NCAA finds no rules broken at UNC - wow

[REM08]

Title says it all.

On Aug. 23, 2012, University Counsel Leslie Strohm and Senior Associate Dean Jonathan Hartlyn provided an update to the enforcement staff. The NCAA staff reaffirmed to University officials that no NCAA rules appeared to have been broken.

http://blogs.fayobserver.com/accbask...e-in-a-review-

IMO, "lesser" schools would have vacated any wins that were affected by this scandal - and by "lesser" I really just mean that schools that don't wear the white hats. I also wonder if things wouldn't have played out differently had this event not followed on the heals of the NCAA crippling Penn State.

Gotta give the NCAA credit for something though. When they say that past rulings do not create precedent - they mean it. Like MLB with the steroid era, its hard for profit driven entities to come down hard on their most financially productive workers - so to speak. Especially when its schools like UNC that are pointed to as being beacons of light in the slimy world of college athletics.

Bruce Feldman tweets:

Bruce Feldman ‏@BFeldmanCBS

"The NCAA concludes ... " c'mon, whatever it wants to conclude.

Sports writer from the Louisville Courier Journal:

Kyle Tucker ‏@KyleTucker_CJ

Penn State fans are mad today. Probably some UK fans annoyed. But Florida State should be furious. UNC academic issues dwarfed the Noles'.

[InstiGATOR1]

Originally Posted by REM08

IMO, "lesser" schools would have vacated any wins that were affected by this scandal - and by "lesser" I really just mean that schools that don't wear the white hats. I also wonder if things wouldn't have played out differently had this event not followed on the heals of the NCAA crippling Penn State.

Did UNC treat athletes different than other students? Were the classes in question open to every student? Were athletes in the class treated differently than non-athletes?

The NCAA rules attempt to do three things:

1. prevent schools from giving recruits incentives to attend that above that agreed upon by member schools.

2. prevent schools from admitting student athletes with credentials below minimums agreed upon by member schools.

2. prevent schools from treating student athletes different than other students at their schools.

Did UNC do either of these things? From what little I have heard, I do not think so. So if a "lesser" school had exactly the same scandal, I suspect the findings would be the same.

You seem to want the athletic departments to dictate academic standards to the academic departments of the universities. I assure you the member schools of the NCAA most certainly do NOT want that.

[REM08]

Originally Posted by InstiGATOR1

Did UNC treat athletes different than other students? Were the classes in question open to every student? Were athletes in the class treated differently than non-athletes?

The NCAA rules attempt to do three things:

1. prevent schools from giving recruits incentives to attend that above that agreed upon by member schools.

2. prevent schools from admitting student athletes with credentials below minimums agreed upon by member schools.

2. prevent schools from treating student athletes different than other students at their schools.

Did UNC do either of these things? From what little I have heard, I do not think so. So if a "lesser" school had exactly the same scandal, I suspect the findings would be the same.

You seem to want the athletic departments to dictate academic standards to the academic departments of the universities. I assure you the member schools of the NCAA most certainly do NOT want that.

Insti, unless I'm thinking of someone else, you've already been proven incredibly, and thoroughly, wrong on this matter in another thread by multiple posters - all of whom emphatically disagreed with you. I also posted an article written by the compliance director at Ohio University who had this same scandal break out and was treated VERY differently than UNC has been. This article included quotes from the NCAA that directly contradict what you're saying. Read that last sentence again. The NCAA disagrees with you also. Yet, for some reason, you continue making the same inaccurate points - over and over again. Read the other thread. Lesser schools have had LESS apparent academic fraud and been forced to vacate wins.

Apparently you're onto something that none of these people are aware of:

Jay Bilas ‏@JayBilas

And NCAA wonders why it's a laughingstock?: http://bit.ly/O1bzUF Cue NCAA Prez to lecture on integrity, and who's "in charge."

Gregg Doyel ‏@GreggDoyelCBS

Had you told me UNC would get either A) death penalty or B) exonerated, I'd have picked A. Because B makes no sense

Jeff Goodman ‏@GoodmanCBS

Still trying to grasp the fact that NCAA announced no violations broken in UNC's academic scandal. Makes no sense.

[TheRaid]

So athletes can go to parties with agents and get stuff from them and not go to class and it is not against the rules. Can I be an athlete?

[InstiGATOR1]

Originally Posted by REM08

Apparently you're onto something that none of these people are aware of:

Of course I am much smarter and able to understand what is going on than ex-jocks and sports reporters. I thought that went without saying. Good grief, given their pack mentality, isn't most everyone?

[InstiGATOR1]

Originally Posted by TheRaid

So athletes can go to parties with agents and get stuff from them and not go to class and it is not against the rules. Can I be an athlete?

Of course they can go to parties with agents and get stuff from them. If the school finds out, they will be declared ineligible. But there is certainly nothing to stop anyone from going to any party they want to go to.

[STR8OUTDASWAMP1]

I don't see anything wrong with this ruling. If UNC was shown to not have sanctioned or have any knowledge of the wrongdoings, then why should they be punished?

