When will NCAA apologize

[Capt. Tuttle]

to UNC for tarnishing it's good name?

 

[bballbeadle]

to UNC for tarnishing it's good name?

So funny/sarcastic! Gotta use humor to get through these things. Humor is how we rise above . .. everything. :rolling:

 

[DonLightfoot]

Ya

 

[Townie72]

This is actually a nightmare for the NCAA.

Here's a school that did something awful and they can't do anything about it.

UNC looks bad because of what they did. Not only that, many of the people that are saying they knew nothing about it are flat-out lying and everybody ought to know it. Everybody knows there are people in the Athletic Department that monitor student-athlete academic performance. (If this was the Government, people would be going to jail for covering up, impeding investigations, etc)

The NCAA looks bad for what it was unable to do.

Every school and its supporters that has been or will be disciplined is going to be screaming, "UNC, UNC, UNC) with some justification. Look at the SU boosters on here that are complaining about the punishment SU received for offenses it confessed to.

 

[l'orange]

This will sound overly dramatic and I love college basketball too much to probably make good on this but the NCAA is so unfair and unbalanced I am considering taking a break from all college sports, its all such bull$hi*t.

 

[RF2044]

This is actually a nightmare for the NCAA.

Here's a school that did something awful and they can't do anything about it.

UNC looks bad because of what they did. Not only that, many of the people that are saying they knew nothing about it are flat-out lying and everybody ought to know it. Everybody knows there are people in the Athletic Department that monitor student-athlete academic performance. (If this was the Government, people would be going to jail for covering up, impeding investigations, etc)

The NCAA looks bad for what it was unable to do.

Every school and its supporters that has been or will be disciplined is going to be screaming, "UNC, UNC, UNC) with some justification. Look at the SU boosters on here that are complaining about the punishment SU received for offenses it confessed to.

"Can't?"

 

[Townie72]

"Can't?"

Well, to buy into what you are suggesting --- that the NCAA could but didn't want to --- is pretty far-fetched in my opinion.

It ascribes a degree of prejudice and malice to the NCAA that isn't supported by anything in the past. Maybe you can show me other examples of wanton and unbridled favoritism.

You can ignore the fact that others took these courses. But I'm not sure a jury would. And UNC could have argued that successfully in court, I submit.

That's the problem with "regulations", you write them a certain way and you are stuck with them.

I get that SU fans are smarting from our sanctions. And I think that's why people are suggesting that the NCAA wanted to punish SU and not punish UNC. Surely they'd pick on a school with less of a presence in the sports media.

 

[RF2044]

Well, to buy into what you are suggesting --- that the NCAA could but didn't want to --- is pretty far-fetched in my opinion.

It ascribes a degree of prejudice and malice to the NCAA that isn't supported by anything in the past. Maybe you can show me other examples of wanton and unbridled favoritism.

You can ignore the fact that others took these courses. But I'm not sure a jury would. And UNC could have argued that successfully in court, I submit.

That's the problem with "regulations", you write them a certain way and you are stuck with them.

I get that SU fans are smarting from our sanctions. And I think that's why people are suggesting that the NCAA wanted to punish SU and not punish UNC. Surely they'd pick on a school with less of a presence in the sports media.

Stop. When your lone purpose is to enforce rules and prevent corruption, and you blatantly fail to uphold that mission, it isn't about "can't" but rather about "want."

When you situationally choose what to enforce and which institutions to go after, and when your penalties are arbitrary, capricious, and not tied to precedent in order of magnitude, then it isn't about "can't" but rather about "want."

What a complete rationalized bit of nonsense on your part. When literally hundreds of athletes across dozens of sports had their GPAs artificially inflated by fake classes that contributed to their eligibility, that's not about whether or not the NCAA should be involved with determining the viability of college course content. It's not about "can't." Not far fetched at all -- rather, it should have been minimum threshold compliance enforcement.

 

[Townie72]

Stop. When your lone purpose is to enforce rules and prevent corruption, and you blatantly fail to uphold that mission, it isn't about "can't" but rather about "want."

When you situationally choose what to enforce and which institutions to go after, and when your penalties are arbitrary, capricious, and not tied to precedent in order of magnitude, then it isn't about "can't" but rather about "want."

