UNC will not receive punishment from NCAA

[westerncat]

I was really surprised how the NCAA came down on UL but will they take the title from them ? I really hope they do. Now to UNC is the NCAA going to grow a pair and come down hard on them also ? I hope this is the year we see that happen. I like some others don't think they will take a title but if they want to do the right thing I think they have to hammer UNC also. If they don't hammer the Cheaters then the NCAA is going to open a big can of worms. JMO

 

[Lovebaskelball]

The NCAA couldn't care less about UL but they love UNC. They will only hand out a token penalty and that will be it.

 

[Bluegrassking]

UNC should get the death penalty, flat out and full stop.

Why? Other programs have received it and UNC has offended beyond any of them as far as I'm concerned.

Hell, they should have their entire athletic department nuked from space.

Remember how hard we were hit? That was nothing compared to this utter fraud that pisses dead in the eye of even the basic concept of student athletics.

If the NCAA doesn't come down like a ton of bricks then they negate their entire argument to exist and I'd strongly support just blowing the thing up.

 

[preacherfan]

UNC should get the death penalty, flat out and full stop.

Why? Other programs have received it and UNC has offended beyond any of them as far as I'm concerned.

Hell, they should have their entire athletic department nuked from space.

Remember how hard we were hit? That was nothing compared to this utter fraud that pisses dead in the eye of even the basic concept of student athletics.

If the NCAA doesn't come down like a ton of bricks then they negate their entire argument to exist and I'd strongly support just blowing the thing up.

Whether or not the NCAA ever hammers them, I don't know. I hope they do and they certainly should. But, I have to say that this has been an incredible few years watching the arrogant UNC fanbase sweat this out.

Their fans came here in droves when we hired Cal to brag about their clean rep and accuse us of cheating. One of them, Rev Gary Heels, called me a liar when the scandal broke. He had bragged that this kind of scandal could not happen at UNC. Once we gave him the articles that were breaking he ran away.

Then, the excuses began: easy classes, rogue employee, men's bball not involved, Roy didn't know, and my favorite presented by my widdle buddy, Bradley Bethel, the academic counselors thought Crowder was a professor! Seriously, so the academic counselors aren't really crooked. They are just plain stupid and totally unqualified to do that kind of work to confuse a secretary with a professor!

 

[North Carolina Blue Wildcat]

Love that UofL is in shambles...Hoping Carolina get theirs as well....2017 will be a banner (less) year!!!!!!

 

[bballcat4]

There is no such thing as "ineligible benefits." There are benefits, impermissible benefits and extra benefits. This issue is clearly beyond your ken.

Not surprisingly, your questions are irrelevant. This has nothing to do with credit.

Was a general student able to request that Crowder add a course to the bulletin so that they take a course that semester? The answer is no. However, athletes could. That makes this an extra benefit that impacts eligibility. The AFAM courses could've all been legitimate and UNC would still have violations.

@UKnCincy, why spew the hate? "Your questions are irrelevant." "This issue is clearly beyond your ken."

Dude, lighten up. We disagree on what we expect the NCAA will do. This issue doesn't have to be Hatfields & McCoys.

Using "ineligible" rather than "impermissible" may prove the topic is beyond my comprehension. But, I like your use of "ken." Wish I could blame my blunder on an erratum.

I'm assuming (rectify my error if I'm incorrect) that like me, you find Cunningham's statement laughable at best when he states,

"The courses were available to all students; that athletes were treated no differently than the other students enrolled in the courses; that the courses originated in the AFAM department as a means to assist students with a wide variety of challenges and interests; that no coach or athletic department employee were involved in steering athletes to the courses; and that the issues involved with the courses were academic in nature and not “the result of inadequate athletic oversight.”​

Whereas, I think his statement, “The fundamental issue in our case is that the NCAA bylaws cover athletic matters, not how academics are managed.” is a pile of hot dung, I also expect this topic to be the reason NCAA slaps UNC on the wrist.

