SMU president: UNC should be "shaking in their boots"

[TheBlueMax]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...d-turner-ncaa-sanctions-larry-brown/73055362/

Writer makes it clear that's who SMU prez was talking about.

I hope he is saying this to put the NCAA on warning. What SMU did for Frazier is a parking ticket compared to homicide when matched with Julius Peppers' transcripts to keep him eligible in football AND basketball, or Rashad McCants making the Dean's List while admitting he never attended class.

That UNC has not drawn more official attention from a very strange NCAA is beyond inexplicable. UNC should be shaking in their boots--there are significant reasons why they should have to vacate huge amounts of wins and at least one basketball championship. No matter which person or persons could be held responsible for that record of abject cheating and lack of institutional control, it should, on face value at least, carry the stiffest penalty possible. Se ve que merece la pena de muerte. I do think, in time, even the NCAA will have to bow to pressure to give them a proper penalty.

 

[UpstateNYCat]

Let's talk about Roy who knew exactly what his players were doing in the classroom. No, let's talk about how Roy didn't know what they were doing in the classroom. Let's talk about Roy who got KU in trouble. Or, maybe we can talk about Roy who asked the usher to check the Presbyterian kid's ticket or how about Roy who left his scrubs on the floor for the end of the game so he and the real players could run to safety!

Lets not forget about Roy's involvement with Lester Earl's xfer to KU, pretty much going behind the LSU coaches back. And IIRC, he cried about losing Miller to UF and siccing the NCAA on them. Yep, a real sleazebag and a perfect fit for those phony f**ks in Chapel Hell.

 

[Stonewall12]

Wait, didn't SMU get hit hard because of Brown, the admin and the player all lying to the NCAA, the admin instructing the player to lie, Brown hiding the violations, and finally Brown being a repeat offender? If so, not sure what the president is complaining about.

You and your kind are the worst.

 

[JPScott]

Was reading this article about Volkswagen in the New York Times.

As Volkswagen Pushed to be No. 1, Ambitions Fueled a Scandal

Anyone else thinks it sounds familiar to another scandal out there? From the article:

Volkswagen’s current crisis has its roots in decisions made almost a decade ago. In 2007, it abandoned a pollution-control technology developed by Mercedes-Benz and Bosch and instead used internal technology.

At the same time, the determination by Mr. Winterkorn, the company’s hard-charging chief executive, to surpass Toyota put enormous strain on his managers to deliver growth in America.

To capture market share, Volkswagen, which also makes such brands as Audi and Porsche, would need to build the larger cars favored by Americans. But it would also need to comply with the Obama administration’s toughening standards on mileage. All automakers developed strategies to meet the new mileage rules, and diesel was a big part of Volkswagen’s plan. But diesel engines, while offering better mileage, also emit more smog-forming pollutants than conventional engines, so Volkswagen’s strategy ran head-on into American air pollution standards, which are stricter than those in Europe.

Cheating on emissions tests solved several issues at once. Not only were drivers rewarded with better mileage and performance, but the automaker also avoided more expensive and cumbersome pollution-control systems.

While Volkswagen cheated behind the scenes, it publicly espoused virtue. This, after all, is the company that used one of the largest advertising arenas in the world, the Super Bowl, to run a commercial showing its engineers sprouting angel’s wings.

The scandal has shaken not just Volkswagen, but the whole auto industry. And it is painful for Germany, where one in seven workers is employed directly or indirectly by the auto industry. Volkswagen has long been a symbol of the efficiency and engineering acumen that make the country one of the most formidable economies in the world.

It is not Volkswagen’s first run-in with regulators over emissions. When the United States began regulating tailpipe pollutants in the 1970s, Volkswagen was one of the first companies caught cheating. It was fined $120,000 in 1973 for installing what became known as a “defeat device,” technology to shut down a vehicle’s pollution control systems. This time, it equipped its vehicles with software that was programmed to fake test results, an action the E.P.A. rebuked in 1998, when it reached a $1 billion settlement with truck-engine manufacturers for doing the same thing.

Over the last year, when confronted with evidence that its system was not performing as promised, Volkswagen aggressively pushed back, saying that regulators were not doing the testing properly.

