Jay Bilas hosting KSR show tomorrow

[ORCAT]

They're not phony classes, they count towards valid credits. So, no ineligible players, no cheating from men's basketball.

Wow, just wow. What else can be said after a statement like that and I actually think he really believes this stuff.

 

[ArmyWildcat81]

It's really very simple. You, like most here, want to see UNC men's basketball hammered by the NCAA, regardless if they broke any rules, played ineligible players, etc., while Jay is more interested in what actually transpired and what, if any, rules were broken. He, unlike you, doesn't think Wainstein was forced by UNC to write a faux report (still waiting for those damning emails tying the men's basketball team to the scandal) and decided to take the time to read it, rather than just taking other peoples word for it.

This brings up something that I just cannot wrap my head around. You're incredibly quick to correct others when they post inaccuracies related to UK basketball, making it a point to constantly bring up how the media gets it wrong and not check the facts before they print their articles. Yet you're completely unwilling to even begin to look at the facts in the UNC scandal, while still posting about it. Perhaps this is why you're baffled when the experts look into the facts and ask where are the violations?

Don't cry when the ncaa shats upon your program.

 

[Lumpy 2]

I'm still waiting for those incriminating emails, you know the proof that men's basketball broke rules like everyone here keeps claiming. Just copy & paste them here.

@ThroughBlue, Idk I've never met the guy, he could be intelligent. I've read comments from some of his former teammates, both at UNC and in the NBA, saying he's pretty smart and well-spoken, so who knows with him. However, there's no denying he's not said some crazy things over the years.

From a 10/23/14 article in the dailytarheel: "Several counselors within the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes were found to direct athletes to the fake courses. The report said counselors who steered athletes were affiliated with the football team, such as Cynthia Reynolds, Beth Bridger, Octavious Barnes and Jamie Lee. Basketball tutors Burgess McSwain and Wayne Walden and soccer tutor Brent Blanton also steered athletes, Wainstein found,"

From page 64 of the Wainstein Report: "Walden acknowledged knowing how the courses worked, including that Crowder did at least some of the grading."

From page 73 of the Wainstein Report: "Walden acknowledged knowing about irregular aspects of the paper classes including Crowder doing some of the grading."

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

From a 10/23/14 article in the dailytarheel: "Several counselors within the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes were found to direct athletes to the fake courses. The report said counselors who steered athletes were affiliated with the football team, such as Cynthia Reynolds, Beth Bridger, Octavious Barnes and Jamie Lee. Basketball tutors Burgess McSwain and Wayne Walden and soccer tutor Brent Blanton also steered athletes, Wainstein found,"

From page 64 of the Wainstein Report: "Walden acknowledged knowing how the courses worked, including that Crowder did at least some of the grading."

From page 73 of the Wainstein Report: "Walden acknowledged knowing about irregular aspects of the paper classes including Crowder doing some of the grading."

Still waiting for that damning evidence...not an article from the DTH/N&O. Please supply factual things, ie, those incredibly damning emails and not the opinions of someone who's not read the report. From the other quotes it does appear you've taken the time to open the Wainstein report. But, you should read the whole report, not just the summary. When you read the whole report you'll read the following (which is where your quotes come from):

(starting p122) "Walden was aware of the paper classes and thought they had been approved by the University because they were open to all students … he said he thought Crowder was probably doing some of the grading, though he never knew for sure."

Here's the rest of the article that explains your quotes, but not taken out of context:

Walden worked under Roy Williams from 2003-09 and corresponded regularly with Deborah Crowder, the AFAM secretary who was pinned as the orchestrator of independent study classes that offered generous grades without regard to the quality of the submitted work.

According to the Wainstein Report, which documented the fraud, men’s basketball players accounted for 226 enrollments in the paper classes from 1999-2009. But in his first comments since the report was released in October, Walden said he didn’t steer players into those classes and didn’t know as much about how they worked as the Wainstein Report let on.

Walden’s knowledge of the classes is described at three different parts in the 131-page report. Walden said the most accurate one was on pages 122-3: “Walden was aware of the paper classes and thought they had been approved by the University because they were open to all students … he said he thought Crowder was probably doing some of the grading, though he never knew for sure.”

However, the first two times Walden is cited, any ambiguity about Crowder’s role is taken out: “Walden acknowledged knowing how the courses worked, including that Crowder did at least some of the grading” (p. 64) and “Walden acknowledged knowing about irregular aspects of the paper classes including Crowder doing some of the grading” (p. 73).

“I am troubled that the first two statements are very loosely worded and have been incorrectly interpreted to indicate that I knew more about those courses than is true,” Walden wrote in an e-mail.

While acknowledging the difficult task former U.S. Attorney Kenneth Wainstein faced, Walden said he was also disappointed to see that the bulk of his discussions with the Wainstein team – which totaled about three hours – was left out of the report.