No reason to be combative if you have a different opinion or disagree.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

Whatever happens.. the NCAA just cleared up a ton of their summer schedule in the last 2 days. You're next UNC.

 

[martinsm30]

@UKnCincy, why spew the hate? "Your questions are irrelevant." "This issue is clearly beyond your ken."

Dude, lighten up. We disagree on what we expect the NCAA will do. This issue doesn't have to be Hatfields & McCoys.

Using "ineligible" rather than "impermissible" may prove the topic is beyond my comprehension. But, I like your use of "ken." Wish I could blame my blunder on an erratum.

I'm assuming (rectify my error if I'm incorrect) that like me, you find Cunningham's statement laughable at best when he states,

"The courses were available to all students; that athletes were treated no differently than the other students enrolled in the courses; that the courses originated in the AFAM department as a means to assist students with a wide variety of challenges and interests; that no coach or athletic department employee were involved in steering athletes to the courses; and that the issues involved with the courses were academic in nature and not “the result of inadequate athletic oversight.”​

Whereas, I think his statement, “The fundamental issue in our case is that the NCAA bylaws cover athletic matters, not how academics are managed.” is a pile of hot dung, I also expect this topic to be the reason NCAA slaps UNC on the wrist.

No reason to be combative if you have a different opinion or disagree.

Except the ASPCA at UNC was guiding athletes into the fake classes. They were not helping joe student as Deb Crowder's email illustrates by stating the frat crowd had found out about the fake classes and she didn't know what to do about it but to accept them into the classes.

 

[bballcat4]

Except the ASPCA at UNC was guiding athletes into the fake classes. They were not helping joe student as Deb Crowder's email illustrates by stating the frat crowd had found out about the fake classes and she didn't know what to do about it but to accept them into the classes.

That may be the straw that breaks the camel's back and causes the house of cards (no pun intended ;-) to fall apart. That's the only way I see UNC receiving harsh sanctions.

 

[martinsm30]

That may be the straw that breaks the camel's back and causes the house of cards (no pun intended ;-) to fall apart. That's the only way I see UNC receiving harsh sanctions.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/north-carolina-academic-scandal

Among non-athletes, the courses were favored by fraternity members, to the point where Crowder expressed worry in an e-mail that word had gotten out on the “frat circuit.” (The report notes that some students were genuinely interested in the subject of the courses and took them seriously, even as the people administering them did not.)

In addition, the report states that several counselors within the Office of Academic Support Program for Student Athletes not only had direct knowledge of the shadow curriculum but also, in some cases, steered students toward these courses in order to help them secure academic eligibility.

 

[bballcat4]

http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/north-carolina-academic-scandal

Among non-athletes, the courses were favored by fraternity members, to the point where Crowder expressed worry in an e-mail that word had gotten out on the “frat circuit.” (The report notes that some students were genuinely interested in the subject of the courses and took them seriously, even as the people administering them did not.)

In addition, the report states that several counselors within the Office of Academic Support Program for Student Athletes not only had direct knowledge of the shadow curriculum but also, in some cases, steered students toward these courses in order to help them secure academic eligibility.

This sounds crazy, but the fraternity members finding out about the shadow classes and other students taking the classes thinking they were serious classes may be what keeps their bacon from getting fried. These non-athletes taking classes may have expedited the public finding out. But, it was just a matter of time before someone listened to the whistle-blower. Now, UNC is pointing to these non-athletes as proof the classes weren't just for athletes.

If (and that's a big 'if') UNC dodges severe sanctions, non-athletes attending the classes will be the reason.

 

[martinsm30]

This sounds crazy, but the fraternity members finding out about the shadow classes and other students taking the classes thinking they were serious classes may be what keeps their bacon from getting fried. These non-athletes taking classes may have expedited the public finding out. But, it was just a matter of time before someone listened to the whistle-blower. Now, UNC is pointing to these non-athletes as proof the classes weren't just for athletes.

If (and that's a big 'if') UNC dodges severe sanctions, non-athletes attending the classes will be the reason.

