Maryland president: Would expect shutdown of UNC over academic allegations
"For the things that happened in North Carolina, it's abysmal. I would think that this would lead to the implementation of the death penalty by the NCAA. But I'm not in charge of that."
This is the first time in a long time someone (with a voice) has talked about this. I doubt NCAA will ever appropriately punish UNCheat, but just surprising to see this morning on ESPN.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Maybe Maryland's president should be more worried about how much of an asshole his own students can be towards opposing teams, rather than what is going on at other schools. Further, it seems like the only curriculum at Maryland that the students actually take part in is "Driver's Ed: How to Drive Like a True Marylander."
Blindfold yourself and slam on the gas pedal while wildly swerving on I-95.
Now if you can do that while occasionally slamming on the brakes for no reason, you'll just about have it.
I enjoy seeing Joe randomly post on TKP about Maryland Driver's that he must encounter on his commute.
that sounds like an improvement!
Isn't that the same guy who moved Maryland from the ACC (disregarding years of tradition in the one sport they're good at) to the Big 10 for more TV money? Guess who is still butt-hurt because the ACC charged him an exit fee...
Also, "the death penalty"? Penn State (in his new conference) didn't get that for their administration overlooking pedophilia!
Commentary like this belong in the "sanctimonious self-interest" category, not the "moral statement" one.
What happened at Penn State can't really be compared to what happened (is happening?) at UNC. Both institutions should be punished accordingly but I don't agree with comparing the two. What happened at Penn State was abhorrent to say the least but also on a completely different level than the situation at UNC.
I agree they're on different levels. What happened at Penn State was significantly worse.
My point is that Loh wasn't calling for the death penalty of an administration knowingly overlooking some pretty bad behavior inside his new conference, and now he's calling for the death penalty for a university in his old conference. The old conference being the one who made him pay a $31 million exit fee.
I don't really want to defend UNC here, but the comment about the "death penalty" is totally over the top. If you didn't use it for Penn State, you can't even bring it up here.
Loh moved Maryland into a new conference for purely financial reasons. Now he's pumping hundreds of millions into Maryland's sports programs, and bashing a member of his old conference. That's what I'm picking up on.
He's not a moralist, he's self-serving.
It's not just that they are on different levels... one was a criminal activity that happened to take place at college football institution. Another is a team cheating at sport. The NCAA significantly hurt their reputation by trying to take a criminal matter that is largely unrelated to football into their own hands.
I see what your going for, but I think PSU is just a bad example. If the Jim Tressel/OSU 'Tattoo scandle' was overlooked by the NCAA, and the UMD AD chose to call out UNC, I think you'd have a good point.
We can get in a whole conversation about how the NCAA should've handled PSU, I personally think the death penalty would be incorrect, since this wasn't an issue of players receiving benefits or special treatment. Penn State coaches, AD and President committed a crime, but they didn't 'cheat' in a sport. The NCAA is not supposed to enforce federal/state law, they are suppose to enforce rules agreed upon by their member institutions; one of which is not giving athletes any special treatment.
UNC did just that; they gave athletes special treatment. If they can prove this is true (to whatever burden of truth the NCAA requires), than this is punishable, arguably by the death penalty.
Edit: for some reason I only read the first half of your comment before replying and basically restated the second half.... Going back to the break room for a cup of coffee now....
VTKey edited his comment before I finished posting mine, so I went back and added the second half, I'm sure after you started replying but before you hit post. You might not be having as bad as a morning as you thought.
2 main differences, in my mind, 1st the Penn State thing was a criminal matter, something that is properly an issue to be addressed by the Government. 2nd, allowing a pedophile to continue to work and have connections to the program doesn't convey a direct competitive advantage to the athletic department.
