UNCheat Gets Probation from Its Accrediting Agency

[Lumpy 2]

Western, actually my daughter works for a college in California so it isn't SACS that she dealt with but another similar agency. But, the issues are still basically the same.

The answer to your question is a qualified yes. The COI will make the final decision with full knowledge of what SACS did but that committee is only as good as the strongest members. Unfortunately, the committee isn't balanced enough with members who are (or were) not directly involved in athletic programs.

No matter what, the SACS decision is a BIG negative for UNC. I think a lighter punishment is less likely now but we all know that ONE powerful voice can change the way a committee votes.

BTW, I hope UNC sends Bradley Bethel to defend their case to the COI. UNC would get the death penalty!

Bobby told Jon Scott a couple of days ago he was too busy to respond to his post and hasn't been heard from since. Maybe he's the one preparing UNC's response to the NOA.

 

[preacherfan]

Bobby told Jon Scott a couple of days ago he was too busy to respond to his post and hasn't been heard from since. Maybe he's the one preparing UNC's response to the NOA.

 

[DDS62]

I am not sure how you nailed it and missed it at the same time? SACS absolutely NAILED UNC. For UNC, probation along with the likes of SC State is a major back eye. UNC thrives on reputation and that reputation has been permanently tarnished.

I have a daughter who just spent a year working on bringing her school into compliance for accreditation and she had a lot to say about this and what UNC is facing. You need to know that the leadership, donors, etc are all concerned and they are NOT happy right now. A warning would have been acceptable but UNC was expecting to be cleared based on what they have already done.

As for stopping the fraud completely, YAHOO! Peppers, R Wallace, Ed Cota, J Williams (to name a few) would have been ineligible to compete if they had stopped this a long time ago.

UNC is in deep crap and you don't see bobby on here celebrating, do you?

Preacherfan it is an opinion that UNC was "nailed" as you say. And it may not be an opinion that UNC has received a "black eye", but it is definitely only an opinion that UNC's reputation has been permanently tarnished. Nothing wrong with your opinions, but crys of being "nailed" by the public is a far cry from being punished. And you need not remind anybody that the Administration is unhappy with the probation classification, that goes without saying. Like I stated in a thread just one month ago (page 8 May 15
SACS to announce on June 11 unc *** 's accreditation
), my wife worked with SACS for 15 years and also has an indepth understanding of what is going on. If you check that thread I (she) predicted the pronouncement of probation after SACS summer meeting which is exactly what happened. There isn't going to be anything that happens to UNC and all of the embarrassment they are sustaining with the SACS ruling will vanish like smoke in the air over time. Only a few basketball fans from Duke and Kentucky will remain to rub it in there face, everybody else will forget. The only organization that might punish UNC is the NCAA and as time move on it looks less and less like that will happen.

 

[preacherfan]

Preacherfan it is an opinion that UNC was "nailed" as you say. And it may not be an opinion that UNC has received a "black eye", but it is definitely only an opinion that UNC's reputation has been permanently tarnished. Nothing wrong with your opinions, but crys of being "nailed" by the public is a far cry from being punished. And you need not remind anybody that the Administration is unhappy with the probation classification, that goes without saying. Like I stated in a thread just one month ago (page 8 May 15
SACS to announce on June 11 unc *** 's accreditation
), my wife worked with SACS for 15 years and also has an indepth understanding of what is going on. If you check that thread I (she) predicted the pronouncement of probation after SACS summer meeting which is exactly what happened. There isn't going to be anything that happens to UNC and all of the embarrassment they are sustaining with the SACS ruling will vanish like smoke in the air over time. Only a few basketball fans from Duke and Kentucky will remain to rub it in there face, everybody else will forget. The only organization that might punish UNC is the NCAA and as time move on it looks less and less like that will happen.

You and I both know that removing accreditation was never a real option. We both know that SACS could have either declared them in compliance or issued a warning. SACS did what they could do and had the authority to do.

While I did overstate the reputation being PERMANENTLY tarnishd (I debated editing that), the rest of my post stands. A "public ivy" doesn't get put on probation. That is being nailed and a black eye.

As for the NCAA, I have NO idea why you say that it looks less likely considereing the NOA that just came out. Do you agree with the UNC fans that LOIC is no big deal?

 

[kybassfan]

Preacher, I'm not sure that "permanently tarnished" would necessarily be so far off the mark. While in athletic circles, I can see this fading into the woodwork over some period of time, I'm not so sure about the academic side will recover so quickly. I say this for two reasons. For an aspiring academician, working at a prestigious university is on the short list of goals. Such prestige does not go hand in hand with the slimy ethics we are seeing unfold with UNC. Second, if UNC does not or can not attract a faculty of highest quality, then their programs will suffer, grant money will dry up and they will be unable to perpetuate (read restore) the façade of academic excellence they've foisted on us these many years. To a degree, they've become the university equivalent of Bernie Madoff. Lastly, they don't seem to be launching the full court press on reputation recovery. I frankly see little more than token evidence that they give a damn and their greatest regret seems to be getting caught.

That sort of scum does not wash off so easily.

 

[JPScott]

Bobby told Jon Scott a couple of days ago he was too busy to respond to his post and hasn't been heard from since. Maybe he's the one preparing UNC's response to the NOA.

I think you're giving him way too much credit. He'll be back I'm sure with some new lines of BS. He just needs to have someone tell him what to say now.

It likely took a while for it to sink into his brain but he may understand now that the way the NOA was structured, it basically bypasses the large majority of the talking points he's relied on for the past month or so (i.e. that the NCAA has to prove the individual athletes were academically ineligible before they can administer punishment).

Beyond that, the SACS decision has essentially undercut one of his other main arguments (i.e. that the classes in question are fully legitimate per SACS.) His assumption that without UNC losing their accreditation, it's equivalent to saying that SACS thinks the classes are legitimate never was a very strong one to begin with. (And FWIW if SACS catches wind that UNC is trying to argue this point to the NCAA, that may just be enough to convince them to tighten the screws even further.)

 

[preacherfan]

Beyond that, the SACS decision has essentially undercut one of his other main arguments (i.e. that the classes in question are fully legitimate per SACS.) His assumption that without UNC losing their accreditation, it's equivalent to saying that SACS thinks the classes are legitimate never was a very strong one to begin with. (And FWIW if SACS catches wind that UNC is trying to argue this point to the NCAA, that may just be enough to convince them to tighten the screws even further.)

The bottomline is that UNC played chicken with SACS and lost. UNC touted their "reforms" and shouted "move forward" from the towers. I think they believed that SACS would pat them on the back for making changes.

UNC clearly was willing to gamble with their academics to save the banners. They lost that gamble. SACS slammed them as hard as they could.

The PR firm has given horrible counsel to UNC administrators and we are seeing the results. SACS is watching to see what UNC does next and UNC is well aware that they are on a tightrope over the Grand Canyon.

 

[Xception]

The PR firms strategy has been to keep walking like nothing happened , when bad news comes send out something positive (ex. Roy's extension) to try and overshadow it . Basically if you act as if nothing happened then people will dismiss it because all criminals flee the crime scene so if UNC just stands there saying it's ok or nothing at all then they have to be innocent . The uniformed will fall for this and that is what the firm is banking on , if they can win over the clueless masses then you can negate the informed minority .

 

[docholiday51]

Some great discussion here,I fear that UNC will be much better at playing 'chicken' with the NCAA than with SACS.

As sports scandals go this ranks ahead of the black sox scandal of 1919,anything that happened in the 1950's ,Clay/Liston,UCLA in the 1960's,the Olympic basketball game with the Russians and any damn thing else that happened in sports in the past 200 years.......just sayin

 

[westerncat]

The bottomline is that UNC played chicken with SACS and lost. UNC touted their "reforms" and shouted "move forward" from the towers. I think they believed that SACS would pat them on the back for making changes.

UNC clearly was willing to gamble with their academics to save the banners. They lost that gamble. SACS slammed them as hard as they could.

The PR firm has given horrible counsel to UNC administrators and we are seeing the results. SACS is watching to see what UNC does next and UNC is well aware that they are on a tightrope over the Grand Canyon.[/QUOTE]

I would love to see that tightrope start to unravel ! UNC*** deserves to be punished hard for their past cheating.