UNC Scandal latest

[Duvall]

My delussional UNC friend bet me a couple of six packs that Butch Davis would not lose his job over this. He says that the UNC fan base is 80% behind Davis and that he will get another chance. He claims that the only thing UNC cares more about than their reputation is the bottom line and that football was going to be a big money maker for them. He says they have already invested too much into the infrastructure to turn back now. What would that say about UNC? To me it would be a clear indication that they had sold out if Davis survives.

Not 80%, but pretty high.

[oldnavy]

While I DO enjoy a good chuckle at the goings on in Blight Blue, there is another item to look at a deeper.

Surely UNC is not the only school doing this type of thing... While I have no proof and its only speculation and conjecture on my part, you'd have a hard time convincing me there is no funny business happening at Ala. Fla. Tx or fill in the blank with any Big-Time college football program. Call it intuition.

I may be a cynic, but I just don't think running a 100% "clean program" that wins consistently can be done.

I cant help but think that whatever sanctions the NCAA dishes out to UNC for their shenanigans... If it is overly harsh, I think it sets the bar for how good the ACC CAN EVER be as a football conference. It would establish the ACC as a 2nd tier football destination.

The NCAA needs to drop the hammer on everyone uniformly, or the ACC has to figure out how to be better cheaters in football.

Don't get me wrong, I'm OK with that outcome. My feeling right now is if we cant be then everyone should stink it up equally with us.

I know lots of you will vehemently disagree and that's fine. But I think we can agree that its fun to watch them burn and fester.

I agree and disagree with your statement bolded above. I think that with a rule book the size of the NYC telephone book, it would be very difficult to be 100% compliant. I am not even sure that the NCAA would expect that you would be 100%, however I do believe that you can run a very good top tier program without be what I and perhaps the NCAA would classify as "cheaters". Inadvertantly overlooking an administrative requirement or two is way different that purposfully breaking the intent or letter of a major rule. I agree that everyone needs to be held accountable for it to work, but that is the same for any regulatory process.

[Jderf]

No I'm not suggesting that Duke start cheating... not exactly...
If we are on the interstate, the posted limit is 70 mph.. But the flow of traffic is moving at a faster clip...

Are you content to get passed, or are you gonna drive with the pack?
You have a decision to make.

If you happen to pass multiple cars stopped by the police, then that decision gets a whole LOT easier to make. Its up to the NCAA to play the role of speed limit enforcer.

The cynic in me says Good-faith adherence to the rules is rare among top flight football schools.

If the NCAA doesn't enforce, or lacks the resources to have enough patrol cars to catch speeders speeding... then perhaps its time to rethink the whole notion of what is speeding actually is and make some new laws.

Speeding is an interesting, though dangerous, analogy. Where in some cases the "everyone's doing it" defense could sound plausible (speeding; or downloading music), I don't think it is in any way reasonable as applied in this case. In those other cases, nobody is going to criticize your moral bearings for going 10 mph over the limit, or downloading Don Henley's greatest hits. But I think if any Duke athletic program ever got caught cheating, most Duke fans (myself included) would be absolutely horrified.

[oldnavy]

Not 80%, but pretty high.

Yep. What is going to be interesting is how the Board of Governors and or the administration feels. You know Joe Sixpack really doesn't care about the details of maintaining a good program, but how will the administration feel about letting the reputation of a school go down the toilet for a few football wins each year? We shall see...

[JasonEvans]

Not 80%, but pretty high.

The key question that poll did not ask is "Have you followed the details of the academic/agent scandal involving UNC football?" I bet a huge percentage of those "die hard" Carolina fans have no idea about the scandal or what is going on. If you only surveyed fans who are passionate enough to follow the scandal, I bet Davis' support would be lower.

The poll also did not ask fans if they felt it would be wise for Davis to step down. The choices appear to have been --
1) Fire him
2) Let him continue to coach
3) No opinion
It is hardly surprising, given those options, that a very large percentage would say let him continue to coach. If you added in "let him gracefully resign at the end of the season," I am betting you would see Davis' support drop significantly.

I would similarly be interested in a question that asked, "would you be upset if Butch Davis resigned?"

That said, I still think a large percentage of UNC fans, even the ones who have paid attention to this scandal, are trying to rationally explain all this away as one bad dude -- not a program-wide problem. It is very easy to distance the institution/program you love from the bad things happening around it. Those folks certainly want Davis to stay on.