Actually the ASPCA guiding the athletes to fake classes is what will their bacon fried as the ASPCA did not guide non athletes to the classes. I know it is difficult. Your school is in trouble. Maybe they won't get burned but they sure deserve too...

 

[bballcat4]

Actually the ASPCA guiding the athletes to fake classes is what will their bacon fried as the ASPCA did not guide non athletes to the classes. I know it is difficult. Your school is in trouble. Maybe they won't get burned but they sure deserve too...

Come on. UNC is now "my school" because I've expressed reasons I think NCAA will not give a harsh penalty? What kind of moderating is that? If I blamed my expectations on ESPN, Vitale or other emotional reasons would it make me a better fan? When did agreement on what actions we expect NCAA to take become the litmus test for being a fan?

I'm not a UNC fan at all. I do try to take off my blue tinted glasses, which I promise is not easy. I didn't expect a moderator to take a shot at me.

 

[UKnCincy]

@UKnCincy, why spew the hate? "Your questions are irrelevant." "This issue is clearly beyond your ken."

Dude, lighten up. We disagree on what we expect the NCAA will do. This issue doesn't have to be Hatfields & McCoys.

Using "ineligible" rather than "impermissible" may prove the topic is beyond my comprehension. But, I like your use of "ken." Wish I could blame my blunder on an erratum.

I'm assuming (rectify my error if I'm incorrect) that like me, you find Cunningham's statement laughable at best when he states,

"The courses were available to all students; that athletes were treated no differently than the other students enrolled in the courses; that the courses originated in the AFAM department as a means to assist students with a wide variety of challenges and interests; that no coach or athletic department employee were involved in steering athletes to the courses; and that the issues involved with the courses were academic in nature and not “the result of inadequate athletic oversight.”​

Whereas, I think his statement, “The fundamental issue in our case is that the NCAA bylaws cover athletic matters, not how academics are managed.” is a pile of hot dung, I also expect this topic to be the reason NCAA slaps UNC on the wrist.

No reason to be combative if you have a different opinion or disagree.

The portions of my post that you quoted are statements of fact, not hate. Viewing that as "hate" or combativeness is an incorrect inference on your part.

That said, you should be aware that passive aggressiveness is not an effective camouflage when debating. So you're not fooling anyone.

To your question, if Cunningham is right, then why were the athletics counselors fired?

 

[bballcat4]

The portions of my post that you quoted are statements of fact, not hate. Viewing that as "hate" or combativeness is an incorrect inference on your part.

That said, you should be aware that passive aggressiveness is not an effective camouflage when debating. So you're not fooling anyone.

To your question, if Cunningham is right, then why were the athletics counselors fired?

When did I ever say Cunningham was right? I said his statement was "laughable."

If you think anywhere in my posts I think UNC is innocent, then you've missed my point. All my posts have been about what actions I expect NCAA will take.

 

[martinsm30]

Come on. UNC is now "my school" because I've expressed reasons I think NCAA will not give a harsh penalty? What kind of moderating is that? If I blamed my expectations on ESPN, Vitale or other emotional reasons would it make me a better fan? When did agreement on what actions we expect NCAA to take become the litmus test for being a fan?

I'm not a UNC fan at all. I do try to take off my blue tinted glasses, which I promise is not easy. I didn't expect a moderator to take a shot at me.

You are an anonymous poster who defends a school which has robbed young men and women of an education. The only thing UNC cares about are those national championship banners and their brand. You ignore facts presented to you and continue to use the talking points spread by the UNC folks.

FYI I can have an opinion just like anyone else. My opinion is you are a ram trying to spread their view point.

 

[FrankUnderwood]

When did I ever say Cunningham was right? I said his statement was "laughable."

If you think anywhere in my posts I think UNC is innocent, then you've missed my point. All my posts have been about what actions I expect NCAA will take.

I get what you're saying now. You make valid points.