On the other hand, the NCAA and it's rulebook, including the death penalty, is designed explicitly for this reason, it's what the the NCAA exists for, it's why UNC agreed to be part of the NCAA, it's why the NCAA even kind of has a leg to stand on with the 'we don't need to pay athletes because they are getting the benefit of education'. Well if the "education" is a scam, the athletes aren't getting any benefit. (I think athletes should be paid. I don't think that would work. I can't reconcile the two in my own mind.)
By allowing athletes to remain eligible and 'go to class' in a system that requires no work or effort, it allows them to recruit and keep eligible athletes who other schools can't recruit and keep eligible, making it easier for UNC and conveying a direct competitive advantage. One could also take it further and surmise that a 'student athlete' who knows he doesn't have to worry about the 'student' part (Cardale Jones?) has more time to train/focus on his sport, and less stress overall, since the only thing he has to worry about is 'athlete'.
PSU cheated at life, and the offenders have largely been hammered by the sanctions that the Government has at its disposal. UNC cheated at sports, and should be hammered by the sanctions the NCAA has at its disposal.
The Penn State thing was a criminal matter AND a sports administration matter.
The competitive advantage sought was the avoidance of a revelation that would have damaged the program, not unlike the revelation of criminal behavior by someone associated with the program or academic fraud. The matter should have been reported to the criminal authorities AND to the NCAA.
There are a lot of variables like "was the administration actively involved" or "did the administration know about the issue" or "how long did they know about it" or "was it ongoing", but the fact that it's being investigated by someone outside of the NCAA doesn't remove it from their area of responsibility.
Academic fraud at UNC should be investigated by a) the university, b) the accreditation authority, and c) the NCAA. These three organizations have different realms of responsibility, but they all have an interest in the matter and the outcome. They may all three require different remedies.
well said and totally agree
You and I definitely see this differently.
Joe Paterno failed to report a matter to police because he wanted to protect his football program. The police and the administration also failed to act for the same reason. In that case, the football program, and the attitude surrounding it, was part of the problem, as negligence among their administrators was the direct cause of ongoing criminality.
The jurisdiction of the court system and the NCAA may overlap, but it's well within both of their jurisdictions, as far as I'm concerned. They both have governance responsibilities, though with different priorities.
I'll confess to not knowing the details of the UNC matter. Have they proven that the athletic administration or coaches were aware of the academic fraud or directed it? Was there cash involved? Seems to me that these details matter before assigning a penalty.
The point I was trying to make, though, is that Loh seems over the top with his "death penalty" statement. The details really matter. Does he know the details? Do they really warrant a death penalty? Or is he just bashing his former conference foe?
My counterpoint would be to ask you what leads you to this opinion? Most everything in the NCAA handbook (I skimmed the headers, I haven't read much) deals with the relationship between student-athletes, coaches and and administrators. Even the Unethical Content section - section 10.1 doesn't even discuss breaking the law (except for banned the substances section).
The NCAA is a group of schools that have banned together to make there an even playing field (or close enough to it) and no cheating in college athletics, not punish illegal actions by an employee of a member institution.
My understanding is that for over a decade, UNC created a major (African American studies) that only contained athletes. These classes were almost exclusively athletes and were often single paper classes. Athletes either received significantly easier grading from teachers (as in papers written at a "4th grade level" earned B grades), had tutors do their work for them or plagiarized material. Since these classes were primarily filled with athletes, it appears as though that these majors/classes were made purely for the purpose of keeping athletes eligible. The university argues that other students could have taken these classes, and would have received the same type of grading for their paper, but other students simply chose not to.
I'll just use the NCAA's words:
By perpetuating a "football first" culture that ultimately enabled serial child sexual abuse to occur, The Pennsylvania State University leadership failed to value and uphold institutional integrity, resulting in a breach of the NCAA constitution and rules.
