Maybe you're right, but when has even the NCAA threatened a player with retroactive ineligibility for not cooperating?
So where does the NCAA stand on the Cliff Alexander
- Thread starter nookam
- Start date
Maybe you're right, but when has even the NCAA threatened a player with retroactive ineligibility for not cooperating?
So players saying they never attended class, staff members wrote their papers, and were given grades is not evidence enough for you?
Teachers and other staff members writing books about their experience while employed at unc and its rampant cheating is not evidence to you?
A law firm hired by the school to investigate the cheating resulted in overwhelming evidence of players receiving preferential treatment, given classes that were a total sham is not evidence for you?
Actual transcripts with data from sham classes not evidence?
Keep being a lowlife with no integrity, unc's reputation is tarnished terribly. I will just assume you are not alumnus as many are pretty pissed by the whole affair.
Memphis did know before the 07/08 season that there were questions about Rose's test scores. His test was examined by a forensic handwriting expert and she determined it was inconclusive whether or not Rose took the test. That report was issued on 9/2/07. The NCAA Clearinghouse then cleared Rose to play. The ETS declared Rose's test score invalid in May, 2008, 1 month after the NCAA Championship Game. They did this based on the report from the forensic document examination which neither cleared nor implicated Rose. When the NCAA issued their ruling, they admitted they had no proof that Rose didn't take the test but they ruled him ineligible anyway and punished Memphis under the "strict liability" clause.
Kansas had a player in that same season, Darrell Arthur, who, like Rose was investigated for academic improprieties that occurred before he enrolled in school. Arthur's 11th grade math teacher claimed he failed a math class but the grade was later changed without the teacher's knowledge. The NCAA allowed the school district do the investigation and when they didn't find any evidence of wrongdoing the NCAA decided there was no need for further investigation.
Like Rose, the NCAA never had conclusive evidence whether or not Arthur should have been eligible in the 07/08 season. Unlike Rose and Memphis they decided Arthur and Kansas would not be punished.
Great start, ... "Believe this" and then you follow it up with the conspiracy theory that the NCAA is out to "get" UK.
So why havent they "gotten" UK in the last 10 years or so then? Because UK is the model for doing everything by the book? Really - that's what you believe? Even with WWWes hanging around UK for years?
Or could it possibly have something to do with what evidence the NCAA actually has to be able to "rule" against a school/program? Nah, that makes too much sense and doesn't fit your obvious bias.
Back to the main point of this thread though...
You may think/believe/hope/whatever Self/KU knew Cliff's mom took out a loan she shouldn't have if she cared about Cliffs eligibility. I may believe differently. But the bottom line is there is no proof that Self knew of this.
However there is not only proof but we have record that Cal/Memphis knew that Rose was in jeapordy of being Ineligible and Cal chose to play Rose anyway. The ruling from the ETS that the test he took was invalid made him Ineligible and therefore was proof for the NCAA to rule against Memphis and vacate wins.
I know you don't like it and so you can BELIEVE whatever you like. But I'm going to stick with what can be proven regarding this topic. I'm very confident that time will PROVE me correct.
Now regarding UNC, there is plenty in the public domain for the NCAA to pursue. My hope is they are just slow.
"Darrell Arthur, who, like Rose was investigated for academic improprieties that occurred before he enrolled in school. "
Rose's test was questioned because he had failed three previous attempts to get a qualifying score AND because the ETS had cause to question whether someone else took it for him.
Arthur's eligibility was NOT questioned because he had nothing to do with the grade change AND even with him NOT passing the one class he had fulfilled enough requirements to graduate without it.
You mean the same woman who never even worked with basketball players or along side basketball admin, yet said she did? This same woman? How about this, if she has such iron-clad proof tell here to go speak with the NCAA about it. By the way, the Wainstein report pretty much clears Roy and his team, minus a few comments towards Walden that are currently being challenge by Walden.
No, I'm no defense attorney. I'm also not lumping everything together like most people. You must separate among sports to get a true idea of what the NCAA has to work with -- Women's BB and soccer, a lot, Men's BB not so much.
A lot of us are irate over what went on. I earned everything I got. I love UNC, with passion, just like bbn loves their cats. I think Carolina will walk away unpunished because of some legal technically but that doesn't lift the cloud of shame giving students (athlete or not) elementary school work at a university.
Hopefully you feel the same way regarding the UNC situation...only go by what can be proven.
Yep, I completely agree. I saw it happen, even at a small school. But, in the end of the day, none of that matters. What matters is what can be proven, not what you think should be true.
I guess we'll just have to wait for the NCAA to see who's right about this issue. Imo, expect a LOIC for UNC as a whole, to please the masses, but when it gets down to actually looking at violations I expect probation for the men's bb team...other sports (w bb, w soccer in particular) will get hammered.
Wait didn't this guy hire the tutor who was funnelling money to players as a tutor for his kids? Didn't he also hire an agent to work on his staff? If true, those alone are reasons to be fired. Not to mention, if you're shamed by the AFAM classes, you should not like Butch. His players took A LOT of those classes.
I can't find anything saying whether or not Arthur would have been eligible without the grade change. The only reason I could find for not declaring Arthur ineligible was because, like Rose, he had been cleared by the NCAA Clearinghouse. Arthur's school was stripped of it's state title as a result of the grade change so there was proof the cheating occurred. Math is a core course and he would have been required to have enough math credits to have been eligible to enroll at KU. Could you provide a link that says Arthur would have been eligible without the grade change?
I have no idea either, but that is not his point. His point is that if Arthur's high school diploma had been invalidated then the NCAA would've had not choice but to force KU to vacate, much like they did for Rose/Memphis.
However, imo, the Arthur case is far closer to the Bledsoe situation than the Rose situation.
That might be the most ethical and honest post I have read from any UNC fan since this started.
"But, but, but . . . that was the Best 7th Seed of all-time!
And WSU was actually favored in that game!"
-KilmoHawk
Why did Cal or Memphis not get to chose who lead the investigation into the Memphis deal ? I think Baskerville Holmes, Keith Lee or let Dana Kirk do it. I mean, UNC got to pick a UNC alum to do a investigation to bring the non bias stuff truth out,,,,,, oh wait. Stay Tuned. You will get what should have all ready been done.
My claim about you being naive has nothing to do with the specifics of the Rose and Alexander cases, and everything to do with your belief that because Alexander's family refused to cooperate that this somehow magically gives them an out from the school being punished.
My point is that this is ONLY true if the NCAA choose to fall for it. They did so with regard to Lance Thomas. But they most certainly didn't do so in other cases. In fact not cooperating with the NCAA used to mean the NCAA automatically assumed you to be guilty, regardless of the actual evidence (or lack of evidence as the case may be).
Yeah not really. Wainstein actually did a pretty masterful job of getting out of town alive with his head still held high. No doubt that the UNC officials who paid him were expecting a whitewash, and they paid Wainstein handsomely for it.
But I do think at some point Wainstein realized just how high the BS was flowing and while he made some simplistic comments during the press conference etc. to give the appearance that Roy was OK (i.e. we asked Roy whether he knew of the fraudulent classes and he said he didn't) but the report appendices along with the other material which has come out from other sources, it is clear that the program knew exactly what was going on and was the prime beneficiary and driving force behind the fraud.
In other words, Wainstein put lipstick on a pig and said just enough of what his master's wanted to hear to get out of Chapel Hill intact, but left enough breadcrumbs for a serious investigation to nail the program.
Not only that, but similarly Wainstein was happy to do his master's bidding by making the ridiculously simplistic claim that the scandal originated and was accomplished with Debby Crowder, but then he left enough additional evidence to show that not only was it going on before she started cheating, but continued on after she left.
FWIW, I could tell Wainstein was walking a political tightrope between the truth and the whitewash that UNC officials paid him for when he started talking about what his investigation was limited to. (i.e. he didn't look into the Wheel's for Heels, the dental school, or really follow the money trail). Frankly there's a whole lot about this scandal that people have only scratched the surface. The NCAA has to know this as well.
