UNC academic scandal: NCAA reportedly finds no rules broken

[CTWarrior]

http://tracking.si.com/2012/08/31/unc-academic-scandal-ncaa/?sct=cb_t2_a3

I guess a t-shirt and a ride are worse than many years of provable academic fraud

[mu03eng]

http://tracking.si.com/2012/08/31/unc-academic-scandal-ncaa/?sct=cb_t2_a3

I guess a t-shirt and a ride are worse than many years of provable academic fraud

This is why I don't buy the whole post-JoePa era nonsense.  The NCAA is merely a PR machine, as long as we avoid major issues we're good to go.

Edit: The above sounds callous and dismissive.  I really just mean that as long as we do our best to obey the rules with the occasional mis-step we'll be fine.

[brewcity77]

I'm disgusted. UNC should be barred from multiple postseasons and be facing full-scale probation for years based on what they did. Truly appalling that the NCAA won't crack down on them just because they are one of their darlings.

[IrwinFletcher]

Agreed.  And this is from one of the finest academic institutions in our Country.  Yet winning football games has become more important.

[Dawson Rental]

http://tracking.si.com/2012/08/31/unc-academic-scandal-ncaa/?sct=cb_t2_a3

I guess a t-shirt and a ride are worse than many years of provable academic fraud

After extensive review of all current NCAA rules it was discovered that the NCAA neglected to pass a rule forbidding prostitution of a school's academic mission to athletics.  Evidently, the NCAA just figured out that such a rule is required.

What would be nice to see is any accrediting association that has accredited North Carolina University starting an investigation.

[forgetful]

The reason no NCAA rules were violated, is because the NCAA has no rules against academic fraud or cheating on the part of the students.

The only way it is a violation is if UNC, knowingly promoted fraud or cheating by the athletes.  Supposedly, they were unaware of the fraud/cheating and hence were not responsible for any of it.

It can be likened to a situation where the Basketball players, lets call them a fraternity, had a cabinet full of old tests/term papers and the athletes on their own accessed those files to turn them in as their own work.  Although cheating, the University has nothing to do with that and hence is not culpable in the fraud.

If one could definitively prove that the athletes were steered towards those courses by the administration then we would have a violation.

[Dawson Rental]

The reason no NCAA rules were violated, is because the NCAA has no rules against academic fraud or cheating on the part of the students.

The only way it is a violation is if UNC, knowingly promoted fraud or cheating by the athletes.  Supposedly, they were unaware of the fraud/cheating and hence were not responsible for any of it.

It can be likened to a situation where the Basketball players, lets call them a fraternity, had a cabinet full of old tests/term papers and the athletes on their own accessed those files to turn them in as their own work.  Although cheating, the University has nothing to do with that and hence is not culpable in the fraud.

If one could definitively prove that the athletes were steered towards those courses by the administration then we would have a violation.

It's interesting that the NCAA was able to so quickly make that determination.  It seems (to me anyways) like it would take some time to investigate whether that was true.

Thanks for filling in the background on how this could have been a violation.

[Lennys Tap]

Dodd/Frank has 2000 pages of regulations to make operating a small business in the financial sector a nightmare of paperwork, but when John Corzine takes customer money to pay for his high risk trades he walks because it's not illegal. The NCAA has a rulebook thicker than the New York City phonebook but "institutional control" doesn't include academic fraud. And those in charge wonder why people are cynical.

[jpvegas]

The reason no NCAA rules were violated, is because the NCAA has no rules against academic fraud or cheating on the part of the students.

The only way it is a violation is if UNC, knowingly promoted fraud or cheating by the athletes.  Supposedly, they were unaware of the fraud/cheating and hence were not responsible for any of it.

It can be likened to a situation where the Basketball players, lets call them a fraternity, had a cabinet full of old tests/term papers and the athletes on their own accessed those files to turn them in as their own work.  Although cheating, the University has nothing to do with that and hence is not culpable in the fraud.



If one could definitively prove that the athletes were steered towards those courses by the administration then we would have a violation.

The NCAA does not have any regulations against what happened at Penn State yet found reason to punish them quickly.  Actually if I was U Conn I would be madder.  They could have avoided probation by having their athletes get an A in some bogus independent study class to get a degree in some major created for athletes.

[CTWarrior]

The only way it is a violation is if UNC, knowingly promoted fraud or cheating by the athletes.  Supposedly, they were unaware of the fraud/cheating and hence were not responsible for any of it.

But it was UNC classes that were bogus.  How does the school not know it offers bogus classes?  Doesn't that fall under institutional control somehow?  These kids didn't cheat so much as they were put in classes where they didn't have to do anything.

[forgetful]

But it was UNC classes that were bogus.  How does the school not know it offers bogus classes?  Doesn't that fall under institutional control somehow.  These kids didn't cheat so much as tghey were put in classes where they didn't have to do anything.

I agree, I'm just sharing the actual rules.  The problem is for cheating/academic fraud, you have to prove they were aware of it.  The professor is the one at fault and it is really really hard to know if advisors and administrators were aware of the professors and the students fraud.

In my opinion there is enough red flags to say yes.  But definitively proving that is really hard.  An in relation to the Penn St, issue I really would rather not go there, but I'll at least add that there isn't as much public uproar about the UNC case.  If so they may relax the burden of proof.

