|
Post by BubbleVisionBiff on Oct 22, 2014 12:34:56 GMT -5
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,379
|
Post by SSHoya on Oct 22, 2014 12:35:35 GMT -5
|
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,775
|
Post by njhoya78 on Oct 22, 2014 12:52:49 GMT -5
Maybe ACC really stands for Any Course Considered.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Oct 22, 2014 13:38:04 GMT -5
Athletes Coddled Consistently
|
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,775
|
Post by njhoya78 on Oct 22, 2014 17:03:40 GMT -5
Trying not to hijack this thread, but here's more on the allegations of academic fraud at Chapel Hill:
Brad Wolverton @bradwolverton · 4h 4 hours ago Basketball player enrollment in bogus classes, by coach: Dean Smith, 54; Bill Guthridge, 17; Matt Doherty, 42; Roy Williams, 167.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2014 17:14:09 GMT -5
Trying not to hijack this thread, but here's more on the allegations of academic fraud at Chapel Hill: Brad Wolverton @bradwolverton · 4h 4 hours ago Basketball player enrollment in bogus classes, by coach: Dean Smith, 54; Bill Guthridge, 17; Matt Doherty, 42; Roy Williams, 167. My goodness Roy… That looks like every player you coached and a couple Ball Boys also… WTH
|
|
ksf42001
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 901
|
Post by ksf42001 on Oct 22, 2014 17:17:47 GMT -5
Trying not to hijack this thread, but here's more on the allegations of academic fraud at Chapel Hill: Brad Wolverton @bradwolverton · 4h 4 hours ago Basketball player enrollment in bogus classes, by coach: Dean Smith, 54; Bill Guthridge, 17; Matt Doherty, 42; Roy Williams, 167. That's crazy, he's only been the coach since 2003. This has to count players more than once who took multiple fake classes.
|
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,775
|
Post by njhoya78 on Oct 22, 2014 17:37:05 GMT -5
My guess is that this is expressed in terms of player courses, as compared to simply the number of players taking fake classes. It would work out, though, for Williams to better than 16 courses per season, or better than one per player each season. Arguably, we could then assume that several Tar Heels enrolled in more than one such course each year, as I would have to think (perhaps optimistically) that there was at least one player who did not take any such courses.
|
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,775
|
Post by njhoya78 on Oct 22, 2014 17:57:43 GMT -5
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Oct 22, 2014 19:04:47 GMT -5
I once heard Manson say that Bundy was a way worse serial killer so maybe the Orange folks have a point here...
|
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,775
|
Post by njhoya78 on Oct 22, 2014 20:17:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Oct 23, 2014 9:49:39 GMT -5
They're in big trouble. This is now front page of cnn.com-worthy national news. Rightly or not, the NCAA is quite susceptible to public pressure and ridicule (particularly given all the legal trouble the NCAA is facing), and this all goes to one of the core pillars of the "student-athlete" argument. This isn't one kid making some bucks from autographs; this is an entire athletics program disregarding the "student" part of the equation, and over an extended period of time. How the NCAA cannot look at the pervasiveness and decide that this doesn't constitute a lack of institutional control worthy of severe sanctions is beyond me. But obviously they've made head-scratching decisions before.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,776
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Oct 23, 2014 10:30:47 GMT -5
They're in big trouble. This is now front page of cnn.com-worthy national news. Rightly or not, the NCAA is quite susceptible to public pressure and ridicule (particularly given all the legal trouble the NCAA is facing), and this all goes to one of the core pillars of the "student-athlete" argument. This isn't one kid making some bucks from autographs; this is an entire athletics program disregarding the "student" part of the equation, and over an extended period of time. How the NCAA cannot look at the pervasiveness and decide that this doesn't constitute a lack of institutional control worthy of severe sanctions is beyond me. But obviously they've made head-scratching decisions before. But that's the problem--the NCAA can adjudicate based on its manual, but what NCAA rule did UNC violate? Otherwise, it's the kind of subjective and punitive overreach so blatantly misused in the Penn State case. Joe Paterno violated no NCAA rule and this had wins taken away for no other reason that it looked to be "the right thing to do", though none of the players themselves were in violation of any NCAA action. Taken to its extreme, NCAA sanctions would become little more than a tool of societal outrage.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,783
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Oct 23, 2014 10:32:37 GMT -5
No one's in big trouble.