Volkswagen, the UNC of auto makers?

 

[topps coach]

Do not think that UNC will get what they deserve but am hoping for at least three years of reduced scholarships which hopefully will make them irrelevant

 

[screwduke]

What pisses me off so badly about this is that if UK did 5% of what UNC did they would have handed down a massive punishment. We all knows its true. Yet UNC just skates off freely.

 

[wromanp7]

Was reading this article about Volkswagen in the New York Times.

As Volkswagen Pushed to be No. 1, Ambitions Fueled a Scandal

Anyone else thinks it sounds familiar to another scandal out there? From the article:

Volkswagen’s current crisis has its roots in decisions made almost a decade ago. In 2007, it abandoned a pollution-control technology developed by Mercedes-Benz and Bosch and instead used internal technology.

At the same time, the determination by Mr. Winterkorn, the company’s hard-charging chief executive, to surpass Toyota put enormous strain on his managers to deliver growth in America.

To capture market share, Volkswagen, which also makes such brands as Audi and Porsche, would need to build the larger cars favored by Americans. But it would also need to comply with the Obama administration’s toughening standards on mileage. All automakers developed strategies to meet the new mileage rules, and diesel was a big part of Volkswagen’s plan. But diesel engines, while offering better mileage, also emit more smog-forming pollutants than conventional engines, so Volkswagen’s strategy ran head-on into American air pollution standards, which are stricter than those in Europe.

Cheating on emissions tests solved several issues at once. Not only were drivers rewarded with better mileage and performance, but the automaker also avoided more expensive and cumbersome pollution-control systems.

While Volkswagen cheated behind the scenes, it publicly espoused virtue. This, after all, is the company that used one of the largest advertising arenas in the world, the Super Bowl, to run a commercial showing its engineers sprouting angel’s wings.

The scandal has shaken not just Volkswagen, but the whole auto industry. And it is painful for Germany, where one in seven workers is employed directly or indirectly by the auto industry. Volkswagen has long been a symbol of the efficiency and engineering acumen that make the country one of the most formidable economies in the world.

It is not Volkswagen’s first run-in with regulators over emissions. When the United States began regulating tailpipe pollutants in the 1970s, Volkswagen was one of the first companies caught cheating. It was fined $120,000 in 1973 for installing what became known as a “defeat device,” technology to shut down a vehicle’s pollution control systems. This time, it equipped its vehicles with software that was programmed to fake test results, an action the E.P.A. rebuked in 1998, when it reached a $1 billion settlement with truck-engine manufacturers for doing the same thing.

Over the last year, when confronted with evidence that its system was not performing as promised, Volkswagen aggressively pushed back, saying that regulators were not doing the testing properly.

Volkswagen, the UNC of auto makers?

awesome.

 

[Poetax]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...d-turner-ncaa-sanctions-larry-brown/73055362/

Writer makes it clear that's who SMU prez was talking about.

I hope he is saying this to put the NCAA on warning. What SMU did for Frazier is a parking ticket compared to homicide when matched with Julius Peppers' transcripts to keep him eligible in football AND basketball, or Rashad McCants making the Dean's List while admitting he never attended class.

SMU already knows the wrath of the NCAA, so if I was them, I would fight them to the ends of the earth using the Carolina Way as their battle cry.

 

[musrat59]

The only person who didn't have a clue as to what was going on with the cheaters was ole Bubba.

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

I don't think they will win it, but UNCheat will have a team that is capable of making a serious run at a title. Just imagine if they do win it, and then get close to the death penalty shortly thereafter. No matter which way they find, the NCAA better be praying they don't win it all this season.

 

[Blueisbest]

If UNC isn't hit harder than any school in history then the NCAA needs to just close up shop and go home. What little credibility they still have will go up in smoke.

Here is what should happen:

Forfeiture of EVERY game that an ineligible player appeared in.
2005 National title should be vacated.
Roy needs to step down.
3-5 years of probation with no post season.

What will likely happen:

Absolutely nothing.