--Jason "nothing worse than a poll that only asks the easiest of questions in an effort to only tell part of the story" Evans

[billy]

Yep. What is going to be interesting is how the Board of Governors and or the administration feels. You know Joe Sixpack really doesn't care about the details of maintaining a good program, but how will the administration feel about letting the reputation of a school go down the toilet for a few football wins each year? We shall see...

I actually do have some "inside" information about how the admin (I'll use that term very loosely) felt of the situation a couple of weeks ago. They feel like it was an isolated incident with Blake primarily and that Butch shouldn't lose his job for it. The one (in my mind) misguided rationale provided was that should Butch lose his job the program would go into a tailspin for 10 years or so. That underscored the "win at all costs" mentality that appears to have resulted in this situation.

[whereinthehellami]

The whole arguement that everyone does it or could get in trouble for it is bogus. It wasn't just one thing for UNC. It's multiple issues of impropriety and corruption. While any school could slip up and have one of these problems, UNC went for the hattrick with:

1. An associate HEAD coach who was a runner/agent to an agent.
2. Multiple athletes accepting improper gifts/money.
3. Multiple athletes cheating academically.
4. Multiple athletes hanging around a known drug dealer.
5. Athlete(s?) acting as runner/agent(s?) for another agent.
6. A rogue tutor(s?) hired by the head coach
7. Direct illegal involvement of booster(s?) gifts/money (supposedly the next prong)?

Together these are alarming and can't be overlooked or forgiven. The NCAA has a landmark case in front of them. If they let Carolina continue the "carolina way" than the NCAA of old is dead and schools are really just going to run afoul. The NCAA has to hammer UNC and hard. And they should. No school has ever cheated this bad before. They were cheating so much they bragged about it online, which is the only reason they got caught. How does your compliance department not see all of the above? I am absolutely shocked at UNC's response to this and have lost all respect for them as an athletic school.

[sagegrouse]

--Jason "nothing worse than a poll that only asks the easiest of questions in an effort to only tell part of the story" Evans

Here's a quote from the article cited:


"A scientific telephone survey of North Carolina voters describing themselves as fans of the Tar Heels found that:

"-Only 14% of Carolina fans want Davis to be fired with 57% preferring that he continue as the coach and 29% having no opinion. 41% of fans approve of Davis' overall job performance to only 20% who disapprove, numbers any politician would love to have."

Sorry guys, but the unsupported quote, "scientific survey," makes the hair stand up on the back on my neck. Uh, how was the sample chosen? Random calls to listed numbers (or all phone numbers in NC)? How were respondents chosen? What was the non-response rate? How was the question teed up -- you know, introductory material? Were there other questions in the survey pertaining UNC and Butch Davis? Were there other questions in the survey pertaining to politics or other subjects?

And, as Jason says, the list of options was a harsh option, "fire him," versus a mild option, "continue as the coach," when there were clearly other more neutral ways to phrase the question.

sagegrouse

[Newton_14]

So the latest little twist in this saga is the idea of red-shirting some of the kids that have been held out so far if they were part of the academic cheating prong, but not part of the illegal gifts/agents prong.

I am sorry but to me that is not right. If the kid was caught cheating and had to miss part or all of the season due to the cheating, then declaring this season to be a red-shirt year just seems wrong to me.

Am I crazy here? I will say that I am all for forgiveness and giving kids a 2nd chance after a screw up. I have no problem with a kid getting a 2nd chance, but being allowed to red-shirt to make up for a season lost due to cheating is wrong imo. On the Adam Gold show today, Adam supported the redshirt and said it was the exact same thing as a kid who redshirts because his grades were too low to be eligible and he needed that year to raise the grades back up to an acceptable level. Sorry but those are 2 very different situations.

I am interested to see how you guys and gals feel about this one.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

So the latest little twist in this saga is the idea of red-shirting some of the kids that have been held out so far if they were part of the academic cheating prong, but not part of the illegal gifts/agents prong.

I am sorry but to me that is not right. If the kid was caught cheating and had to miss part or all of the season due to the cheating, then declaring this season to be a red-shirt year just seems wrong to me.

