Here come the judge...

[Boozemon Barro]

It's far past time for players in revenue sports to be paid and non revenue sports to be transitioned into club sports. Some basic free market principles would eliminate most of these issues.

[muguru]

Scholarship reductions and show causes for the head coach also would work.

Not really...I mean say the reduce scholarships by 1 or two a year for 5 years. Who really needs a 12th and 13th scholarship anyway?? Post season bans are what teams really don't want...especially the UL's, KU's and Zona's of the world, and their fans. Hit them where it's going to hurt most.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Not really...I mean say the reduce scholarships by 1 or two a year for 5 years. Who really needs a 12th and 13th scholarship anyway?? Post season bans are what teams really don't want...especially the UL's, KU's and Zona's of the world, and their fans. Hit them where it's going to hurt most.

Teams have banned themselves from the post-season.  Unless you make it really lengthy, it's not going to change behavior.

Giving someone like Sean Miller a ten year show-cause penalty will get the message out that they aren't messing around.  It will show coaches that they are responsible for all aspects of their program.

Or do both.  Look what they did to Baylor after the Bliss scandal.

[Loose Cannon]

Ncaa had no jurisdiction in the North Carolina situation, thus they didn’t let Williams off because they couldn’t.

Have I got this right?  Because the NCAA had no Jurisdiction in this case, therefore the NCAA can not prohibit others schools from duplicating what North Caroline did.  Or has that situation been closed down? If so by who?

I'm implying you have the answers, but I'm trying to understand the current status of what can be done.  Thanks

[The Equalizer]

So if MU gets the Creighton loss back, can we raise the Big East banner?

No, because when a team vacates a win it doesn't change the result for the other team.

Creighton vacates the win, but we will still have the game as a loss.

[Cheeks]

It's far past time for players in revenue sports to be paid and non revenue sports to be transitioned into club sports. Some basic free market principles would eliminate most of these issues.

Good luck with Title IX on this.  Massive removal of opportunities for minorities and women in particular.  The total number of “revenue” sports....do you mean revenue, or do you mean profitable because many men’s basketball lower D1 programs are revenue generating but lose money.  Same for football.

[Cheeks]

Have I got this right?  Because the NCAA had no Jurisdiction in this case, therefore the NCAA can not prohibit others schools from duplicating what North Caroline did.  Or has that situation been closed down? If so by who?

I'm implying you have the answers, but I'm trying to understand the current status of what can be done.  Thanks

That is correct.  The NCAA is not an academic entity, it is a membership association for athletics.  The NCAA doesn’t get to dictate what courses schools offer in their curriculum, etc....and a reminder that the UNC courses were open to all students, not just athletes.  They have no jurisdiction in this.

MU has basketball physics we would call it.  Many players were in Comm school.  Other schools have players in Phys Ed.  Etc etc.

The NCAA cannot make that call and the members do not want their own governing body to make that call.  If the courses were open to only student athletes, I think more of an argument for NCAA involvement, but not a general course for all.

[connie]

Have I got this right?  Because the NCAA had no Jurisdiction in this case, therefore the NCAA can not prohibit others schools from duplicating what North Caroline did.  Or has that situation been closed down? If so by who?

I'm implying you have the answers, but I'm trying to understand the current status of what can be done.  Thanks

What the NCAA essentially found was that North Carolina's cheating was so widespread that it extended to the entire student population.  Since every student was allowed to take non-existent classes to improve their gpa's, the scam was not set up for the benefit of college athletes, and thus outside the scope of the ncaa's enforcement power. I have to tip my hat to NC's lawyers---sacrificing the academic reputation of the entire university to avoid penalties was truly inspired, and it hasn't seemed to hurt them a bit.

[Cheeks]

In past years (fairly distant past by now, unfortunately), the NCAA has widely used the "lack of institutional control" umbrella to penalize institutions.

IMHO, the kind of cheating that took place at UNC -- broad, borderline boastful, academic fraud -- is far worse than money getting spread around. Money goes against amateurism, which basically doesn't exist any more in big-time college athletics; academic fraud attacks the very heart of every university's mission.

That may be the case, but ultimately still comes down to what we want done and what can be done....two different things.