 

[FrankUnderwood]

You are an anonymous poster who defends a school which has robbed young men and women of an education. The only thing UNC cares about are those national championship banners and their brand. You ignore facts presented to you and continue to use the talking points spread by the UNC folks.

FYI I can have an opinion just like anyone else. My opinion is you are a ram trying to spread their view point.

See tho, (not being abrasive ) I don't think he's "defending UNC " he's expressed many times that he thinks what UNC did was WRONG and he thinks they SHOULD be punished.

He's just saying he doesn't THINK the NCAA will/ will be able / etc ... to punish UNC severely / more than a slap on the wrist.

 

[martinsm30]

See tho, (not being abrasive ) I don't think he's "defending UNC " he's expressed many times that he thinks what UNC did was WRONG and he thinks they SHOULD be punished.

He's just saying he doesn't THINK the NCAA will/ will be able / etc ... to punish UNC severely / more than a slap on the wrist.

I understand but he continues to repeat the same statement over and over as if his point is the only point to be made. We have had multiple UNC posters come here with the same talking point and the same argument style. They simply want to get the word out how UNC can get off not discuss why UNC can get punished.

 

[bballcat4]

You are an anonymous poster who defends a school which has robbed young men and women of an education. The only thing UNC cares about are those national championship banners and their brand. You ignore facts presented to you and continue to use the talking points spread by the UNC folks.

FYI I can have an opinion just like anyone else. My opinion is you are a ram trying to spread their view point.

Please point out one single post or statement where I defend UNC. I will point out numerous posts where I say their AD's statements are laughable, the classes were a sham, and UNC created a system for cheating.

My point has always been what actions I EXPECT NCAA to take. I communicated reasons why I expect NCAA to make their decision.

 

[martinsm30]

Please point out one single post or statement where I defend UNC. I will point out numerous posts where I say their AD's statements are laughable, the classes were a sham, and UNC created a system for cheating.

My point has always been what actions I EXPECT NCAA to take. I communicated reasons why I expect NCAA to make their decision.

We communicated back and you simply repeat the same statement. Is there anything more to add than UNC will get off due to offering the classes to the general populace? We know that fact is untrue due to Deborah Crowder's email.

 

[bballcat4]

I understand but he continues to repeat the same statement over and over as if his point is the only point to be made. We have had multiple UNC posters come here with the same talking point and the same argument style. They simply want to get the word out how UNC can get off not discuss why UNC can get punished.

I agree I keep making the same point.

Others keep interpreting my point as being a UNC fan. I didn't expect NCAA to make UL forfeit games. Does that make me a Cards fan?

 

[UKnCincy]

I agree I keep making the same point.

Others keep interpreting my point as being a UNC fan. I didn't expect NCAA to make UL forfeit games. Does that make me a Cards fan?

Your argument for why the NCAA won't punish UNC harshly is based on a factually incorrect assessment of both the scope the NCAA's authority and the nature of the allegations.

Further, this same line of reasoning was generated first by UNC and is nothing but spin.

Thirdly, when presented with the facts that refute your rationale, you have doubled down and continued to repeat what is in fact, a dishonest assessment of how the NCAA is adjudicating this.

That means either you're not able to understand the glaring logical flaws in your argument or you are pushing talking points.

 

[martinsm30]

I agree I keep making the same point.

Others keep interpreting my point as being a UNC fan. I didn't expect NCAA to make UL forfeit games. Does that make me a Cards fan?

Which we know is a talking point which UNC fans use to claim they will not be busted and is Bilas's claim as well.

I expect nothing from the NCAA but since the COI has gone for impermissible benefits they could rule a different way. Do you accept the fact UNC could get punished? So far you have ignored those who state it is a possibility or just repeat your talking point. So I am not sure there is any reason to keep discussing this with you.

 

[bballcat4]

We communicated back and you simply repeat the same statement. Is there anything more to add than UNC will get off due to offering the classes to the general populace? We know that fact is untrue due to Deborah Crowder's email.

Plenty reasons that I listed in the OP.