I probably won't pore through the NCAA handbook for all the possible places where Joe Paterno failed to live up to NCAA rules, but I'd say he probably failed at 10.1 of the NCAA handbook:
Individuals employed by (or associated with) a member institu-
tion to administer, conduct or coach intercollegiate athletics and all participating student-athletes shall act with
honesty and sportsmanship at all times so that intercollegiate athletics as a whole, their institutions and they, as
individuals, shall represent the honor and dignity of fair play and the generally recognized high standards associ-
ated with wholesome competitive sports.
Sure, there's no specific sanction for hiding pedophilia, but does there really need to be?
Now, let's turn to UNC. Who knew what and when? Did the administrators and coaches at UNC know about the fraud, other than it was an easy 'A'? Are the people who had an awareness of the fraud still at UNC, administering sports, or did UNC take the appropriate steps to solve the problem? What steps do you think the NCAA needs to take in order to bring UNC back into compliance?
The Death Penalty is designed for programs that are either a) not cooperating with an NCAA investigation, or b) repeat offenders, which is why Penn State didn't get it.
They're different cases, of course, but they're both partially in the realm of the NCAA. With respect to the "Death Penalty", it seems we should know the facts before rendering judgment.
plenty of non-athletes took those courses too, but when 50% of the class have scholarships, something is probably a little fishy...
Sure doesn't sound like random chance.
I might be the lone proponent but I would like to see UNC get hit with the Death Penalty. Yeah it would hurt the ACC as a whole. But academic fraud to keep athletes eligible across multiple sports tacked onto to player contact with agents, alleged recruiting violations, and other criminal activities being overlooked should bring the death penalty for their entire sports program.
You're not the lone proponent. If any institution is deserving of the dealth penalty, its UNC for what they did.
Or Baylor
or Miami.
Didn't most of the Nevin Shaperio things wind up being false? Also, even if they are true, I still think no deserves the death penalty more than Baylor, who's administration actively worked with law enforcement to conceal sexual assault in order to keep football players on the field.
I think it was more that most of Nevin Shapiro couldn't be proven than were false. The Miami coaches were quick to get on players to delete photos, etc.
Baylor is going to get the hammer of doom but will it be aimed only at the football program or athletic department wide?
Even if only half of what is alleged in the complaint filed against Baylor is true,what that athletic department did is the most deplorable thing the NCAA has investigated in the past 20 years. Academic fraud is one thing, but not allowing victims of sexual assault to access campus resources available to them for adjudication is in a different league.
If that program doesn't get shut down, the death penalty should no longer exist.
Ich, I knew it was ugly, but I didn't know it was that ugly. So show cause for the athletic department and loss of scholarships for every area that had one of those students? Was this football players, basketball, or all?
The complaint alleges only football players. To be fair to Baylor, I've not read an answer or any subsequent filings to gauge their response. Regardless, it's awful.
Fair warning: these can ruin your day, but the complaints can be found here and here
This may be an unpopular opinion, but I kind of see the Baylor thing as being more Penn State and less UNC. The analogy's not perfect, but UNC is cheating within the NCAA. Penn State and Baylor cheated (as I said somewhere else in this thread) at life. Consider a casino.
UNC, having agreed not to count cards in exchange for being allowed to play blackjack at a casino, is getting caught counting cards. It's not 'illegal', it's just frowned upon, (like masturbating on airplanes) and UNC is getting caught, and should get banned from the casino.
Penn State (and to a more direct extent Baylor, it being players vs. a coach/former coach) went into the same casino and punched a guy. Penn State broke the law and got smacked. But they don't necessarily get in any trouble with the casino.
In no way do I intend my analogy to downplay or minimize what the victims of the Baylor or Penn State scandals went through.
I also admit that I grew up a Penn State fan (parents got grad degrees there) and am still surrounded by Penn state fans (fil also got his grad degree at Penn State). Growing up role models for 'how to do it right' were JoePa and CFB.
Really? That's the example that came to mind?
Anyway, at Baylor, besides covering up 125 complaints of harassment and sexual assault, they also formed the Baylor Bruins hostess club which was unofficially expected to perform sexual favors for players and recruits. I'm pretty sure that falls squarely under "improper benefits" which NCAA supposedly opposes. So I'd say Baylor has a little of both outright illegal and outright in violation of NCAA rules. Different rules from UNC, but still breaking the rules all the same.
It's a reference from The Hangover. I know it's not in great taste, but once I got going I just couldn't leave the reference out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPin5LRBfZo
I appreciated it being included
"Pretty sure that's illegal too"
I get the analogy, but I'm not totally buying it. I can agree that only one "cheated", but why are all three of them getting caught with armfuls of extra cash?
All three of these guys committed their infractions for the benefit of padding their wallet (football program).
I would agree UNC is the "cheater", here, but you could make the case that PSU and Baylor's "assaults" are more like robberies that involved assault.
I'm not sure that you ban the card counter but don't touch the assholes that beat up and robbed your dealers/customers. They all left the casino with more money than they should have.
Williams said the length of the investigation in some ways has been a punishment for his program.
Hey Roy, the length of the investigation is a direct result of the shell game UNC has elected to play with the issue.
Is this so-called "shell game" going to be played in a hurricane/downpour?
Pretty tasteless move by a university president.
One could also say that cheating for years with absolutely no punishment is pretty tasteless too
Somehow, Penn State's troubles didn't stop him from joining that conference.
So I think he can tap the brakes on the moral outrage.
One could also say pie is pretty tasteless too. CAKE FOREVER!
Must. NOt. DoWnVoTE. OPINIONS!
If someone said pie is tasteless, they're miscaken.
yeah, well one could also be WRONG
Why? Because he had the balls to tell it like it is? smh
Surprised I'm in the minority on this post but I agree with him. Finally somebody with authority is taking a stand against UNC.
Yeah, I don't care who it is calling them out. The more public attention on it, the better.
That was my thought as well.
It seems like not many people talk about this now and it is good to bring it up and make it a headline again. I don't want it to go away and I want the NCAA to actually do something.
I agree. UNC needs more people to call them out.
I would like to see if the UMD prez takes a similar stand against Penn State then.
Okay, so can some in a calm, level headed way, tell me why everyone is drawing apples to apples for UNC and Penn State?
From what I understand, UNC has committed academic fraud essentially which, to my best knowledge, isn't a criminal offense. Penn State or Baylor for example, are embroiled in criminal/legal trouble.
If the NCAA has any leg to stand on, it is slamming things that damage the student of Student Athlete, see fake or fraudulent classes.
In short, the PSU scandal was by far the "worst" scandal in college athletics history, so it quickly became the benchmark for every subsequent scandal. This is not the way it should be, but it's what happened.
IMO, Baylor is different from PSU. PSU was 2-10 people (depending on what reports you do/don't believe) who worked for/around the football team covering up a crime. No players had any knowledge, much less involvement, in these criminal acts. At Baylor, the administration and local law enforcement actively covered up crimes committed by players (sexual assault - a serious crime where others are hurt, not a misdemeanor like marijuana possession) in order to keep said players on the football team.
In my unprofessional, not-a-lawyer opinion, the UNC case is more similar to the Baylor case: both cases deal with athletes getting special treatment from the university. The PSU/Sandusky scandal could have happened at any 'institution' - a government, a school, a church, etc.
I think the NCAA acted incorrectly right after PSU scandal broke, and it hurt them big time. First, they handed down a 'weak' punishment for the crime, in comparison to what they had handed down in the past (It looks very bad when the punishment SMU got for paying players is harsher than the penalty for child abuse). THEN taking it back... Which was the right move, but they should've taken their time and not caved to public pressure. I'll admit - At first I thought PSU deserved a death penalty, but as I took time to think about it, I realized that it wasn't the NCAA's issue to deal with.
Personally, I really hope that the NCAA comes down hard on Baylor with a show-cause against Briles, Ian McCaw and even the president. I do think the death penalty is warranted here, but I think that it is most important to make a statement that coaches and administrators who put wins and losses before the safety of others have no place in the NCAA.