[jmoliver]

they had FAKE classes for only athletes. I guess that is OK now.

[InstiGATOR1]

Originally Posted by jmoliver

they had FAKE classes for only athletes. I guess that is OK now.

They DID NOT. They had classes that included both athletes and not athlete where a professor did not uphold standards.

BTW, does the name Howard Appledorf mean anything to anyone here?

[REM08]

Originally Posted by InstiGATOR1

They DID NOT. They had classes that included both athletes and not athlete where a professor did not uphold standards.

BTW, does the name Howard Appledorf mean anything to anyone here?

It wasn't just one professor and it doesn't matter if the class is available to regular students as well. I see you still haven't read the other thread which includes the quote from an NCAA rep saying that IT DOESN'T MATTER IF A CLASS IS OPEN TO OTHER STUDENTS OR NOT. He goes onto say that what matters is whether or not the sports programs involved gained an advantage because of the existence of such classes. This was not a case of typical easy-jock classes either.

[REM08]

Originally Posted by STR8OUTDASWAMP1

I don't see anything wrong with this ruling. If UNC was shown to not have sanctioned or have any knowledge of the wrongdoings, then why should they be punished?

If this were the case, there would be a number of coaches out there without vacated wins. The NCAA calls their policy on this matter "strict liability" and it states that the school/program pays the price (usually vacated wins) for the participation of an ineligible player whether the there is ANY reason to suggest that they should have known about this ineligibility or not.

[InstiGATOR1]

Originally Posted by REM08

It wasn't just one professor and it doesn't matter if the class is available to regular students as well. I see you still haven't read the other thread which includes the quote from an NCAA rep saying that IT DOESN'T MATTER IF A CLASS IS OPEN TO OTHER STUDENTS OR NOT. He goes onto say that what matters is whether or not the sports programs involved gained an advantage because of the existence of such classes. This was not a case of typical easy-jock classes either.

Then the NCAA rep you are listening to is wrong or the reporter got the statement from the wrong. Your heavy dependence on reporters particularly sports reporters rather than thinking is doing you in yet again in this thread.

[tupacbiff]

Insti sorry but you are doing a poor job trying to save face. You were shredded in the other thread and wisely went away quietly. Now the NCAA pulls a ruling out that contradicts past rulings and their own rules and u claim to be right. I'll leave it simply that your arguments are all wrong and have been proven wrong so I'm not sure why u are arguing the same thing. Good day.

[your_perfect_enemy]

I don't know what to believe.. tupac and insti have both proclaimed to always be right and we're stupid not to listen to them, yet they're contradicting each other

[tupacbiff]

Originally Posted by your_perfect_enemy

I don't know what to believe.. tupac and insti have both proclaimed to always be right and we're stupid not to listen to them, yet they're contradicting each other

Easy. See the other thread.

[corpgator]

There's an SI article, which basically posits that UCONN should have set up classes like these to keep their APR up because that wouldn't have been wrong.

[philnotfil]

Jim Harrick wants his career back.

[GatorLurker]

Originally Posted by philnotfil

Jim Harrick wants his career back.

UGa was ashamed.

Apparently UNC is not.

[InstiGATOR1]

Originally Posted by tupacbiff

Insti sorry but you are doing a poor job trying to save face. You were shredded in the other thread and wisely went away quietly. Now the NCAA pulls a ruling out that contradicts past rulings and their own rules and u claim to be right. I'll leave it simply that your arguments are all wrong and have been proven wrong so I'm not sure why u are arguing the same thing. Good day.

I only came to this thread because again disinformation was being spread by a fan of one of the most infamously cheating programs in college basketball. Sure if I were a fan of UK, I would want UNC to be cheaters too. But no matter what I do in my class, the NCAA can not change my grades, can not change the credit hours students earn in my class and can not change what I chose to cover in my class. And no self respecting University would belong to an organization that wanted to assert such a power. How hard is this for you guys to understand???? I can understand why you guys are so clueless about the PSU sanction and why they happened, but surely this is easy enough?

Not going back to a thread to argue with people who believe sport writers are smart, informed, basically anything higher than a gerbil is not being shredded it is not arguing with people. So on that thread, I explained the correct situation to those who wanted to be informed and ignored the rest.

Read more: http://www.gatorcountry.com/swampgas...#ixzz25COC7kbl

Originally Posted by your_perfect_enemy

I don't know what to believe.. tupac and insti have both proclaimed to always be right and we're stupid not to listen to them, yet they're contradicting each other

Pretty funny, but a good rule of thumb is to believe me. Particularly when it is me or tupac.

[InstiGATOR1]

Originally Posted by philnotfil

Jim Harrick wants his career back.

Actually UGa was found to have provided improper benefits to a player. A wire transfer of $300 was what kicked off that investigation. In addition a member of the athletic department, ie Harrick's son who was covered by NCAA rules, was found to have given away grades in a class to athletes. And there were other violations.

Is it really surprising to you that the NCAA does have some ability to sanction a school based on classes taught by a coach but no ability to sanction a school base on classes taught by any other professor or instructor?