UNC Investigation

[Herman Cain]

I think this is a case that the NCAA does not necessarily want to win as it will open a can of worms with other schools.

[GGGG]

I think this is a case that the NCAA does not necessarily want to win as it will open a can of worms with other schools.

I agree with this analysis.

[forgetful]

Why?  I am all about the NCAA setting up the rules of play, putting together championships, and ensuring that recruitment practices are as above board as possible.

I have never been all that comfortable with the NCAA having anything to do with academic eligibility or any notion of academic progress.  That's for the schools to figure out.  If a school wants to bastardize their academics for the sake of athletics, that's an issue for their governing board and their accreditation body to oversee.

Everything that the NCAA has done in this regard is simply a series of check-marks and hoops to jump through.  I am not sure it has done the student athlete any good in the long run.  Has it lead to more degree earners?  Are those degree earners reaping the benefits of their degrees?  It just seems like a lot of window dressing to me for the sake of public relations.

No!  Absolutely No! to the schools determining this for themselves.  Athletes won't even be going to class anymore they will just be athletes.

[GGGG]

No!  Absolutely No! to the schools determining this for themselves.  Athletes won't even be going to class anymore they will just be athletes.

Well that may be. That's their decision to make and their consequences to live with.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

My armchair quarterback opinion on this is that in a perfect world the schools would police their own academics. Unfortunately, we live in a world where money is value over integrity, athletics over academics, and not having to go to class is considered a bonus by a majority of male college football and basketball players. Schools would have monetary incentives to create the lowest academic standards possible for their college athletes. Given that the greatest form of payment college athletes receive for all of their work is their tuition, it would create a system where players are even more taken advantage of then they are now. The NCAA policing academics is a necessary evil in order to ensure fair competitive play and students getting properly compensated for the revenue they generate for the school.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Well that may be. That's their decision to make and their consequences to live with.

What consequences do you think there will be?

[GGGG]

What consequences do you think there will be?

Accreditation and embarrassment.

I don't really care honestly. I don't think the NCAA should be cast as the great defender of the student athlete.

[forgetful]

Well that may be. That's their decision to make and their consequences to live with.

There would be no consequences, because there would be no governing body to disclose this to or oversee it.  They would just do it and pretend they are giving educations to kids.

Hell, they would even use those educations to support their mission and get grants saying they are providing to underprivileged students. 

Frankly, if there is no governing body making sure these kids are getting an education and that there are fierce punishments for breaking this rule, then there should be no college athletics period.

[mu03eng]

There would be no consequences, because there would be no governing body to disclose this to or oversee it.  They would just do it and pretend they are giving educations to kids.

Hell, they would even use those educations to support their mission and get grants saying they are providing to underprivileged students. 

Frankly, if there is no governing body making sure these kids are getting an education and that there are fierce punishments for breaking this rule, then there should be no college athletics period.

Is this a moral or a logistical argument.

Sultan is right....right now we are sitting in an ambiguous stance where we claim to care about athletes being students but then don't do anything to force them to be. Why have the pretense of requiring athletes to be successful students? If Alabama wants to put a bunch of kids on scholarship that can't spell can't and give them money to go to their school so be it. Wouldn't stop Harvard or Stanford or Cal or whoever from having their own academic standards and demanding their students meet them.

The current system in place is merely window dressing so people who watch college sports can feel morally clean when it comes to the value proposition for the people playing the games.

[GGGG]

Is this a moral or a logistical argument.

Sultan is right....right now we are sitting in an ambiguous stance where we claim to care about athletes being students but then don't do anything to force them to be. Why have the pretense of requiring athletes to be successful students? If Alabama wants to put a bunch of kids on scholarship that can't spell can't and give them money to go to their school so be it. Wouldn't stop Harvard or Stanford or Cal or whoever from having their own academic standards and demanding their students meet them.

The current system in place is merely window dressing so people who watch college sports can feel morally clean when it comes to the value proposition for the people playing the games.

Exactly.  The idea that somehow the NCAA is the moral defender of the student athlete is darn near close to laughable. 

[#UnleashSean]

My armchair quarterback opinion on this is that in a perfect world the schools would police their own academics. Unfortunately, we live in a world where money is value over integrity, athletics over academics, and not having to go to class is considered a bonus by a majority of male college football and basketball players. Schools would have monetary incentives to create the lowest academic standards possible for their college athletes. Given that the greatest form of payment college athletes receive for all of their work is their tuition, it would create a system where players are even more taken advantage of then they are now. The NCAA policing academics is a necessary evil in order to ensure fair competitive play and students getting properly compensated for the revenue they generate for the school.