“I’m sure that a very comprehensive report would have been thousands of pages so they determined a narrative and that appears to be what was included in the report,” wrote Walden.

When Walden told investigators that he knew about the irregular classes, he meant that he knew they required one or two papers, did not meet in a lecture format and were similar to other independent study classes but were not titled “Independent Study.”

However, he thought the classes were authorized or sanctioned by the university – including how they were taught and graded – for three main reasons: they were available to and taken by non-athletes, they were listed on a database with all other UNC class offerings that was visible to all faculty and administrators, and they had existed for years before he arrived in Chapel Hill.

“Statements in the Wainstein report seem to have been interpreted as if I had secret knowledge about these courses which I did not share with the coaches,” Walden said. “This simply is not true.”

Walden’s role in what Wainstein called a “paper-class scheme” created in part to keep athletes eligible could be important to the NCAA, which would be interested if academic advisors steered players to classes they knew to be fraudulent. However, former assistant coach Joe Holladay said that like everyone else in the basketball office, Walden never encouraged players to take AFAM classes and was shocked to find out the extent of Crowder’s involvement.

“There’s no better person than Wayne Walden and to have anybody think that Wayne did something wrong, that just bothers me and bothers him – he’s just crushed,” said Holladay, who was a member of the coaching staff from 2003-13 and served as the liaison between Walden and Williams. “I just hate for anybody to think that Wayne knew what was going on, because he did not.”

Williams also defending Walden throughout the fall, calling him “the most ethical person I know” and saying he trusted Walden “from the bottom of my soul.”

“There’s a difference between somebody thinking and somebody knowing,” Williams said. “And there’s a difference between coming aware in 2004 or 2008 that something had happened three or four years before.”

Williams and Holladay both thought that Walden was misrepresented in the report because his answers were paraphrased and removed from context.

“They asked him, ‘Wayne did you know Debby was grading papers?’’ Holladay said. “Wayne said, ‘Yes, it doesn’t surprise me because there’s TAs all over campus grading papers, they have the approval from the professor to do that, and Debby’s been in the department for 20 years and she has a degree from the University of North Carolina, and she has a good relationship with the professors in the department and the dean, and so it wouldn’t surprise me if she was grading papers.’ So the answer in the report just says, ‘Yes.’ That’s a big difference right there.

“That part bothers me because he’s just like the rest of us – who would think that Debby is signing the professors’ names and there really is no teacher involved? No one at the University of North Carolina would think that. It’s listed in the university course guides, it’s got a course name and a teacher’s name beside it.”

Now that we've gotten that out of the way, on with the incriminating emails.

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

Lumpy, don't bother. Roy, Walden, and Dean himself could confess under oath, and this nitwit would parse every word and convince himself that they said the exact opposite. Realized it's pointless trying to reason with him. Apparently, everyone is involved in a grand conspiracy to manufacture evidence, and UNCheat is actually pure as the driven snow. Who knew? Oh, yeah, this tool did.

 

[Supafuzz75]

Lol,, these tarhole fans are a hoot.. Blind leading the blind..

 

[TeoJ]

Still waiting for that damning evidence...not an article from the DTH/N&O. Please supply factual things, ie, those incredibly damning emails and not the opinions of someone who's not read the report. From the other quotes it does appear you've taken the time to open the Wainstein report. But, you should read the whole report, not just the summary. When you read the whole report you'll read the following (which is where your quotes come from):

(starting p122) "Walden was aware of the paper classes and thought they had been approved by the University because they were open to all students … he said he thought Crowder was probably doing some of the grading, though he never knew for sure."

Here's the rest of the article that explains your quotes, but not taken out of context:

Walden worked under Roy Williams from 2003-09 and corresponded regularly with Deborah Crowder, the AFAM secretary who was pinned as the orchestrator of independent study classes that offered generous grades without regard to the quality of the submitted work.

According to the Wainstein Report, which documented the fraud, men’s basketball players accounted for 226 enrollments in the paper classes from 1999-2009. But in his first comments since the report was released in October, Walden said he didn’t steer players into those classes and didn’t know as much about how they worked as the Wainstein Report let on.

Walden’s knowledge of the classes is described at three different parts in the 131-page report. Walden said the most accurate one was on pages 122-3: “Walden was aware of the paper classes and thought they had been approved by the University because they were open to all students … he said he thought Crowder was probably doing some of the grading, though he never knew for sure.”

However, the first two times Walden is cited, any ambiguity about Crowder’s role is taken out: “Walden acknowledged knowing how the courses worked, including that Crowder did at least some of the grading” (p. 64) and “Walden acknowledged knowing about irregular aspects of the paper classes including Crowder doing some of the grading” (p. 73).

“I am troubled that the first two statements are very loosely worded and have been incorrectly interpreted to indicate that I knew more about those courses than is true,” Walden wrote in an e-mail.

While acknowledging the difficult task former U.S. Attorney Kenneth Wainstein faced, Walden said he was also disappointed to see that the bulk of his discussions with the Wainstein team – which totaled about three hours – was left out of the report.

“I’m sure that a very comprehensive report would have been thousands of pages so they determined a narrative and that appears to be what was included in the report,” wrote Walden.

When Walden told investigators that he knew about the irregular classes, he meant that he knew they required one or two papers, did not meet in a lecture format and were similar to other independent study classes but were not titled “Independent Study.”

However, he thought the classes were authorized or sanctioned by the university – including how they were taught and graded – for three main reasons: they were available to and taken by non-athletes, they were listed on a database with all other UNC class offerings that was visible to all faculty and administrators, and they had existed for years before he arrived in Chapel Hill.

“Statements in the Wainstein report seem to have been interpreted as if I had secret knowledge about these courses which I did not share with the coaches,” Walden said. “This simply is not true.”

Walden’s role in what Wainstein called a “paper-class scheme” created in part to keep athletes eligible could be important to the NCAA, which would be interested if academic advisors steered players to classes they knew to be fraudulent. However, former assistant coach Joe Holladay said that like everyone else in the basketball office, Walden never encouraged players to take AFAM classes and was shocked to find out the extent of Crowder’s involvement.

“There’s no better person than Wayne Walden and to have anybody think that Wayne did something wrong, that just bothers me and bothers him – he’s just crushed,” said Holladay, who was a member of the coaching staff from 2003-13 and served as the liaison between Walden and Williams. “I just hate for anybody to think that Wayne knew what was going on, because he did not.”

Williams also defending Walden throughout the fall, calling him “the most ethical person I know” and saying he trusted Walden “from the bottom of my soul.”

“There’s a difference between somebody thinking and somebody knowing,” Williams said. “And there’s a difference between coming aware in 2004 or 2008 that something had happened three or four years before.”

Williams and Holladay both thought that Walden was misrepresented in the report because his answers were paraphrased and removed from context.

“They asked him, ‘Wayne did you know Debby was grading papers?’’ Holladay said. “Wayne said, ‘Yes, it doesn’t surprise me because there’s TAs all over campus grading papers, they have the approval from the professor to do that, and Debby’s been in the department for 20 years and she has a degree from the University of North Carolina, and she has a good relationship with the professors in the department and the dean, and so it wouldn’t surprise me if she was grading papers.’ So the answer in the report just says, ‘Yes.’ That’s a big difference right there.

“That part bothers me because he’s just like the rest of us – who would think that Debby is signing the professors’ names and there really is no teacher involved? No one at the University of North Carolina would think that. It’s listed in the university course guides, it’s got a course name and a teacher’s name beside it.”

Now that we've gotten that out of the way, on with the incriminating emails.

No one is this stupid,wait a minute did you take the courses at Carolina? I bet you passed.

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

Lumpy, don't bother. Roy, Walden, and Dean himself could confess under oath, and this nitwit would parse every word and convince himself that they said the exact opposite. Realized it's pointless trying to reason with him. Apparently, everyone is involved in a grand conspiracy to manufacture evidence, and UNCheat is actually pure as the driven snow. Who knew? Oh, yeah, this tool did.

Well, ok, let's see. I back my posts up with facts and quotes from the people themselves, not to mention point out the quote in the Wainstein report (not the summarized, inaccurate, comment), while you and others simply just say things or supply opinion articles. But I'm the one who's getting it wrong. Have you stopped looking for those damning emails, you know the ones that tie the men's basketball team to this scandal (other than players just taking the courses)?

It's funny that you say I believe everyone is involved in a grand conspiracy to manufacture evidence. I hope you feel that way when the NOA comes out tomorrow (I originally heard yesterday, but it was pushed back till tomorrow) and it doesn't live up to your expectations and it turns out that the media was wrong this whole time? I think your inability to find these damning emails that everyone "uses as proof" to show UNC mbb cheated might have already taking some of the sting off of the inevitable let-down that is going to happen tomorrow. Perhaps though this taught some of you a valuable lesson: read for yourself, don't simply take the word of someone else. It would've saved you so much time and misunderstanding in this case, the Memphis case, and others, to name a few.

 

[CatEye2010]

Well, ok, let's see. I back my posts up with facts and quotes from the people themselves, not to mention point out the quote in the Wainstein report (not the summarized, inaccurate, comment), while you and others simply just say things or supply opinion articles. But I'm the one who's getting it wrong. Have you stopped looking for those damning emails, you know the ones that tie the men's basketball team to this scandal (other than players just taking the courses)?

