UNC Investigation

[mu03eng]

Which is exactly what I said the problem was going to be earlier in this topic. (See reply #9.)  It is simply a bigger issue than the NCAA's scope.

You aren't wrong, but it is pretty pathetic how the NCAA chooses to apply the involving athletics vs non-athletics standard.

[Herman Cain]

This author took a very hard stance on the issue.

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article93352282.html

[GGGG]

You aren't wrong, but it is pretty pathetic how the NCAA chooses to apply the involving athletics vs non-athletics standard.

It's a poorly run organization whose members are making out like bandits on television contracts. They have too broad a mission and too small a resource base to accomplish that mission.

[#UnleashSean]

I don't know how to feel. On one hand I hate UNC and really want to see them destroyed. On the other hand I hate the NCAA hypocrisy and really want to see UNC stick it to them.

[forgetful]

The NCAA should respond:

You are right, how you provide a BS education to 50% of the individuals is none of our business.  We will lead that to accreditors to rule on and the courts for any students that think that this cheapens their degree and that they should be financially compensated for any potential losses in academic value.

But it is our business to make sure the 50% of athletes are getting a proper education.  Our response is to ban football and basketball from any competition for the next 3 years.  All athletes can transfer immediately without penalty.

[Dawson Rental]

You aren't wrong, but it is pretty pathetic how the NCAA chooses to apply the involving athletics vs non-athletics standard.

I agree that the NCAA isn't in business to penalize UNC for having a bogus academic course of study.  But can't they penalize UNC's athletic department for knowingly steering athletes toward those classes? 

If the NCAA is looking for an out (as clearly they were in 2012), they got it.  I wonder if the presence of non-athletes in these classes was orchestrated by UNC just for the purpose of giving them this out when the NCAA came calling.  Shouldn't that make this even worse?

[Dr. Blackheart]

So less than 1% of UNC students are student-athletes, but they represented 47% of the students in these scam courses?  It would seem that the NCAA should be interested in that ratio.

Let's face it, this is fraud and the defense is weak.  If UNC skates, the NCAA is severely weakened morally, legally and as a governing body. Certainly, there is already a civil element to this case, but one could argue a criminal one revolving the university's charter. Will that happen? Not likely but the UNC defense could be perilous for other reasons than NCAA sanctions for the can of worms. 

[GGGG]

But it is our business to make sure the 50% of athletes are getting a proper education.

I'm not necessarily sure that I am comfortable giving the NCAA the authority to ensure that "athletes are getting a proper education."

[mu03eng]

I'm not necessarily sure that I am comfortable giving the NCAA the authority to ensure that "athletes are getting a proper education."

To be fair, I'm not comfortable giving the NCAA authority to do anything but we have to give them something to do and determining the basic academic requirements for student athletes has to be a relative layup compared to the rest of the stuff they bungle.

[StillAWarrior]

I view UNC's defense here much in the same way that Kentucky defends their basketball dorm (which, incidentally, has not been considered a violation): "it's not an impermissible benefit because it's open to non-basketball students."  Right....

I'm guessing the percentage of non-athletes in these bogus classes is probably quite a bit higher than the percentage of non-athletes in that dorm.

[GGGG]

To be fair, I'm not comfortable giving the NCAA authority to do anything but we have to give them something to do and determining the basic academic requirements for student athletes has to be a relative layup compared to the rest of the stuff they bungle.

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. 

[warriorchick]

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.

Has UNC decided that any potential hits to their academic accreditation status is outweighed by the benefit to their athletic program?

[warriorchick]

I view UNC's defense here much in the same way that Kentucky defends their basketball dorm (which, incidentally, has not been considered a violation): "it's not an impermissible benefit because it's open to non-basketball students."  Right....

I'm guessing the percentage of non-athletes in these bogus classes is probably quite a bit higher than the percentage of non-athletes in that dorm.

A bogus degree is not an "impermissable benefit".

[GGGG]

Has UNC decided that any potential hits to their academic accreditation status is outweighed by the benefit to their athletic program?

I have no idea.  Nor do I particularly care.

[warriorchick]

So less than 1% of UNC students are student-athletes, but they represented 47% of the students in these scam courses?  It would seem that the NCAA should be interested in that ratio.

Let's face it, this is fraud and the defense is weak.  If UNC skates, the NCAA is severely weakened morally, legally and as a governing body. Certainly, there is already a civil element to this case, but one could argue a criminal one revolving the university's charter. Will that happen? Not likely but the UNC defense could be perilous for other reasons than NCAA sanctions for the can of worms.

The reality is that the program was set up for athletes. If other students were stupid or naive enough to enroll in it, all the better (in the University's eyes).

[StillAWarrior]

A bogus degree is not an "impermissable benefit".

Not under the NCAA's rules -- or at least their rules before they made some changes earlier this year.  As I understand it, the concept of "impermissible benefit" relates to whether athletes receive benefits that other students don't receive.  UNC's defense in this case essentially boils down to, "all students were able to obtain a bogus degree, so this was not an impermissible benefit to our athletes."

You and I can be amazed that UNC has sold its soul as a degree-granting institution to this extent.  But that's what the rule is about.  It really does boggle the mind that a once-proud institution chose, "but we give out lots of bogus degrees" as its defense to protect its athletics program.

They already took the hit with their accrediting board.  They were on probation for a year due to the fact that they were running a bogus program, but that probation has ended and they're in good standing now.

[WarriorInNYC]

I agree that the NCAA isn't in business to penalize UNC for having a bogus academic course of study.  But can't they penalize UNC's athletic department for knowingly steering athletes toward those classes? 

This is the key for me.  Its one thing if there were bogus classes and some athletes found out about it and took them, because why wouldn't you.

But as others have pointed out with the extremely high ratios of athletes attending these classes compared to the ratio of athletes on campus, if the athletic dept steered athletes to these courses, then I think thats where it becomes a big issue.

[GGGG]

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. 

[StillAWarrior]

The reality is that the program was set up for athletes. If other students were stupid or naive enough to enroll in it, all the better (in the University's eyes).

Not only was it, "all the better," but it was absolutely vital to the defense that UNC is putting forward.  One wonders if that was the plan all along or whether it was just a "happy accident" for UNC.

Again, it's like the Kentucky basketball dorm.  Everyone knows that the over-the-top facility was constructed for the basketball team.  But since a very limited number of non-athletes (i.e., 16 - of an enrollment of 30,000+) get to live there with the basketball team, it's not an impermissible benefit under NCAA rules.

[mu03eng]

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.

Take a look at the crap around the remote camps that went on this summer. We're banning them because the $EC doesn't like them, oh wait Jim Harbaugh is upset well then I guess they are ok....wait small conferences don't like them, well maybe we should reconsider.

The NCAA is a $hit$how of an organization that has a myriad of conflicting directives, constituencies, and competency levels. The ultimate goal for them is to keep the money rolling in, which ultimately I don't have any issue with, just don't cloak yourself in the auspices of wanting to promote the student in student-athlete.

[GGGG]

Take a look at the crap around the remote camps that went on this summer. We're banning them because the $EC doesn't like them, oh wait Jim Harbaugh is upset well then I guess they are ok....wait small conferences don't like them, well maybe we should reconsider.

The NCAA is a $hit$how of an organization that has a myriad of conflicting directives, constituencies, and competency levels. The ultimate goal for them is to keep the money rolling in, which ultimately I don't have any issue with, just don't cloak yourself in the auspices of wanting to promote the student in student-athlete.

Right.  That's kind of my point here.  I don't think the academic eligibility or progress issue has lead to much of anything other than a mentality that college admission and progress is a series of low hurdles that athletes have to jump to retain eligibility.  And at the end they are left with...what exactly?  Yeah a degree, but one without many of the soft skills they really need to utilize it in the end.

So instead of having a bunch of rules with questionable value, I would rather have less and live with the results.  Of course I have always been kind of an anarchist in that way. 

[mu03eng]

Right.  That's kind of my point here.  I don't think the academic eligibility or progress issue has lead to much of anything other than a mentality that college admission and progress is a series of low hurdles that athletes have to jump to retain eligibility.  And at the end they are left with...what exactly?  Yeah a degree, but one without many of the soft skills they really need to utilize it in the end.

So instead of having a bunch of rules with questionable value, I would rather have less and live with the results.  Of course I have always been kind of an anarchist in that way.

Listen, no one hates bureaucracy more than me. If the argument is to get the NCAA out of all of this crap, you and I are in violent agreement. The issue though is the NCAA has inserted itself into all of this academic stuff but then decides not to engage on an obvious issues in their assumed scope of oversite....they need to be called on their hypocrisy.

[GGGG]

Listen, no one hates bureaucracy more than me. If the argument is to get the NCAA out of all of this crap, you and I are in violent agreement. The issue though is the NCAA has inserted itself into all of this academic stuff but then decides not to engage on an obvious issues in their assumed scope of oversite....they need to be called on their hypocrisy.

What is the NCAA?  Among other things, it is an organization set up by members to police its members.  (And then not really given the resources necessary to do a competent job.)  So while we can point out the hypocrisy of UNC getting away with something, while they hypothetically throw the book at North Carolina A&T, the fact is that the people who created this mess don't seem to be particularly concerned.  And the reason they aren't concerned is that they know we will still have our television sets on, that we will still buy the tickets, and still purchased the licensed clothing. 

I guess I'm just over the whole NCAA criticism.  We can criticize them all we want but it's not going to make much of a difference because the members, especially those who control most of the resources, are by and large getting off scott free. 

[Spotcheck Billy]

Don't forget that the NCAA is facing a lawsuit concerning paying athletes and has always claimed that an education is part of the bargain. I think if they let UNC skate on a technicality it's going to really hurt them in that court case. 

[mu03eng]

What is the NCAA?  Among other things, it is an organization set up by members to police its members.  (And then not really given the resources necessary to do a competent job.)  So while we can point out the hypocrisy of UNC getting away with something, while they hypothetically throw the book at North Carolina A&T, the fact is that the people who created this mess don't seem to be particularly concerned.  And the reason they aren't concerned is that they know we will still have our television sets on, that we will still buy the tickets, and still purchased the licensed clothing. 

I guess I'm just over the whole NCAA criticism.  We can criticize them all we want but it's not going to make much of a difference because the members, especially those who control most of the resources, are by and large getting off scott free.

Entirely fair, if we continue to pump money into the NCAA by watching their "product" we get the organization we deserve.