What a complete rationalized bit of nonsense on your part. When literally hundreds of athletes across dozens of sports had their GPAs artificially inflated by fake classes that contributed to their eligibility, that's not about whether or not the NCAA should be involved with determining the viability of college course content. Not far fetched at all -- rather, it should have been minimum threshold compliance enforcement.

UNC absolutely inflated the academic records of athletes by allowing these bogus classes. But, because they were generally available, they were not against NCAA rules.

Your suggestion is that they not pay attention to the rules as written. All the indignation in the world isn't going to change that.

They beat the wrap. Frustrating, isn't it?

 

[Bayside44]

UNC absolutely inflated the academic records of athletes by allowing these bogus classes. But, because they were generally available, they were not against NCAA rules.

Your suggestion is that they not pay attention to the rules as written. All the indignation in the world isn't going to change that.

They beat the wrap. Frustrating, isn't it?

The problem with the NCAA logic here is that we can lease cars cheaply, give money to players, do whatever we want as long as we cherry pick some random SU students to get the same stuff.

 

[RF2044]

UNC absolutely inflated the academic records of athletes by allowing these bogus classes. But, because they were generally available, they were not against NCAA rules.

Your suggestion is that they not pay attention to the rules as written. All the indignation in the world isn't going to change that.

They beat the wrap. Frustrating, isn't it?

No, my suggestion is that they enforce the rules that are on the books, instead of comporting themselves with this level of "dignity:"



It is not that they "can't" enforce the rules, which is your suggestion, it's that they won't.

Your interpretation of the situation at UNC continues to be off target. It has zero to do with the classes being generally available to other students, and everything to do with athletes who shouldn't have been eligible playing in games across dozens of sports, for 17 years. Schools vacate wins [at minimum] for far less than what happened at UNC. The NCAA turning a blind eye and abdicating enforcement responsibility is the equivalent of the image above.

Why bother having rules if the ostensible "enforcement" agency is arbitrary and capricious? Maybe they were too busy investigating the Adidas / pay for players scandal to both with UNC. No... that can't be it, as the FBI did the NCAA's job for them.

 

[Townie72]

No, my suggestion is that they enforce the rules that are on the books, instead of comporting themselves with this level of "dignity:"



It is not that they "can't" enforce the rules, which is your suggestion, it's that they won't.

Your interpretation of the situation at UNC continues to be off target. It has zero to do with the classes being generally available to other students, and everything to do with athletes who shouldn't have been eligible playing in games across dozens of sports, for 17 years. Schools vacate wins [at minimum] for far less than what happened at UNC. The NCAA turning a blind eye and abdicating enforcement responsibility is the equivalent of the image above.

Why bother having rules if the ostensible "enforcement" agency is arbitrary and capricious? Maybe they were too busy investigating the Adidas / pay for players scandal to both with UNC. No... that can't be it, as the FBI did the NCAA's job for them.

Contrary to what you maintain, it has everything to do with if the courses were available to the student body at large. Not "Zero" as you maintain, but everything.

Given the fact that these courses were not a special benefit for athletes only, exactly what rule is it that UNC broke?

What rule is it that the NCAA failed to enforce?

I don't think there is an "Too Easy Course" rule.

Are we now going to have minimums on the "levels' or the difficulty of college classes offered? From the descriptions, the UNC were ridiculously easy and required little work. But where do we draw the line?

Everybody that went to college knows there are hard courses and easy ones. Everybody ought to know that the courses at Duke are generally taught at a higher level than they are at Louisville.

People can do their best Rumplestiltskin or Yosemite Sam imitations and jump up and down and complain about the unfairness of this in their eyes and sputter inindignation.

But apparently UNC didn't break any rules. The NCAA did not fail to enforce any rules.

 

[Townie72]

The problem with the NCAA logic here is that we can lease cars cheaply, give money to players, do whatever we want as long as we cherry pick some random SU students to get the same stuff.

Well, I don't know whether that would pass muster or not.

Making a course generally available and listing it in the catalog seems a far way from cherry picking students to give leased cars to.

 

[Bayside44]

Well, I don't know whether that would pass muster or not.

Making a course generally available and listing it in the catalog seems a far way from cherry picking students to give leased cars to.

They put up a sham for 2 decades and if other kids got in on the joke no worries. This was an area of study that 90% of the kids would never look at.

If that were UL or USF then so be it. This is different.

We know innocent people don't tend to spend 18 million dollars to prove it.

 

[RF2044]

Contrary to what you maintain, it has everything to do with if the courses were available to the student body at large. Not "Zero" as you maintain, but everything.

Given the fact that these courses were not a special benefit for athletes only, exactly what rule is it that UNC broke?

What rule is it that the NCAA failed to enforce?

I don't think there is an "Too Easy Course" rule.

Are we now going to have minimums on the "levels' or the difficulty of college classes offered? From the descriptions, the UNC were ridiculously easy and required little work. But where do we draw the line?

Everybody that went to college knows there are hard courses and easy ones. Everybody ought to know that the courses at Duke are generally taught at a higher level than they are at Louisville.

People can do their best Rumplestiltskin or Yosemite Sam imitations and jump up and down and complain about the unfairness of this in their eyes and sputter inindignation.

But apparently UNC didn't break any rules. The NCAA did not fail to enforce any rules.

The rule that they failed to enforce is having ineligible athletes participate in games. GPAs have to be above a minimum threshold, and if they are artificially inflated, then some of those athletes would not have been eligible.

But please feel free to take the intellectually dishonest path and rationalize away the wrong doing, like the NCAA. Luckily, the sports media is not so willing to be complicit in critiquing the NCAA's failings. This will likely be the domino that brings about transformative change in collegiate athletics -- a future that probably does not include NCAA oversight for revenue sports.

Yosemite Sam interpretation? You're the one who constantly posts like Ignatius Reilly.

 

[RF2044]

They put up a sham for 2 decades and if other kids got in on the joke no worries. This was an area of study that 90% of the kids would never look at.

If that were UL or USF then so be it. This is different.

We know innocent people don't tend to spend 18 million dollars to prove it.

Spot on.

 

[realorange]

Spot on.

All of this commentary is little different from other contentious topics of the day like gun and pharmaceutical laws/regulations.
Nothing will happen with any of these because money talks.

 

[RF2044]

That’s what the NCAA did with the North Carolina case, after seven years of investigation, millions of dollars in legal fees (well spent, as it turns out) and three very different bills of indictment.

The NCAA punted.

And not just on the North Carolina case, either. It punted its entire mandate.

If the NCAA can’t punish North Carolina for decades of what was clearly, to any outsider, academic fraud designed to keep athletes eligible, what’s the point? Already exposed as feeble and inept by the FBI, which shed more light on the seedy side of basketball recruiting in one pun-laden press conference than the NCAA ever has, Friday’s admission that it has no way to punish North Carolina for decades of self-described scandal opens the door to fake classes everywhere.

As of Friday, there’s no reason for any athlete to be called a “student-athlete” anymore. They’re just athletes, because the NCAA is powerless to enforce the other half of its beloved phrase. And as if it just couldn’t resist applying a coda to highlight this, the NCAA ruled N.C. State freshman Braxton Beverly ineligible for having the temerity to attend a summer school class at Ohio State, the kind of capricious nonsense at which the NCAA excels.

The NCAA can knock around a kid who transferred before his freshman year even really began and had the blessing of the school he left, but years of academic fraud to benefit athletes remain outside its purview.

...
So there will be no punishment for anyone else who decides their athletes don’t necessarily need to go to class, after all. The door is now open for universities to create entire Potemkin departments for their athletes. Who’s going to stop them?

Certainly not the NCAA, a prisoner of the narrow vision of its own leaders, unable to enforce its core mission, thoroughly exposed as weak, powerless, ineffective and obsolete.


Read more here: After punting UNC case, NCAA exposed as powerless, obsolete

 

[RF2044]

All of this commentary is little different from other contentious topics of the day like gun and pharmaceutical laws/regulations.
Nothing will happen with any of these because money talks.

Maybe.

Or maybe this sham outcome in conjunction with the FBI investigation / pay for players scandal will galvanize change.

The status quo of pretending that the rules are being followed and enforced in "amateur athletics" is no longer an option, in light of these two events.

