Jay Bilas: NCAA officials ‘breaking their own rules’ to punish UNC

[martinsm30]

@JPScott

Our own Jon Scott noted Jay Bilas has a conflict of interest by taking money from a PR firm or law firm employed by UNC. I cannot find the details maybe he can give us more info.

 

[Wall Knight Teague]

He's still smarting over the UK Fan Threats/Higgins non-story. He was on here spouting that moral superiority crap then as well. He trashed everyone that came down on the UK fans side of that argument and now is defending Bilas' very weak position on UNCheat. Kinda makes you wonder.

I don't know which team that tool Spamburger roots for, but it sure as hell isn't UK.

 

[UKCatnNC]

The NCAA is extremely strict on the High School transcript and Admission test scores for entry into their Div. 1 schools.

The inference Jay is trying to sell everyone, is once that admission standard has been established and the student-athlete enters school, the said athletic dept. has ZERO responsibility for the legitimacy of the classes? HOGWASH!!!

If that's the case these coaches also need to stop getting bonus' for academic accomplishments, especially when they are fraudulent like the UNCHEAT case!

I went to ncaa.org and found the following on the academics page (http://www.ncaa.org/about/what-we-do/academics):

CONTINUING ACADEMIC SUCCESS
Student-athletes commit to academic achievement and the pursuit of a degree, and they are required to meet yearly standards to be able to compete. College athletes' success is tracked using three measures: grades, minimum credit hours per year and progress toward earning a degree. Schools in all divisions (Division I, Division II, Division III) must confirm the academic eligibility of student-athletes, and those who are declared ineligible must go through the student-athlete reinstatement process to compete again.

I just don't see how they can use fake classes for athletes to get around this!? It is no different than just giving them grades to keep them eligible. GO CATS!!

 

[fearthebluecat]

Jay is getting more like Dickie V each year. He used to be an outstanding commentator now he just likes to run his mouth about things he has no control over. UNC should have there title taken for being a bunch of cheaters and not attending classes. They need something done to them besides a pat on the back.

 

[Primedfor9]

Because he's the best analyst they have and has tons of credibility. Just because he has his own opinion different from yours doesn't mean he's wrong. Most of the vocal posters on this board like or dislike media members based only on if they are of the same opinion on a subject. I don't agree with Bilas on this, but I still like the guy. You can disagree and not hate someone. You know, like adults should be able to.

Bilas was great for a long time, but lately his ACC bias has taken over his objectivity. He just keeps slamming the NCAA thinking everyone else will buy it because it's the NCAA, the organization everyone loves to hate but it looks to me like they might be redeeming themselves a bit and are starting to do things the right way and here you have Bilas acting like nothing wrong was done in louisville and they should just skate along with UNC. How anyone could think louisville shouldn't vacate their games when they played ineligible players is beyond me.

 

[irishcat1965]

Because he's the best analyst they have and has tons of credibility. Just because he has his own opinion different from yours doesn't mean he's wrong. Most of the vocal posters on this board like or dislike media members based only on if they are of the same opinion on a subject. I don't agree with Bilas on this, but I still like the guy. You can disagree and not hate someone. You know, like adults should be able to.

We all know you like the guy, you being a UL and ACC fanboy.

 

[Lumpy 2]

The NCAA routinely checks academic records of any athlete they believe warrants investigation. They have often invalidated test scores and disallowed course credits from schools they determine to be diploma mills. I guess Bilas believes that is ok, but operating a diploma mill after they enroll at UNC is ok.

 

[Poetax]

I'll give Bilas this, if it was us and UNC on the chopping block, he would probably take up for us too but the reasons would be the same, to save ACC schools. He thinks he's in a win win situation, beat up on the NCAA, the organization that everybody hates, and he smells like a rose. But we hate the NCAA because they don't penalize special schools when they get caught cheating, this he doesn't get.

 

[UKWildcatT]

Because he's the best analyst they have and has tons of credibility. Just because he has his own opinion different from yours doesn't mean he's wrong. Most of the vocal posters on this board like or dislike media members based only on if they are of the same opinion on a subject. I don't agree with Bilas on this, but I still like the guy. You can disagree and not hate someone. You know, like adults should be able to.