 

[preacherfan]

Lets not forget about Roy's involvement with Lester Earl's xfer to KU, pretty much going behind the LSU coaches back. And IIRC, he cried about losing Miller to UF and siccing the NCAA on them. Yep, a real sleazebag and a perfect fit for those phony f**ks in Chapel Hell.

And, we can't forget him trashing the kid who went to Michigan St after he allegedly gave Roy a verbal. I remember Izzo being quite upset about that one. That story alone shows the lack of character of one Roy Williams.

 

[JPScott]

If UNC isn't hit harder than any school in history then the NCAA needs to just close up shop and go home. What little credibility they still have will go up in smoke.

Here is what should happen:

Forfeiture of EVERY game that an ineligible player appeared in.
2005 National title should be vacated.
Roy needs to step down.
3-5 years of probation with no post season.

What will likely happen:

Absolutely nothing.

To extend the UNC-Volkswagen analogy, there are already talks about VW facing stiff fines on the order of billions of dollars and criminal investigations.

If Mark Emmert and the NCAA were in charge, they not only would tip off VW to bury the evidence ahead of time, but they'd allow VW to self-investigate themselves for up to 5 years in the hopes that things will just fade away.

 

[UpstateNYCat]

And, we can't forget him trashing the kid who went to Michigan St after he allegedly gave Roy a verbal. I remember Izzo being quite upset about that one. That story alone shows the lack of character of one Roy Williams.

"I don't give a shit about North Carolina." Another bold face lie told to the national audience.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

If you don't think the lying and past troubles didn't exponentiate the penalties then genuinely feel sorry for you.

If that were the case Elmo, wouldn't 25 years of proven cheating by UNCheat get them the death penalty?

 

[Brewskie]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...d-turner-ncaa-sanctions-larry-brown/73055362/

Writer makes it clear that's who SMU prez was talking about.

I hope he is saying this to put the NCAA on warning. What SMU did for Frazier is a parking ticket compared to homicide when matched with Julius Peppers' transcripts to keep him eligible in football AND basketball, or Rashad McCants making the Dean's List while admitting he never attended class.

I have a feeling that these NCAA 'investigations' have no uniformity whatsoever. SMU got hammered and deservedly so. They seem to hammer a school when a coach/player lies to them to cover something up, regardless of the severity of the initial infraction. I think when they visited UNC they probably went in, drank some coffee, said hello, didn't ask any questions that would give a reason for someone to lie and finally said, 'well, nothing to see here. Thx!' It's beyond a joke.

 

[.S&C.]

By the way, UNC True Believers are convinced this tactic of throwing the women's basketball team under the bus will save them.

Really? What woman basketball player benefited more from AF-AM "impermissible benefits" as the NCAA called the fake classes, than Rashad McCants? Or Julius Peppers? Or all the players on the 2005 team that were signed up for AF-Am free grades?

The NCAA lawyers are too shrewd to fall into that logic trap: a woman gets help and its a sanction, but McCants gets all A's and Peppers is kept eligible and that's okay?

Too many writers out there and TV investigative programs that could shred that tissue of lies and present it as an attack on women -- as sexist politics at its worst.

Hey well now we might have found a good use for the liberals after all.

 

[.S&C.]

What pisses me off so badly about this is that if UK did 5% of what UNC did they would have handed down a massive punishment. We all knows its true. Yet UNC just skates off freely.

Then imagine Larry Brown played for UK and gets hit while all of this is going on.

UNC's image is gone forever. There's nothing the NCAA can do about it.

 

[Stonewall12]

If I was Brown and SMU, I would literally hold a press conference and laugh in the ncaa face. I would tell them nothing is changing and we are going to continue like we always have done. We will not abide by these penalties. You have the largest scandal in ncaa history at unc and the ncaa had done nothing. You give them punishment first and we will comply. Otherwise the heck with you.

 

[*Bleedingblue*]

You remind me of the crooks involved in the Watergate Scandal. You sound just like G. Gordon Liddy.

Deny, deny, deny, cover-up, cover-up, cover-up, keep people quiet with intimidation, whitewash, say there is nothing to see here, throw people under the bus, hide evidence, circle the wagons, have a slush fund, lie to the press over and over, and then think you can get away with with it all.

How did that turn out for Nixon and his gang?

I think you mean Hillary Clinton for those not old enough to remember that scandal, matter of fact she was involved in the prosecuter's team back then. Shoot the scandals today are vastly more broad and shocking than sneakin into a hotel and looking for papers. That's like an everyday thing now, they just use hackers to go into ur computer and steal what they can off ya. They do it every day all day long. Used to you went to prison for that but it's all legal now. 99% of politicians are criminals of the highest order and should be tried and if found guilty of treason...shot
UNC is just like these politicians. That's why they hired them to smooth this over for em. Just like tickle my pickle is here tryin to smooth things over.

 

[Xception]

I doubt Larry would take any defiant Stance given that Brown is part of the UNC family tree . I am convinced at this point that schools care much less about being treated with equal justice as they do about getting their slice of the pie . Usually the pressure comes from the public and that drives the media to act but there is little interest from the sporting public as a whole . What you do have is continuous revelations that has kept the scandal afloat , making UNC along with the NCAA look incompetent , complicit and downright corrupt .

 

[downthehatch]

Serious question here: What happens if SMU refuses to recognize the punishments? Let's say they just go on about their season as if they never got the letter. And, in effect, says to the NCAA, "Try and make us comply. See you in court!" And if they threaten to bring up everything about NCAA bias as part of their defense?

Or, what if they even threaten to do so in order to negotiate a better deal?

 

[shutzhund]

Comparing SMU penalties and probable NC lack of penalties should spotlight the cavalier misuse of power by the NCAA enough for even Vitale to understand. I like Vitale but he should be the NCAA's poster boy on this subject. WAKE UP DICK.

I wish he would regain his objectivity and speak out against the NC hypocrisy of cheating players out of an education for the sake of eligibility. When you don't act you're part of the problem.

 

[preacherfan]

Serious question here: What happens if SMU refuses to recognize the punishments? Let's say they just go on about their season as if they never got the letter. And, in effect, says to the NCAA, "Try and make us comply. See you in court!" And if they threaten to bring up everything about NCAA bias as part of their defense?

Or, what if they even threaten to do so in order to negotiate a better deal?

SMU is appealing. That is ALL they can do or they can simply drop out of the NCAA but that isn't a good option. The NCAA would win in court and they know it. The NCAA is a voluntary organization. They hold the cards in a court of law.

 

[jameslee32]

I will be thrilled to eat crow on UNC sanctions but there's a huge difference between SMU and UNC.

 

[JPScott]

Below is a link with a video of Dan Kane questioning ACC commissioner and former UNC AD John Swofford. Talk about awkward.

Link: Swofford talks about ACC prospects, UNC problems

Swofford is an alum and played football at UNC. He served as Athletic Director of UNC between 1980 and 1997 (i.e. the very time when much of the cheating started.)

Beyond the obvious conflict of interest given his background, he simply doesn't strike me as a person who is going to lead any sort of charge to reform this mess going forward.

 

[UKnCincy]

Wait, didn't SMU get hit hard because of Brown, the admin and the player all lying to the NCAA, the admin instructing the player to lie, Brown hiding the violations, and finally Brown being a repeat offender? If so, not sure what the president is complaining about.

Not exactly. Brown's lie is a non-issue and wouldn't have added to anything. He fessed up to the lie later in the same interview before ever being caught in the lie. It's a bad move on his part, but not one that would've motivated harsher penalties because he came clean immediately and did so on his own. NCAA's major issue with Brown is that he became aware of the violation and never reported it to anybody. Also, the NCAA didn't label Brown a repeat offender. The NCAA labeled SMU a repeat offender, similar to how they labeled UNC a repeat offender in UNC's most recent NOA.

As for the admin, lying to the NCAA and trying to get the player to lie fall under the unethical conduct by-law. Also under this by-law is failure to cooperate with an investigation. Because the NCAA lacks subpoena power, it views them both more or less equally in terms of seriousness and they both are Level I violations. Point being, there's no meaningful difference (from the NCAA's perspective) between the SMU admin lying and Deb Crowder refusing to cooperate.