It's funny that you say I believe everyone is involved in a grand conspiracy to manufacture evidence. I hope you feel that way when the NOA comes out tomorrow (I originally heard yesterday, but it was pushed back till tomorrow) and it doesn't live up to your expectations and it turns out that the media was wrong this whole time? I think your inability to find these damning emails that everyone "uses as proof" to show UNC mbb cheated might have already taking some of the sting off of the inevitable let-down that is going to happen tomorrow. Perhaps though this taught some of you a valuable lesson: read for yourself, don't simply take the word of someone else. It would've saved you so much time and misunderstanding in this case, the Memphis case, and others, to name a few.

Bobby, could you help me with something? I think you have the expertise: Could you please tell me what the definition of is, is? (nod to Bill Clinton).

 

[TeoJ]

From what I've seen of Jay Bilas, I haven't got the impression that he's spent much time looking at the UNC scandal in detail. If anything his comments have come across as naive and uninformed, which is very un-Bilas-like. Although more recently Bilas (unlike you) has acknowledged that the NCAA can certainly punish UNC over their transgressions.

We'll see what he has to say about it today, or whether he tries to avoid the topic.

As for your second part, I don't have time to respond but may at some point. FWIW, I recently have been spending time updating my UK stats website but if you ask me to devote more time scrutinizing UNC's many dirty deeds, then be careful what you wish for.

Know that's funny I don't care who you are.
I would not want Jon looking up stats on me.

 

[bcox13]

Well, ok, let's see. I back my posts up with facts and quotes from the people themselves, not to mention point out the quote in the Wainstein report (not the summarized, inaccurate, comment), while you and others simply just say things or supply opinion articles. But I'm the one who's getting it wrong. Have you stopped looking for those damning emails, you know the ones that tie the men's basketball team to this scandal (other than players just taking the courses)?

It's funny that you say I believe everyone is involved in a grand conspiracy to manufacture evidence. I hope you feel that way when the NOA comes out tomorrow (I originally heard yesterday, but it was pushed back till tomorrow) and it doesn't live up to your expectations and it turns out that the media was wrong this whole time? I think your inability to find these damning emails that everyone "uses as proof" to show UNC mbb cheated might have already taking some of the sting off of the inevitable let-down that is going to happen tomorrow. Perhaps though this taught some of you a valuable lesson: read for yourself, don't simply take the word of someone else. It would've saved you so much time and misunderstanding in this case, the Memphis case, and others, to name a few.

So you think UNC has spent the money they have in the last few years both defending, and to some extent uncovering facts, over a few emails? You can't be this dense. There is plenty of evidence showing academic scandal, whether any sports programs are punished is irrelevant.

 

[Lumpy 2]

Still waiting for that damning evidence...not an article from the DTH/N&O. Please supply factual things, ie, those incredibly damning emails and not the opinions of someone who's not read the report. From the other quotes it does appear you've taken the time to open the Wainstein report. But, you should read the whole report, not just the summary. When you read the whole report you'll read the following (which is where your quotes come from):

(starting p122) "Walden was aware of the paper classes and thought they had been approved by the University because they were open to all students … he said he thought Crowder was probably doing some of the grading, though he never knew for sure."

Here's the rest of the article that explains your quotes, but not taken out of context:

Walden worked under Roy Williams from 2003-09 and corresponded regularly with Deborah Crowder, the AFAM secretary who was pinned as the orchestrator of independent study classes that offered generous grades without regard to the quality of the submitted work.

According to the Wainstein Report, which documented the fraud, men’s basketball players accounted for 226 enrollments in the paper classes from 1999-2009. But in his first comments since the report was released in October, Walden said he didn’t steer players into those classes and didn’t know as much about how they worked as the Wainstein Report let on.

Walden’s knowledge of the classes is described at three different parts in the 131-page report. Walden said the most accurate one was on pages 122-3: “Walden was aware of the paper classes and thought they had been approved by the University because they were open to all students … he said he thought Crowder was probably doing some of the grading, though he never knew for sure.”

However, the first two times Walden is cited, any ambiguity about Crowder’s role is taken out: “Walden acknowledged knowing how the courses worked, including that Crowder did at least some of the grading” (p. 64) and “Walden acknowledged knowing about irregular aspects of the paper classes including Crowder doing some of the grading” (p. 73).

“I am troubled that the first two statements are very loosely worded and have been incorrectly interpreted to indicate that I knew more about those courses than is true,” Walden wrote in an e-mail.

While acknowledging the difficult task former U.S. Attorney Kenneth Wainstein faced, Walden said he was also disappointed to see that the bulk of his discussions with the Wainstein team – which totaled about three hours – was left out of the report.

“I’m sure that a very comprehensive report would have been thousands of pages so they determined a narrative and that appears to be what was included in the report,” wrote Walden.