So, we shouldn't believe what Wainstein said about his report, we should believe what others think he really meant when he said those things? Is this really what you're suggesting?
No worries, here's a link to the report itself. We can all read along.
http://3qh929iorux3fdpl532k03kg.wpe...-content/uploads/2014/10/UNC-FINAL-REPORT.pdf
The Roy Williams' subsection starts on page 76...have fun finding anywhere in the report were he says Roy knew or did anything other than trying to get the players out of the classes as soon as he heard about their clustering. I think I speak for everyone here when I say that I'm looking forward to seeing this. Oh, and please, unlike most on message boards, don't give us opinions of others, give us instances where Wainstein actually said this himself...I think we've all been mislead by biased media in our lives, so let's just stick with the guys words himself.
Yeah actually, as I mentioned Wainstein in his press conference and in his report did much of what he was paid to do by UNC. But he left enough information in the appendices (which you didn't link) to demonstrate how deep UNC was in on the fraud.
UNC people assumed that Williams was 'exonerated' by the report but he really wasn't. Again a pretty masterful job by Wainstein to give UNC what they thought they were paying for, while still maintaining some shred of professional integrity.
Who the hell cares about the Wainstein report, that UNC paid for, does or does not say?
It matters what the NCAA investigators have to say about the decades of corruption in Chapel Hill. We know the evidence is there. Will the NCAA sweep this under the rug (ala Duke) or give UNC the treatment that Boeheim and Syracuse got?
Wow, ok. So, we are not to believe Wainstein's own report? Are you saying his interpretation of those emails was not included in his report? So why did UNC let Wainstein release the appendix info if this was the case? Also, has anyone other than you and NC State fans come to this conclusion; i.e., where is the outrage from the media over these emails and how Wainstein was not allowed to include them in his interpretation of the scandal? Why have we not heard from Wainstein about how UNC restricted him from putting what he wanted into his report? Are you calling Wainstein a liar, seeing how he said those emails and other materials were what he based his report on? Why would UNC let him included those damning comments about Boxil in his report?
In regards to the bold part above, absolutely not. If what you're saying is true, then you're saying he was pressured into releasing a report with his name that he signed off on, while all along knowing it was not complete and very misleading in certain areas. Maybe you consider those to be traits of someone with integrity, not sure a lot would agree with you though.
Surely you don't really believe this, do you?
If the player is gone to the pros, then he's gone. But that doesn't mean the school can't still punish the school. That's how the NCAA typically used to operate anyway (i.e. punish the school regardless of the status of the athlete himself.)
The word "integrity" cannot be in a UNC dictionary. Thousands of students took classes that they knew were irregular. How can ANYONE take a language class and ONLY write a paper?
AFAM students blatantly participated in the scam. Administrators either participated or looked the other way.
The Chancellor, President and Provost all knew nothing? Not one student or prof ever said that there is something fishy going on in AFAM?
20 years of scam and thousands of students violating the school's honor code and now UNC says, "Well, they turned in a paper so they is college gradates!"
Zero integrity for all at UNC!
You clearly don't understand how the NCAA works or have followed how they function.
They do not have subpoena power to make someone like a parent or the loan company talk to them. They only investigate something if evidence is handed to them on a platter from another source. Basically the case has to be so glaring and obvious that it forces them to look further into a situation.
I wish I could bet you that nothing will come of this because it's easy money. The NCAA simply isn't going go after Cliffs Mom and the loan company more than they already have which is to ASK them to talk to them.
They aren't talking to the NCAA and nothing else is going to come from this because the NCAA can't and won't make them.
You are the naive one if you think differently and are setting yourself up for disappointment.
Reading comprehension is not exactly your strength. And, if anyone knows how the NCAA works, it is JPScott.
He wrote...
"My claim about you being naive has nothing to do with the specifics of the Rose and Alexander cases, and everything to do with your belief that because Alexander's family refused to cooperate that this somehow magically gives them an out from the school being punished."
KU will NOT be punished. If the family does not talk to the NCAA then what evidence does the NCAA have that KU would be punished for?