At any rate, you're missing the SMU President's broader point. His gripe is that the penalties are too severe because they disproportionately impact current student athletes who weren't involved. His basis for this belief is that the NCAA found SMU to have institutional control. That means that the NCAA views these violations as the result of individual bad actors and not part a broader institutional problem. Because of that, the penalties for those violations should be limited as much as possible to only those bad actors.

In this case, the golf coaches and admin were removed and Brown is suspended for a third of the season. The SMU president has no issue with needing to fire someone or Brown's suspension. He does have an issue with banning current players from post season play when they had nothing to do with this. And when the NCAA says SMU has institutional control, the NCAA is in essence saying that SMU is doing everything they can to prevent these types of things. In light of that, the current players shouldn't be penalized and I think this is a valid criticism.

The other issue the SMU President has is with the vacating of wins in basketball, which I don't think he'll get anywhere with. His concern was that the NCAA never once informed SMU that they were at risk of having a player deemed ineligible. It wasn't mentioned in the NOA or during the investigation. It didn't come up until the actual COI hearing, and he felt that SMU had inadequate time to prepare for that.

The problem is SMU made an assumption they shouldn't have. Just because the NCAA does not mention player ineligibility in an NOA or investigation, that is by no means an indication that it is off the table. SMU should've known this was a possibility given the allegations and, if they had doubt, they should have proactively asked the NCAA about it.

 

[preacherfan]

Not exactly. Brown's lie is a non-issue and wouldn't have added to anything. He fessed up to the lie later in the same interview before ever being caught in the lie. It's a bad move on his part, but not one that would've motivated harsher penalties because he came clean immediately and did so on his own. NCAA's major issue with Brown is that he became aware of the violation and never reported it to anybody. Also, the NCAA didn't label Brown a repeat offender. The NCAA labeled SMU a repeat offender, similar to how they labeled UNC a repeat offender in UNC's most recent NOA.

As for the admin, lying to the NCAA and trying to get the player to lie fall under the unethical conduct by-law. Also under this by-law is failure to cooperate with an investigation. Because the NCAA lacks subpoena power, it views them both more or less equally in terms of seriousness and they both are Level I violations. Point being, there's no meaningful difference (from the NCAA's perspective) between the SMU admin lying and Deb Crowder refusing to cooperate.

At any rate, you're missing the SMU President's broader point. His gripe is that the penalties are too severe because they disproportionately impact current student athletes who weren't involved. His basis for this belief is that the NCAA found SMU to have institutional control. That means that the NCAA views these violations as the result of individual bad actors and not part a broader institutional problem. Because of that, the penalties for those violations should be limited as much as possible to only those bad actors.

In this case, the golf coaches and admin were removed and Brown is suspended for a third of the season. The SMU president has no issue with needing to fire someone or Brown's suspension. He does have an issue with banning current players from post season play when they had nothing to do with this. And when the NCAA says SMU has institutional control, the NCAA is in essence saying that SMU is doing everything they can to prevent these types of things. In light of that, the current players shouldn't be penalized and I think this is a valid criticism.

The other issue the SMU President has is with the vacating of wins in basketball, which I don't think he'll get anywhere with. His concern was that the NCAA never once informed SMU that they were at risk of having a player deemed ineligible. It wasn't mentioned in the NOA or during the investigation. It didn't come up until the actual COI hearing, and he felt that SMU had inadequate time to prepare for that.

The problem is SMU made an assumption they shouldn't have. Just because the NCAA does not mention player ineligibility in an NOA or investigation, that is by no means an indication that it is off the table. SMU should've known this was a possibility given the allegations and, if they had doubt, they should have proactively asked the NCAA about it.

Bradley Bethel gets owned again!

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Not exactly. Brown's lie is a non-issue and wouldn't have added to anything. He fessed up to the lie later in the same interview before ever being caught in the lie. It's a bad move on his part, but not one that would've motivated harsher penalties because he came clean immediately and did so on his own. NCAA's major issue with Brown is that he became aware of the violation and never reported it to anybody. Also, the NCAA didn't label Brown a repeat offender. The NCAA labeled SMU a repeat offender, similar to how they labeled UNC a repeat offender in UNC's most recent NOA.