When Walden told investigators that he knew about the irregular classes, he meant that he knew they required one or two papers, did not meet in a lecture format and were similar to other independent study classes but were not titled “Independent Study.”

However, he thought the classes were authorized or sanctioned by the university – including how they were taught and graded – for three main reasons: they were available to and taken by non-athletes, they were listed on a database with all other UNC class offerings that was visible to all faculty and administrators, and they had existed for years before he arrived in Chapel Hill.

“Statements in the Wainstein report seem to have been interpreted as if I had secret knowledge about these courses which I did not share with the coaches,” Walden said. “This simply is not true.”

Walden’s role in what Wainstein called a “paper-class scheme” created in part to keep athletes eligible could be important to the NCAA, which would be interested if academic advisors steered players to classes they knew to be fraudulent. However, former assistant coach Joe Holladay said that like everyone else in the basketball office, Walden never encouraged players to take AFAM classes and was shocked to find out the extent of Crowder’s involvement.

“There’s no better person than Wayne Walden and to have anybody think that Wayne did something wrong, that just bothers me and bothers him – he’s just crushed,” said Holladay, who was a member of the coaching staff from 2003-13 and served as the liaison between Walden and Williams. “I just hate for anybody to think that Wayne knew what was going on, because he did not.”

Williams also defending Walden throughout the fall, calling him “the most ethical person I know” and saying he trusted Walden “from the bottom of my soul.”

“There’s a difference between somebody thinking and somebody knowing,” Williams said. “And there’s a difference between coming aware in 2004 or 2008 that something had happened three or four years before.”

Williams and Holladay both thought that Walden was misrepresented in the report because his answers were paraphrased and removed from context.

“They asked him, ‘Wayne did you know Debby was grading papers?’’ Holladay said. “Wayne said, ‘Yes, it doesn’t surprise me because there’s TAs all over campus grading papers, they have the approval from the professor to do that, and Debby’s been in the department for 20 years and she has a degree from the University of North Carolina, and she has a good relationship with the professors in the department and the dean, and so it wouldn’t surprise me if she was grading papers.’ So the answer in the report just says, ‘Yes.’ That’s a big difference right there.

“That part bothers me because he’s just like the rest of us – who would think that Debby is signing the professors’ names and there really is no teacher involved? No one at the University of North Carolina would think that. It’s listed in the university course guides, it’s got a course name and a teacher’s name beside it.”

Now that we've gotten that out of the way, on with the incriminating emails.

You say you want facts and not just an article with someones opinion. I gave you 2 quotes directly from the Wainstein Report (which you claim you've read and that nothing was in there to implicate the basketball program). Now you come back and cite an article to back up your claims. That article quotes another former assistant who is defending Walden. Was Holliday present when Wainstein interviewed Walden? How else would he know what Walden told Wainstein? When was Walden lying, when he interviewed with Wainstein or when he made these statements?

The only thing of significance Walden said in the interview was: "Statements in the Wainstein Report seem to have been interpreted as if I had secret knowledge about these courses which I did not share with the coaches. This is simply not true." Of course it's not true, the courses were no secret and he didn't need to share the information with other coaches; they already knew.

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

You say you want facts and not just an article with someones opinion. I gave you 2 quotes directly from the Wainstein Report (which you claim you've read and that nothing was in there to implicate the basketball program). Now you come back and cite an article to back up your claims. That article quotes another former assistant who is defending Walden. Was Holliday present when Wainstein interviewed Walden? How else would he know what Walden told Wainstein? When was Walden lying, when he interviewed with Wainstein or when he made these statements?

The only thing of significance Walden said in the interview was: "Statements in the Wainstein Report seem to have been interpreted as if I had secret knowledge about these courses which I did not share with the coaches. This is simply not true." Of course it's not true, the courses were no secret and he didn't need to share the information with other coaches; they already knew.

Uh, that article also quotes Walden directly. It states he was bothered by the way his quote (which I also provided you and which is in the Wainstein report) was taken out of context and inaccurately summarized (the other two opinions in the Wainstein report). If you read the rest of the article great, but it was not linked for that purpose, rather it was linked so you have the original source. By the way, you also missed what Walden ment by saying he knew about the irregular classes. Did you just miss that? If so, you should really read it again.

So, can you provide those damming emails now?

 

[docholiday51]

Bilas did a good job with the show,but i suspect that news and some subjects were off limits because of his job with ESPN.

UNC has far bigger issues than did Syracuse,how things play out remains to be seen.Anyone who has anything to do with college sports(even those of us that just watch)have a vested interest in what happens between the NCAA and UNC.The outcome will define what college sports is or is not for many years to come.

 

[TUL]

Hey , if Wayne says it was true, it was true. I mean, nobody ever lies when they have something to lose, only to have mountains of stuff make them look like liars. Nope, Wayne was telling the truth. That's facts.