I could easily argue any school that offers courses on Disneyland, bowling, Skeet Shooting, etc, are also doing a disservice to their academic institution...but those courses exist at major universities.  As long as they are open to everyone and everyone is graded in the same fashion, there is nothing the NCAA can do.  As much as all of us wish we could.

As I said in another thread, this is human nature....give an inch take a mile.  This happens everywhere to varying degrees in business, govt, education, athletics, society at large.  Find the loophole and drive a truck through it.

If you want to ban the “sham” classes that is fine, but who decides?  Some of those sham classes at UNC were African American studies....cannot wait to see the huge can of worms that opens up if those classes are banned.  What is the criteria to determine what is a sham class and what isn’t?  And what resources will be dedicated to monitoring 1000’s of schools in the NCAA divisions?  At some point we have to hope schools are being honest, and the people involved with them.....but alas that isn’t always to be the case.  I just don’t understand the blame of the NCAA here...they have plenty of warts already, but this one isn’t on them.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I think whether or not the NCAA had jurisdiction isn't relevant to the question of whether or not what UNC did was squirmy

[Boozemon Barro]

Good luck with Title IX on this.  Massive removal of opportunities for minorities and women in particular.  The total number of “revenue” sports....do you mean revenue, or do you mean profitable because many men’s basketball lower D1 programs are revenue generating but lose money.  Same for football.

Profitable sports are commonly called revenue sports in this discussion. Title IX is obsolete as women attend college at a greater rate than men (Currently 56% women to 44% men enrolled). Women are more likely to graduate as well. Handing out scholarships to sports programs that lose money is no longer needed to break down a gender education gap. If the individual universities want to provide these scholarships they should be able to, but being required to do so in order to receive federal funding is silly in my opinion.

 The majority of scholarship men's basketball and football players at P6 universities are black. They are currently experiencing a massive removal of opportunity by having their value artificially capped by the NCAA. Even the intersectional woke scolds should be able to support these players being able to fully capitalize on their value.

I'm not in favor of forcing schools to pay players. I want the regulations against paying players removed. Market forces will take care of the rest.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Profitable sports are commonly called revenue sports in this discussion. Title IX is obsolete as women attend college at a greater rate than men (Currently 56% women to 44% men enrolled). Women are more likely to graduate as well. Handing out scholarships to sports programs that lose money is no longer needed to break down a gender education gap. If the individual universities want to provide these scholarships they should be able to, but being required to do so in order to receive federal funding is silly in my opinion.

Your opinion is silly in my opinion. Market forces as you put it would destroy all trace of women's sports at the university level.

The majority of scholarship men's basketball and football players at P6 universities are black. They are currently experiencing a massive removal of opportunity by having their value artificially capped by the NCAA. Even the intersectional woke scolds should be able to support these players being able to fully capitalize on their value.

I'm not in favor of forcing schools to pay players. I want the regulations against paying players removed. Market forces will take care of the rest.

I do agree with this to a point. Allow players to profit off their likeness and I think that addresses these concerns without destroying women's sports.

[Boozemon Barro]

Your opinion is silly in my opinion. Market forces as you put it would destroy all trace of women's sports at the university level.

I do agree with this to a point. Allow players to profit off their likeness and I think that addresses these concerns without destroying women's sports.

Women's sports wouldn't be destroyed, they'd become club sports.

Likeness rights should be obvious, but the real value of a player is when they're being heavily recruited by sports programs that make millions of dollars. These programs aggressively compete for these recruits by building multi-million dollar facilities and paying huge salaries for the best coaches they can get. Only restricting them from competing in player compensation is especially punitive to the players.

[Cheeks]

I think whether or not the NCAA had jurisdiction isn't relevant to the question of whether or not what UNC did was squirmy

Of course what they did was, the author of that statement knew that going in.

[Cheeks]

Your opinion is silly in my opinion. Market forces as you put it would destroy all trace of women's sports at the university level.

I do agree with this to a point. Allow players to profit off their likeness and I think that addresses these concerns without destroying women's sports.

Except as noted earlier the schools and Alumni will drive a truck through that and make matters even worse.  Profit off their likeness?  If I put Zion in a Centenary uniform is he worth more or less than a Duke uniform?  So exactly who is driving the profitability?  The player to some degree, but the platform has an enormous amount to do with it.  I love how so many think it is just the athlete...it simply isn’t the case (not suggesting you are saying this).

[Cheeks]

Profitable sports are commonly called revenue sports in this discussion. Title IX is obsolete as women attend college at a greater rate than men (Currently 56% women to 44% men enrolled). Women are more likely to graduate as well. Handing out scholarships to sports programs that lose money is no longer needed to break down a gender education gap. If the individual universities want to provide these scholarships they should be able to, but being required to do so in order to receive federal funding is silly in my opinion.

 The majority of scholarship men's basketball and football players at P6 universities are black. They are currently experiencing a massive removal of opportunity by having their value artificially capped by the NCAA. Even the intersectional woke scolds should be able to support these players being able to fully capitalize on their value.

I'm not in favor of forcing schools to pay players. I want the regulations against paying players removed. Market forces will take care of the rest.

You are in favor of destroying Marquette basketball, the idea of any Cinderella story ever again, as well as the NCAA tournament along with essentially saying these guys are pros and there for one reason.  That may be what you believe, but doesn’t make it reality.  Of course there are some kids there to do one thing and one thing only....play ball.  And many that are looking for balance of athletics and college experience.  That would be the result of your “market forces”.  You would also completely destroy women’s sports.  Completely.

People always want to throw money at the problem as if that cures it and the only solution.  Instead, this will have massive destructive results.     

[Boozemon Barro]

You are in favor of destroying Marquette basketball, the idea of any Cinderella story ever again, as well as the NCAA tournament along with essentially saying these guys are pros and there for one reason.  That may be what you believe, but doesn’t make it reality.  Of course there are some kids there to do one thing and one thing only....play ball.  And many that are looking for balance of athletics and college experience.  That would be the result of your “market forces”.  You would also completely destroy women’s sports.  Completely.

People always want to throw money at the problem as if that cures it and the only solution.  Instead, this will have massive destructive results.   

How do you figure? Loyola Chicago made a Final Four run with players that had zero interest from P6 schools. Actually every Cinderalla story is teams without high major talent making a magical run. The distribution of talent would remain largely the same. I think a school like Marquette could actually benefit since all our resources go to basketball. Almost all of the football schools would prioritize their football player budget over basketball. Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, etc. would still get all the elite basketball players, but maybe the price of the elite talent would get so high that a school like Marquette could compete financially for that next tier of player. Talent isn't the only factor for team success.

Women's sports, actually all sports outside of men's basketball and football, would go from scholarship sports that barely anyone watches or supports to club sports that barely anyone watches or supports. I don't believe these athletes deserve scholarships over regular students for playing a sport that loses their university money. There are thousands of college students paying their own way and playing club sports currently.

[Loose Cannon]

That is correct.  The NCAA is not an academic entity, it is a membership association for athletics.  The NCAA doesn’t get to dictate what courses schools offer in their curriculum, etc....and a reminder that the UNC courses were open to all students, not just athletes.  They have no jurisdiction in this.

MU has basketball physics we would call it.  Many players were in Comm school.  Other schools have players in Phys Ed.  Etc etc.

The NCAA cannot make that call and the members do not want their own governing body to make that call.  If the courses were open to only student athletes, I think more of an argument for NCAA involvement, but not a general course for all.

Thanks for your reply.  But I'm a little confused.  NC established the classes and I think the classes are currently closed, so NC started them and then close them down, but somewhere  in the middle they had no Jurisdiction of the classes.

I think there are six College accreditation agencies for the US and I don't think Colleges have to get prior approval before starting new classes.  What am I missing.  Is it then the Accreditation agency responsibility to monitor the class.
Thanks for your help.

[Cheeks]

Women's sports wouldn't be destroyed, they'd become club sports.

Likeness rights should be obvious, but the real value of a player is when they're being heavily recruited by sports programs that make millions of dollars. These programs aggressively compete for these recruits by building multi-million dollar facilities and paying huge salaries for the best coaches they can get. Only restricting them from competing in player compensation is especially punitive to the players.