Wouldn't like...  Getting paid work better?

[StillAWarrior]

Sultan, you're in higher education, right?  I'm not particularly well versed in the accreditation process, but aren't those boards the ones that are charged with ensuring that universities don't offer sham degrees?  I would think that the individuals employed by those boards have some qualifications/experience to make such assessments.  Perhaps that is hopelessly naive.  But it seems to me like the NCAA has already created a cluster f**k out of its attempts to oversee its own area of responsibility and supposed expertise.  I'm not sure they should expand their oversight responsibilities to include an area that would seem to be exponentially more complicated.

[forgetful]

Exactly.  The idea that somehow the NCAA is the moral defender of the student athlete is darn near close to laughable.

But it is more true than University administrations being the moral defender of the student athlete.

[forgetful]

Sultan, you're in higher education, right?  I'm not particularly well versed in the accreditation process, but aren't those boards the ones that are charged with ensuring that universities don't offer sham degrees?  I would think that the individuals employed by those boards have some qualifications/experience to make such assessments.  Perhaps that is hopelessly naive.  But it seems to me like the NCAA has already created a cluster f**k out of its attempts to oversee its own area of responsibility and supposed expertise.  I'm not sure they should expand their oversight responsibilities to include an area that would seem to be exponentially more complicated.

Accreditation organizations are a sham also.  UNC was put on probation, but their accreditation is not at risk, because they are taking steps to make sure this doesn't happen again. 

The thing about these accreditation organizations is that like the NCAA, they exist because the Universities permit them to exist.  Their are a number or accreditation organizations, none of whom place any restrictions on administration or have any requirements regarding courses, degrees etc. 

Its all BS that justifies more jobs and allows the administration to pat themselves not he back as doing a good job and if something goes wrong they have lengthy paperwork that they can use to pass the blame on to someone else.  In this case, the professor teaching all those classes and running the program.  Accreditation oversees educators, not administration.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Wouldn't like...  Getting paid work better?

Personally, I feel like their college tuition is more than adequate compensation. I think it would be a logistical nightmare to find a way to fairly compensate if we switched to paying players. I think it would also price athletics out of a lot of schools. I do think there is room for some sort of small stipend that is consistent across all schools to help with non academic expenses. I also think players should get compensated from sources like video games featuring them and camps where they instruct.

Of course this is all based on my very limited understanding of all this

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Accreditation and embarrassment.

I don't really care honestly. I don't think the NCAA should be cast as the great defender of the student athlete.

So no consequences. Because no university would ever go so far that their accreditation is at risk and they're would no embarrassment as long as the team kept winning.

I get the irony in casting the NCAA as the great defender of the student athlete. They are really bad at it. But they are the only ones doing it. A bad defender is better than no defender.

[GGGG]

Sultan, you're in higher education, right?  I'm not particularly well versed in the accreditation process, but aren't those boards the ones that are charged with ensuring that universities don't offer sham degrees?  I would think that the individuals employed by those boards have some qualifications/experience to make such assessments.  Perhaps that is hopelessly naive.  But it seems to me like the NCAA has already created a cluster f**k out of its attempts to oversee its own area of responsibility and supposed expertise.  I'm not sure they should expand their oversight responsibilities to include an area that would seem to be exponentially more complicated.

Yes and that's kind of my point.  The accreditation body for UNC already put them on probation.  Here is a story on that and how the University has had to respond.

http://college.usatoday.com/2015/06/11/unc-probation-accreditation-agency/

To me this is much more effective than NCAA standards that are simply window dressing.  While the changes got rid of the sham degree, it didn't get rid of the get them in, move them along and move them out mentality.  So we have created a system that seems like it adds legitimacy, but I'm not sure it does.

Put it this way, we like to tout when Marquette basketball players graduate.  However how many of them truly have gained the knowledge that allow them to use that degree?  How many of them retained that knowledge when working extensively with tutors?  How many of them end up in careers that require a college degree?

I would much rather have a system where schools are allowed to admit whomever they want, BUT guaranty them free attendance for life to attain their degree along with access to resources such as tutoring and career development.  (Not necessarily a basketball scholarship for four years though.)  So instead of throwing a bunch of resources at them simply to keep them eligible, use those resources to make sure they actually learn something.

[Benny B]

To me this is much more effective than NCAA standards that are simply window dressing.  While the changes got rid of the sham degree, it didn't get rid of the get them in, move them along and move them out mentality.  So we have created a system that seems like it adds legitimacy, but I'm not sure it does.

Perhaps, but using UNC's logic, "the mentality of get them in, move them along and move them out" applies to all students in higher education these days... not just student-athletes.