My theory is that the average person simply doesn't have a firm grasp of the concept of jurisdiction. People see an authority figure or governing body, and assume it has virtually unlimited power to mete out whatever sanction they see fit for terrible, abhorrent behavior.
You sir have been promoted to my spokesman.
I don't quite get the jurisdiction arguments. Jurisdictions can overlap.
The NCAA has a very specific responsibility. The administration of sports. Not academics, and not criminal behavior. But in situations where the administration of athletics overlaps with those other areas, such as when special favors are granted to athletes, or when athletes are involved in a more widespread academic scandal, or when crimes are overlooked by the administrators or coaches of an athletic program, the NCAA does have some responsibility and authority.
I agree that they have some responsibility and authority, but only as it applies to their charter. As a silly argument to give logic to this statement, I do not believe that the NCAA should have anything to do with the food served in the cafeterias because it is not in their charter.
The case at Penn State was criminal in nature *and* was overlooked by the athletic program, but it can be argued that it didn't give Penn State any athletic competition advantage. I say that the NCAA should have left the punishment to the justice system.
Baylor on the other hand apparently used the "loose" environment as a selling point to recruits. This puts it into the charter of the NCAA because it could give an athletic competition advantage. I think the NCAA should hammer Baylor (as should the justice system).
The scandal at UNC pales in moral insignificance next to the above situations, but it is exactly what the NCAA was created for. I think that the NCAA is the co-lead dog in this battle (shoulder to shoulder with the accreditation board), and should give the maximum penalty.
edit: spelling will get after ya!
This is like saying a drug that enhances recovery isn't a performance enhancer. If it doesn't make you better, it must not be a competitive advantage. However in reality it would reduce fatigue that would naturally be felt, essentially preventing degradation. Covering up Sandusky very specifically avoided the negative consequences that would have impacted the program. So, to me, there absolutely was a competitive advantage associated with the unethical acts.
As for UNC, if the phantom classes were truly open to all students, I don't see that as an NCAA problem. If anything it should impact academic accreditation and simply be a shame on the university.
Not sure of the analogy. By definition a drug (which is on the list) which improves recovery is an unacceptable advantage.
Penn State didn't look the other way for decades to avoid the negative consequences, if that were the case they would have quietly fired him long ago (without consequences). They looked the other way because it was the easy thing to do.
You think that UNC created phantom courses for the good of the general population? Nope. They were created for athletes. They allowed anyone who discovered it to use it, probably because it helped hide it for what it was: a way to push athletes through who otherwise (likely) couldn't (or wouldn't) handle the load.
Penn State didn't look the other way for decades to avoid the negative consequences
That's exactly why they did it. Paterno wanted to avoid damaging the brand he spent his entire career building. The other administrators at Penn State, and even local police, weren't about to cross Joe Pa.
It's for this reason that both criminal and NCAA penalties were appropriate. They cover the governance from different perspectives. As the primary motivation was to protect the football program, the NCAA component should be included in the penalty.
I would love to see a widespread public outcry against UNC, but it simply isn't going to happen. You'll never hear the ACC say anything about it because they have too much of a stake in having yet another basketball pennant to point to. The NCAA doesn't even want to do anything about it because they make too much money from blue blood basketball teams.
As much as I wanted PSU to get slammed for the Sandusky crap, that straddled the realms of the legal system and NCAA's jurisdiction. UNCheat's scandal is what NCAA oversight was created for and yet they still haven't lifted a finger to punish them. Every University that strives to play by the rules should be raising hell to put NCAA under the microscope on this.
This was the only thing that PSU fans have to be upset about. The NCAA was definitely at the fingertips of it's reach in leveling punishment for the Sandusky case.