And McCants being an F student until he needed to play, and then becoming an A student, and then him saying that he cheated, along with lots of other basketball players, isn't facts.

I love the UNC fans. Their own university has admitted they cheated, they have thousands of classes with essentially no work and secretaries grading to ensure players stay eligible, they have coaches who say "I know every detail of my kids schooling!" one second and "How on earth can I follow the school work of 14 kids!" the next... But they didn't cheat. Insanity.

I truly think that it is just too big a blow for them to accept. They cannot accept that Dean and Roy and Gut and Doh were involved in a cheating scheme more long lasting and impactful than anything we've ever seen in the history of college sports.

 

[Jamal Mercer]

In all my years of reading/posting at Wildcatfaithful, Catspause, and now here, I have never come across a more delusional poster than BobbyG.

It's one thing to defend your program when it's still up in the air on whether or not they cheated.

It's a whole other story to actually believe the things you're saying/typing.

Booby, UNC cheated. It's beyond obvious. Whether they get hammered remains to be seen. But, your favorite team is now associated with possibly the biggest scandal in NCAA history. The "Carolina Way" was/is a joke.

And I get the feeling you might end up in the damn nuthouse if the hammer falls.

 

[Lumpy 2]

Uh, that article also quotes Walden directly. It states he was bothered by the way his quote (which I also provided you and which is in the Wainstein report) was taken out of context and inaccurately summarized (the other two opinions in the Wainstein report). If you read the rest of the article great, but it was not linked for that purpose, rather it was linked so you have the original source. By the way, you also missed what Walden ment by saying he knew about the irregular classes. Did you just miss that? If so, you should really read it again.

So, can you provide those damming emails now?

You keep saying it doesn't matter what we read in articles and the facts are in the report. I have taken your advice and chosen to ignore the article you linked and focus on the fact that Walden told Wainstein he knew about the fake classes and the email attachment showing Wainstein asking Crowder to get a basketball player switched into an AFAM class because he was flunking another class and was about to become ineligible. You say you've read the report so I'm sure you've already read the email and don't need to see it again.

 

[TankedCat]

I really like Jay Bilas

That said, all you have to do is look at what happened to Bill Simmons calling out Goodell to see why a basketball analyst employed by the network will not go against the Alma Mater of the network president.

That's not just with Bilas, it holds true I suspect with any talking head making serious jack at the network. Go hard against UNC at your own demise.

Simmons was supposedly pulling in about $5m a year under contract with ESPN

 

[*Bleedingblue*]

Still waiting for that damning evidence...not an article from the DTH/N&O. Please supply factual things, ie, those incredibly damning emails and not the opinions of someone who's not read the report. From the other quotes it does appear you've taken the time to open the Wainstein report. But, you should read the whole report, not just the summary. When you read the whole report you'll read the following (which is where your quotes come from):

(starting p122) "Walden was aware of the paper classes and thought they had been approved by the University because they were open to all students … he said he thought Crowder was probably doing some of the grading, though he never knew for sure."

Here's the rest of the article that explains your quotes, but not taken out of context:

Walden worked under Roy Williams from 2003-09 and corresponded regularly with Deborah Crowder, the AFAM secretary who was pinned as the orchestrator of independent study classes that offered generous grades without regard to the quality of the submitted work.

According to the Wainstein Report, which documented the fraud, men’s basketball players accounted for 226 enrollments in the paper classes from 1999-2009. But in his first comments since the report was released in October, Walden said he didn’t steer players into those classes and didn’t know as much about how they worked as the Wainstein Report let on.

Walden’s knowledge of the classes is described at three different parts in the 131-page report. Walden said the most accurate one was on pages 122-3: “Walden was aware of the paper classes and thought they had been approved by the University because they were open to all students … he said he thought Crowder was probably doing some of the grading, though he never knew for sure.”

However, the first two times Walden is cited, any ambiguity about Crowder’s role is taken out: “Walden acknowledged knowing how the courses worked, including that Crowder did at least some of the grading” (p. 64) and “Walden acknowledged knowing about irregular aspects of the paper classes including Crowder doing some of the grading” (p. 73).

“I am troubled that the first two statements are very loosely worded and have been incorrectly interpreted to indicate that I knew more about those courses than is true,” Walden wrote in an e-mail.

While acknowledging the difficult task former U.S. Attorney Kenneth Wainstein faced, Walden said he was also disappointed to see that the bulk of his discussions with the Wainstein team – which totaled about three hours – was left out of the report.

“I’m sure that a very comprehensive report would have been thousands of pages so they determined a narrative and that appears to be what was included in the report,” wrote Walden.

When Walden told investigators that he knew about the irregular classes, he meant that he knew they required one or two papers, did not meet in a lecture format and were similar to other independent study classes but were not titled “Independent Study.”

