front of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, which accredits it as an actual university, it declared that no-show, no-professor, no-work classes were wrong.

“UNC reported to its accreditor that what occurred for nearly 18 years on its campus was academic fraud,” the NCAA report stated. ” … Specifically, UNC admitted [it] demonstrated that, ‘the academic fraud was long-standing.'”

Now, though, the classes weren’t fraud. They were fine. The NCAA was astounded. The Committee on Infractions asked how this was possible.

“UNC [told] the panel that it was merely a ‘typo’ or oversight,” the NCAA wrote.

A typo? At this point the case had become a “My Cousin Vinny” punchline … “I’m not Jerry Gallo … I’m Jerry Callo.”

What exactly was the typo that caused the school to write the term “academic fraud.” If you replace one letter do you get some other phrase? Maybe whomever does the typing in Chapel Hill is so inept it typo’d an entire phrase which, coincidentally, spelled out “academic fraud” in a case that wasn’t at all “academic fraud.”

Heck of a coincidence, dadgummit.


Also, this article by Dennis Dodd is also very interesting. It is about how close UNC came to losing their accreditation.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-b...on-agency-considered-dropping-north-carolina/

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."

Listened to Gary Parrish take on it this morning on the way to work and all i needed to hear was, UNC's student make up is 4% athletes, though 47% of athletes took the sham class over the 18 year period. Says it all.

 

[jeffgt14]

To a certain extent, maybe the correct route for punishment should have gone through the accreditation agency. They should have lost their accreditation which in turn should allow the NCAA to give them the boot for not being an accredited University (No idea if that’s a rule but it should be). No one wants to revoke the school’s accreditation because it ends up doing more harm to a lot of current students and a lot of in state kids in the future for something that was done primarily by the athletic department. Reading NCAA Bylaws, I’m not entirely sure what they can do. It’s an endless circle.

 

[RamblinRed]

taking away accreditation is quite literally the 'death penalty' for a college.
Means you cannot receive any federal aid. Which means no student can go there and get federal grant or loan money. No professor can get federal money for research.

The eye on basketball podcast at CBSSPorts from Monday with Gary Parrish and Matt Norlander is a really good listen for this topic.

 

[YlJacket]

UNC is in the top 5 for NIH funding in the country. Take that alone away and they are toast.

I can almost understand the lack of desire by the NCAA to go after the class itself and whether it was an impermissible benefit or outside their perview.

What I truly cannot understand is the emails linking the academic advisors to the creation of a pathway to eligibility with the AFAM department and the emails dictating what grade is required. That alone is lack of institutional control and a hammer.

 

[RamblinRed]

UNC is in the top 5 for NIH funding in the country. Take that alone away and they are toast.

I can almost understand the lack of desire by the NCAA to go after the class itself and whether it was an impermissible benefit or outside their perview.

What I truly cannot understand is the emails linking the academic advisors to the creation of a pathway to eligibility with the AFAM department and the emails dictating what grade is required. That alone is lack of institutional control and a hammer.

No kidding on this. I just don't see how you can see those emails and not say there was benefits being provided.

 

[awbuzz]

No kidding on this. I just don't see how you can see those emails and not say there was benefits being provided.

It is because the NCAA does not want to see anything regarding UNC.

 

[GTpdm]

No kidding on this. I just don't see how you can see those emails and not say there was benefits being provided.

Yes, precisely. This is where the whole "regular students benefited, too" argument is blatantly invalid. No--regular students in the course did not have their academic advisors calling up the booster/secretary running the pseudo-courses, to suggest the grades that would keep them in school.

 

[Peacone36]

Yes, precisely. This is where the whole "regular students benefited, too" argument is blatantly invalid. No--regular students in the course did not have their academic advisors calling up the booster/secretary running the pseudo-courses, to suggest the grades that would keep them in school.

And according to reports by either Dausters or Parrish regular students were not given the same leniency over the course of the class

 

[YlJacket]

And according to reports by either Dausters or Parrish regular students were not given the same leniency over the course of the class

FYI - one thing UNC was really careful not to do was rescind credit for the course for anyone - athlete or normal joe. That would have led to massive eligibility questions and them having to claw back diplomas from regular joes. I don't know for sure but would expect that this continuing to count the courses in the face of saying they were fraudulent is a big part of what the accrediting association got pissed at.

 

[Peacone36]

FYI - one thing UNC was really careful not to do was rescind credit for the course for anyone - athlete or normal joe. That would have led to massive eligibility questions and them having to claw back diplomas from regular joes. I don't know for sure but would expect that this continuing to count the courses in the face of saying they were fraudulent is a big part of what the accrediting association got pissed at.

On the most recent reports both Dausters and Parrish said they classes and credits remain on all transcripts and will not change for that reason

 

[GTpdm]

And according to reports by either Dausters or Parrish regular students were not given the same leniency over the course of the class

I also read in the "big report" (Wainstein?) that once the nature of the no-lecture reading courses became apparent, Carolina "cracked down" by requiring them to be real, attendance-based classes, with regular meeting times and assignments/tests--but the parties involved in the sham courses still selected some students who signed up for the course to take it on a reading-only basis (i.e. no attendance and just the one pseudo-paper). So, on the books, it now looked like a real course--but they saw to it that athletes (only) were the subset who took it as a reading class, while for everyone else it was a regular course (albeit still an easy A course). The setup was specifically orchestrated to allow athletes to get by with lower workloads than other students in the same course.

It's absolutely ridiculous that anyone could come to the conclusion that the AA-AFAM partnership was not exploiting this loophole to keep players eligible without having to meet any real academic expectations.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

UNC is not a legitimately high reputation university.

One way that they have operated in a manner that benefits their athletic programs, but is open to all students and so is considered licit, is they have degree programs where you can get the B.A. in 1/4 or so less credit hours. That is the equivalent of getting a 4 year degree for 3 years of normal coursework. Invariably, athletes major in such programs. What that means in practical terms is that where at legit academic institution like Tech an athlete has to take a certain load, including summer courses, to maintain the APR, at UNC an athlete keeps eligible for APR by taking 1/4 less of a course load. Let's use hypothetical numbers. A Tech kid needs to take 8 courses a year to stay eligible under APR, and so they may do something like 3-3-2 (fall-spring-summer). At UNC they could take 2-2-2 and be seen as having progressed to a degree in an equal manner to the Tech kid. And that is even before one examines the value of the degree or what actual work is required in the courses.

Also, all schools let athletes enroll before the general population, they get priority because of the necessity of working around practice times. This is true at every school and is acceptable to the NCAA. But it is the means by which these b.s. majors proliferate, or even just specific b.s. professors/courses. Because the class is technically open to all students, but the athletes can be steered into them since they enroll first, and the course is made easy for them even if a few lucky stiffs from the general population got into them as well.

 

[okiemon]

taking away accreditation is quite literally the 'death penalty' for a college.
Means you cannot receive any federal aid. Which means no student can go there and get federal grant or loan money. No professor can get federal money for research.

You know, that sounds like a reasonable penalty for UNC to me.