The NCAA is actually damaging its reputation by dragging its feet on UNC and the Heels winning a basketball championship only makes it worse. The NCAA is trying to avoid having to pay players by sticking to the "value of an education" argument while fighting the charge they are raking in money by exploiting athletes. Now when a prominent university has clearly not upheld its end of the education bargain and is continued to allowed to compete in the sports that generate the most revenue for the NCAA, I think it is only more damning of the institution. The NCAA is missing the golden opportunity to lay the hammer on UNC and wave its principles over the ashes as reaffirmation of it's purpose. The fact that they have not done so proves the NCAA is for dollars not degrees.
I don't believe that the NCAA is dragging their feet. They are trying to go by the book with their processes and procedures. Which means as the time for punishment comes, UNC self reports an infraction that restarts the timer. They've done this for years now.
I agree completely. The UNC scandal is directly tied to a competitive advantage in sports. Hopefully we will be wrong and they actually get punished accordingly.
you are right about PSU being a legal issue. if anyone is going to mention the death penalty, how do you not mention Baylor?? UNC is bad, but no one compares to Baylor.
He's not wrong.
18 years of outright academic fraud with the primary intention of keeping athletes eligible is basically Textbook Example 1a on what will get you in deep shit with the NCAA. The reasons that UNC hasn't been completely gutted over this are 2-fold.
1 - The NCAA is too chickenshit to ever hammer anyone again. They are at too precarious of a position anymore with schools with connections essentially daring them in the courts knowing they will win based on who would rule. SMU's demise scared them, and the backlash for their Penn St penalties took their bite away.
2 - UNC is far, faaaar too connected for the NCAA to ever have anything stick. Not only is essentially everyone in the judicial system of NC, where any lawsuit would be filed, a Tar Heel and likely to rule blindly in UNC's favor, but UNC also has numerous alumni is the administrative offices of the ACC and NCAA itself. To highlight the absurdity of the situation, the lead NCAA investigator on this case graduated from... you guessed it... UNC. The people who have the obligation to penalize UNC over this are the ones with the most incentive to brush it under the rug.
Yes, UNC deserves to get the Death Penalty over this in football, men's basketball, women's basketball, and any other sport that benefited from this. This is the most egregious flaunting of absolute disregard of the NCAA rule book that has ever been uncovered. This makes what happened at SMU look like small potatoes. This wasn't a simple case of giving athletes special benefits, oh no. This was systematic organized fraud to keep players on the court or field that had no business being there, and they were caught red handed. But here's the thing... They won't be punished for this. And if they do, whatever punishments are doled out will be thrown away in the NC courts. Its just the way it is, and there is nothing we can do about it.
Are you serious about the lead investigator? No conflict of interest???????
Yeah, read that on WRAL a couple years ago. Can't find the article now, because it was obviously buried within it, but yeah... The lead investigator at the NCAA at the time this broke, who got assigned the case graduated from UNC.
The NCAA needs a complete overhaul. I believe I read last year that the NCAA's budget for rules enforcement is less than 5%.
As i understand things, the NCAA didn't even investigate the Penn State situation, they simply relied on the findings of the Freeh report.
I understand all the desire for sanctions against UNC and I agree the NCAA has taken way to long to act. But the one thing that bothers me is people bringing up this years national title and UNCs current success like it was a direct result of UNC academically cheating. The academic issues at hand were involving players from years ago. Sure you can argue that the current teams shouldn't be playing but please don't take away from the kids that weren't involved. Anyway that's my mini rant
how many of those kids would have signed up to play for a school recovering from the death penalty? Or for a school who wouldn't participate in the post season until their senior year? UNC doesn't have the basketball team they did this year unless the NCAA fails to do their job.
I agree with you on that and even conceded that in my original post. But my comment was made (not to anyone on this thread or TKP in general) but to people that devalue the current UNC players for being "cheaters." The fact the NCAA didn't punish the university is not the kids fault.
