Cusefan0307
Red recruits the ACC!
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2011
- Messages
- 44,939
- Like
- 126,521
That was for the academic side of UNC-CHeat's not controlling the AFAM Dep.'t. and the "pick a grade" manner in which the courses were run. You could almost look at that as the signal to the NCAA to drop the hammer. IIRC, there are only two punishments, the 1-year probation (to give you time to clean up the mess) and pulling accreditation (which is the death penalty because all Federal funding to anything and anybody is stopped). Auburn and we were put on probation because of trustees' attempts to fire our presidents. The Auburn meddling was so bad they nearly lost accreditation which would have caused chaos in the SEC on top of the Federal money stuff.I don't know how all of that stuff works but it seems to be a premature punishment. And a very light one.
Rechon Black could decommit. He is a 6'7" 4/5 star guard.
Am I correct that the 1992-93 title is not in jeopardy? Can you imagine if they vacated that win? The 1993 championship game would no longer exist.Nope, and "eligibility" is code for vacating wins. After 18 years ... lots of trophies might be going up on E-Bay.
The NCAA has an obligation to enforce rules consistently. Unfortunately, when the UNC investigation broke and Emmert issued his famous "wheelhouse" quote, it appeared that consistency was out the window and UNC was going to be given a free pass. More recently, the COI has has taken a much harder line -- a U-turn from Emmert's circular reasoning. This is good news, and is (depending on the ultimate penalty) a pleasant departure from an era of arbitrary and capricious decisions that has made the COI infamous. If SU players receiving footnote help were kept eligible through excessive academic assistance, then a school giving away whole courses should be held to the same standard ... and penalized on the scale of its violations. Unlike SU's (isolated incidents), UNC's excessive assistance was dispensed on a systemic scale, for 18 years. However, I haven't heard of any allegations going back as far as 25 years (to the season you mentioned).Am I correct that the 1992-93 title is not in jeopardy? Can you imagine if they vacated that win? The 1993 championship game would no longer exist.
Am I correct that the 1992-93 title is not in jeopardy? Can you imagine if they vacated that win? The 1993 championship game would no longer exist.
So it would be like Roy was never there. :rolling:I would guess if they start vacating it's going to be every game for those 17/18 years. They basically always had at least one ineligible guy.
So it would be like Roy was never there. :rolling: