UNC Scandal latest

[JasonEvans]

Sigh, is this even news any more?

Apparently John Blake began steering players to Gary Wichard (http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news;_ylt=AghwSVTG2QkSQ2x5Qk_6_xA5nYcB?slug=cr-blakefolo101910) while he was coach at Oklahoma. Among them, former NCAA and NFL star Brian Bosworth (who would be a very lucrative client for an agent). Bosworth is quote in the story--


“John said to me, ‘Hey, I’ve set a meeting up with a guy who I really think you need to know, because he’s going to change your world, ’ ” Bosworth said. “The only way Gary Wichard got to me was through John Blake. John made it clear that Gary was the only guy I needed to be with. Every meeting that I had with Gary was set up by John. John would even pick me up and take me there, whether it was at a hotel or whatever.

“You have to understand, John was the eyes inside the locker room. He was the fisherman and Gary was the cook. You’ve got to have somebody out there who is going to get the bounty, and Gary’s the one who then goes and sells the bounty. I don’t understand why they would be trying to skirt the truth on that. That is what it was. It was so blatant. … And I know I wasn’t the only player who saw it."

--Jason "the fact that this is not shocking anymore is just sad" Evans

[SCMatt33]

NFL star Brian Bosworth

That's just too funny. Maybe we should ask Bo Jackson about that one.

[SuperTurkey]

That's just too funny. Maybe we should ask Bo Jackson about that one.

Bo knows Boz (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLmpjg4UhdE&feature=related).

[JasonEvans]

Well, from the standpoint of an agent, Boz was a huge NFL star because he signed the biggest rookie contract in NFL history in 1987 -- 11 million for 10 years. I am sure Wichard made a pretty penny off Boz and having Boz on your list of clients gives you big-time credibility with other college football stars.

Also, an actual update to the Carolina scandal...

You all have to read this story (http://www.statefansnation.com/index.php/archives/2010/10/19/burney-picking-up-mid-semester-class-to-be-eligible/) about Kendrick Burney. He was suspended for 6 games while the NCAA looked into money he got from an agent. They lifted that suspension but UNC uncovered some kind of academic problem with him too. The school found him guilty of cheating, or something like that, and gave him a failing grade in a class. As a result, he was not going to have enough classes to remain eligible. So, the school told him to just enroll in some class right now to get back on the football team...

...except it is the middle of the semester. How could anyone do actual classwork after missing the first 2 months of classes?

as the story leaked that UNC was letting this kid remain academically eligible, someone must have realized that it looked really bad because Carolina is reconsidering things now.

It is just so pathetic and funny that Carolina has turned into this wannabe football factory that does not even pretend to care about academics or ethics. I would be embarrassed if Duke ever stooped this low.

-Jason "just pathetic" Evans

[roywhite]

You all have to read this story (http://www.statefansnation.com/index.php/archives/2010/10/19/burney-picking-up-mid-semester-class-to-be-eligible/) about Kendrick Burney. He was suspended for 6 games while the NCAA looked into money he got from an agent. They lifted that suspension but UNC uncovered some kind of academic problem with him too. The school found him guilty of cheating, or something like that, and gave him a failing grade in a class. As a result, he was not going to have enough classes to remain eligible. So, the school told him to just enroll in some class right now to get back on the football team...

...except it is the middle of the semester. How could anyone do actual classwork after missing the first 2 months of classes?

as the story leaked that UNC was letting this kid remain academically eligible, someone must have realized that it looked really bad because Carolina is reconsidering things now.

It is just so pathetic and funny that Carolina has turned into this wannabe football factory that does not even pretend to care about academics or ethics. I would be embarrassed if Duke ever stooped this low.

-Jason "just pathetic" Evans

Yep, it looks like damage control 24x7 is the order of the day on the Hill.

[left_hook_lacey]

I'm not even sure how I feel about this anymore. Every time something new comes out, there is so much secrecy and hear-say about what is going on behind the scenes, it makes me not even care anymore. Obviously, there was some very dirty things going on, but the layers to the story and the level of involvement is so unclear, that it's hard to know what the real truth is and who was really involved. I'm just ready for them to hand out punishments so I can point fingers at them and laugh. It's to the point that it's becoming a distraction from the season IMO.

[OldPhiKap]

At the beginning of this, I was pretty sure that Butch would be gone but nothing above his level.

I would not feel comfortable if I were the AD or even the Chancellor at this point.

[PADukeMom]

Jason...I agree with you. I'm at the point where I don't really care but I know I should.

[camion]

Every time I hear something new about the UNC debacle I have to remind myself that this isn't Kentucky we're talking about. As my parents would say, "UNC, I'm very disappointed in you."

[JasonEvans]

Every time I hear something new about the UNC debacle I have to remind myself that this isn't Kentucky we're talking about. As my parents would say, "UNC, I'm very disappointed in you."

This is the saddest part. UNC is not an SEC school or one of those ACC schools that have a bit of history of cheating in certain circumstances (like Clemson, Miami, and a couple others). UNC has always been a bastion of integrity and a school that genuinely prided itself on things like graduation rates and ethics.

The stink from this will last for a while too. Getting a clean rep after you have been dirty is really, really hard to do.

-Jason "so sad and embarrassing... sigh" Evans

[oldnavy]

At the beginning of this, I was pretty sure that Butch would be gone but nothing above his level.

I would not feel comfortable if I were the AD or even the Chancellor at this point.

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.

[Acymetric]

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.

Here's what I don't understand about this. Seems to me you should still fire Davis, and if the school still wants big time football go out and hire another guy...throw enough money out there and it'll stick to someone.

But why is retaining Butch necessary to continue building a football program? I've seen unc fans say things like that over and over, and it just doesn't make sense to me. Get rid of him and bring in another big name with a better reputation for running clean programs.

[DevilWearsPrada]

I was at a wedding this past Saturday evening, with several UNC alum......and they are not happy over this NCAA investigation. And want Davis to be fired! Most of the alums, (within the last 5 years), studied hard at Carolina, and graduated. And did not cheat.

We all agreed that Unc is too good of a school, to be caught up in a Cheating NCAA investigation. This is something more like FSU, Maryland, Miami, but not UNC. Plants a bad seed within the ACC, and for all the student athletes, that attend a higher academic university, and keep their nose clean, do their studies, play sports and graduate.

I am so over all the UNC crap. Local news: unc this and unc that. Its something every day. I should care, but I am so over it, already. The only good thing, is it gives 2nd string, walkon players a chance to get into the game.

UNC still THE UNIVERSITY OF NON COMPLIANCE !!!!

[whereinthehellami]

I think the corruption at UNC runs deep and is anchored by some deep pocketed alums that have sold their souls for big time football. It's just really dissappointing that the rest of UNC is letting this happen to their school. And for the rest of the ACC, UNC is an embarrassment.

When the NCAA submits their final report its going to be ugly, especially if UBC kept anyone associated with this debacle.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Somehow Burney still has a chance to play, but is out for at least one more game. Charles Brown is gone for the year.

http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/story/8484725/



Kendric Burney, whose six-game NCAA suspension for receiving improper benefits from an agent ended after last week's win (http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/story/8484725/#) over Virginia, still has an "unresolved issue related to the review," and will miss the Heels' game against Miami.
That makes me laugh.

[oldnavy]

Here's what I don't understand about this. Seems to me you should still fire Davis, and if the school still wants big time football go out and hire another guy...throw enough money out there and it'll stick to someone.

But why is retaining Butch necessary to continue building a football program? I've seen unc fans say things like that over and over, and it just doesn't make sense to me. Get rid of him and bring in another big name with a better reputation for running clean programs.

I agree with you, but in my friends twisted logic, he doesn't think UNC will be able to attract another high level coach. Plus he says most everyone thinks Davis is a great guy and they like him. It seems to me that the fans that think they need to keep him are falling for the rationalization arguments (everyone's doing it, Butch didn't know...) and not taking a step back to see what it would really mean for the university.

Question: Would it be worse if Butch really didn't know? What I mean is, this guy is getting millions of dollars a year to ensure that this type of thing doesn't happen. Is he in a defensible position by saying "I had no idea what my assistant head coach was doing"? To me that is worse or at least no better than turning a blind eye...

[Class of '94]

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.

Is this a UNC fan talking or a Kentucky fan??!!?? If this is true, I can't believe it. Is UNC becoming the new Kentucky of the South and the ACC?? Those comments are eerily similar to what Kentucky and its fans have done in the past and currently with Calipari in regards to their basketball program .....

I don't want to keep piling on; but I grew up in NC in the 80s and early 90s, and this kind of attitude was never tolerated by UNC, its fans and administration back then. It really would appear that UNC has "sold out" if this is the prevalent belief there.

[wilko]

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.

[Jderf]

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.

Wait, What? Are you suggesting that the Duke football program should follow suit and start cheating to get ahead? That is some strange advice -- advice that would most likely result in us moving backwards, not forwards. Even if you ignore the extremely obvious moral objections to your position, it is still not even a good idea from the practical point of view. Have you not noticed that the NCAA has been doing a little cracking down on cheaters lately? Dropping the hammer, as you say. Do you want to add Duke to the long list of top-tier programs that have been tainted?

You don't think consistent winning can be achieved without cheating? I assume you are only talking about football, since our basketball program has been pretty consistent while being one of the better-run programs in the country.

[wilko]

Wait, What? Are you suggesting that the Duke football program should follow suit and start cheating to get ahead? That is some strange advice -- advice that would most likely result in us moving backwards, not forwards. Even if you ignore the extremely obvious moral objections to your position, it is still not even a good idea from the practical point of view. Have you not noticed that the NCAA has been doing a little cracking down on cheaters lately? Dropping the hammer, as you say. Do you want to add Duke to the long list of top-tier programs that have been tainted?

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.




I assume you are only talking about football.

Correct, I didn't bring up basketball oncel. Different animal ENTIRELY.

[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 (http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/10/overwhelming-support-for-davis.html).

[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 (http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/10/overwhelming-support-for-davis.html).

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 (http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/10/overwhelming-support-for-davis.html).

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:


An associate HEAD coach who was a runner/agent to an agent.
Multiple athletes accepting improper gifts/money.
Multiple athletes cheating academically.
Multiple athletes hanging around a known drug dealer.
Athlete(s?) acting as runner/agent(s?) for another agent.
A rogue tutor(s?) hired by the head coach
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.

[Newton_14]

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.

Bingo. And sorry, I should have made that clearer in my post. I am ok with kids found to have been innocent of any wrongdoing getting a redshirt because they were held out while the investigation took place. No issue with that whatsoever.

My beef is giving a redshirt to any of the kids that were held out but ultimately found guilty of the academic or agent/gift related charges. My understanding is a couple of the guilty kids are in fact being considered as redshirt candidates.

[uh_no]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5716015

THis is going downhill for the tarheels....if BD doesn't get fired, i'm guessing based on the board of chancellors (or whatever they're called)'s comments he'll be on a sort of 0 tolerance policy a-la the general at IU

[sagegrouse]

ESPN has article up that identified three individuals (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5716015). One works for the firm of agent Drew Rosenhaus; the others appear to be independent of recognized agencies.

None of the football players are named in this attempt to deflect blame elsewhere.

sagegrouse

[wilko]

These penaties and violations...

Where does the issue stem from? Is it that they re on scholarship or participate in a team sport?

In other words could a walk-on have done some of the same things as the accused Heels (cant not smile at that) and not have it be a big deal because they are not on a scholarship? Different standard for walk-ons?

Or is the issue that they participate in the sport itself? Just curious.

[roywhite]

These penaties and violations...

Where does the issue stem from? Is it that they re on scholarship or participate in a team sport?

In other words could a walk-on have done some of the same things as the accused Heels (cant not smile at that) and not have it be a big deal because they are not on a scholarship? Different standard for walk-ons?

Or is the issue that they participate in the sport itself? Just curious.

Using a player who was or should have been ineligible is a violation. As I understand it, the player's scholarship status doesn't have anything to do with it. In practical terms, it would be rare for a walk-on player to be subject to a violation such as improper benefits from an agent. However, recall the concern that came up with the UNC basketball program because Greg Little (a scholarship football player but a walk-on so far as basketball was concerned) participated somewhat on the hoops team.

[wilko]

Using a player who was or should have been ineligible is a violation. As I understand it, the player's scholarship status doesn't have anything to do with it. In practical terms, it would be rare for a walk-on player to be subject to a violation such as improper benefits from an agent. However, recall the concern that came up with the UNC basketball program because Greg Little (a scholarship football player but a walk-on so far as basketball was concerned) participated somewhat on the hoops team.

I see.
My thought was... As opposed to an "improper benefit", what if said agent merely paid tuition allowing the player to walk-on. If different rules were in play for scholarship vs walk-ons, well then that might be a logical next step... as it minimizes their risk to a certain extent.

[Olympic Fan]

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.

I am growing more and more disturbed over the academic side of the UNC scandal and specifically to the university's response to it.

Look, I'm not a Tar Heel basher and when this case exploded in August, I told everybody who would listen that while while rules seemed to have been broken, I trusted the University to respond in an ethical manner.

Now, I'm not too sure.

As bad as a agent stuff is, a lot of that is beyond UNC's control (I'm talking about the university administration, not the coaching staff). I do think that Butch should be held accountable for hiring a known cheater (John Blake) and then not monitoring him. It's all about people -- you bring in a Ken Browning and he cheats and you can act surprised. You bring in a John Blake -- nicknamed "Black Santa" on the recruiting trail -- and he cheats and you don't get to claim shock. And the Sgt Schultz act ("I know nothing ... NOTHING!") with Austin and his pals -- when Austin's tweets and Facebook posts are all over the web so that even fans are commenting about it was ridiculous. Plus, Butch has still refused to explained how he allowed an agent and an alledged drug dealer (Chris Hawkins) inside access to his program and facilities.

Still, that's on Butch and his football program ... as far as I can see, the university response when the NCAA came calling was appropriate there.

It's only when the academic problems start to emerge that I have problems. Okay, I can understand a tutor who overstepped her job. And I don't even see where the fact that she worked for Butch as that much of a red flag (even though he was much more than a tutor for his son -- she was closer to a nanny as Joe Schad first reported. She took care of him and drive him around in the family car).

Small red flag that she continued to work for Butch for five months after she was dismissed as a tutor for the UNC program for being too close to the players. Could Butch, who was famous at Miami and Cleveland for having his fingers in every small part of the program, not have known?

Still, that's on Butch and the football staff. It's the next thing that gives me disquiet.

The nanny/tudor was dismissed as a tutor for being too close to the players. Okay, at that point, you know you have a potential problem ... did anybody investigate to see if irregularities had occurred? It would see that if you had cause to dismiss her, you'd at least check to make sure she hadn't done anything wrong to that point.

Apparently no such check was made ... or if it was, it was so cursoury that nothing was found.

That was my first big red flag.

But it gets worse.

There were players who were found to have cheated. How was that handled?

Well, at Duke or NC State or any other repudable university, a first-offense cheating conviction is almost always a suspension -- at Duke it was two semesters for Zack Asack, Ricky Price, Greg Newton of recent memory.

UNC's own honor court guidelines specify that a "normal" penalty for cheating is an F in the course and a one-semester suspension. However, the rules do allow of a minimum penalty -- an F in the course and a one semester probation. I actually have a small bit of confusion about the last part, because I was told that under probation, you could stay in school, but not represent the university (as on the football team). Apparently, that's not true and a probation is merely a slap on the wrist.

Well, flash forward to the case of Kendric Burney. He served a six-game NCAA suspension for receiving improper benefits. That ended with the Virginia game last Saturday. He was supposed to be eligible for this week's game with Miami.

But Burney was also involved in the cheating scandal. Monday night, he appeared before the UNC honor court, plead guilty to cheating and was given, not the normal punishment, but the minimum punishment -- an F in the course he cheated in and a one-semester probation ... which apparently was going to allow him to play at Miami.

But there was a complication. Burney is a fifth-year senior who was only enrolled in one three-hour course this fall. That's legal under an NCAA loophole who allows athletes in that situation to take less than the required load AS LONG AS THAT'S ALL THEY NEED FOR GRADUATION. USC's Matt Leinhart famously ended his career with one course in ballroom dancing.

The problem for Burney was that when the F for the course he cheated in last year was factored in, he was no longer one course from graduation -- and his three hours of coursework is not enough for eligibility under NCAA standards.

UNC's response was to find him a new course that he could enroll in this week -- 10 weeks into the semester -- weeks after the official last day for adding courses at UNC (Aug. 31). Burney promptly told a reporter for his hometown paper that he was back ...and a reporter for the Daily Tar Heel leaked the story of the dirty deal to make him eligible. As the story leaked, the professor who had agreed to enroll Burney late backed off and suddenly the kid was in limbo ("his case is complicated," Butch told reporters). Apparently, UNC has appealed to the NCAA to give Burney a waiver to make him eligible with just three-hours of course work this semester.

This whole episode and the university's twisted efforts to get these cheaters back on the field turns my stomach. At one point, a reporter for the student newspaper was waiting in the building where the honor court meets, trying to get in interview with a player after his session. He was ordered to leave the building -- and Chancellor Holden Thorpe actually called him to demand his departure from a public building.

UNC has not behaved with the integrity I had come to expect from them ... they've been as devious and as duplicious as UNLV in its prime (or Kentucky now). They've waged a PR campaign that would make Baghdad Bob blush -- it's not an NCAA investigation, it's a "review"; players aren't suspended, they're being held out until their status is cleared; players don't finish their suspension, they're "cleared" (visit IC and see how many fans think these cheaters were unfairly held out because the university was bending over backwards tro avoid doring anything wrong -- these poor kids were punished because the university is overcautious).

I'm shocked and disappointed that the Board of Trustees and the Board of Governors have turned into cheerleaders for the football program and avoided asking the same kind of tough questions and hard scrutiny that they displayed during the NC State scandal 20 years ago. Erskine Bowles is a fan of the highest order -- remember it was his father that led the fundraising drive to build the Dean Dome.

Indeed, 20 years ago, the powers that be demanded an independent investigation of NC State. Has any person in power demanded the same for what's haping up as a far more widespread case of academic corruption? Is a university that twists and maneuvers to get a cheater like Burney -- who cheated academically and cheated by taking huge sums of illegal benefits -- back on the field as soon as possible trustworthy enough to investigate itself (just one clue ... when the tutor scandal first broke UNC began by handling it itself ... two weeks later, the NCAA stepped in to monitor the investigation, hmmm)?

I've never been a Carolina hater ... a rival, yes, but until now I always respected UNC as a worthy rival that -- like Duke -- basically does things the right way.

My perception is changing. Unless something changes drastically in this case, UNC is taking its place inn my mind among the academic scumbags of college sports.

[4decadedukie]

EXCELLENT post, I wholeheartedly agree, with one MINOR exception: Suggesting that somehow UNC's Athletic Department and coaches are NOT essential, integrated elements of the Administration, in my opinion provides an erroneous and undesirable "accountability escape hatch" for senior University leadership. Full-time and volunteer leadership (officers, trustees, executive committee members, and so forth) create the governance structure, select the subordinate officials (such as the AD and perhaps the head coaches), determine the policies, monitor the compliance, and provide the oversight. As such, it my opinion that they are fully responsible for debacles such as UNC-CH's football's simultaneous ethical disasters (academic dishonesty plus agent/illicit cash involvement). If we want to see this sort of reprehensible conduct eliminated (or at least substantially reduced), we MUST make ALL relevant individuals and entities -- even those with less-direct involvement -- accountable for results and conduct.

[davekay1971]

This whole episode has gone a long way to showing the true colors of UNC and their fanbase. Olympic Fan's great post lays out beautifully the disappointed response of the university and their clear decision to put academic integrity and ethics firmly beneath establishing a winning and profitable football program in terms of importance. I started off believing that Butch Davis was as good as gone after the season ended, a belief that was based on the assumption that UNC valued it's reputation as an academics-first university. At this point I'd say that as long as the team doesn't self-destruct down the stretch this season, the University will find an excuse to bring Butch back. That's sad.

The fanbase, at this point, is about the same as the KY fanbase in my eyes. They really could care less about the cheating and academic integrity issues. Bottom line, the first two games of the season all I heard in Charlotte was "Butch needs to go! This is terrible!" Enter a four game win streak and all I hear from the same fans is "Butch is doing a great job keeping this team together when they're getting the shaft from the NCAA! We should all support him!"

Just win, baby! That's the "Carolina way"

[moonpie23]

i actually have UNC "friends"......( i know) and at first, they were all upset and trying to hold the "carolina way" up as a beacon, disassociating themselves from butch/cheating/agents etc......NOW they are all saying it's overblown by the "media out to get us" and that they WANT butch to stay and the "kids are getting a bum rap" and all..

it's amazing what they will swallow to keep "big boy football" and unc..

[SharkD]

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?

Public Policy Polling has the survey results, questions posed, sample break down and cross-tabs in the full PDF (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_NC_1021.pdf):
PPP surveyed 597 likely North Carolina voters from October 15th to 17th. 159 of those respondents identified themselves as UNC fans. The margin of error on that subgroup is +/-7.8%. Other factors, such as refusal to be interviewed and weighting, may introduce additional error that is more difficult to quantify.

PPP is considered one of the more accurate political polling firms and, as yet, the most accurate founded since 1990. During the 2008 election cycle, in both local and national races, they had the second-smallest margin of error between predicted and actual results. ( http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122592455567202805.html http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/06/pollster-ratings-v40-results.html )

That said, the relatively small sample and the potential self-selection bias may have resulted in an exaggerated degree of inaccuracy in these results.

[4decadedukie]

I have just reread this post, perhaps for the third time, and it is outstanding.

I, too, am truly shocked and deeply saddened that the most senior levels of UNC's governance and oversight structure -- including North Carolina political leadership, the Trustees, the Board and the University System's officers -- have evidently not proactively investigated, not taken decisive disciplinary actions, and not made significant institutional enhancements to ensure further illicit conduct of these types is essentially impossible.

While UNC-CH is our enduring and principal athletic rival, I have always I respected the University and befriended its alumni. Obviously, this does not diminish any sports-oriented enmity and associated frivolities; after all, intercollegiate athletics largely concern fun for participants and fans. However, this extensive football duplicity (and probably criminality) -- that includes academic dishonesty, unauthorized agent contact, and illegal payments -- is not a game and is not trivial, it is critical and real-life.

I suspect many UNC Chapel Hill alumni and fans read DBR, especially threads of this nature. Therefore, I respectfully request that they fully assimilate this key thought. You and your university are now being judged by your peers -- colleagues, neighbors, associates, friends, and so forth -- NOT regarding the illegitimate actions of football players, coaches, tutors and the like, but rather concerning the CHARACTER and the ETHICS of the University of North Carolina. Like it or not, these judgments will reflect directly upon the alumni, supporters, employees, faculty and leadership of UNC. In a state like North Carolina, where alumni of major, respected universities (UNC, Duke, NCSU, Wake, Davidson, and several others) live, work, worship, party, and much more together, this is not an inconsequential situation. Carolina could easily develop an ethical reputation similar to UNVL’s or Kentucky’s, unless clearly decisive corrective actions are quickly implemented.

It is unfortunate, but college-age kids and coaches sometimes do foolish things, through immaturity, greed, stupidity, and the like. This is very common, many of us have had regrettable personal experiences in this regard, and it is usually pardonable. However, great institutions are supposed to have the integrity, the wisdom, the discretion, the perceptiveness, and the long-term perspective to avoid such imprudence. UNC-CH will soon be evaluated, both by local peers and by national critics, concerning whether it has passed this crucial principles and governance test. This assessment is certain to have a substantial influence on UNC’s stature during the next decades. Currently, I fear that the University of North Carolina is badly failing.

[camion]

OF#47

The most disturbing thing about the situation is that UNC officials seem much more interested in protecting the football program than in protecting the university. They have it backwards.

[JasonEvans]

It sounds crazy, but I hope the on-the-field results change the attitude of many of the folks backing Butch and his enablers.

Prior to yesterday, UNC had won 4 games in a row and likely felt it was back in the hunt for the Coastal Division title. I am sure folks were thinking about which prominent bowl they might attend and being ranked again. Heck, I bet some of the blind faithful had even dreamed about beating Miami and Va Tech to get to the ACC title game.

Well, Miami turned those dreams into nightmares yesterday with a 33-10 drubbing. Carolina gets William and Mary (a blowout) and then 2 very tough games at FSU and against Va Tech. If the Heels get thumped in both of those, Davis-backers will not be able to fall back upon the "look at the on-field results" because the team will be 5-5 and looking at a low-level bowl at best.