[mu03eng]

Personally, I feel like their college tuition is more than adequate compensation. I think it would be a logistical nightmare to find a way to fairly compensate if we switched to paying players. I think it would also price athletics out of a lot of schools. I do think there is room for some sort of small stipend that is consistent across all schools to help with non academic expenses. I also think players should get compensated from sources like video games featuring them and camps where they instruct.

Of course this is all based on my very limited understanding of all this

See, this exposes the flawed underpinning of all of this and requires us to do a whole bunch of mental gymnastics to rationalize everything.

We all love college sports, we pay big money to watch college sports. That money goes to universities and businesses associated with delivering the product we love to watch. The universities then "pay" their athletes in the form of free education and enhanced educational support. That makes us feel morally ok because we have altruistic outcomes (students get an "education") in addition to our self serving outcomes (we get to watch semi-pro football). However, since we've built this house of cards on "fairness" and "altuism" we must enforce the educational standards so the fault of the original construct isn't exposed(an education must be delivered or they aren't getting "paid")....ergo we police the education provided to the athletes, but not too hard because we might limit our ability to enjoy the product.

Yes there are net positives of the system (students get access to educational opportunities they otherwise wouldn't, big sports funding pays for small sports which act as feeder systems for olympic sports, etc) but the entire construct is a foundation of lies and self serving outcomes. The sooner we all either accept that we are part of the corruption and be ok with it or vow to eliminate the source of it we'll never escape this debate/conundrum.

[Spotcheck Billy]

Now I feel dirty and can not watch college sports any longer. Thanks for that mu03.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

See, this exposes the flawed underpinning of all of this and requires us to do a whole bunch of mental gymnastics to rationalize everything.

We all love college sports, we pay big money to watch college sports. That money goes to universities and businesses associated with delivering the product we love to watch. The universities then "pay" their athletes in the form of free education and enhanced educational support. That makes us feel morally ok because we have altruistic outcomes (students get an "education") in addition to our self serving outcomes (we get to watch semi-pro football). However, since we've built this house of cards on "fairness" and "altuism" we must enforce the educational standards so the fault of the original construct isn't exposed(an education must be delivered or they aren't getting "paid")....ergo we police the education provided to the athletes, but not too hard because we might limit our ability to enjoy the product.

Yes there are net positives of the system (students get access to educational opportunities they otherwise wouldn't, big sports funding pays for small sports which act as feeder systems for olympic sports, etc) but the entire construct is a foundation of lies and self serving outcomes. The sooner we all either accept that we are part of the corruption and be ok with it or vow to eliminate the source of it we'll never escape this debate/conundrum.

I guess I don't see it that way. To me it's simple business.

Universities make money off athletes. In exchange, athletes are given free education, room and board, enhanced academic support, coaching from the best in the business, free travel, and lots of exposure. NCAA regulates and takes a cut of the universities' money.

I don't see something based on altruism or fairness. I also don't see the need to do mental backflips to rationalize anything. I see a system where everyone benefits. Are there abuses? Sure and this should be addressed. Do the athletes deserve more? Possibly and that should be figured out. But I don't think the system is really that bad fur anyone involved.

[Dawson Rental]

Then the question becomes...did the athletic department know they were "bogus?"  Or simply that they were easier and worked well with athletes?  Because if it was simply the latter, every school has programs like that including my beloved alma mater.

Wait, wasn't it alleged that Dean Smith participated in starting these programs up for the purpose of having somewhere to direct his players?

[mu03eng]

I guess I don't see it that way. To me it's simple business.

Universities make money off athletes. In exchange, athletes are given free education, room and board, enhanced academic support, coaching from the best in the business, free travel, and lots of exposure. NCAA regulates and takes a cut of the universities' money.

I don't see something based on altruism or fairness. I also don't see the need to do mental backflips to rationalize anything. I see a system where everyone benefits. Are there abuses? Sure and this should be addressed. Do the athletes deserve more? Possibly and that should be figured out. But I don't think the system is really that bad fur anyone involved.

If that were the case, why do we have to have an enforcement agency to make sure the athletes are properly collecting their "pay" (going to class and getting grades etc). No one would run around and force an NFL players or Joe Blow to cash their check

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

If that were the case, why do we have to have an enforcement agency to make sure the athletes are properly collecting their "pay" (going to class and getting grades etc). No one would run around and force an NFL players or Joe Blow to cash their check

You're thinking about it wrong. Theyre not there to make sure athletes are collecting their pay. They are there to make sure the university is properly distributing that pay.

[NCMUFan]

UNC should just have it that you can pay for your degree.  No courses required.  Just have an asterisk after BA* or BS* to indicate it was bought.