Am I crazy here? I will say that I am all for forgiveness and giving kids a 2nd chance after a screw up. I have no problem with a kid getting a 2nd chance, but being allowed to red-shirt to make up for a season lost due to cheating is wrong imo. On the Adam Gold show today, Adam supported the redshirt and said it was the exact same thing as a kid who redshirts because his grades were too low to be eligible and he needed that year to raise the grades back up to an acceptable level. Sorry but those are 2 very different situations.

I am interested to see how you guys and gals feel about this one.

It would appear that some see redshirting as a way to make the problem disappear or be seen in a different light. I agree with you. To red shirt someone who's cheated is wrong and sends the wrong message.

[sagegrouse]

So the latest little twist in this saga is the idea of red-shirting some of the kids that have been held out so far if they were part of the academic cheating prong, but not part of the illegal gifts/agents prong.

I am sorry but to me that is not right. If the kid was caught cheating and had to miss part or all of the season due to the cheating, then declaring this season to be a red-shirt year just seems wrong to me.

Am I crazy here? I will say that I am all for forgiveness and giving kids a 2nd chance after a screw up. I have no problem with a kid getting a 2nd chance, but being allowed to red-shirt to make up for a season lost due to cheating is wrong imo. On the Adam Gold show today, Adam supported the redshirt and said it was the exact same thing as a kid who redshirts because his grades were too low to be eligible and he needed that year to raise the grades back up to an acceptable level. Sorry but those are 2 very different situations.

I am interested to see how you guys and gals feel about this one.

If the question is, "Should athletes who cheat be awarded an additional year of eligibility?" The answer ought to be "no!"

If the question is, "Should athletes who cheated be suspended or expelled from UNC?" The right answer seems to be "yes!"

Howsomever, the second course of action, which kicks the offending athletes out of school, would automatically lead to an additional year of athletic eligibility for a player after he returns, because the player did not compete this year. I suppose some would not be able to play, if they had already been hanging around UNC for five calendar years.

sagegrouse

[devilish]

If the question is, "Should athletes who cheat be awarded an additional year of eligibility?" The answer ought to be "no!"

If the question is, "Should athletes who cheated be suspended or expelled from UNC?" The right answer seems to be "yes!"

Howsomever, the second course of action, which kicks the offending athletes out of school, would automatically lead to an additional year of athletic eligibility for a player after he returns, because the player did not compete this year. I suppose some would not be able to play, if they had already been hanging around UNC for five calendar years.

sagegrouse

But a suspended student/player should not be allowed to practice with team/participate in spring drills (remember Zack Asack.) Redshirt players can participate.

For anyone who is really interested in this saga you should check out NC State's blog: www.statefansnation.com they have a daily update of all UNC shenanigans.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

So the latest little twist in this saga is the idea of red-shirting some of the kids that have been held out so far if they were part of the academic cheating prong, but not part of the illegal gifts/agents prong.

I am sorry but to me that is not right. If the kid was caught cheating and had to miss part or all of the season due to the cheating, then declaring this season to be a red-shirt year just seems wrong to me.

Am I crazy here? I will say that I am all for forgiveness and giving kids a 2nd chance after a screw up. I have no problem with a kid getting a 2nd chance, but being allowed to red-shirt to make up for a season lost due to cheating is wrong imo. On the Adam Gold show today, Adam supported the redshirt and said it was the exact same thing as a kid who redshirts because his grades were too low to be eligible and he needed that year to raise the grades back up to an acceptable level. Sorry but those are 2 very different situations.

I am interested to see how you guys and gals feel about this one.

I continued to think about this issue.

It's appalling that anyone would even entertain a thought of red shirting for someone who's cheated. The question should be whether someone who's cheated should be allowed to remain in school, not whether a year of eligibility can be salvaged.

[devil84]

If the question is, "Should athletes who cheat be awarded an additional year of eligibility?" The answer ought to be "no!"

If the question is, "Should athletes who cheated be suspended or expelled from UNC?" The right answer seems to be "yes!"

Howsomever, the second course of action, which kicks the offending athletes out of school, would automatically lead to an additional year of athletic eligibility for a player after he returns, because the player did not compete this year. I suppose some would not be able to play, if they had already been hanging around UNC for five calendar years.

sagegrouse

I totally agree with the answers to your questions.

But if the "student" athlete started the year and burned the use of a scholarship, it seems to me that they should burn their year of eligibility (exception: injuries), particularly if they violated rules, which would be the case with cheating.

