Reply to thread | Syracusefan.com
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Chat
Football
Lacrosse
Men's Basketball
Women's Basketball
Media
Daily Orange Sports
ACC Network Channel Numbers
Syracuse.com Sports
Cuse.com
Pages
Football Pages
7th Annual Cali Award Predictions
2024 Roster / Depth Chart [Updated 8/26/24]
Syracuse University Football/TV Schedules
Syracuse University Football Commits
Syracuse University Football Recruiting Database
Syracuse Football Eligibility Chart
Basketball Pages
SU Men's Basketball Schedule
Syracuse Men's Basketball Recruiting Database
Syracuse University Basketball Commits
2024/25 Men's Basketball Roster
NIL
SyraCRUZ Tailgate NIL
Military Appreciation Syracruz Donation
ORANGE UNITED NIL
SyraCRUZ kickoff challenge
Special VIP Opportunity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Syracuse Athletics
Syracuse Football Board
UNC hearing / process explained
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="HtownOrange, post: 2271984, member: 622"] You are trying to be legalistic. However, the NCAA has "rules" to ensure "moral" behavior. Players "cannot" be paid by boosters, get jobs with boosters, get free stuff from boosters, etc.; just a sampling of the "moral" issues the NCAA guards against due to the efforts by others in the past to entice players to attend/play for said boosters' schools. Protecting a criminal is a legal issue, doing so is a moral issue, i.e. cheating, so, yes, the NCAA does have governance over the matter. What you are really arguing is that the NCAA bylaws don't have a specific rule stating that protecting a criminal coach/coordinator is a form a cheating when the &^$% should be in jail so the PedState incident is not in their "wheelhouse". Your argument falls flat on its face because protecting a criminal is a crime and is a cheat in the legal world; therefore, it is a cheat in the civil world, too. It also carries civil penalties on top of the criminal penalties and civil litigation requires only the preponderance of the evidence (50% plus anything). What you are saying is that using child molesters for recruiting and coaching is not cheating. If the NCAA is about protecting the student athlete, how can you claim they are protecting student athletes who are being recruited and coached at camps at young ages who are the prey of the molester/coach/recruiter? By your reasoning, why is the NCAA involved with Baylor? Furthermore, why would the NCAA investigate PedState when they knew there was no bylaw stating the exact violations occurred and knowing the issues were "not in their wheelhouse"? It appears that the NCAA was looking for an excuse to get out of the PedState mess. They will likely repeat with UNC and possibly Baylor. The NCAA should have stuck to their guns and forced the issue, making PedState sue the NCAA over their (weak) punishment, they would not be in a predicament now with UNC and Baylor, the NCAA would look and be stronger and have more enforcement capability and credibility. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?
Post reply
Forums
Syracuse Athletics
Syracuse Football Board
UNC hearing / process explained
Top
Bottom