Oh good lord dude. People don't hate Bilas because of a "different opinion", it's because his is a ridiculous opinion.

The guys sole purpose is to take apart the NCAA. Bravo! We all hate the NCAA! We have an active coach that would love for that to happen.

But Bilas is blinded by his hatred of the NCAA as he continually defends scum bags like Boeheim, Pitino and Roy Williams.

This isn't hard man.

 

[J. Shellacque]

Wow......"Jay Bilass" defending UNC's ass for obvious decades of cheating.. Jay used to be pretty good, but now he continues embarrassing himself. ESPN puppet. He's almost there, and if he keeps up this same nonsensical rhetoric trying to defend UNC, his credibility will start being talked about as at the same level of Milli Vanilli

 

[UKnCincy]

Nothing is right about it. The question isn't about what's right, it's about what is legal (according to NCAA laws). I see a lot of people talking about just setting up a fraudulent class. UNC did something quite different, unless I missed something, and maybe I did. From what I have seen, the problem is the classes existed and were accredited before this scam. Therefore, they would not be fraudulent. Instead, it appears that UNC took an accredited major and turned it into a series of ultra easy classes. Now, if that is right, it will be a whole lot harder to prove that the classes were fraudulent, even if common sense tells you they were.

No, this was fraud. And UNC admitted this was fraud to SACS.

From page 29 of their response to SACS:

The Wainstein report explains this information at length and in significant detail and demonstrates, as SACSCOC correctly observes, that the academic fraud was long-standing and not limited to the misconduct of just Nyang’oro and Crowder. Indeed, the latter point is precisely what led the University, as Chancellor Folt announced at the news conference accompanying the release of the Wainstein report on October 22, 2014, to terminate or commence disciplinary reviews of a number of employees—all in furtherance of Carolina’s commitment to holding individuals appropriately accountable for the past academic failings.
​

You've been listening to the Jay Bilas' of the world too much. The NCAA has not evaluated the quality of these courses in any way. UNC did that themselves, as stipulated by the by-laws.

 

[UKnCincy]

I might agree with him based on the letter of the law. But what it fails to consider are the hundreds/thousands of documents, emails, etc. showing that these classes were *explicitly created* for the sole purpose of keeping players eligible. That other students eventually caught on and were able to take those same classes is smoke and mirrors.

His assessment of the letter of the law is not accurate. Take his quote about academic fraud being defined by the NCAA as only the player cheating the school and not the school's curriculum itself.

Bilas' definition actually ignores the most prominent fraud outlined in the by-laws, which is the arrangement of fraudulent credit / transcripts in order to maintain eligibility.

There is a phrase that is familiar to anyone who has dealt with the NCAA on a regular basis. This phrase is an "erroneous certification of eligibility." That is the outcome that the NCAA wants to avoid, and academic issues are a primary cause of erroneous certifications. This pops up in past COI reports frequently and highlights how the NCAA has always been concerned with academic eleigiblity and tied it to infractions / penalties. This is not some unprecedented action on the part of the NCAA.

Jay Bilas either has no clue what he's talking about or he has an agenda and is spinning the truth.

 

[bestshadofblue]

@UKnCincy , does it even matter if the courses were fraudulent or not? I thought the NCAA charged them with impermissible benefits for giving athletes preferential treatment when it came to accessing the classes. Did they base any of their allegations on the classes being fraudulent?

 

[UKnCincy]

@UKnCincy , does it even matter if the courses were fraudulent or not? I thought the NCAA charged them with impermissible benefits for giving athletes preferential treatment when it came to accessing the classes. Did they base any of their allegations on the classes being fraudulent?

That is correct. The allegations focus on extra benefits and not fraud.

UNC is refusing to call these classes "fraud" in the NCAA investigation, despite doing so in their response to SACS. This further highlights how shameless they have been through all this.

That said, UNC's insistence to the NCAA that this isn't fraud has forced the NCAA to go the extra benefits route and focus instead on the impermissible academic assistance that was offered to the athletes and not to the general student body.

It is also worth noting the fact that the NCAA hasn't pressed the issue on alleging academic fraud. This is another example of how the NCAA has been trying to adjudicate this exactly as the by-laws would dictate.

 

[bestshadofblue]

That is correct. The allegations focus on extra benefits and not fraud.

UNC is refusing to call these classes "fraud" in the NCAA investigation, despite doing so in their response to SACS. This further highlights how shameless they have been through all this.

That said, UNC's insistence to the NCAA that this isn't fraud has forced the NCAA to go the extra benefits route and focus instead on the impermissible academic assistance that was offered to the athletes and not to the general student body.

It is also worth noting the fact that the NCAA hasn't pressed the issue on alleging academic fraud. This is another example of how the NCAA has been trying to adjudicate this exactly as the by-laws would dictate.

Just so I completely understand, whether the courses were fraudulent or not has absolutely no bearing on the allegations, correct? Or, alternatively stated, even if the NCAA cannot prove that the courses were fraudulent, they are still going to hammer UNC, correct? That is, UNC is not going to get off on some technicality about the courses counting for credit or anything dumb like that, right?

 

[UKnCincy]

Just so I completely understand, whether the courses were fraudulent or not has absolutely no bearing on the allegations, correct? Or, alternatively stated, even if the NCAA cannot prove that the courses were fraudulent, they are still going to hammer UNC, correct? That is, UNC is not going to get off on some technicality about the courses counting for credit or anything dumb like that, right?

The allegations have nothing to do with fraud.

However, you've missed the point in my two posts that discussed fraud. The point of those posts were to do two things:

1. Dispel the myth which UNC has been spreading through their surrogates that this is simply an issue of easy classes and poor oversight. It's not. Whether the NCAA alleges it or not, this is a clear cut case of fraud and UNC has admitted so to their accreditor.
2. Reinforce the fact that Jay Bilas has been consistently wrong in his understanding of NCAA by-laws. I selected his quote about fraud as it was low hanging fruit and germane to the topic of discussion.

You also might want to work on not being so obvious.

 

[UKvisitor]

There are people right here on RR that have a better (truer) voice than Bilas (and alot of so called experts)

 

[uky8unc5]

If UNC had a compelling argument of innocence, this mess would have evaporated 4 years ago.

The fact that the NCAA's investigation has (reluctantly/begrudgingly) grown day by day until it reached this magnitude is the strongest proof of just how horrible is their crime.

 

[J. Shellacque]

The end result will bring the most ire of all time...........by all sides and many times over

 

[JPScott]

Bilas and other UNC shills have tried to make a case that the NCAA hasn't been 'following their own rules' when it comes to the UNC case. They haven't really provided any specific examples though.

I will say that this case has been complicated, for example there have not been one but three different NOAs. But what's not mentioned is that much of the blame for that falls squarely on UNC itself.

Remember once allegations come to light, UNC as a dutiful member of the NCAA is supposed to do a thorough investigation and be an open, honest and willing partner with the NCAA in a quest to get to the bottom of what happened. That's not happened.

UNC has from day 1 tried to control the narrative and 'guide' one investigation after another. Each time they've produced sham results, only to see their findings unravel as others (PackPride, Dan Kane etc.) have revealed that the various self-investigations are not capturing the larger picture. [As an illustration of just how much of a sham these early reports were, remember that Jan Boxill was allowed to not only review but to water down the reports in order to minimize the connection between classes and athletics as much as possible. The same Jan Boxill who later in the Wainstein investigation was found to be knee-deep in the fraud herself!]

Even the 'independent' investigation that appears to have stuck, the Wainstein report, was fully funded by UNC who despite claims of being open-ended, was firmly defined to focus solely on AFAM studies. In other words, UNC was able to limit the scope of the investigation to a very small part of the potential scandal.

Even then, UNC has pulled out every dirty trick they can think of to avoid punishment. First delaying the 1st NOA by trying to introduce additional evidence which pushes the blame off to minor sports and giving them time to lobby the NCAA to water down the allegations.

They pretty much received everything they could hope for with the 2nd NOA but even that wasn't enough for them and they foolishly allowed their lawyers to argue that they shouldn't be held accountable for even watered-down charges.

This led to the 3rd NOA which largely reinstated many of the original charges, which frankly shouldn't have been dropped in the first place.

Even with that, UNC tried a last-minute delay tactic by having Debbie Crowder finally come forward after years of silence. [after 'miraculously' hiring a high-priced attorney (an attorney BTW who seemed to be more interested in defending UNC than in guarding the rights of his 'client') to tell her side of the story (which she could have done at any time without even needing an attorney but failed to do so).]

UNC has decried the slow pace of this case, but a lot of the blame for that falls squarely on themselves. If they had done a credible investigation from the beginning and had answered to the NCAA's NOA when they were supposed to, this case would have been decided years ago.

One thing to keep in mind, after the 1st NOA, if UNC truly wanted to get this case over with ASAP, they could have gone ahead and answered to the existing charges while submitting additional findings for the minor sports programs. Or they could have submitted the additional findings once they were found, rather than waiting to the deadline before introducing these new findings and requesting a delay. But they did neither. They waited until the deadline and then refused to answer the original charges, essentially delaying as much as they possibly could.

So when I hear people complaining about the NCAA 'not following procedure', I have to wonder where's the outcry for UNC not following procedure?

UNC has clearly not been a 'cooperative' partner when it comes to this case. The sooner the NCAA recognizes this and treats UNC accordingly, the better IMO. I certainly hope that if UNC is dumb enough to bring this issue to an outside court, that the NCAA makes this point that UNC has been hostile to the process all along.

Remember this is supposed to be a voluntary organization. If UNC can't be counted on to follow the rules (both in terms of not holding up the principles of the organization in terms of providing a quality education to its student-athletes in return for their participation in sports but also in terms of being an honest member who is capable and willing of investigating it's own wrong-doing), then maybe UNC should simply drop out of the organization altogether?

 

[Ryan Lemonds Diary]

He has received countless death threats to his family from UNC higher ups. It isn't being reported because Jay is scared for his family.

Wrong...only UK fans make death threats. Don't you watch the sports channels?

 

[weatherbird]

No, this was fraud. And UNC admitted this was fraud to SACS.

From page 29 of their response to SACS:

The Wainstein report explains this information at length and in significant detail and demonstrates, as SACSCOC correctly observes, that the academic fraud was long-standing and not limited to the misconduct of just Nyang’oro and Crowder. Indeed, the latter point is precisely what led the University, as Chancellor Folt announced at the news conference accompanying the release of the Wainstein report on October 22, 2014, to terminate or commence disciplinary reviews of a number of employees—all in furtherance of Carolina’s commitment to holding individuals appropriately accountable for the past academic failings.
​

You've been listening to the Jay Bilas' of the world too much. The NCAA has not evaluated the quality of these courses in any way. UNC did that themselves, as stipulated by the by-laws.

Thanks for that information, as that changes things totally in my view. If UNC admitted fraud in the SACS report, then in my opinion, NCAA needs no further proof. They should be hammered.

 

[Ryan Lemonds Diary]

I still don't get it, don't go to class, imaginary professors, and you still get passing grades, what is right with this? And if the NCAA has to get involved to stop it, they should, it's cheating.

According to UNC and Bilas because it wasn't limited to just athletes it isn't a NCAA problem. The thing that ticks me off is that they acknowledge what they did was morally wrong but are arrogant enough to say that it isn't against NCAA rules so in a sense they are giving the NCAA a double barreled middle finger up and saying you can't touch us. Under the old regime that may have worked but with Swanke we will have to see how that works for them.

 

[bestshadofblue]

@weatherbird I think you are getting caught up in the same thing that 95% of others are getting caught up in and that is the courses. In particular, whether the courses were deemed fraudulent or not. As I pointed out above, which @UKnCincy confirmed, nothing in the allegations is tied to the actual content of the courses. The allegations are centered around athletes being given preferential treatment when registering for courses, changing of grades, and so on, that the regular student body was not given.