However, he thought the classes were authorized or sanctioned by the university – including how they were taught and graded – for three main reasons: they were available to and taken by non-athletes, they were listed on a database with all other UNC class offerings that was visible to all faculty and administrators, and they had existed for years before he arrived in Chapel Hill.

“Statements in the Wainstein report seem to have been interpreted as if I had secret knowledge about these courses which I did not share with the coaches,” Walden said. “This simply is not true.”

Walden’s role in what Wainstein called a “paper-class scheme” created in part to keep athletes eligible could be important to the NCAA, which would be interested if academic advisors steered players to classes they knew to be fraudulent. However, former assistant coach Joe Holladay said that like everyone else in the basketball office, Walden never encouraged players to take AFAM classes and was shocked to find out the extent of Crowder’s involvement.

“There’s no better person than Wayne Walden and to have anybody think that Wayne did something wrong, that just bothers me and bothers him – he’s just crushed,” said Holladay, who was a member of the coaching staff from 2003-13 and served as the liaison between Walden and Williams. “I just hate for anybody to think that Wayne knew what was going on, because he did not.”

Williams also defending Walden throughout the fall, calling him “the most ethical person I know” and saying he trusted Walden “from the bottom of my soul.”

“There’s a difference between somebody thinking and somebody knowing,” Williams said. “And there’s a difference between coming aware in 2004 or 2008 that something had happened three or four years before.”

Williams and Holladay both thought that Walden was misrepresented in the report because his answers were paraphrased and removed from context.

“They asked him, ‘Wayne did you know Debby was grading papers?’’ Holladay said. “Wayne said, ‘Yes, it doesn’t surprise me because there’s TAs all over campus grading papers, they have the approval from the professor to do that, and Debby’s been in the department for 20 years and she has a degree from the University of North Carolina, and she has a good relationship with the professors in the department and the dean, and so it wouldn’t surprise me if she was grading papers.’ So the answer in the report just says, ‘Yes.’ That’s a big difference right there.

“That part bothers me because he’s just like the rest of us – who would think that Debby is signing the professors’ names and there really is no teacher involved? No one at the University of North Carolina would think that. It’s listed in the university course guides, it’s got a course name and a teacher’s name beside it.”

Now that we've gotten that out of the way, on with the incriminating emails.

You do know that if they were making up stories they would be liable. That newspaper would be put under and everybody on the street if the things they were saying were made up. If they are made up then how come UNC is not suing them for slander?

 

[JPScott]

It's really very simple. You, like most here, want to see UNC men's basketball hammered by the NCAA, regardless if they broke any rules, played ineligible players, etc., while Jay is more interested in what actually transpired and what, if any, rules were broken. He, unlike you, doesn't think Wainstein was forced by UNC to write a faux report (still waiting for those damning emails tying the men's basketball team to the scandal) and decided to take the time to read it, rather than just taking other peoples word for it.

Not sure where you concluded that I want to see UNC men's basketball hammered regardless if they broke any rules. They DID break many rules. All one has to do is to read the NCAA manual and you'll quickly see that not only has UNC broken multiple rules, but they've violated the very spirit of what the NCAA organization claims is it's core principles and values.

For example core principles of Institutional Control and Responsibility, Principle of Student-Athlete Well-Being, Principle of Sportsmanship and Ethical Conduct, Principle of Sound Academic Standards, Principle of Rules Compliance, Principle Governing Eligibility etc. If anything it might be easier to list the core values and principles that UNC did not violate.

As far as Weinstein's report, I already said that while there was plenty enough information there to nail UNC (if the NCAA chooses to do so), there's also plenty that Wainstein ignored.

Bilas has actually said very little of substance about the issue, although most recently he admitted that UNC could be nailed by the NCAA for what's in the Wainstein report, so I'm not sure why you take it as some sort of vindication.

BTW, you keep making a reference to emails. I don't know where you got this, but I never made such a claim so not sure why you keep asking me about them.

This brings up something that I just cannot wrap my head around. You're incredibly quick to correct others when they post inaccuracies related to UK basketball, making it a point to constantly bring up how the media gets it wrong and not check the facts before they print their articles. Yet you're completely unwilling to even begin to look at the facts in the UNC scandal, while still posting about it. Perhaps this is why you're baffled when the experts look into the facts and ask where are the violations?

The times when I dispute what people in the media say about UK, I provide direct evidence disputing their claim, and usually from the original source and fully referenced. And this evidence is generally directly relevant to the issue at hand.

You, on the other hand, seem to struggle mightily making any logical point, because either you don't have relevant information at hand or you are too busy trying to muddy the discussion with non sequiturs and avoiding answering any relevant questions.