The UNC scandal is a mess. UNC will/has turned this into schools -vs- NCAA. Presidents will not be public, but privately will not want NCAA getting involved with academics. Presidents will make their thoughts known to NCAA. Fear of P5 schools having a reason to talk about pulling out of NCAA will lead to slap on the wrist.

UNC luckily had non-athletes get into these classes. They may not have been happy when it happened, but it will help them argue their defense.

I'm not happy with what I expect will happen.

 

[bballcat4]

Which we know is a talking point which UNC fans use to claim they will not be busted and is Bilas's claim as well.

I expect nothing from the NCAA but since the COI has gone for impermissible benefits they could rule a different way. Do you accept the fact UNC could get punished? So far you have ignored those who state it is a possibility or just repeat your talking point. So I am not sure there is any reason to keep discussing this with you.

Where have I ever ignored those who state it is a possibility UNC could be punished?

You ask, "Do you accept the fact UNC could get punished?" A person would be foolish to not think UNC could get punished. More so after today's announcement.

I have said 10 times in this thread I don't expect serious sanctions, but would have a smile on my face if it happens.

The one thing we agree on is this thread is going around in circles. Calling it a night. Maybe we'll get to see what NCAA does before the end of the decade.

Peace out!

 

[martinsm30]

Plenty reasons that I listed in the OP.

The UNC scandal is a mess. UNC will/has turned this into schools -vs- NCAA. Presidents will not be public, but privately will not want NCAA getting involved with academics. Presidents will make their thoughts known to NCAA. Fear of P5 schools having a reason to talk about pulling out of NCAA will lead to slap on the wrist.

UNC luckily had non-athletes get into these classes. They may not have been happy when it happened, but it will help them argue their defense.

I'm not happy with what I expect will happen.

The President of the University of Maryland stated pretty clearly how he feels about the UNC scandal but I am sure he should be discounted, right? The power 5 will pull out of the NCAA due to money not some scandal by the worst offender in the history of the NCAA. We already know that UNC did not offer the fake courses to students. The students found out through the grapevine likely from a poorly educated athlete who could not keep his mouth closed.

http://www.espn.com/college-sports/...th-penalty-north-carolina-tar-heels-athletics

 

[bballcat4]

Your argument for why the NCAA won't punish UNC harshly is based on a factually incorrect assessment of both the scope the NCAA's authority and the nature of the allegations.

Further, this same line of reasoning was generated first by UNC and is nothing but spin.

Thirdly, when presented with the facts that refute your rationale, you have doubled down and continued to repeat what is in fact, a dishonest assessment of how the NCAA is adjudicating this.

That means either you're not able to understand the glaring logical flaws in your argument or you are pushing talking points.

The basis for my thesis is mainly based on previous NCAA decisions. Today changed my thoughts some, but I want to see the banners come down before I believe too much.

Allegations against UNC are a no brainer to me. They even acknowledge embarrassment over the classes.

Scope of NCAA Authority - I'm saying this is the sticky point. Please hear me when I say Cunningham's argument, "We know these were sham classes, but the quality of classes is not a NCAA issue." is very close to the "I was drunk, so it's not my fault" defense. It's a joke. Everyone knows they're guilty. I'm just not certain NCAA wins that argument.

I'll celebrate with everyone else if I'm wrong.

Calling it a night. Peace!

 

[UKnCincy]

The basis for my thesis is mainly based on previous NCAA decisions. Today changed my thoughts some, but I want to see the banners come down before I believe too much.

Allegations against UNC are a no brainer to me. They even acknowledge embarrassment over the classes.

Scope of NCAA Authority - I'm saying this is the sticky point. Please hear me when I say Cunningham's argument, "We know these were sham classes, but the quality of classes is not a NCAA issue." is very close to the "I was drunk, so it's not my fault" defense. It's a joke. Everyone knows they're guilty. I'm just not certain NCAA wins that argument.

I'll celebrate with everyone else if I'm wrong.

Calling it a night. Peace!

The NCAA has never weighed in on the quality of the classes as the basis of a violation. The NCAA has made it crystal clear that assessing the quality of a class is the responsibility of the member institutions.

It is exceedingly dishonest to argue that the NCAA is overstepping their bounds here when none of the allegations in the NOA have anything to do with the quality of the courses.

 

[bballcat4]

The NCAA has never weighed in on the quality of the classes as the basis of a violation. The NCAA has made it crystal clear that assessing the quality of a class is the responsibility of the member institutions.

It is exceedingly dishonest to argue that the NCAA is overstepping their bounds here when none of the allegations in the NOA have anything to do with the quality of the courses.

You keep saying I'm arguing for UNC. I can't discern how you're connecting dots that don't exist.
I'm not arguing for UNC and never have!!! I just don't think NCAA will level harsh sanctions against them. They let it go on too long. It involved basketball, football other sports including Olympic sports. How many games, individual matches and competitions do you think they'll make them vacate? They can't punish team sports and not punish individual sports of people who attended a class.

NCAA allowed it to go on too long. I'm going to blame it on ESPN, Vitale and Bilas so I can earn my fan card back. Let's agree to reconvene when it's all said and done to compare notes and see who had an accurate prediction.

This has been like making a prediction for a political candidate you didn't vote for. People don't hear who you voted for. They hear your prediction as a vote for another candidate regardless of how many times you tell them differently.

I don't want UNC to skate on these allegations. But, I don't expect much from the NCAA!!!

 

[JPFisher]

JMO, Louisville was very accommodating to the NCAA and got hammered so quickly because of it. UNC is like a wild horse. It may take a while to break it, but I truly believe they will in the end. Same with Baylor.

If UNC had complied like UL did, they'd already have two fewer banners and likely wouldn't have been in the NCAAT this past season.

Again, jmo.

 

[Cindog28]

Poor Cleveland St.

 

[UNIVKY]

One of my arguments why UNC should be "punished" is the use of part time "student athletes" to compete in NCAA athletic events..The minimum requirement to be a full time student is 12 hours...If athletes were enrolled in a class that didnt actually meet, any athlete who was at the 12 hour minimum, actually would only have 9 hours...and lets face it.....most take the bare minimum of hours to stay eligible.

Also, I would love to know how many athletes at UNC were declared "academically ineligible" during that 18 year period, compared to other universities.

I have lived here in NC since 1984 after graduating from UK......I have many many friends and relatives who are huge UNC fans...My dad is a 1955 UNC grad (he is completely embarrassed by this scandal)....I love my dad........But, I hope they get HAMMERED

Then they will never hear the end of me saying "The Carolina Way"

 

[Big_Blue_Skidoo]

At this point, even though they absolutely deserve it, I kinda hope the NCAA lets UNC off the hook with no penalties. Would make it even more difficult for UofL fans to stomach the nut kick they just received. And since misery loves company, I would just rather they wallow in their agony all by themselves.

 

[Jkwo]

Your argument doesn't make sense - for better or worse, the NCAA is not worried about remaining inside the strict bounds of their jurisdiction now.

Bilas is right that there is no "repugnant" section of the manual, but that was the entire basis for the NCAA going for top-level violations.

Also, Jones is right to say that a bunch of fans just have an obsession for repeatedly and emphatically stating their pessimistic guesses as fact about these cases. It says more about your personality than about what's actually going on.

 

[WildmanWilson]

UNC is willing to throw the reputation of the entire academic program and school under the bus to save its men's basketball program. They allow less than grade school classes to be taught to keep illiterate athletes eligible. They may save the athletics but are burning down their reputation as an accredited institution....And they are fine with that apparently.

 

[martinsm30]

UNC has made themselves synonymous with their championship banners.

1. Fake classes to win championships
2. $20 million to defend fake classes used to win championships.
3. Fans who do not care about fake classes or how much it costs to defend the fake classes.

Education and money mean nothing. Those championship banners mean everything.

 

[meteordealer]

Many UK fans are licking their chops this afternoon after NCAA dropped the hammer on UL. NCAA is now viewed by many as Wyatt Earp. The Cardinals and Tarheels are the evil Outlaws. A dream for many UK fans is to hear NCAA say to both programs, "Tell them I'm coming after them, and hell is coming with me."

Well, I'm guessing the group from Indy will blow some smoke at UNC, but it'll be nothing more than Earp blowing threatening smoke at the poker table. Here's why I think it happens this way.

1. NCAA cannot decide if a class offered by UNC is valid. That's an accreditation and school issue.
2. Everyone and their mother (including UNC athletics) knows why the program existed. Having an entire program designed that your typical 2nd grader can pass is not a problem as long as the school made classes available to other students.
3. NCAA can't punish an academic program for athletes taking classes that the university approved. Other schools know that a sham was created. But, they'll not stand by if NCAA tries to step into "what schools should and should not teach." No one wants the Indy group to have that much authority.
4. They'll be more punishment for a teacher/asst coach doing someone's homework or test than for all the athletes that participated in the classes.

Was it a sham? Absolutely! Will NCAA punish them for it? Don't think they have the legal reach to do so.

Here's more bad news for those who want to see the NCAA continue chasing the programs we label as "Outlaws" (I'm glad no one views our program or coach in this way ;-) ... I don't think the UL 2013 banner comes down. UL will appeal. NCAA has never taken down a title banner. FinalFour banner will come down, but title banner will stay up.

These are just projections. Some (ones who thought Higgins deserved to be harassed and threatened) will interpret this post as anti-UK. I didn't say I wouldn't have a slight smile if all the banners come down. I just doubt anything of significance happens to UNC and that UL title banner comes down.

UNC was placed on probation by SACS. That pretty much tells me the classes weren't valid.

 

[Ryan Lemonds Diary]

Many UK fans are licking their chops this afternoon after NCAA dropped the hammer on UL. NCAA is now viewed by many as Wyatt Earp. The Cardinals and Tarheels are the evil Outlaws. A dream for many UK fans is to hear NCAA say to both programs, "Tell them I'm coming after them, and hell is coming with me."

Well, I'm guessing the group from Indy will blow some smoke at UNC, but it'll be nothing more than Earp blowing threatening smoke at the poker table. Here's why I think it happens this way.

1. NCAA cannot decide if a class offered by UNC is valid. That's an accreditation and school issue.
2. Everyone and their mother (including UNC athletics) knows why the program existed. Having an entire program designed that your typical 2nd grader can pass is not a problem as long as the school made classes available to other students.
3. NCAA can't punish an academic program for athletes taking classes that the university approved. Other schools know that a sham was created. But, they'll not stand by if NCAA tries to step into "what schools should and should not teach." No one wants the Indy group to have that much authority.
4. They'll be more punishment for a teacher/asst coach doing someone's homework or test than for all the athletes that participated in the classes.

Was it a sham? Absolutely! Will NCAA punish them for it? Don't think they have the legal reach to do so.

Here's more bad news for those who want to see the NCAA continue chasing the programs we label as "Outlaws" (I'm glad no one views our program or coach in this way ;-) ... I don't think the UL 2013 banner comes down. UL will appeal. NCAA has never taken down a title banner. FinalFour banner will come down, but title banner will stay up.

These are just projections. Some (ones who thought Higgins deserved to be harassed and threatened) will interpret this post as anti-UK. I didn't say I wouldn't have a slight smile if all the banners come down. I just doubt anything of significance happens to UNC and that UL title banner comes down.

Where did you mention the illegal benefits in the form of free rental cars, thousand dollar dental pieces, etc? If they didn't provide those to the average student isn't that an extra benefit and if they provided extra benefits aren't the athletes ineligible?

 

[Ryan Lemonds Diary]

Maybe my memory has failed me but didn't the NCAA look into Eric Bledsoe and a math class he had in high school to determine if it was a legit grade? If so why do they concern themselves with High School classes and grades but not college classes? I thought the C in NCAA stood for Collegiate.