By becoming club sports you have decimated them.  No scholarships and welcome to Title IX.   This is fantasy at this point.

Those multi million dollar facilities are built for teams that suck, too....that lose way more than they win...that lose money...so how does that equate to your story?   Yes, even the 300th ranked team in D1 plays in a multi million facility, but loses their ass in $$$$.

[MUDPT]

So if MU gets the Creighton loss back, can we raise the Big East banner?

Need to raise 2012 from Syracuse vacating.

[Cheeks]

Thanks for your reply.  But I'm a little confused.  NC established the classes and I think the classes are currently closed, so NC started them and then close them down, but somewhere  in the middle they had no Jurisdiction of the classes.

I think there are six College accreditation agencies for the US and I don't think Colleges have to get prior approval before starting new classes.  What am I missing.  Is it then the Accreditation agency responsibility to monitor the class.
Thanks for your help.

It definitely isn’t the NCAA’s jurisdiction, this is an academic issue not an athletic issue. 

The Southern Association of Schools and Colleges gave full accreditation in Dec 2017, 2 years after they were put on probation as a result of the various issues that were going on.  The accreditation lasts 10 years. 

The agency said some members wanted to drop their accreditation of the university. Probation was the harshest penalty that agency had given in 40 years.

Further complicating things, the NCAA membership (the universities) passed a rule that only a school can determine what is academic fraud, not the NCAA itself.  The foxes run the henhouse as it were, but the actual body of the ncaa in Indianapolis can only follow the rules and regs of their body membership.

[Cheeks]

How do you figure? Loyola Chicago made a Final Four run with players that had zero interest from P6 schools. Actually every Cinderalla story is teams without high major talent making a magical run. The distribution of talent would remain largely the same. I think a school like Marquette could actually benefit since all our resources go to basketball. Almost all of the football schools would prioritize their football player budget over basketball. Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, etc. would still get all the elite basketball players, but maybe the price of the elite talent would get so high that a school like Marquette could compete financially for that next tier of player. Talent isn't the only factor for team success.

Women's sports, actually all sports outside of men's basketball and football, would go from scholarship sports that barely anyone watches or supports to club sports that barely anyone watches or supports. I don't believe these athletes deserve scholarships over regular students for playing a sport that loses their university money. There are thousands of college students paying their own way and playing club sports currently.

Distribution of talent would likely be even more disparate.  Today, Loyola can compete to a degree with other schools.  You add another weapon into the arsenal regarding payment and the haves will do better than the have nots. 

I’m well aware of club sports.  My son wears the Marquette jersey proudly the last two years and travels to Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois, Indiana, etc on a nationally top 10 ranked MU club team.  And yes, we pay a lot of money to MU for tuition, room and board.  Those kids work hard, travel a bunch, no scholarships, all for pride of school and comraderie amongst the teammates.

That is far different than taking existing varsity D1 programs with scholarships and now they become non scholarship.  It will destroy those programs. You may not believe the woman’s tennis or lacrosse team players deserve scholarships, but they are representing the school and busting their ass.  This is a non starter politically, legally, and ethically.  Yes, it is socialism....but you aren’t going to be able to unwind this one.

[Hards Alumni]

Letting the biggest offenders and beneficiaries get away with it does the opposite of that. If their cheating continues to be rewarded, then it would encourage rather than deter such behavior.

You're changing the debate here.  You asked why SDNY would want to see Miller etc go down.  I wasn't responding as to if it would be effective.

[Uncle Rico]

Free The Bagmen

[Lennys Tap]

That is far different than taking existing varsity D1 programs with scholarships and now they become non scholarship.  It will destroy those programs. You may not believe the woman’s tennis or lacrosse team players deserve scholarships, but they are representing the school and busting their ass.  This is a non starter politically, legally, and ethically.  Yes, it is socialism....but you aren’t going to be able to unwind this one.

I'm with Boozeman. I don't think the men's OR women's tennis, lacrosse, golf (and other non revenue sports) "deserve" scholarships just because they represent the school and "bust their ass". Title IX may make it difficult (impossible?) to politically or legally "unwind this one", but why is this a non starter ethically? Not IMHO.