As for the admin, lying to the NCAA and trying to get the player to lie fall under the unethical conduct by-law. Also under this by-law is failure to cooperate with an investigation. Because the NCAA lacks subpoena power, it views them both more or less equally in terms of seriousness and they both are Level I violations. Point being, there's no meaningful difference (from the NCAA's perspective) between the SMU admin lying and Deb Crowder refusing to cooperate.

At any rate, you're missing the SMU President's broader point. His gripe is that the penalties are too severe because they disproportionately impact current student athletes who weren't involved. His basis for this belief is that the NCAA found SMU to have institutional control. That means that the NCAA views these violations as the result of individual bad actors and not part a broader institutional problem. Because of that, the penalties for those violations should be limited as much as possible to only those bad actors.

In this case, the golf coaches and admin were removed and Brown is suspended for a third of the season. The SMU president has no issue with needing to fire someone or Brown's suspension. He does have an issue with banning current players from post season play when they had nothing to do with this. And when the NCAA says SMU has institutional control, the NCAA is in essence saying that SMU is doing everything they can to prevent these types of things. In light of that, the current players shouldn't be penalized and I think this is a valid criticism.

The other issue the SMU President has is with the vacating of wins in basketball, which I don't think he'll get anywhere with. His concern was that the NCAA never once informed SMU that they were at risk of having a player deemed ineligible. It wasn't mentioned in the NOA or during the investigation. It didn't come up until the actual COI hearing, and he felt that SMU had inadequate time to prepare for that.

The problem is SMU made an assumption they shouldn't have. Just because the NCAA does not mention player ineligibility in an NOA or investigation, that is by no means an indication that it is off the table. SMU should've known this was a possibility given the allegations and, if they had doubt, they should have proactively asked the NCAA about it.

Where is TickleMeElmo's response to that? Probably can't drag himself off the bridge.

 

[drbubba]

Saw the Larry Brown conference. This on the heals of Syracuse's defiance. No shame, no accountabiltiy. Now the ACC boss brushes off the likelihood of UNC sanctions. There simply is a class of people who don't think rules apply to them. The day of the amateur "scholar athlete" is nearing an end. Thanks, NCAA.

 

[shun1]

SMILE

!!!!!!!!!!!!! GO ROY & STAFF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!! GO TAR HEELS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[JPScott]

Saw the Larry Brown conference. This on the heals of Syracuse's defiance. No shame, no accountabiltiy. Now the ACC boss brushes off the likelihood of UNC sanctions. There simply is a class of people who don't think rules apply to them. The day of the amateur "scholar athlete" is nearing an end. Thanks, NCAA.

I gave the link to ACC Commissioner (and former UNC AD) John Swofford looking like a deer in the headlights talking about the UNC scandal.

Swofford on UNC scandal

But when you step back and look at all the other scandals happening at the other ACC schools, it really puts it into context just how lacking the leadership is. Watching this video, this is not someone who is going to do a credible job at reforming anything. They need to clean house IMO, not just at UNC and some of these other schools but within the ACC offices as well.

 

[JPScott]

SMILE

!!!!!!!!!!!!! GO ROY & STAFF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!! GO TAR HEELS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Go VW executives!!!!!!!!! Keep up the good work!!!!!!!!

Smile!!!!!

...... Yeah, just as ridiculous when talking about VW as it does UNC and their shenanigans.

 

[KMKAT]

Below is a link with a video of Dan Kane questioning ACC commissioner and former UNC AD John Swofford. Talk about awkward.

Link: Swofford talks about ACC prospects, UNC problems

Swofford is an alum and played football at UNC. He served as Athletic Director of UNC between 1980 and 1997 (i.e. the very time when much of the cheating started.)

Beyond the obvious conflict of interest given his background, he simply doesn't strike me as a person who is going to lead any sort of charge to reform this mess going forward.

Jon, been saying this about Swofford since this investigation was tracked back to the Smith days. Smith himself told Doherty not to change anything. What's the purpose for a conference commissioner if its not going to assist in making sure all conference teams are following the rules?
But, they did bring in Louisville and Syracuse to their conference didn't they?