You seem to miss the point that failure to cooperate has NEVER prevented the NCAA from acting against a player or a school in the past (well, that is if you don't count Lance Thomas at Duke). Eric Manuel was banned for life from playing collegiate basketball, and the NCAA even tried to ban him from playing NAIA, even though they were not able to prove that he cheated on his ACT. Their reasoning? Because according to them he failed to cooperate by not fingering anyone else who the NCAA assumed was helping him. The NCAA tried everything they could to intimidate him and his family, including having an NCAA investigator outside his house yelling at them threatening that he'd never let Manuel play basketball again.
How long have you been following the NCAA exactly? The truth is that the NCAA doesn't follow any guideline. They don't even follow their own rules or precedents. Instead they do whatever they damn well please and just hope that no one sues them or questions their non-profit classification.
As far as what the NCAA claims currently, below is an item from less than two years ago where the NCAA seems to indicate that failure to cooperate is still pretty serious to them.
Source: NCAA New Violation Structure
Level I: Severe breach of conduct
Violations that seriously undermine or threaten the integrity of the NCAA collegiate model as set forth in the Constitution and bylaws, including any violation that provides or is intended to provide a substantial or extensive recruiting, competitive or other advantage, or a substantial or extensive impermissible benefit.
....
Examples of violations
Level I
- Lack of institutional control.
- Academic fraud.
- Failure to cooperate in an NCAA enforcement investigation.
- Individual unethical or dishonest conduct.
- Head coach responsibility violation by a head coach resulting from an underlying Level I violation by an individual within the sport program.
Last edited:
rickyzwalters; In an earlier post you claimed Arthur would have been eligible at KU even without the grade change that caused his high school team to forfeit their state championship. I asked you for a link that showed Arthur had sufficient grades to be eligible at Kansas, including enough core credits in math. You have not responded so I assume you can't provide a link to prove your claim.
I went through this years ago regarding Arthur and his grades with other UK fans hoping and praying then as now that the NCAA would punish naughty, cheating, horrible KU and Bill Self. I see not much has changed, just different UK fans.
I'm not that interested to spend time searching for it again.
But as the UNC fan said earlier in this thread if the failed class had affected Arthur's diploma/graduation then he wouldn't have been ruled academically eligible and in that hypothetical scenario KU would have had their season vacated like Memphis.
Clearly KUs 07/08 season is still intact as is Arhur's HS diploma.
If you really care that much feel free to search for it yourself.
The thing you keep missing is that both KU and Cliff Alexander have ALREADY fully cooperated with the NCAA. The only ones who haven't are Cliff's Mom and the lending company, and they NCAA can't force them to talk to them.
The NCAA is NOT going to punish KU/Self for something they have no control over.
Can you give the current update on that? All I could find was his lawyer claiming he was cooperating in March. According the article, the NCAA had info but had not talked to Cliff yet. So, when did he meet with the NCAA?
And, that is the point. Both the KU fan and UNC fan refuse to acknowledge that and then one of them tells JPS that he doesn't understand how the NCAA works. You can't make this stuff up.
This is a tough question. The NCAA has a few avenues it could go down.
It could invoke the Cam Newton rule, which is CA didn't know what his mother was doing, so everything is A-Okay. Or it could use the UNC rule, which is silence is golden, and we don't care what happened, and we don't give a shiz. Or it could use the Coach K rule, which is the coach is a good guy and a fine coach, so we choose to do nothing. Or they could use the Coach Cal rule, which is bust their azz.
Or they can write a new rule, the Rock Chalk rule, which is aw this is too much trouble and do nothing.
This is not rocket science. Don't let this stuff spoil your day.
It could invoke the Cam Newton rule, which is CA didn't know what his mother was doing, so everything is A-Okay. Or it could use the UNC rule, which is silence is golden, and we don't care what happened, and we don't give a shiz. Or it could use the Coach K rule, which is the coach is a good guy and a fine coach, so we choose to do nothing. Or they could use the Coach Cal rule, which is bust their azz.
Or they can write a new rule, the Rock Chalk rule, which is aw this is too much trouble and do nothing.
This is not rocket science. Don't let this stuff spoil your day.
