https://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/files/2016/12/NCAA-third-notice-of-allegations.pdf
Mens Basketball, mens football, Roy specifically mentioned....
Mens Basketball, mens football, Roy specifically mentioned....
UNC 3rd NOA Released
- Thread starter Slowwalker
- Start date
$3 billion endowment and UNC can't afford full Adobe to give us searchable pdfs.
Burn 'em. They've beat their chest about academics and integrity for so long, second only to Duke, there is only one option. Hit 'em where it hurts, scholarships, rafters, record books, and post season.
They can afford it. They just choose not to employ it. It's part of their strategy.
Although frankly I'm surprised this didn't come out at 4:45 on the Friday before Christmas.
How many more years is it going to take to resolve this scandal????????? 20 years to investigate a 20 year cheat fest?????
Gotta love this:
"Many at-risk student-athletes, particularly in the sports of football and men's basketball, used these courses for purposes of ensuring their continuing NCAA academic eligibility."
A clearer statement of the NORTH CAROLINA WAY has never been made.
Was all that detail in the earlier ones? I don't recall it but its been awhile. I'm guessing that Bobbi swervy pervy or whatever his name was will be back to "read" this for us. That should be entertaining.
"Many at-risk student-athletes, particularly in the sports of football and men's basketball, used these courses for purposes of ensuring their continuing NCAA academic eligibility."
A clearer statement of the NORTH CAROLINA WAY has never been made.
Was all that detail in the earlier ones? I don't recall it but its been awhile. I'm guessing that Bobbi swervy pervy or whatever his name was will be back to "read" this for us. That should be entertaining.
This has gotten lost a little bit with the UL game and Allen's antics but you guys may have missed what Dave Glenn(radio guy in NC, UNC fan) tweeted this morning.
He said the NCAA revised NOA will contain:
1. reinstates "extra benefit" charge.
2. specifies FB and MBB
3. expands timeline (now fall 2002-summer 2011)
He said the NCAA revised NOA will contain:
1. reinstates "extra benefit" charge.
2. specifies FB and MBB
3. expands timeline (now fall 2002-summer 2011)
The real question becomes, do we see a Miami part deux or are Sankey's actions allowed? Seems like UNC has a valid argument for legal action. However, that will take years. So, will UNC be willing to endure years of similar crappy recruiting or just take Sankey's pill and swallow? Me thinks they would rather this just go away.
It's a win-win for the NCAA. Even if it is thrown out, they can still say in their legal battles, currently underway and on the way, that they tried to punish schools like UNC who don't take academics as serious as they should.
It's a win-win for the NCAA. Even if it is thrown out, they can still say in their legal battles, currently underway and on the way, that they tried to punish schools like UNC who don't take academics as serious as they should.
Here's the problem with legal action as so many at Inside Carolina are screaming for.
Do they want the NCAA to have subpoena power now? do they want Julius Nyangoro the professor of those bogus classes on the stand??? do they want Deborah Crowder on the stand??
The NCAA can give a sweeping several years post season ban to UNC.. .. By the time the court case settles........... then the damage has already been done to the program
Where do you see grounds for legal action by NC? They have no expectation of due process. Individuals maybe. Member institution? Very doubtful.
Yep. However, I'm pretty sure the NCAA doesn't want to deal with discovery either. What a treat that would be.
UNC is arguing Sankey/COI violated their own by-laws. They're using the Wainstein report, when they are not allowed. They are not acting in good-faith. And so on.
There are a lot of arguments that UNC can make and probably would win. But, I don't see them going that route...unless they're fine with recruiting the way it's been for the past couple of years. We shall see I guess.
This is how you know the NCAA is pissed and out for blood. In the first version, UNC loved to mention how none of the basketball administration folks were mentioned. This was a false statement, but the mentions were buried in the factual information so you really had to go looking for it.
In this version, the NCAA decided to include something I've never before seen in an NOA. They included a handy list on the last three pages that identifies everyone who's included in the factual information. This list includes honest Roy and his sidekick Wayne Walden.
I see no reason to draft up that list other than wanting to stick it to UNC.
Last edited:
I've not seen the accusation about acting in bad faith, but it's clear that UNC is the only party that could be accused of that.
Regarding the COI, the by-laws afford them a measure of discretion and flexibility depending on the circumstances. To say UNC would probably win is not accurate.
How many years can the NCAA turn it's head and pretend that it just doesn't seeHow many more years is it going to take to resolve this scandal????????? 20 years to investigate a 20 year cheat fest?????
All the cheating and fraud that has gone on for so long ,over at UNC
the answer my friend is blowing in the wind,the answer is blowing in the wind
How many banners will have to come down along with some losses of wins
The cost will be great but they must atone for their decades of sims
the answer my friend is now blowing in the wind,the answer is blowing in the wind
Last edited:
You seem to be drinking the Inside Carolina kool aid by the gallon. 'Sankey actions?' The only people making the case that this is some sort of conference-based vendetta involving Sankey are the "See-No-Evils' at UNC-Cheats. Which is laughable.
