ADVERTISEMENT

Espn Talks to 2016 UNC Recruits About UNCheat Investigation

The afam scandal is the nfl's deflate gate. The nfl did not want to punish the pats but did to save its reputation .
The ncaa does not want to punish unc *** but will to ensure its existence. GBB
 
Well, the last time I saw UNC in trouble was related to football and they paid a WHOPPING 50K to make things right.....................
I'll be shocked if any major penalty comes down on Roy and his practices of relocating his players to elite standards not available to the student body.
 
Mark Emmert has been adamant saying this is an academic issue, not an athletics one.

So how's the process gonna play out? Will many athletes be found and linked to the fake classes, thus making them retroactively ineligible once transcripts are calculated without the fake classes, and THEN it becomes an athletics issue the NCAA will have to act on?

I'm curious to see what the line of punishment is, if there's gonna be one.

I think that's what will happen...similar to the Rose situation, the NCAA didn't throw out his test, it was the testing facility board who did that part...thus making him ineligible, which is when the NCAA vacated all games in which he played.
 
I think that's what will happen...similar to the Rose situation, the NCAA didn't throw out his test, it was the testing facility board who did that part...thus making him ineligible, which is when the NCAA vacated all games in which he played.


I believe I heard that the accrediting agency, SACS, is to issue a ruling in June concerning this. IF they deem those athletes to have attended bogus classes (from an accreditation standpoint) and invalidates them, then the NCAA can step in and rule those players ineligible. Similar to Rose, where ETS invalidated his SAT, thereby making him ineligible. The NCAA cannot call a college's courses inadequate. They have no jurisdiction there. But SACS does. Or unc** could, but we know they'll never self-report. So it's up to SACS, whose very credibility is at stake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UKvisitor
I believe I heard that the accrediting agency, SACS, is to issue a ruling in June concerning this. IF they deem those athletes to have attended bogus classes (from an accreditation standpoint) and invalidates them, then the NCAA can step in and rule those players ineligible. Similar to Rose, where ETS invalidated his SAT, thereby making him ineligible. The NCAA cannot call a college's courses inadequate. They have no jurisdiction there. But SACS does. Or unc** could, but we know they'll never self-report. So it's up to SACS, whose very credibility is at stake.
That may be true, but the NCAA sure as hell as jurisdiction over a couple of hundred unauthorized grade changes, and students who had papers written for them.
If the NCAA doesn't act on UNC, they are paving the way for every other school to set up the same thing. Most schools will have far too much integrity to do so- but some will go hog wild.
 
I believe I heard that the accrediting agency, SACS, is to issue a ruling in June concerning this. IF they deem those athletes to have attended bogus classes (from an accreditation standpoint) and invalidates them, then the NCAA can step in and rule those players ineligible. Similar to Rose, where ETS invalidated his SAT, thereby making him ineligible. The NCAA cannot call a college's courses inadequate. They have no jurisdiction there. But SACS does. Or unc** could, but we know they'll never self-report. So it's up to SACS, whose very credibility is at stake.

Sacs is this from the state of NC or is this a National board ?
 
I believe I heard that the accrediting agency, SACS, is to issue a ruling in June concerning this. IF they deem those athletes to have attended bogus classes (from an accreditation standpoint) and invalidates them, then the NCAA can step in and rule those players ineligible. Similar to Rose, where ETS invalidated his SAT, thereby making him ineligible. The NCAA cannot call a college's courses inadequate. They have no jurisdiction there. But SACS does. Or unc** could, but we know they'll never self-report. So it's up to SACS, whose very credibility is at stake.

The NCAA can adjust their rules on the fly. Two words: Strict Liability. How many times was it used before or has it been used since the Memphis issue? If they want UNC***s head on platter they can have it.
 
I don't see why it would be hard at all for the NCAA to simply label the whole mess -- the AF-AM fraud, the Wheels for Heels, the drug and gun cases like PJ Hairston, the tainted jobs to Tami Hansbrough, and on and on -- a massive example of Lack of Institutional Control.

That would give them the latitude to render about whatever punishment they want to, and it would have to be more severe than any previous case of LOIC on the contrast with the wanton corruption of UNC compared to any previous mess would be too obvious.
That's exactly what it should be, because that's exactly what it is
 
  • Like
Reactions: wildcatwelder
I don't see why it would be hard at all for the NCAA to simply label the whole mess -- the AF-AM fraud, the Wheels for Heels, the drug and gun cases like PJ Hairston, the tainted jobs to Tami Hansbrough, and on and on -- a massive example of Lack of Institutional Control.

That would give them the latitude to render about whatever punishment they want to, and it would have to be more severe than any previous case of LOIC on the contrast with the wanton corruption of UNC compared to any previous mess would be too obvious.

Amen, Brother.
 
I don't see why it would be hard at all for the NCAA to simply label the whole mess -- the AF-AM fraud, the Wheels for Heels, the drug and gun cases like PJ Hairston, ex-player Will Graves getting busted for drugs while living in a Roy William's house, the tainted jobs to Tami Hansbrough, and on and on -- a massive example of Lack of Institutional Control.

That would give them the latitude to render about whatever punishment they want to, and it would have to be more severe than any previous case of LOIC on the contrast with the wanton corruption of UNC compared to any previous mess would be too obvious.


Some of what you mentioned above was going on while the UNC*** athletics dept. was already on probation from the football scandal. Probations tend to mean if you commit more violations while on probation you get pounded even harder.
 
If they do in fact dole out some kind of punishment, I can't see how part of it won't be a post-season ban, which would be perfect given that they will be one of the favorites next season.
 
Keep in mind that if a recalculation is done, UNC rejected the NCAA's min GPA several years ago and raised theirs to mimic Duke. They did the same with their required hours per semester as well, which could turn up to be huge if entire courses are nixed. Such lofty expectations, but hey, they are a public ivy.
 
This is a scandal that we may never know the true depth of. The Wainstein report was huge in unearthing a lot of it, but there is still a lot buried that may never see the light of day.
This makes all other scandals in the history of the National Collegiate Athletic Association look very small.
 
If 'more likely than not' under-inflating a few footballs leads to your best player suspended for 4 games, loss of a 1st round draft pick and a 4th round pick, and a $1 million fine, what should be the penalty for a systematic 18 year conspiracy involving members of the athletic department that was designed to keep players eligible to play basketball and football who should not have been, in which the fundamental mission of the university -- to educate young people -- was grotesquely and disgracefully obliterated?

How about the entire UNC athletic program suspended four years, then three scholarships cut for another two years, and a $50 million fine?


I like what you're proposing. This is a death penalty case unlike any other.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT