No. Roy Williams arrived (2003) and became aware of the classes (around 2006). The line decreases after that, doesn't it? Again, when Roy Williams learned of the classes, he told Joe Hollady (his Asst. who oversaw the team's academics) to make sure basketball players were not being steered into paper classes. And that is why you see the decrease.
Push in back doesnt matter. @5.8 Meeks committed lane violation on his free throw
- Thread starter crawfords corner
- Start date
No. Roy Williams arrived (2003) and became aware of the classes (around 2006). The line decreases after that, doesn't it? Again, when Roy Williams learned of the classes, he told Joe Hollady (his Asst. who oversaw the team's academics) to make sure basketball players were not being steered into paper classes. And that is why you see the decrease.
Welp, it's all settled. Ol Roy AND GL97 both said that UNC did nothing wrong. I suppose all those people that got fired will be getting their jobs back.
"...student-athletes comprised 44.9% of the total student enrollments in the anomalous course sections."
This . . . THIS . . . . is the conversation ender for me.
I went to college. I never had a class in which nearly half the enrolled students were athletes. Not even close.
This . . . THIS . . . . is the conversation ender for me.
I went to college. I never had a class in which nearly half the enrolled students were athletes. Not even close.
I provided a link to both reports because if one wants to understand this academic issue, reading those two reports is a good start.
OK, so are you fine with vacating the 2005 title since players clearly took bogus classes to stay eligible?
"Outside the Lines" reported last week that McCants said his tutors wrote his term papers, he rarely went to class for about half his time at UNC and he remained able to play largely because he took bogus classes designed to keep athletes academically eligible.
So you do admit that Dean started the entire cheating mess? Good for you.
Check the number of players that left AFAM for communications when things started to get hot.. the fact no investigation into that major is yet another travesty and embarrassment.
Forgetting for a minute that this turned into a cheating thread, can we stop with the one individual play or moment when an official didn't get it right. I could go through almost every play in every game and say that there should have been a foul, travel, illegal screen, etc.. We lost, there's no conspiracy, the world isn't out to get us. There isn't a grand conspiracy by the Illuminati to get unc a title or screw us. The only issue is that, for the most part, college officials suck. Until they have full time, paid officials, which will never happen, there will always be controversial calls
lol
I never said UNC didn't do anything wrong, now did I? I said Roy Williams has been cleared of wrongdoing, which he has. Clearly, there was a problem in the AFAM Department and clearly UNC did not exercise the oversight it should have over that academic department. I am not denying there wasn't wrongdoing on the part of the University.
However, this is an academic issue. Not an athletic issue. The problem arose in the AFAM Department not in the athletic department and that is the key fact that most who want to see UNC athletics punish ignore.
This^. how many players from that team were enrolled in these courses? Just curious.
And so is the implication here that they were being steered into the courses before 2006?
If so . . . that's still a problem, my friend.
Dude, your college cheated for 20 years, the Carolina Way was cheating...
The entire world knows it...
North Carolina’s Dominance Fails to Cover Cheating’s Stain
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/31/sports/ncaabasketball/north-carolina-final-four-cheating-fake-classes.html?_r=0
No, I admit what is true. Two individuals (Dr. Nyang’oro and Ms. Crowder) started offering "easy" classes in their department. It originated in an academic department and not the athletic department.
The idea that it wasn't an athletic issue makes no sense. Its like a kid stealing from a store and the parent saying they didn't see it happen, but its the stores fault they didn't have sensors at the door to detect the theft. Its the kids faults. The athletes were the ones involved no matter which way you spin it. They 'took' bogus classes to ensure they stayed eligible.
I like the D grade in Applied Ethics. Seems appropriate.
You are correct as to the origin of the issue.
But "easy" courses morphed into fraudulent courses. . . ones that required virtually no time commitment, while offering a GPA boost. The Martin report lists the student-athlete enrollment in these courses to be nearly 50% of the enrolled students.
Do you find that merely an astonishing coincidence, or is it more likely that the athletic department was aware of the circumstances and steering its athletes accordingly?
You yourself stated that the " graph line" dropped once Roy learned of the courses and asked that his athletes not be steered. So, do your own observations and comments not strongly imply that they WERE being steered? It seems in your effort to exonerate Roy, you implicated your program.
"...this steering was most prevalent among the counselors for the revenue sports of football and men’s basketball.” - Kenneth Wainstein, the former U.S. assistant attorney general asked by North Carolina to investigate the fraud.
Last edited:
It's noteworthy that an AA and a bunch of women are the ones who have had to quit or were fired. Notice that all the white males are getting away scot free. Progressive place that.
When classes are created specifically for an athlete, meaning that athlete is the only person enrolled in the class, it absolutely is an athletic problem. This happened. Please explain to me why a course would be created for literally one athlete. Get real. These classes were created for athletes and word got out about the easy courses and other students enrolled. Just so happens that by having other students in the classes, it actually looks better for the university.
The ole phrase....
"Never argue with an idiot. They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience"
comes to mind reading this thread.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience"
comes to mind reading this thread.
Steering takes place at every college. Both student athletes and regular students are often steered to "easy classes." Anyone who has been to college knows about this. Students always know the "easy classes" where they can get an "easy A."
Now, if you want to discuss rather this is right or wrong, that is a valid discussion. But it happens at every college. The key fact in relation to the AFAM classes at UNC though was that this did not originate in the athletic department but in the academic department. The athletic department did not go and create these classes for the purpose of "cheating."
Jeeezus. . . you can't be this dumb.
They weren't steered to "easy classes". . . . they were steered to fraudulent ones.
Absolutely not. (1) This was a problem that originated in an academic department and not the athletic department and thus the governing body on this issue is the accreditation board, (2) because one cannot prove that the players would not have been ineligible if they hadn't taken the classes (but some other classes), and (3) there is no evidence that the basketball program did anything wrong under NCAA guidelines that rise to the level of taking away a title.
Yes they absolutely did. Classes were created for individual athletes. They were created for the sole purpose of getting them to be eligible. When a class has one person in it and that person is an athlete and was created to maintain eligibility, it is an athletic problem.
And so were regular students. You going to punish the regular students too? Take away their degrees? You then going to take away every college degree around the nation from someone who took an easy class?
Again, this originated within an academic department at the University. It did not originate in the athletic department. That is key. It is an academic issue. And btw, this is one reason the NCAA hasn't done anything yet. The NCAA is treading very carefully here for a reason.
The coordination between academics and athletics has been proven.
You are in denial.
Your beloved school is tarnished and even if you win tonight, it will only increase the desire and demands from the entire nation that the NCAA comes down hard on your disgraced institution.
Nearly, but not quite. Which means that the majority of the students were regular students, not student athletes. Again, this was an academic issue arising in an academic department.
Do I find it merely an astonishing coincidence that regular students were also steered to these classes? I don't disagree that it was known that there were "easy" classes in the AFAM Department. But this occurs at every college! You don't think UK students (and student athletes) aren't steered towards known easy classes? Come on man.
You seem very much hung-up on who "started the problem" . . . perhaps, because that really remains your only footing.
The fact is .... while the athletic department didn't create the courses for the purposes of cheating, it certainly used the courses for such.
AND THAT IS A PROBLEM.
The classes were created for all students and a majority of the students in these classes were not student athletes. Your claim they were created for athletes has been disproven. It is not true.
Not a UK fan at all (UofL fan who has read in depth the details regarding UNC's now-defunct AFAM department). The UK fan's characterization of what happened, while a little over-the-top in terms of student-athletes being defrauded, is not entirely inaccurate. UNC counselors ensured that student-athletes who were at risk of becoming ineligible were purposely steered into those bogus AFAM classes. The fact that most of those student athletes were more than happy to take the "easy A" is immaterial.
The real question is whether the NCAA should be in the business of setting minimum standards for college classes. UNC says it shouldn't. The NCAA has recently come back and said that, in this case, it will.
For a long time, I have been of the opinion that the NCAA would be over-reaching if they were to punish UNC in this case ... it would be unprecedented, which is the reason why the case has dragged on as long as it has. But even at that, it's clear that UNC kept many "at risk" players eligible by allowing them to receive grades for doing absolutely nothing. The NCAA seems to be saying that it would have tolerated a little of this (essentially, that nearly every student looks for an easy class to balance out the tough ones), but UNC's over-use of the AFAM classes was so egregious that it provided a clear athletic advantage over what other schools did, and as such UNC should be punished for its actions.
Which means that 55.1% were non-student athletes. This was an academic issue that arose in an academic department that affected both student athletes and non-student athletes. Funny how those with an agenda only want to punish the athletes.
Thanks for making my point.
I am almost convinced you are joking.
The scandal is not about the athletes being steered toward easier courses.
THE COURSES LARGELY DIDN'T EXIST. THEY WERE STEERED TOWARD FRAUDULENT COURSES!!!
You do recognize a distinction, right?
Jeeeeeezus!
We have since learned they were fraudulent classes (technically speaking). However, at the time, they were simply known as easy classes.
Try to keep up.
It is proven in emails that UNC faculty stated that they needed more regular students to attend these classes as apart of the coverup.... GEEEZ you either lie or dont really know anything.
This is a copy of Julius Peppers essay for one of his AFAM classes. It is well known he read on a 4th grade level in college but yet he remained eligible at one of the most prestigious public universities in America? Sorry GL but we're not buying it.
Similar threads