 

[Townie72]

That’s what the NCAA did with the North Carolina case, after seven years of investigation, millions of dollars in legal fees (well spent, as it turns out) and three very different bills of indictment.

The NCAA punted.

And not just on the North Carolina case, either. It punted its entire mandate.

Maybe.

Or maybe this sham outcome in conjunction with the FBI investigation / pay for players scandal will galvanize change.

The status quo of pretending that the rules are being followed and enforced in "amateur athletics" is no longer an option, in light of these two events.

Already exposed as feeble and inept by the FBI, which shed more light on the seedy side of basketball recruiting in one pun-laden press conference than the NCAA ever has, Friday’s admission that it has no way to punish North Carolina for decades of self-described scandal opens the door to fake classes everywhere.

As of Friday, there’s no reason for any athlete to be called a “student-athlete” anymore. They’re just athletes, because the NCAA is powerless to enforce the other half of its beloved phrase. And as if it just couldn’t resist applying a coda to highlight this, the NCAA ruled N.C. State freshman Braxton Beverly ineligible for having the temerity to attend a summer school class at Ohio State, the kind of capricious nonsense at which the NCAA excels.

The NCAA can knock around a kid who transferred before his freshman year even really began and had the blessing of the school he left, but years of academic fraud to benefit athletes remain outside its purview.

...
So there will be no punishment for anyone else who decides their athletes don’t necessarily need to go to class, after all. The door is now open for universities to create entire Potemkin departments for their athletes. Who’s going to stop them?

Certainly not the NCAA, a prisoner of the narrow vision of its own leaders, unable to enforce its core mission, thoroughly exposed as weak, powerless, ineffective and obsolete.


Read more here: After punting UNC case, NCAA exposed as powerless, obsolete

That’s what the NCAA did with the North Carolina case, after seven years of investigation, millions of dollars in legal fees (well spent, as it turns out) and three very different bills of indictment.

The NCAA punted.

And not just on the North Carolina case, either. It punted its entire mandate.

If the NCAA can’t punish North Carolina for decades of what was clearly, to any outsider, academic fraud designed to keep athletes eligible, what’s the point? Already exposed as feeble and inept by the FBI, which shed more light on the seedy side of basketball recruiting in one pun-laden press conference than the NCAA ever has, Friday’s admission that it has no way to punish North Carolina for decades of self-described scandal opens the door to fake classes everywhere.

As of Friday, there’s no reason for any athlete to be called a “student-athlete” anymore. They’re just athletes, because the NCAA is powerless to enforce the other half of its beloved phrase. And as if it just couldn’t resist applying a coda to highlight this, the NCAA ruled N.C. State freshman Braxton Beverly ineligible for having the temerity to attend a summer school class at Ohio State, the kind of capricious nonsense at which the NCAA excels.

The NCAA can knock around a kid who transferred before his freshman year even really began and had the blessing of the school he left, but years of academic fraud to benefit athletes remain outside its purview.

...
So there will be no punishment for anyone else who decides their athletes don’t necessarily need to go to class, after all. The door is now open for universities to create entire Potemkin departments for their athletes. Who’s going to stop them?

Certainly not the NCAA, a prisoner of the narrow vision of its own leaders, unable to enforce its core mission, thoroughly exposed as weak, powerless, ineffective and obsolete.


Read more here: After punting UNC case, NCAA exposed as powerless, obsolete

So after all of this, where are you on the question of "Couldn't punish" vs. "Won't punish"?

Because all of this above says that they were powerless under the current rules to do anything about it.

 

[RF2044]

So after all of this, where are you on the question of "Couldn't punish" vs. "Won't punish"?

Because all of this above says that they were powerless under the current rules to do anything about it.

Like anybody not taking an unrealistically narrow legal view at the expense of common sense, I am disappointed but not surprised that the NCAA failed to fulfill their mandate. Again.

When a murderer evades prosecution on a legal technicality, it does not make them innocent nor imply that a crime did not occur.

Also, your reading comprehension need work. All of the above is a condemnation of the NCAA copping out. Think.

 

[tbonezone]

write 1 ten page paper for a semesters worth of credit ? say it out loud. it's a sham and should be illegal .