The NCAA's response has been released by UNC.
http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/un...ords-requests/
Wow. Initial reading of this document looks encouraging.
^ yeah, I have only skimmed it briefly but it sounds like they are calling UNC out on all their BS and refuting the school's attempts at getting various charges thrown out.
"It is standard practice for the current head coaches of programs referenced in a notice of allegations to attend."
But but but but but I thought the basketball team wasn't referenced?!!
This is the best Wine and Cheese Day I can remember.
"The issues at the heart of this case are clearly the NCAA's business. When a member institution
allows an academic department to provide benefits to student-athletes that are materially different from
the general student body, it is the NCAA's business. When athletics academic counselors exploit
"special arrangement" classes for student-athletes in ways unintended by and contrary to the bylaws,
it is the NCAA's business. When a member institution provides student-athletes an inside track to enroll
in unpublicized courses where grades of As and Bs are the norm,1 it is the NCAA's business. When a
member institution uses "special arrangement" courses to keep a significant number of student-athletes
eligible, it is the NCAA's business. When a member institution fails or refuses to take action after
receiving actual notice of problems involving student-athletes, thereby allowing violations to
compound and to continue for years, it is the NCAA's business. In sum, it is an NCAA matter when
other member schools who choose not to provide impermissible benefits are disadvantaged by their
commitment to compliance."
Exactly!
"This is the best of all possible worlds."
Dr. Pangloss - Candide
From the NCAA response of 07/17/2017 (p.19)
The institution also discusses the applicability of Bylaw 10.01.1, the use of "student-athlete" courses by other institutions and matters purportedly involving the University of Michigan and Auburn University. The enforcement staff believes all of these issues are without merit and do not warrant a discussion in its written reply. The enforcement staff is, however, prepared to discuss these issues at the hearing if the panel desires.
BaddaBing, BaddaBoom.
The Hammer of Thor is about to fall at the Dump on the Hump and they will never put Humpty Dumpty together again after the Noze Dome is imploded.
(I never mix metaphors!)
"The benefits here are not at all similar to the permissible supports identified by member schools in Bylaw 16. On the contrary, the
access and assistance provided by the institution here do not help "maximize the academic
performances of student-athletes."51 Rather, they alleviated the academic responsibilities for students
that help them develop both as learners and adults. Instead of supporting academic and long-term
success of student-athletes, they cut against this core principle of the Association. p. 16
I only read the first few pages of each (anyone have Cliffs notes?), and have never read any other NCAA proceedings with other universities so have nothing to compare, but it appears that the NCAA is severely P*ssed Off.
uNC may have overplayed their hand. It was crappy to begin with, so maybe the big bluff was their only chance. In poker, the big bluff will only lose you what you choose to put in the pot. uNC won't be so fortunate.
august-2017-calendar.jpg
the time has come....
"One POSSIBLE future. From your point of view... I don't know tech stuff.".... Kyle Reese
This hearing will take place in Cheekwood ABC meeting rooms at the Gaylord Opryland Resort and Convention Center, 2800 Opryland
Drive, Nashville, Tennessee 37214. The panel has set aside two full days for this hearing.
NCAA infractions hearings are closed to the public, and the information discussed during
these hearings is considered confidential, as is the date, time and location of the hearing.
I'm confused as to whether or not we should know when and where this is taking place on the 16th... Sounds like it should have been redacted before being published? Or am I reading that last sentence wrong?
Cliffs notes version of the enforcement staff's case for extra benefits:
The issues at the heart of this case are clearly the NCAA's business. When a member institution allows an academic department to provide benefits to student-athletes that are materially different from the general student body, it is the NCAA's business. When athletics academic counselors exploit "special arrangement" classes for student-athletes in ways unintended by and contrary to the bylaws, it is the NCAA's business. When a member institution provides student-athletes an inside track to enroll in unpublicized courses where grades of As and Bs are the norm, it is the NCAA's business. When a member institution uses "special arrangement" courses to keep a significant number of student-athletes eligible, it is the NCAA's business. When a member institution fails or refuses to take action after receiving actual notice of problems involving student-athletes, thereby allowing violations to compound and to continue for years, it is the NCAA's business. In sum, it is an NCAA matter when other member schools who choose not to provide impermissible benefits are disadvantaged by their commitment to compliance. …
Rather, the institution argues that the same arrangements were generally available to other students. The argument is incorrect and mischaracterizes the clear statements of numerous individuals with personal knowledge of the special arrangements. …
Crowder and the AFRI/AFAM department began offering anomalous or "special arrangement" courses in 1999. These were closed enrollment classes where Crowder had almost exclusive enrollment authority. They were not published as options in the student catalog and they were not advertised in the institution's schedule of classes. …
Because the institution did not make them known or generally available, students could only learn about these "special arrangement" courses through arts and sciences advisors, word of mouth, Crowder herself or athletics academic counselors. They were not listed with other courses and a student needed one of these limited connections to learn of the classes. Unlike other courses that were published, advertised and officially made known by the institution, these were open only to a select group with inside knowledge and were not generally available to the student body. …
However, the dramatically high student-athlete enrollment is a clear manifestation and illustration of the extra benefit of preferential access. The proportionally small universe of student-athletes could not have enrolled in such high numbers absent the preferential access Crowder provided them through her relationship with ASPSA. …
There is no information in the record suggesting that [Crowder] made similar "group enrollment" accommodations for any other segment of campus. …
Rather, Crowder stated that she made "special arrangements" for student-athletes because classes sometimes impacted a student-athlete's practice time.
Although other arts and sciences advisors were generally aware of the availability of "special arrangements," the athletics academic counselors in ASPSA knew Crowder and Nyang'oro and had an inside track to learn about these unpublicized courses and to enroll student-athletes in them. …As a result, athletics academic counselors leveraged these relationships to benefit student-athletes in ways not available to the general student body. …
As a result, over the course of nearly a decade, student-athletes were enrolled in "special arrangement" classes at a rate 10 times greater than their representation in the student body, at a minimum, and as high as a one-to-one ratio with their general student colleagues. …
Primarily, athletics academic counselors used these courses to help maintain NCAA eligibility for student-athletes who were at risk academically. This, along with other benefits, such as the ability to control and monitor the administration of these courses, meant that student-athletes did not need to attend class or meet with AFRI/AFAM faculty or staff. …
The preferential access to the "special arrangement" courses and the corresponding course assistance provided the institution a competitive advantage because it allowed the institution to admit a significant number of student-athletes who were at risk. …
We are not UnCheat. Read the damned response. It is quite enlightening!