No one is devaluing their current players or team. Clearly they had a great team but the cheating in the past sets them up for the success they have now and in the future with recruiting momentum, money, national recognition etc. They have benefited from all that over the years. If the NCAA had come through with a significant punishment in the past we would not be looking at the same program today and highly doubt UNC would be playing in a national championship.
If what happened at UNC happened at places like Villanova or Gonzaga, they wouldn't have been eligible for the postseason for at least 5 years after the allegations broke. Their appearances in the title game (and Villanova's title) would have never happened.
But because this is UNC, nothing has been done, and they've been able to continue on like nothing happened. That's why people are getting pissed off because there's a damn good chance that your program has been hammered by the NCAA for something minor (VT included), and its infuriating to see this go without even a wrist slap.
Add to this the more you don't do anything, the worse it will get. As you were saying above, the NCAA is too scared to do anything to almost anyone, much less a blueblood like UNC. You look at Baylor from a purely athletic success standpoint, and it's still likely that they made the 'right' decision. Will they serve some type of penalty? Sure hope so. But even if that phase lasts say 3 years, it probably won't send them back to the football basement they cheated/sleazed their way out of.
Until someone gets crushed, there will always be assholes who only care about the bottom line. Which in NCAA athletics equals football or basketball success, and if that means rules have to be broken and/or a few young peoples' lives have to be ruined, so be it. It's disgusting and really should piss off people who run their programs inside the rules and relatively acceptable moral boundaries.
So this may be an unpopular opinion, but I don't really feel any outrage towards this issue. Honestly, UNC was providing a service to kids who wouldn't otherwise have gone to college and just immediately went professional. With the 1 and done rules as they are, what blind idiots are we that we expect these kids who know they are going to end up in the NBA to actually care about their classes?
UNC just decided that they wanted to care about the classes as much as their athletes did. It may be "unethical" or "slimy" or whatever, but basically, this was a mutually beneficial business transaction. The ridiculous rules that make these kids into "student-athletes" and hold that standard as high as God, Country and Krispy Kreme are doing nothing to further the actual education of the expectant professional athlete and are just allowing us to feel better about exploiting the labor of these kids.
Honestly, I feel like UNC was the most honest party in the NCAA when they didn't really even pretend to have classes for athletes. Everyone else is just hiding the truth and yelling loudly at the people that don't.
Edit: Just so y'all know, I am very much in support of paying current student-athletes market wages for their services. Just a disclaimer.
I can definitely see where that train of thought comes from. I honestly have no real opinion on the pay vs scholarship debate other than that I can't see it going to a pay system and not turning into a minor league baseball type environment along with my opinion that their compensation on average will not be much more than they already get, it will just be dollars, not education. The caveat to that last point is that I can definitely see that some players would prefer the dollars and I have no problem with that.
At any rate, I do feel that everyone should play by the rules as they are now, not how they want them to be.
I think the 1 and done thing should be eliminated and kids should be allowed to go straight to the pros if they're good enough, and I'm cool with paying NCAA athletes. What I have a problem with is 18 years (EIGHTEEN YEARS) of academic fraud getting totally ignored. Syracuse and Boeheim got SLAMMED (deservedly so) for far less egregious violations. Same with SMU recently. It's a very clear double standard.
Edit: Also, only about half of the almost 3,000 students enrolled in these 'classes' were athletes. What service was UNC providing to the average student in those 'classes', other than fraudulent GPA boosting?
In response to your edit - that is what I found most confusing about this scenario. Who were these other students, why were they in those classes, and how did it take so long for this to come out? Maybe these other students were just completely fake identities so that it did not seem like only athletes were in the classes. While I probably would not have complained about a class in college that boosted my GPA, I probably would have told friends, etc. and you would think someone would find out, sooner than 18 years later.
If they were creating fake names to make it look like it's not just athletes, that almost makes it worse, IMO.