Low grades don't necessarily come from deliberate actions on the part of the student -- there could be plenty of reasons such as the student's inability to grasp the course material despite trying, the student's learning style is incompatible with the instructor's teaching methods, the rare poor instructor, or the student's sub-par time-management skills. In nearly every case, there is the ability to monitor the grades throughout the semester and provide some sort of help to bring up grades. Second chances should be available to the students as long as they're putting forth effort to make the grades. It's rare that there should be some surprise at the end of the semester that a student, whether an athlete or not, didn't make the grades. With football, the athlete is either academically eligible or not for the whole season (except bowl games?), so the grades can be brought up in the off-season (spring and summer semesters).

Cheating and most other rules violations come from a deliberate action on the part of the athlete. For football, these deliberate actions can cause an athlete's eligibility to change mid-season. If you violate the rule and get yourself kicked off the team, IMHO you should lose your eligibility. Do those who miss the remaining season due to getting in trouble with the law get their eligibility back?

Since all students would find themselves expelled from school beginning with the semester in which the violation is discovered, I would expect no less for an athlete. If a non-athlete student would have to forfeit his/her tuition, room, board fees, scholarships, and eligibility for participation with campus groups for that semester in which they were kicked out for academic dishonesty, then it follows that the athlete should lose their eligibility if they started out listed on the roster at the beginning of the semester.

Of course, this assumes that the athlete found cheating IS ACTUALLY EXPELLED just like any other student. I'm waiting for those UNC football players to be treated as if they were a recipient of a Morehead or other merit scholarship and was found to be cheating. Heck, treat 'em just like a regular ol' student whether the student is a recipient of any scholarships or not.

I can't believe the message UNC is sending. It's outrageous.

[JasonEvans]

I agree with the outrage here but have one comment

I may be wrong, but I believe there are some players who have been held out of numerous games but who have not been found guilty of anything. They were held out as a precaution while UNC and the NCAA investigated their situation.

A player like that -- a player who missed half of the season due to suspicion that proved unfounded -- should be allowed to take the redshirt year.

-Jason "does anyone disagree?" Evans

[Acymetric]

I agree with the outrage here but have one comment

I may be wrong, but I believe there are some players who have been held out of numerous games but who have not been found guilty of anything. They were held out as a precaution while UNC and the NCAA investigated their situation.

A player like that -- a player who missed half of the season due to suspicion that proved unfounded -- should be allowed to take the redshirt year.

-Jason "does anyone disagree?" Evans

As long as they were legitimately cleared and not "cleared" shadily by unc (which they've been accused of recently) then absolutely, and if I was that player I would probably want to transfer if possible...although I guess they would lose another year.

[camion]

In the phrase "cleared to play" the meaning of "cleared" needs to be cleared up. It could mean:

Cleared1 - Found innocent of wrongdoing and eligible to play, but missed games because of the investigation.

Cleared2 - Found guilty of something with some sort of suspension penalty, but time served is sufficient punishment and now eligible to play.

For Cleared1 I think a redshirt year would be appropriate.

For Cleared2 I don't think a redshirt should be granted.

[BD80]

I agree with the outrage here but have one comment

I may be wrong, but I believe there are some players who have been held out of numerous games but who have not been found guilty of anything. They were held out as a precaution while UNC and the NCAA investigated their situation.

A player like that -- a player who missed half of the season due to suspicion that proved unfounded -- should be allowed to take the redshirt year.

-Jason "does anyone disagree?" Evans

Wouldn't that be somewhat similar to the extra year granted to Duke's lacrosse players?

[Duvall]

Wouldn't that be somewhat similar to the extra year granted to Duke's lacrosse players?

Perhaps, but weren't they already ineligible for discretionary redshirts?

[devil84]

I agree with the outrage here but have one comment

I may be wrong, but I believe there are some players who have been held out of numerous games but who have not been found guilty of anything. They were held out as a precaution while UNC and the NCAA investigated their situation.

A player like that -- a player who missed half of the season due to suspicion that proved unfounded -- should be allowed to take the redshirt year.

-Jason "does anyone disagree?" Evans

Absolutely no disagreement here. If they were held out of games while the investigation was in progress and truly did nothing wrong, they absolutely should take the redshirt year.

If they were found guilty of any academic hanky-panky or deliberate actions on their part to break rules, rewarding their behavior with a redshirt year is wrong.