So, that means you can replace these fake classes with honors quantum mechanics classes that required a PhD dissertation for completion and you would still have the same breaking of by-laws by UNC, the same NOA, and they would still get hammered.

The validity of the classes is completely irrelevant to the discussion of the NCAA's cases.

 

[UKnCincy]

Bilas and other UNC shills have tried to make a case that the NCAA hasn't been 'following their own rules' when it comes to the UNC case. They haven't really provided any specific examples though.

I will say that this case has been complicated, for example there have not been one but three different NOAs. But what's not mentioned is that much of the blame for that falls squarely on UNC itself.

Remember once allegations come to light, UNC as a dutiful member of the NCAA is supposed to do a thorough investigation and be an open, honest and willing partner with the NCAA in a quest to get to the bottom of what happened. That's not happened.

UNC has from day 1 tried to control the narrative and 'guide' one investigation after another. Each time they've produced sham results, only to see their findings unravel as others (PackPride, Dan Kane etc.) have revealed that the various self-investigations are not capturing the larger picture. [As an illustration of just how much of a sham these early reports were, remember that Jan Boxill was allowed to not only review but to water down the reports in order to minimize the connection between classes and athletics as much as possible. The same Jan Boxill who later in the Wainstein investigation was found to be knee-deep in the fraud herself!]

Even the 'independent' investigation that appears to have stuck, the Wainstein report, was fully funded by UNC who despite claims of being open-ended, was firmly defined to focus solely on AFAM studies. In other words, UNC was able to limit the scope of the investigation to a very small part of the potential scandal.

Even then, UNC has pulled out every dirty trick they can think of to avoid punishment. First delaying the 1st NOA by trying to introduce additional evidence which pushes the blame off to minor sports and giving them time to lobby the NCAA to water down the allegations.

They pretty much received everything they could hope for with the 2nd NOA but even that wasn't enough for them and they foolishly allowed their lawyers to argue that they shouldn't be held accountable for even watered-down charges.

This led to the 3rd NOA which largely reinstated many of the original charges, which frankly shouldn't have been dropped in the first place.

Even with that, UNC tried a last-minute delay tactic by having Debbie Crowder finally come forward after years of silence. [after 'miraculously' hiring a high-priced attorney (an attorney BTW who seemed to be more interested in defending UNC than in guarding the rights of his 'client') to tell her side of the story (which she could have done at any time without even needing an attorney but failed to do so).]

UNC has decried the slow pace of this case, but a lot of the blame for that falls squarely on themselves. If they had done a credible investigation from the beginning and had answered to the NCAA's NOA when they were supposed to, this case would have been decided years ago.

One thing to keep in mind, after the 1st NOA, if UNC truly wanted to get this case over with ASAP, they could have gone ahead and answered to the existing charges while submitting additional findings for the minor sports programs. Or they could have submitted the additional findings once they were found, rather than waiting to the deadline before introducing these new findings and requesting a delay. But they did neither. They waited until the deadline and then refused to answer the original charges, essentially delaying as much as they possibly could.

So when I hear people complaining about the NCAA 'not following procedure', I have to wonder where's the outcry for UNC not following procedure?

UNC has clearly not been a 'cooperative' partner when it comes to this case. The sooner the NCAA recognizes this and treats UNC accordingly, the better IMO. I certainly hope that if UNC is dumb enough to bring this issue to an outside court, that the NCAA makes this point that UNC has been hostile to the process all along.

Remember this is supposed to be a voluntary organization. If UNC can't be counted on to follow the rules (both in terms of not holding up the principles of the organization in terms of providing a quality education to its student-athletes in return for their participation in sports but also in terms of being an honest member who is capable and willing of investigating it's own wrong-doing), then maybe UNC should simply drop out of the organization altogether?

One thing I'd add about Wainstein that no one seems to have noticed is this. Rick Evrard was part of designing the scope of the Wainstein investigation and defining how it would be conducted and how information would be shared.

Rick Evrard is an attorney specializing in NCAA compliance and has been leading UNC's responses to the various NOAs.

What's clear from looking at how Wainstein was set up, is that the investigation was intended to be an end around on the NCAA and accomplish two things:

1. Allow UNC to talk about the in-depth investigation and put this to bed
2. Try to collect the information in a way that would prevent the NCAA from using it

In other words, they wanted to be able to pat themselves on the back about how they got to the bottom of this, but they didn't want to have to deal with any negative consequences. Fortunately, things got a bit away from them and didn't go exactly according to plan.

 

[howercat]

Yep, toeing the UNC line..wonder who his boss is?

 

[JPScott]

One thing I'd add about Wainstein that no one seems to have noticed is this. Rick Evrard was part of designing the scope of the Wainstein investigation and defining how it would be conducted and how information would be shared.

Rick Evrard is an attorney specializing in NCAA compliance and has been leading UNC's responses to the various NOAs.

What's clear from looking at how Wainstein was set up, is that the investigation was intended to be an end around on the NCAA and accomplish two things:

1. Allow UNC to talk about the in-depth investigation and put this to bed
2. Try to collect the information in a way that would prevent the NCAA from using it

In other words, they wanted to be able to pat themselves on the back about how they got to the bottom of this, but they didn't want to have to deal with any negative consequences. Fortunately, things got a bit away from them and didn't go exactly according to plan.

Good points and interesting about Evrard, although not surprising.

Regarding the comment about things not going "exactly according to plan", my theory is Wainstein largely gave UNC what they paid him to do: 1.) focus solely on AFAM (where he primarily blamed two 'rogue' employees who were no longer at the school) and 2.) steer clear of men's basketball coaches and other athletic officials having any culpability in the fraud.

The fly in the ointment is that Wainstein (who I guess probably got turned off eventually by UNC's entitled attitude) said what they wanted to hear in the news conference but left enough nuggets in the report's addendum to fry UNC. Gave him just enough time to get out of town before UNC figured out what happened.

 

[LeonThe Camel]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/college/article156649234.html

He is accurate in what he is saying. The NCAA should not legislate the quality of a class.

 

[bestshadofblue]

He is accurate in what he is saying. The NCAA should not legislate the quality of a class.

He might be right, luckily for us the NCAA is not trying to do that. Nothing in the NOA is based off of the content of the classes or if the classes were legit or fraudulent. Those "classes" are completely irrelevant to their allegations.

 

[weatherbird]

@weatherbird I think you are getting caught up in the same thing that 95% of others are getting caught up in and that is the courses. In particular, whether the courses were deemed fraudulent or not. As I pointed out above, which @UKnCincy confirmed, nothing in the allegations is tied to the actual content of the courses. The allegations are centered around athletes being given preferential treatment when registering for courses, changing of grades, and so on, that the regular student body was not given.

So, that means you can replace these fake classes with honors quantum mechanics classes that required a PhD dissertation for completion and you would still have the same breaking of by-laws by UNC, the same NOA, and they would still get hammered.

The validity of the classes is completely irrelevant to the discussion of the NCAA's cases.

This is correct, and why I had the opinions I did at the beginning of the thread. If the core of the NOA is not about whether the classes were legit or not, then UNC should fry.

 

[UKGrad93]

The problem is, Bilas happens to be right in this case. What UNC did was wrong. The problem is not determining whether the classes existed or not, but whether they were used intentionally to keep athletes eligible. That is going to be harder to do, because there would have to be unadulterated proof that the intent was just that. To us, it is easy, but to prove it is harder, and probably why it is taking so long. And what Bilas is talking about is really legal matters more than anything else. It isn't about his opinion, it is about the facts which he is stating, which happen to be true.

The classes were a scam, but as Bilas mentions, do we really want the NCAA dictating curriculum in classes for athletes? Because once that starts, there is no end to it. Even programs who aren't trying to keep athletes eligible with no-show classes could be in danger of punishment. I think the NCAA wants to punish UNC because they see what we do. But what rule do they cite as broken? I believe if they ever feel like there is significant evidence to prove that the classes were made to keep athletes eligible, they will come down hard. That is hard to do just on a he said/she said type of evidence.

I don't like Bilas, but I can't fault his stance on this subject. If the NCAA wants to punish, they are going to have to think like the criminals do, and find loopholes to close the loopholes.

I agree that the NCAA is not and should not be an academic accreditation body. However, everyone knows the classes were fake. If they were legitimate, then some UNC professors and administrators should be wining lawsuits for wrongful termination. The classes were fake. UNC lied. End of discussion. In most of the rest of the world, you get punished for lying.

 

[JPScott]

He is accurate in what he is saying. The NCAA should not legislate the quality of a class.

They're not.

 

[EliteBlue]

a. yes, but both had rules for which violations occurred.
b. yes, but there is a standard by which the incoming students are measured by, and it is generally about as low as the general admission requirements for any common public institution.



I think we all agree it is wrong, but the question is do we want the NCAA just punishing schools for anything they want, even if it isn't in the rules? And a lot of athletes are enrolled in similar easy courses (not fake ones necessarily) to lighten the load for them. most if not all schools do this. The NCAA rules are by and large just about determining amateur status. So all their rules boil down to a) are you eligible to attend college? b) are you still amatuer?

You sound like a UNC fan. EASY courses that ALL universities have is one thing. Not every student has to major in engineering; that is why you have communications and art. Everyone knows that's an easier path to a degree but those classes still meet and have a syllabus w/ real course work. Those classes and degrees aren't there with the intent to boost GPA's of athletes even if that's why some athletes choose to major in those subjects. An academic institution setting up fake classes with non existent instructors with the sole purpose of boosting GPA is a whole other thing. The "other students took them" argument is a straw mans argument. 1) Athletes are a small % of the student body and were the overwhelming majority of the students in said classes. 2) What does the University gain by setting up fake classes/major for a non-athlete--that is intent. (other than using regular students to mask the fraud)

No, it isn't the NCAAs job to regulate how difficult classes are or course work prescribed. But they can't allow non existent classes if at the same time they are going to punish Universities for a students high school transcripts or college admission test being falsified even though they have made the grades required as a college student. (which is what those test are suppose to measure).

 

[UKGrad93]

UNC circumvented the rules in order to benefit. Nothing has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt like a murder case. UNC is guilty as hell and everyone knows it, even Bilas. He's just trying to channel his inner Bill Clinton, depends on the definition of 'is'.

 

[weatherbird]

You sound like a UNC fan. EASY courses that ALL universities have is one thing. Not every student has to major in engineering; that is why you have communications and art. Everyone knows that's an easier path to a degree but those classes still meet and have a syllabus w/ real course work. Those classes and degrees aren't there with the intent to boost GPA's of athletes even if that's why some athletes choose to major in those subjects. An academic institution setting up fake classes with non existent instructors with the sole purpose of boosting GPA is a whole other thing. The "other students took them" argument is a straw mans argument. 1) Athletes are a small % of the student body and were the overwhelming majority of the students in said classes. 2) What does the University gain by setting up fake classes/major for a non-athlete--that is intent. (other than using regular students to mask the fraud)

No, it isn't the NCAAs job to regulate how difficult classes are or course work prescribed. But they can't allow non existent classes if at the same time they are going to punish Universities for a students high school transcripts or college admission test being falsified even though they have made the grades required as a college student. (which is what those test are suppose to measure).

Not an UNC fan. Quite the opposite. But I am also a realist. There is no question to you or I that UNC tailored classes and a major in order to keep athletes both happy and eligible. The question is proving it. What measure do you use to do that? People mention that the fact the class never met, only had one or two grades count, and so on. All of those sound exactly like my senior design class in college (Engineering, by the way). We never met, and our grade was based entirely on our project. And what do you know, even that grade was very subjective. Now I agree that UNC cheated in doing this, but if you are the NCAA you can't set a precedent that could cause more negativity over a longer period of time in the future.

