not to continue beating the drum, I have no issue with those wanting UL to get hammered by the NCAA
but I am convinced that academic fraud is the worst possible (non criminal) sin an academic institution can commit to the NCAA.
hiring a kid a stripper (lets just set aside the prostitution for the moment) does not give the kid or the school an unfair advantage in playing athletics. For that matter , neither does a $100 handshake. If you are to believe the kid would be playing college ball, then those are simply enticements to play at a school. Don't think I'm condoning by saying that - but those do not give the school an unfair advantage if you are to believe this kid would have ended up at some college. (stay with me on that - I"m not saying its not an advantage in recruiting, although it appears that didn't work out for UL, I'm saying its not an advantage of whether the kids actually plays ball or not)
However, if the school is creating an environment where the kid does not have to live up the academic requirements of the school, then that is definitely an unfair advantage. And worse, it essentially makes the student athlete concept a sham. He becomes a professional athlete without the academic side of it.
Now is that worse than what Penn St did? Absolutely not, but that was a criminal activity where people should and did go to jail. While the NCAA felt they had an obligation to step in and further punish Penn St., the crimes committed did not address student athletes.
Now UL is a bit murkier, because its likely they did solicit prostitution that may have included an underage girl as well as high school seniors that ( I would assume) would be considered minors. However at the end, these actions did not give UL an advantage in winning the national championship.
UNC has at least 1 national championship won with players who had no business being on the court.
My point in this is - whatever punishment UL receives, UNC should receive worse - noticeably worse.