[jmayer1]

Dodd/Frank has 2000 pages of regulations to make operating a small business in the financial sector a nightmare of paperwork, but when John Corzine takes customer money to pay for his high risk trades he walks because it's not illegal. The NCAA has a rulebook thicker than the New York City phonebook but "institutional control" doesn't include academic fraud. And those in charge wonder why people are cynical.

Don't enter your misconstrued political bias into an argument about NCAA discipline.

[Lennys Tap]

Don't enter your misconstrued political bias into an argument about NCAA discipline.

Nothing misconstrued or biased (or really political) in my post. The point is it's incredible how large organizations can write rules that cover the smallest bits of minutiae but evidently don't address areas of very bad behavior. Unless you're related to John Corzine or a North Carolina fan the analogy is pretty obvious

[brandx]

Nothing misconstrued or biased (or really political) in my post. The point is it's incredible how large organizations can write rules that cover the smallest bits of minutiae but evidently don't address areas of very bad behavior. Unless you're related to John Corzine or a North Carolina fan the analogy is pretty obvious

Your point may be correct, but jmayer was correct on calling you out. It was a juvenile political jab that we all understood (made all the easier because you've done it before.

But you're right about this and I'm always amazed how universities have their heads in the sand whenever these 'academic' issues arise - after all, they are 'academic' institutions and these would seem like common sense issues for a school to regulate and watch.

[MUMac]

Your point may be correct, but jmayer was correct on calling you out. It was a juvenile political jab that we all understood (made all the easier because you've done it before.

But you're right about this and I'm always amazed how universities have their heads in the sand whenever these 'academic' issues arise - after all, they are 'academic' institutions and these would seem like common sense issues for a school to regulate and watch.

Don't get your overly sensitive undies all bundled.  Corzine was not a public figure as CEO of MF Global. The comment had nothing to do with politics, but more to do with how a bureaucracy that over regulates could have a rule book so thick that no one can understand it, but cannot cover obvious infractions.  It doesn't matter at all what Corzine's public life was previously, to the comment that was made.

It's a good thing, though, that UNC did not give cream cheese with the bagels for their student athletes.  The NCAA would have had no choice but to come down hard on them!

[jmayer1]

Nothing misconstrued or biased (or really political) in my post. The point is it's incredible how large organizations can write rules that cover the smallest bits of minutiae but evidently don't address areas of very bad behavior. Unless you're related to John Corzine or a North Carolina fan the analogy is pretty obvious

Maybe I saw something that wasn't there, but Lenny=republican=hates anything passed under Obama=hates Dodd Frank=makes untrue statement about the level of paperwork required of small businesses in the financial sector.

Sorry if that wasn't your intent and I inferred too much. I agree that it is bs that Corzine will likely get off scot-free, although I don't think that there isn't rule to address what he did, I just think the investigators are buying a load of bull and don't have a backbone on this matter for some reason.

Mods--sorry to steer this thread into any type of a political debate.

[Lennys Tap]

Maybe I saw something that wasn't there, but Lenny=republican=hates anything passed under Obama=hates Dodd Frank=makes untrue statement about the level of paperwork required of small businesses in the financial sector.

Sorry if that wasn't your intent and I inferred too much. I agree that it is bs that Corzine will likely get off scot-free, although I don't think that there isn't rule to address what he did, I just think the investigators are buying a load of bull and don't have a backbone on this matter for some reason.

Mods--sorry to steer this thread into any type of a political debate.

J - no worries. The point I was trying to make was simple. Rulebooks that are thousands of pages long inevitably lead to two things - expensive compliance departments and occasional (frequent?) minor, usually inadvertent violations. When the powers that be (NCAA, justice department, whoever) conclude that really bad guys (Corzine or in this case UNC) are not guilty of wrongdoing it makes the people trying to keep up with all the rules a little cynical.

[jmayer1]

J - no worries. The point I was trying to make was simple. Rulebooks that are thousands of pages long inevitably lead to two things - expensive compliance departments and occasional (frequent?) minor, usually inadvertent violations. When the powers that be (NCAA, justice department, whoever) conclude that really bad guys (Corzine or in this case UNC) are not guilty of wrongdoing it makes the people trying to keep up with all the rules a little cynical.

Agreed.

[mu03eng]

I agree, I'm just sharing the actual rules.  The problem is for cheating/academic fraud, you have to prove they were aware of it.  The professor is the one at fault and it is really really hard to know if advisors and administrators were aware of the professors and the students fraud.

In my opinion there is enough red flags to say yes.  But definitively proving that is really hard.  An in relation to the Penn St, issue I really would rather not go there, but I'll at least add that there isn't as much public uproar about the UNC case.  If so they may relax the burden of proof.

Which is why the NCAA is a joke....they are governed by opinion polls.  And I find it laughable that the NCAA establishes what high school courses meet eligibility requirements but apparently does not govern college classes.....can someone explain to me what the C in NCAA means?

[Dawson Rental]

Which is why the NCAA is a joke....they are governed by opinion polls.  And I find it laughable that the NCAA establishes what high school courses meet eligibility requirements but apparently does not govern college classes.....can someone explain to me what the C in NCAA means?

congenial?

[mu03eng]

congenial?

I was thinking complicit

[muwarrior69]

I was thinking complicit

More like CABLETV