The hammer dropped, well kind of.
The NCAA penalties are as follows:
- Public reprimand and censure.
- Three years of probation from March 12, 2012, through March 11, 2015.
- Three-year show-cause penalty for the former assistant football coach prohibiting any recruiting activity. The public report contains further details.
- Postseason ban for the 2012 football season.
- Reduction of football scholarships by a total of 15 during three academic years. The public report includes further details.
- Vacation of wins during the 2008 and 2009 seasons (self-imposed by the university). The public report includes further details.
- $50,000 fine (self-imposed by the university).
- Disassociation of both the former tutor and former student-athlete who served as an agent runner (self-imposed by the university).
Here's the complete summary from the NCAA.
Over the course of three seasons, six football student-athletes competed while ineligible as a result of these violations, and multiple student-athletes received impermissible benefits totaling more than $31,000.
While employed by the university, a former assistant football coach was compensated by a sports agent for the access he provided to student-athletes and failed to disclose the income to the university. The former assistant coach and a former tutor both committed unethical conduct and failed to cooperate with the investigation.
"This case should serve as a cautionary tale to all institutions to vigilantly monitor the activities of those student-athletes who possess the potential to be top professional prospects," the committee stated in its report. "It should also serve to warn student-athletes that if they choose to accept benefits from agents or their associates, they risk losing their eligibility for collegiate competition."
Penalties for the case include a one-year postseason ban, reduction of 15 football scholarships, vacation of records and three years probation. The former assistant coach received a three-year show-cause penalty restricting any recruiting activity.
The academic fraud violations stemmed from the former tutor constructing significant parts of writing assignments for three football student-athletes. The tutor wrote paragraphs for papers, revised drafts, composed "works-cited" pages, researched and edited content and inserted citations, among other violations. The tutor also provided more than $4,000 in impermissible benefits, including airfare and paying for outstanding parking tickets, to 11 football student-athletes after she graduated and was no longer a university employee. The tutor also refused to cooperate with the investigation.
The former assistant football coach was also cited for a failure to cooperate and unethical conduct. According to the committee, not only did he refuse to provide information relevant to the investigation, but he also furnished false and misleading information. At the hearing, in a reversal of his previous refusal to provide information, the former assistant coach expressed a willingness to provide the pertinent records. However, he did not provide the documents for more than three months following the hearing, resulting in a significant delay in bringing this case to conclusion.
The former assistant coach also did not report $31,000 in athletically related outside income from a sports agency. According to the committee findings, the former assistant coach was either employed or compensated by the sports agent. It was found that even after returning to college athletics, the former assistant coach continued recruiting clients for the sports agency, including student-athletes he was coaching.
The committee also found the university failed to monitor its football program, in part when it allowed a former student-athlete to have regular access to current student-athletes at its athletic facilities without any scrutiny. The former student-athlete was deemed an agent runner during the NCAA investigation. In addition, the university failed to investigate information it obtained suggesting one student-athlete, who accepted the most in impermissible cash and benefits, may have violated NCAA agent rules.
This case also included the provision of thousands of dollars in impermissible benefits to multiple student-athletes. Seven football student-athletes accepted more than $27,500 in benefits from various individuals, some of whom triggered NCAA agent rules. These impermissible benefits included cash, flights, meals, lodging, athletic training, admission to clubs and jewelry, among others. While the value of the benefits the student-athletes accepted varied, one student-athlete received more than $13,500 cash and gifts.
The university took decisive action after discovering the academic fraud violations and when the former assistant coach's violations came to light. In addition, the school cooperated fully during the investigation.
In comparison to recent rulings, USC received a two-year postseason ban, had to forfeit 14 victories and lost 30 scholarships over three years. Ohio State ended up with a one-year postseason ban, three years of probabtion, nine lost scholarships, a vacated 2010 season and a $338,000 fine. So it's a more severe punishment than Ohio State, but less harsh than USC. I guess that seems right. And by "I guess" I mean there's no way to logically compare the the wrongdoings to punishments among schools because the NCAA does what it wants without rational. One of the few givens is that if a school cooperates with the NCAA, it comes out better on the other side, which UNC did.
The postseason ban means UNC is inelligble to play in the ACC Championship Game, which may have been a realistic goal for an experienced, talented team that has a very mangable schedule.
09/01 – ELON
09/08 – at Wake Forest
09/15 – at Louisville
09/22 – EAST CAROLINA
09/29 – IDAHO
10/06 – VIRGINIA TECH
10/13 – at Miami
10/20 – at Duke
10/27 – NC STATE
11/03 – OPEN
11/10 – GEORGIA TECH
11/15 – at Virginia (Thursday, ESPN)
11/24 – MARYLAND
The Heels avoid Atlantic favorites Clemson and Florida State, and they host Coastal powers Virginia Tech and Georgia Tech. They also catch NC State at home. Three of their four ACC road games (Wake Forest, Miami, and Duke) are not in intimidating environments.
Did UNC receive a fair punishment? Will this hurt them much moving forward? What do you guys think?
Comments
Weak Sauce NCAA. It should have been a 3 year bowl ban and a TV ban. This was worse than USC, and USC was pretty bad.
#UNC Alum Here
I'm not as terribly upset with the NCAA as I am the previous coaching staff and players. It's obvious that some players and parts of the coaching staff thought that they were bigger than the "rules." As a recent grad from Chapel Hill, I was disgusted with the way that Thorp handled Butch's firing. Yes Coach Davis prolly deserved to be fired, but doing this one week prior to the start of fall practice is egregious. But you know what, the best teams, accept their mistakes and sanctions and move on to fight another day; on the field and in the class room.
I hope that this team and this program start playing to their ability and start playing with some stank in their ass. I hope that Coach Fedora can coach half as well as he can talk. I hope that we use this season they way that USC did last year: Paving the way for excellence post-ban.
Can't wait to see Hokie Nation invade Chapel Hill in October. Y'all have been good to my family(10+ relatives who are grads and lil' bro a freshman living in Pritchard) and good to me.
WFP
This is about what I expected
USC got the hammer dropped on them because they didn't cooperate with the NCAA. While UNC's misconduct was worse than what happened at OSU, you also have to recall that they weren't explicitly lied to by representatives of the school.
While the penalties aren't stiff enough to really discourage cheating, I do think these sanctions will have a significant impact on UNC. They aren't OSU or USC who can get virtually any recruit they want. The scholarship restrictions and bowl ban will also hurt as they bring in a new coaching staff. I wonder how some of their more recent recruits (Hughes and Williams in particular) feel after seeing this news?
Let's cheat!
What this says to me is that cheating pays.
We've seen the proof that you can cheat and pretty much get away with it. The only victim here are the players who miss out on a bowl this year. If you're a senior, been there done that. If you're a freshman, just play hard in '13 and you'll be bowling in no time!
USC received a much harsher penalty and they'll be among the nation's best teams this year. UNC's young talent isn't going anywhere. They'll be one of the top teams in the conference next year and will be right back in title hunt the year after with a veteran Renner or Williams under center.
This is a joke. But it has led me to a plan that I think Stinespring haters will love:
Let's give Stiney a cheating budget of, say, $100k. Nothing too crazy, but enough to get some heads turning. Then we sent Stiney out to blue chippers who aren't considering us. Stiney shows up at the door with a few Christmas hams (read: cash), then we start getting the big fish like everyone else.
When it all comes crashing down, we fire Stiney and the kids we brought on board illegally will miss a bowl or two, but they'll be chillin up in Kent Square, ready to bring down more titles when the sanctions are lifted.
When probation ends, we give the next cheating budget to Newsome and have him go at it.
It's too easy!!
I don't think
UNC will be bringing in any championships anytime soon. But I see your point. Top-tier schools such as USC, tOSU, and Miami will probably be unaffected by post-season bans and scholarship reductions. I do think, if VT were to get involved in a cheating scandal, it would hurt the program, since a loss of scholarships would really hurt how VT recruits (many 3 stars, hope one hits and develop him). Also, VT's brand is not as recognizable as USC, tOSU, etc, so losing exposure in the post-season would hurt.
I think UNC will struggle, they hired a no-name coach (in terms of national recognition) and probably won't attract the top recruits they had achieved in the height of the Davis era. It's not like they have Lane Kiffin or Urban Meyer who are so recognizable, that even my wife even knows who they are. I guess we'll see how it goes.
Whatever
What UNC did was pretty bad, but punishing them into oblivion does nothing positive for the conference or even football. Let's be honest; UNC is one of the flagship schools of the conference whether we like it or not. Their improvement is the improvement of the conference.
They cooperated with the NCAA, got rid of the coaches responsible, and the negative PR they received hurt as well. I think this punishment is satisfactory. The real problem is that the NCAA has no teeth when it comes to runners and agents. That's where A LOT of these problems stem from. When they can find a way to keep those types in check then things will be better.
Now Miami, on the other hand. They deserve the full wrath of the NCAA.
Flagship university you say?
LMAO That's great.
It's already hurt their recruiting
And it'll continue to do so. It should be harsher especially with the post season ban. The scholarship reduction seems bout right I suppose.
USC is certainly looking good coming out of their probation but theyre USC, theyre an elite program nationally who just have kids fall in their laps. This is Carolina we're talking here, they are a basketball school. I look for them to fall off some, but the bar never got raised tremendously high during the previous regime even with all those blue chip recruits.
And werent Heel fans the ones saying we were gonna tarnish the good name of the ACC with our thug team and drunken hillbilly fans?
Football Only
Since these penalties are against the football program, UNC could care less. UNC is a number one seed and that is all they and the ACC care about. Damn you, F$U, for ruining a 3rd matchup of Duke and UNC in the #ACCChampionshipBasketballGameInAtlanta. Someone said any news is good news, so the basketball team is happy with this light sentence for the football dudes. Funny how UNC fines themselves 50K, which is accepted yet they still receive the pooled bowl money. Great to see the FNCAA fixes that problem and has a punishment scheme that a Harvard mathematics professor couldn't figure out.