Based on information from a current student - the classes had a limited enrollment of twice the number of athletes expected to attend. Someone leaked which classes these were to fraternities - including one he now belongs to, and they would rush to fill the spots left after athlete early enrollment before they were full.
Sounds to me they were building a not special to athlete defense from the start, but really hard to prove.
brownrc,
I understand where you're coming from, but let me put another perspective on it. REGARDLESS of how a person/institution/society feels about the rules, they're expected to be followed. Whether or not you feel outrage is less to the point of, how do all the people who followed the rules feel? All the member institutions have to work under the following the assumptions:
1. if we follow the rules, we won't be punished by the NCAA
2. If an institution breaks those rules, they will be punished accordingly by the NCAA
To me, the situation is very simple (and not a moral thing). UNC deserves to be punished severely for simply breaking the rules for a LONG time. The NCAA can't claim the playing field is level if a school gets to exercise the "break the rules without consequence" option.
I think the way out of this is to allow the current athletes the option to transfer anywhere without sitting out. Using the dont-punish-the-kids excuse basically gives the institution a get out of jail free card: fight the sanction until the people directly involved have left the program, and then state that the it's not fair to punish the current kids.
I completely agree with this - which is why I support show-causes and fines for Coaches, AD's and even presidents in serious situations (AKA Baylor) as punishments, in addition to and/or rather than scholarship cuts, bowl bans, etc.
I doubt we will ever see the death penalty again even when warranted. UNC should be punished beyond athletics since this was more that just giving players some cash or recruiting issues. The school cheated at an academic level that should be brought up to the accreditation governing body as well as the NCAA. I also argue there should be legal ramifications for fraud. I am amazed there aren't class action lawsuits out there from students and other athletes who had to work and pay for their degrees while these players were given a free pass financially and academically.
I am glad someone is calling them out. We all agree UMD sucks but I have to support them in there criticism of UNC on this one. Was it in poor taste? Probably, but that is why UMD is doing it...
Lane Kiffin could criticize UNC and my reaction would be....
It was brought up to the accreditation body, and they gave UNC the "harshest" penalty they could give short of yanking accreditation - probation. While that hurt UNC a bit (loss of grant money due to being on probation), I don't think it was enough. I don't think the accreditation body ever thought there would be an institution the size of UNC with such egregious conduct that they didn't have a penalty they could bring to bear short of the "death penalty".
I think most fans of ACC sports would have some choice words for both UNC and Maryland.
Can't do embedded tweets on phone, but check out one of Bud's recent retweets.
I love that man.
I don't like bud doing that, especially with the new 'immunity' rule the NCAA has imposed. I don't think our kids are taking fake classes, and I don't think we have bagmen dropping 10k on every player we land, but our athletes definitely get special treatment outside of NCAA rules. I would not want VT to get in a shit-throwing contest with any school; not because I think VT is guilty of anything egregious, just because not something I want our program to be a part of. Can't end well.
What if teams just boycotted games? Refused to play UNCheat until something is done? Wouldn't that rattle things enough to get action:?
The NCAA would probably punish those teams for refusing to play, count them all as UNCheat Ws, and award them a Natl Title
or better yet, all the member institutions just break the rules together. "UNC did it without punishment, why can't we?"
Meh, as always nothing will come of all of this but at least it's bad PR.
And for that reason, we thank the twerps for taking the hit.
(They should be used to it by now. The echo in the shell must be comforting to them.)
I mean yeah UNC are cheaters but at least they're our cheaters. #goACC
That's sort of how I interpreted Loh's commentary.
I don't see him bashing someone in his own conference, so he's not really putting his money where his mouth is. My impression is that he's still a little butt-hurt over his exit fee.
The exit fee I believe was SIGNIFICANTLY reduced and probably paid for directly by Kevin Plank (Under Armour)
It went from about $51 million to about $31 million. Was still the biggest exit fee in the NCAA.
I still argue the ACC should have withheld the full amount.
Agreed, I still don't understand why it was reduced