The NCAA has been hesitant for a while now to punish big (read: football) schools with anything truly substantial. If this was SUNY-Stony Brook or something, they'd be in trouble. But unless it turns into a PR disaster for the NCAA (like the PSU mess), the penalties will likely be minor, especially for Aw Shucks Roy. Yeah, the football program may get banned from a bowl for a year and lose scholarships for a few, but it won't touch basketball, I bet.
The Football Schools have leverage of the NCAA, which was never particularly interested in hurting its cash cow, but it definitely won't, now.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,783
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Oct 23, 2014 11:14:16 GMT -5
They're in big trouble. This is now front page of cnn.com-worthy national news. Rightly or not, the NCAA is quite susceptible to public pressure and ridicule (particularly given all the legal trouble the NCAA is facing), and this all goes to one of the core pillars of the "student-athlete" argument. This isn't one kid making some bucks from autographs; this is an entire athletics program disregarding the "student" part of the equation, and over an extended period of time. How the NCAA cannot look at the pervasiveness and decide that this doesn't constitute a lack of institutional control worthy of severe sanctions is beyond me. But obviously they've made head-scratching decisions before. But that's the problem--the NCAA can adjudicate based on its manual, but what NCAA rule did UNC violate? Otherwise, it's the kind of subjective and punitive overreach so blatantly misused in the Penn State case. Joe Paterno violated no NCAA rule and this had wins taken away for no other reason that it looked to be "the right thing to do", though none of the players themselves were in violation of any NCAA action. Taken to its extreme, NCAA sanctions would become little more than a tool of societal outrage. I think it could be easily argued that UNC allowed academically ineligible players to play.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Oct 23, 2014 11:30:26 GMT -5
But that's the problem--the NCAA can adjudicate based on its manual, but what NCAA rule did UNC violate? Otherwise, it's the kind of subjective and punitive overreach so blatantly misused in the Penn State case. Joe Paterno violated no NCAA rule and this had wins taken away for no other reason that it looked to be "the right thing to do", though none of the players themselves were in violation of any NCAA action. Taken to its extreme, NCAA sanctions would become little more than a tool of societal outrage. I think it could be easily argued that UNC allowed academically ineligible players to play. SF beat me to it. But yes that would be the most direct violation. And then there'd be a very easy case for "failure to monitor" or, worse, for "lack of institutional control" if the internal compliance folks weren't following their protocols. I agree with you, DFW, that the NCAA shouldn't be in the business of enforcing societal norms and what they did to PSU was, in my view, out and out wrong. But that's not what this is. This is an institution that systematically encouraged its athletes to take fraudulent courses. That goes to eligibility, and from a public relations standpoint, it puts the lie to the entire "student-athlete" image that is at the core of the (now eroded) NCAA myth. SF, we'll have to agree to disagree on how hard the NCAA comes down on them. I think they'll feel they need to act. The bulk of the sanction may well be directed at football, but I'm guessing, at a minimum, there's a minor postseason ban for basketball.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Oct 23, 2014 11:33:54 GMT -5
But that's the problem--the NCAA can adjudicate based on its manual, but what NCAA rule did UNC violate? Otherwise, it's the kind of subjective and punitive overreach so blatantly misused in the Penn State case. Joe Paterno violated no NCAA rule and this had wins taken away for no other reason that it looked to be "the right thing to do", though none of the players themselves were in violation of any NCAA action. Taken to its extreme, NCAA sanctions would become little more than a tool of societal outrage. I think it could be easily argued that UNC allowed academically ineligible players to play. Presumably, the NCAA would come down on UNC basketball the same way (if not harsher, since this involved so many other players) that it came down on Memphis because of Derrick Rose's SAT. Also, the Gophers lost their Final Four and scholarships b/c of an academic scholarship (the difference, of course, being that Clem Haskins wasn't smart enough to avoid being directly involved) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Minnesota_basketball_scandal#NCAA
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Oct 24, 2014 8:31:34 GMT -5
|
|
seaweed
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,670
|
Post by seaweed on Oct 24, 2014 9:25:00 GMT -5
I don't see how you call it lack of institutional control when they were doing exactly what they wanted to do;-)
|
|
|
Post by matersammich on Oct 24, 2014 10:04:26 GMT -5
I don't see how you call it lack of institutional control when they were doing exactly what they wanted to do;-) Agree. I picture lack of institutional control as turning a blind eye to boosters handing out cars and sacks of money to players. This is different.
|
|