If you read my responses toward the end of the thread, the fact that the NOA is not referencing fraudulent classes is a good sign they will be punished. The NOA apparently referencing impermissible benefits, which in my mind is huge.

 

[bestshadofblue]

If you read my responses toward the end of the thread, the fact that the NOA is not referencing fraudulent classes is a good sign they will be punished. The NOA apparently referencing impermissible benefits, which in my mind is huge.

Yes, this. The classes themselves are irrelevant to the allegations in the NOA. Not sure why people keep talking about the classes. The NCAA doesn't care about the classes, if they were fraudulent or not. We all know they were fraudulent, but that is besides the point.

They are not being accused of setting up fake classes for athletes, they are being accused of giving athletes preferential treatment when registering, grade changes, and so on.

 

[martinsm30]

Yes, this. The classes themselves are irrelevant to the allegations in the NOA. Not sure why people keep talking about the classes. The NCAA doesn't care about the classes, if they were fraudulent or not. We all know they were fraudulent, but that is besides the point.

They are not being accused of setting up fake classes for athletes, they are being accused of giving athletes preferential treatment when registering, grade changes, and so on.

UNC was running a diploma mill for its athletes. UNC's academic reputation should be in the toilet. We can continue to talk about the classes here because these facts shouldn't be forgotten.

 

[bestshadofblue]

UNC was running a diploma mill for its athletes. UNC's academic reputation should be in the toilet. We can continue to talk about the classes here because these facts shouldn't be forgotten.

I completely agree. However, that UNC created a diploma mill for athletes and crapped on its reputation is a separate discussion from the NOA. I think when they are combined it leads to misunderstandings, such as @weatherbird initially had.

If you combine the two then it leads to the UNC defenders saying "oh no, the classes counted towards their credit hours and so no one is ineligible, nor should you punish UNC". If enough people start to believe this case is about the NCAA policing academics then it might lead to more people speaking out against UNC getting punished, as they don't want the NCAA to police academics.

So, while it needs to be repeated over and over again that UNC cheated their own athletes out of an education, I think we just need to be very clear that that is not the reason for the NOA and has no bearing on the NOA.

Edit: This is clearly what Bilas is going for here. He knows that NCAA has no by-laws that address the rigor of courses and he is using that to try to help get UNC off the hook. He wants to sway the media by stating the allegations are concerning the quality of the classes. This is not true.

 

[TankedCat]

funny that the NCAA doesn't want to look at the rigor of classes for its members but it won't think twice about telling a high school that its academics do not meet the standards for a kid to become college eligible in the first place.

-----------------------

In a letter to UNC, the COI hearing panel acknowledged that NCAA bylaws "do not generally contemplate the infractions process addressing quality and content assessments regarding academic courses." But, the COI said, NCAA members have recognized an "appropriate space" for the infractions process to address cases involving university officials improperly influencing athletes' eligibility or academic performance.

So what caused NCAA Notice No. 1 to get a lot better for UNC in NCAA Notice No. 2? According to the COI, there was confusion between the NCAA enforcement staff (which investigates and makes the allegations) and the COI (which decides the penalties after reviewing the allegations and holding a hearing).

"The change appears to have been based, in part, on a belief by the enforcement staff that the COI does not generally support the consideration of impermissible academic assistance allegations," the COI panel wrote to UNC. "That is not an accurate characterization of the COI's position. The COI will consider allegations of violations of NCAA rules, including those involving impermissible academic assistance and academic misconduct, when the facts are present to support such allegations. The COI does not support impermissible academic assistance allegations that appear to constitute academic misconduct. The COI has never intended to suggest that appropriately framed academic allegations (i.e., impermissible academic assistance or academic misconduct) should not be presented to the COI."

 

[Glenn's take]

One thing I will say in Bilas' defense is that I have heard him say numerous times that the NCAA should get out of the business of certifying players coming out of high school and leave it up to the schools. At least he is consistent on that.
That said I do completely disagree with him on this.