There is no question that many men's basketball players and football players took the fake classes -- not easy, or 'paper' classes but fake classes -- so why shouldn't the NOA be amended to what it was originally, and to name that what it is: Impermissible benefits.
UNC-Cheats argument that the NCAA somehow has no authority to rule on whether a student athlete was kept eligible by getting an improper benefit was legalistic nonsense from the beginning. Take it to its logical conclusion: Once a player set foot on campus he could skip class four years running, be given a 'certificate of compliance' and be good to go. (That's not far off what someone like McCants did for three years at UNC. That's some Dean's List at Chapel Hill with his name on it permanently) So tossing out that jurisdiction argument hardly constitutes some deep, hidden agenda.
The outlier -- the totally baffling document from a logic standpoint -- is the 2nd NOA that removed the EXPLICIT mention of men's basketball and football. The only plausible way to read what is happening is that the NCAA took that out of the 2nd NOA as explicit verbiage (it was still implied) to give UNC a chance to self-punish to a degree that would let all off the hook with face saved.
When UNC didn't do that -- in fact, saw it as a sign of weakness by the NCAA and tried to bulldoze the entire process -- the FACTS were returned, and spelled out.
UNC is saying that Sankey notified them of a hearing 32 days prior to it's date. UNC asked days later to be allowed to include documents related to the drafting of the first ANOA. Sankey said no, citing that the 30-day buffer had been surpassed (yet he let other things in that were also asked to be supplied by UNC).
You could be right. But, looking back at the PSU and Miami cases, it seems like the NCAA is stepping out of bounds again here. Just my non-lawyer two cents.
Courts have always held the NCAA to be a benevolent despot with regard to member institutions. I don't know single case where one won. I'd love to see NC opened to legal discovery with sworn witnesses. I hope they do challenge. Drag that cheating filth into cold light of day.
In Miami and PSU, they stepped way out of bounds. In this case, they haven't. Sankay eventually reviewed the request after the initial denial and then denied additional items that he didn't believe were relevant. And from the facts I've seen so far, his assessment is correct.
UNC was basically arguing that they worked with Enforcement after the first NOA to determine several things weren't actually violations. They wanted to include that evidence during the meeting to keep the COI from reviewing those.
Sankey's position is that once the allegations are made, it should be the COI that determines whether or not they occurred. Because these were alleged, the COI should review them. Not UNC and Enforcement.
UNC can still submit these documents as evidence during the COI hearing to argue their innocence. Nothing prevents that. The COI just wants to make sure the charges are evaluated properly.
Sankey has done nothing out of line here and nothing that would materially harm UNC.
I'm not going to argue in UNC's favor. But, put me in the camp that thinks there's more to the story here, and I don't think it's because the COI suddenly grew a spine.
Exactly the opposite. He's saying the NCAA is breaking their own by-laws. This is another reason (that Bilas is saying it) that I think UNC will take legal action and a Miami/PSU outcome will happen.
The list of people salivating to bend over backwards to help these cheaters get away with it is embarrassing.
Just read Bilas tweets. He calls what the NCAA is doing "pathetic". Pity he can't muster a fraction of the same outrage for what UNCheat has done for many, many years. Losing more and more respect for him by the day.
ESPN just metioned it!! WTF is going on lolz!! Thats been years in the waiting!!
ESPN has to mention it now.... just so they can go on a massive PR tirade against it.
Wouldn't put much stock into Bilas' opinion. He has been factually incorrect on the by-laws in the past regarding UNC. There are nuances to several of the by-laws (benefits being one of them) that aren't picked up from a cursory review.
VIDEO from Raleigh News & Observer that explains how UNC got here.
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article93678447.html
Accompanying NEWS ARTICLE that explains the meaning of the newest NOA
http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article122420449.html
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article93678447.html
Accompanying NEWS ARTICLE that explains the meaning of the newest NOA
http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article122420449.html
That ship sailed with the second NOA. The NC scum had a chance to come clean and self impose. They predictably refused. Now the NCAA has armed themselves to take what ever action they choose. The only group with standing to take action against the NCAA is the collective member institutions. That won't happen because those are the same parties that NC has been screwing all these years. Further, the NCAA is fully aware that NC has retained a bevy of lawyers from day 1, but the third NOA was still transmitted.
That sound like a client prepared to back away from litigation to you?
I don't know if the NCAA will drop the hammer. It sure sounds like someone is building a gallows.
So where does this leave the situation. I thought it was a cut and dry situation. The NCAA provides notice. The school responds. The NCAA hands down a judgement. Appeal. Resentencing.
UNC is a voluntary member of the NCAA. If they do not like the rules they can leave at any time. That has already been adjudicated in other cases. UNC will lose and take another massive black eye. I wonder if UNC wants this too linger several more years casting a cloud over their recruiting due to a court case.
In "Jay world" the NCAA is the equivalent of King Kong rampaging through Manhatten. Has he ever offered up a sincere in depth look at what went on at UNC?
Enough that he thoroughly convinced Matt Jones UNCheat broke no rules.