Normally I would suggest that maybe if you truly believed that UNC was innocent and this to be some huge media conspiracy against this fine institution, to put together a website to coherently and logically spell out why what is claimed in the media is a mistake, but seems you've already tried that route and failed miserably.

As far as me and UNC, the fact is that I HAVE looked at the facts of the UNC scandal. I've followed UNC for quite a long time and in fact was in Chapel Hill through some of the times that these things were going on. While I never bought into the propaganda coming out of Chapel Hill regarding their supposed high level of integrity etc., I never imagined the extent of fraud that they were willing to commit.

I did know enough about the basketball program to know that once it became known that AFAM was at the heart of the scandal, that it was going to be HUGE. I also know enough that the group that has been behind this fraud have gone against the very principles that Bill Friday stood for (at least what he claims to stand for anyway.) I met Friday a few times BTW, and if was genuine in what he said, he'd be spinning in his grave right now with the way his university is being dragged down into the toilet by those who seem willing to destroy the University's credibility just to save a couple banners.

PS & FWIW, there was a website which I ran across maybe 15 years ago which is still one of my favorites, as it goes a long way in describing many of the types of people you can run across on the message boards.

Flame Warriors Guide

It's instructive IMO to be aware of these various people and their various tactics. You, BTW, are one of the more bizarre 'Flame Warriors' I've ever seen. I would characterize you as a combination of the following:

Artful Dodger

Ferrous Cranus

Filibuster

Ideologue

Loopy

Stealth

Target

and Tireless Rebutter​

Quite a combination!

 

[Blue Decade]

FWIW, I take it the other way. I.e. by Bilas not taking a hard line against Carolina, he may be feeling guilty over or trying to explain away a lack of academic rigor in his own college experience.

Remember Duke is the home of the three-year sociology degree, where players can earn credit while playing in an international tournament overseas.

Bilas already admitted that he took some bunny classes at Duke, of course the thing he seems to have trouble understanding is the difference between a long-standing class that is simply easy, versus a class which is set up on the spot by a secretary with the intention to keep athletes eligible where you get a passing grade literally without regard to the quality of your work, or even if you do your own work.

FWIW, when it comes to this issue, UNC and Duke are not seen as mortal enemies but more like competitive chums in an exclusive country club sports league. They like to beat each other on the field, naturally, but they're certainly not going to throw the hammer down and upset the unique advantages that they've cultivated over the years for themselves.

+1

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

Jon, thanks for that link. I'd never heard of that site before, and it gives perfect descriptions. Didn't read them all, but is there one for you, responding to the Dodgers and Cranus types knowing how futile it is? LOL.

 

[JPScott]

Jon, thanks for that link. I'd never heard of that site before, and it gives perfect descriptions. Didn't read them all, but is there one for you, responding to the Dodgers and Cranus types knowing how futile it is? LOL.

Well, if the purpose of my posts was to try to talk sense into our guest or change his mind, then yes it would be quite futile.

But that's not my purpose. Rather I use his posts as a prop to illustrate, to those who may not have been following this issue in detail, just how willing those who want to defend UNC over this issue are to abandon all logic, intellect and most of all integrity in their efforts. It's indicative of the lack of honesty and integrity which has become pervasive in the school itself.

It's this very attitude, BTW, which demonstrates why the NCAA needs to stop treating UNC as a partner and more as an adversary, as otherwise they will drag both organizations down to ruin.

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

Well put. What do you think they will do?

 

[JPScott]

Well put. What do you think they will do?

Unlike our guest, I don't claim to know what the NCAA will do. And I'm certainly not going to act like I know whatever real or imagined restrictions the NCAA is beholden to, as Bobby and other UNC apologists have foolishly boasted about in the past.

I've said all along that the NCAA can and will do what they choose to, regardless of evidence, logic or precedence. As in the past, whether they pursue a case or not, and whether they lay down punishment has less to do with the actual evidence or guilt and more to do with politics.

In the case of UNC, there's plenty of evidence to bury the school and their sports programs, even with the half-assed and incomplete investigations presented to date. Whether the NCAA follows through or not, I don't know, but the NOA leaves them with little room to not exact some significant punishment, otherwise the NCAA itself is left critically exposed.

What I do know is that the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill has approached this entire scandal spectacularly wrong the entire time. When I first became aware of this scandal, and already knowing how deep and long-standing this scandal promised to be, I suggested that they come clean, clean house and hope for the best.

They chose instead to close ranks, fight tooth and nail over every piece of information, try to intimidate witnesses, bury incriminating evidence and start a wide-ranging propaganda campaign of BS. They have been paying for that decision ever since IMO. And they will continue to pay for it for at least another decade, if it ever ends. And this is true regardless of whether the NCAA chooses to act, as there will certainly be additional evidence coming out for years to come. The scandal is just too big and has so many tentacles to it, many which remain to be explored in detail.