I heartily embrace the comments made by some of the fabulous posters in this thread over the past 24 hours or so... Carolina is at a precipice looking into the abyss where the unethical schools reside. Please step back, UNC. You have done it the right way for sooo long and been so successful doing it that way. It is not worth it.

--Jason "the pity is, a good reputation is so hard to get but a bad one comes so quickly" Evans

[sagegrouse]

Originally posted by SharkD

Originally Posted by sagegrouse
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?

Public Policy Polling has the survey results, questions posed, sample break down and cross-tabs in the full PDF:

PPP surveyed 597 likely North Carolina voters from October 15th to 17th. 159 of those respondents identified themselves as UNC fans. The margin of error on that subgroup is +/-7.8%. Other factors, such as refusal to be interviewed and weighting, may introduce additional error that is more difficult to quantify.
PPP is considered one of the more accurate political polling firms and, as yet, the most accurate founded since 1990. During the 2008 election cycle, in both local and national races, they had the second-smallest margin of error between predicted and actual results. ( http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122592455567202805.html http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/...0-results.html )

That said, the relatively small sample and the potential self-selection bias may have resulted in an exaggerated degree of inaccuracy in these results.

Wow! Thanks for your response, SharkD. I agree with you that the sample size is a huge problem; I mean, 159 respondents? The other problem is being self-identified as a "Carolina fan." The lukewarm fans turned off by these apparent violations would, I expect, be more reluctant to admit their allegiance. Therefore, the sample may include only the diehard.

sagegrouse

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

Several posts just prior to this one state very eloquently what sort of problem now exists, a new one that goes beyond what might have been done outside the rules and ethical standards set for or by the University of North Carolina. The growing online support for Butch Davis is a very visible index of the new problem.

As the investigations go on longer and longer, there seems to be a shift going on among many Carolina supporters to drift farther and farther away from the reality of misdeeds being uncovered to a new level of denial. I see this in my own family as well as among the general public. The idea that Carolina is being singled out and picked on unfairly seems to be the defense for the unthinkable..... The repeated notion that "everyone's doing this" suggests a serious shift in the view of what's right and what's wrong.

[4decadedukie]

. . . there seems to be a shift going on among many Carolina supporters to drift farther and farther away from the reality of misdeeds being uncovered to a new level of denial . . . The idea that Carolina is being singled out and picked on unfairly seems to be the defense for the unthinkable..... The repeated notion that "everyone's doing this" suggests a serious shift in the view of what's right and what's wrong.


You are, of course, absolutely correct and the trend you describe is the most troubling result of the entire situation. Denial of reality, discounting the relevant factual situation, and the rationale that "everyone does it" are all indicative of a severe, broadly-based, individual and institutional ethical lapse. While the gravity of the situations greatly differs -- and I certainly do not want to trivialize or to demean important events -- this same pattern applied in Watergate, in Nazi Germany, in the recent financial meltdown.

At its essence: (a) standards exist and (b) we are individually and collectively accountable for adherence to those standards, or for incurring the penalties and the necessary corrective actions when we fail to do so.

Reasonable people, and especially those with liberal educations, recognize this and further appreciate its enduring importance. UNC and its partisans can (to paraphrase Lincoln) fool each other, but they will never succeed at fooling the wider-world.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

You are, of course, absolutely correct and the trend you describe is the most troubling result of the entire situation. Denial of reality, discounting the relevant factual situation, and the rationale that "everyone does it" are all indicative of a severe, broadly-based, individual and institutional ethical lapse. While the gravity of the situations greatly differs -- and I certainly do not want to trivialize or to demean important events -- this same pattern applied in Watergate, in Nazi Germany, in the recent financial meltdown.

At its essence: (a) standards exist and (b) we are individually and collectively accountable for adherence to those standards, or for incurring the penalties and the necessary corrective actions when we fail to do so.

Reasonable people, and especially those with liberal educations, recognize this and further appreciate its enduring importance. UNC and its partisans can (to paraphrase Lincoln) fool each other, but they will never succeed at fooling the wider-world.

Certainly, changes in moral compass are taking place in society. College professors are dealing with a similar shift among their undergraduate students, and maybe some graduate students, who seem to have a limited understanding of the difference between copying what someone else said and paraphrasing the idea while giving some credit for the source. The Internet makes lifting someone else's ideas so easy, convenient and instant, no questions asked.

Strong trends tend to spill over to many areas with ease.

I also believe that the response from so many supporters reflects a high level of denial and disbelief. I hope Duke never has to face such a situation. The qualities central to being human aren't always pretty.

[JasonEvans]

I see.
My thought was... As opposed to an "improper benefit", what if said agent merely paid tuition allowing the player to walk-on. If different rules were in play for scholarship vs walk-ons, well then that might be a logical next step... as it minimizes their risk to a certain extent.

Just wanted to note that "walk-on" is really only a term that defines whether a player has an athletic scholarship in a particular sport. There are most certainly walk-ons who would be attractive to agents. Trajan Langdon was a walk-on at Duke. Hakeem Olajuwon, IIRC, was a walk-on his first season at Houston before being given a scholarship. The athletic world is rife with guys who were walk-ons but then turned out to be big-time NBA prospects.

The NCAA, quite rightly, does not treat walk-ons any different from scholarship athletes when it comes to the issue of improper benefits and eligibility.

-Jason "we now take you back to your regularly scheduled conversation on UNC's plunge into the abyss ;) " Evans

[pbc2]

Just took a look at Carolina's schedule the rest of the way and their illusions of an ACC championship or even high-level bowl game will soon be over.

They are 4-3 now.
10/30 - William & Mary
11/6 @ FSU
11/13 VT
11/20 NCSU
11/27 @ Duke

There's a pretty good chance that they'll need to beat Duke in Wallace Wade to make a bowl. Wouldn't it be sweet to pull off that upset and send Butch packing?

[JasonEvans]

Just took a look at Carolina's schedule the rest of the way and their illusions of an ACC championship or even high-level bowl game will soon be over.

They are 4-3 now.
10/30 - William & Mary
11/6 @ FSU
11/13 VT
11/20 NCSU
11/27 @ Duke

There's a pretty good chance that they'll need to beat Duke in Wallace Wade to make a bowl. Wouldn't it be sweet to pull off that upset and send Butch packing?

Yup, my point earlier in the thread was that IF they had beaten Miami, they could start dreaming about these things. But, now that they got their butts whupped by Miami, the notion that they are ready to compete with FSU and Va Tech seems a lot less likely.

It is my hope that, perhaps, some on-field setbacks will open the eyes of the UNC faithful and get them to reconsider their unflinching support of Butch Davis and the powerful forces that, even now, ignore ethics in search of athletic success.

--Jason "these are dark days indeed for the school down the road" Evans

[sandinmyshoes]

A UNC friend of mine says that a list of the agents and or runners involved in this scandal has been turned over to the NCAA.

An interesting fact is that none of them appear to have been associated with John Blake. He also claims that none of the violations involve the recruitment of players to the school. Because of those points, he does not think Davis will lose his job, or that UNC will be hit by particularly hard sanctions.

Some of you seem much more wired in to all this than I am. Do these points he raises have any bearing?

As for UNC and the rest of their season. I think that the likelihood that our game with them will be what puts them into or out of a bowl is as unlikely as their chances of getting into the title game. They got burnt by Miami, and their depth is now paper thin, but that is still the same team that beat Clemson and played LSU and GaTech close.

They probably have a shot at winning any of their remaining games except FSU.

[JasonEvans]

A UNC friend of mine says that a list of the agents and or runners involved in this scandal has been turned over to the NCAA.

An interesting fact is that none of them appear to have been associated with John Blake. He also claims that none of the violations involve the recruitment of players to the school. Because of those points, he does not think Davis will lose his job, or that UNC will be hit by particularly hard sanctions.

Some of you seem much more wired in to all this than I am. Do these points he raises have any bearing?

Your friend does not know what he is talking about. Marvin Austin lost his eligibility because (among other things) he took benefits from sports agent Gary Wichard. Wichard and Blake are absolutely linked. Even their lawyers admit they had a financial arrangement of sorts-- though they claim there was no direct "send me players and I will give you money" quid-pro-quo. Still, Wichard is at the center of much of this mess and Blake and Wichard are joined at the hip.

--Jason "ask your friend who the agent was behind Austin's mess-- if he does not name Wichard, your friend is not following this very closely" Evans

[wilko]

The NCAA, quite rightly, does not treat walk-ons any different from scholarship athletes when it comes to the issue of improper benefits and eligibility.

-Jason "we now take you back to your regularly scheduled conversation on UNC's plunge into the abyss ;) " Evans


Thanks for the clarification. I do appreciate it.

[sandinmyshoes]

Your friend does not know what he is talking about. Marvin Austin lost his eligibility because (among other things) he took benefits from sports agent Gary Wichard. Wichard and Blake are absolutely linked. Even their lawyers admit they had a financial arrangement of sorts-- though they claim there was no direct "send me players and I will give you money" quid-pro-quo. Still, Wichard is at the center of much of this mess and Blake and Wichard are joined at the hip.

--Jason "ask your friend who the agent was behind Austin's mess-- if he does not name Wichard, your friend is not following this very closely" Evans

He did not mention Austin at all. And in fairness to him, he did qualify his comments along the lines of "as it stands now." Do you have any links about Austin? I'd love to send him some. Though I probably shouldn't, since he's a fairly level headed guy.

[oldnavy]

I do not understand the arguments coming from the UNC fan base. Well, wait, I do understand them but they are just not very good arguments if you ask me. There is a segment of the fan base that says Butch Davis did not know about any of this, and therefore he should not be fired. My answer to that is, he is paid millions of dollars to run the program. It is his job to know what his staff is doing. If in fact he did not know (which I would find very hard to believe) then he is incompetent in that rather large area of his job and should be fired on that basis alone. The other argument I hear is that everyone else is doing this. To that I answer, well then you hired the only coach dumb enough to get caught when everyone else has figured a way to get away with it. He needs to be fired for being too dumb to get away with it. I love being on this end of the discussion.
Either way, arguing for Butch Davis to stay is completely transparent and sends a rather clear message that UNC will allow cheating in its program(s) as long as they can get wins. If the administration will not hold the step child football program accountable, what lengths would they go to protect the golden goose? Now, for the record I do not think Roy is or has cheated, but there will be a coach after Ol Roy retires to the mountains. They may not get someone as legit the next time. Heck, they might even go after Calipari to replace Roy. Why not, he obviously doesn’t know anything that goes on with his program, and he does win!
I used to have to concede that UNC did things the right way when I would argue with my UNC friends, but now I guess I can truthfully call them cheaters. I really do not take any pleasure in doing that, it was more fun to me when they did the right thing.

[Acymetric]

He did not mention Austin at all. And in fairness to him, he did qualify his comments along the lines of "as it stands now." Do you have any links about Austin? I'd love to send him some. Though I probably shouldn't, since he's a fairly level headed guy.

Well, Austin has been mentioned in just about every article about the scandal, so that's a pretty glaring omission. I have rehearsal in 10 minutes but I'll dig up some links when I'm back if someone hasn't beat me to it.

[JasonEvans]

He did not mention Austin at all. And in fairness to him, he did qualify his comments along the lines of "as it stands now." Do you have any links about Austin? I'd love to send him some. Though I probably shouldn't, since he's a fairly level headed guy.

This story from Yahoo sports (http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=cr-uncagents092910) talks about the link between Austin and Wishard and details the explosive allegations about Wichard and Blake.

I find it hard to believe anyone could claim to be following this story at all and not be familiar with the above story or the proof within it. There are dozens or simialr stories that talk about this stuff. It hardly takes any research to find them.

-Jason "happy to help educate a foolish Carolina fan!" Evans

[sandinmyshoes]

This story from Yahoo sports (http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=cr-uncagents092910) talks about the link between Austin and Wishard and details the explosive allegations about Wichard and Blake.

I find it hard to believe anyone could claim to be following this story at all and not be familiar with the above story or the proof within it. There are dozens or simialr stories that talk about this stuff. It hardly takes any research to find them.

-Jason "happy to help educate a foolish Carolina fan!" Evans

Thanks for the links! I'll keep them bookmarked. The guy I talked to is not really one of "those" fans, so I don't want to be one of them either. But I will drop the links on him if need be. Again in his defense, I probably made it sound like he was avoiding talking about Austin. What I meant was that he was not talking about Austin in that particular conversation, but about the information that UNC had sent to the NCAA about the other players and that Blake, at this point, does not appear to have been associated with any of the agents or runners in those cases.

If the subject of Austin does come up, though, I'll be ready.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

Thanks for the links! I'll keep them bookmarked. The guy I talked to is not really one of "those" fans, so I don't want to be one of them either. But I will drop the links on him if need be. Again in his defense, I probably made it sound like he was avoiding talking about Austin. What I meant was that he was not talking about Austin in that particular conversation, but about the information that UNC had sent to the NCAA about the other players and that Blake, at this point, does not appear to have been associated with any of the agents or runners in those cases.

If the subject of Austin does come up, though, I'll be ready.

Another good source of online coverage is the web site of the News & Observer. A search of their web site will yield many stories and reports related to this matter. http://www.newsobserver.com/

[JasonEvans]

I believe this is the story (http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/10/22/755808/unc-documents-identify-three-who.html) your friend was talking about when mentioning that no one connected to Blake had been named by Carolina to the NCAA. Your friend is faaar behind the times.

The information in the story I linked is in addition to the already known information about Wichard's relationship with several star UNC players. This is just extra icing on top of the Wichard cake, so to speak.

Now it makes sense.

--Jason "the Carolina case has been too high profile for the NCAA to not hit UNC hard" Evans

[Olympic Fan]

Just to follow up on what I posted earlier, it seems I was mistaken when I said Burney was found guilty of cheating and his only punishment was that he was given an F on the course and a slap-on-the-wirst probation.

It turns out that his penalty was a little lighter -- his grade on a writing course (earned by his tutor) was C. As punishment for cheating, Burney's grade was reduced to a C-minus ... no probation (I was right that one of the aspects of probation is that you can't represent the university while on probation ... I was wrong in that Burney did not get probation).

Burney will play this week.

BTW, this info comes from his father, according the the N&O:

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/10/27/762389/burney-cleared-to-return.html

I also like how his father said his son was "cleared" by the honor court.

Apparently, there are different definitions in Chapel Hill for words such as "cleared" and "honor".

[CameronBornAndBred]

It turns out that his penalty was a little lighter -- his grade on a writing course (earned by his tutor) was C. As punishment for cheating, Burney's grade was reduced to a C-minus ... no probation (I was right that one of the aspects of probation is that you can't represent the university while on probation ... I was wrong in that Burney did not get probation).

Burney will play this week.

Thanks for the update...that is absolutely disgusting. Ask Zack Asack how Burney would have fared at Duke.

[Duvall]

UNC Honor Code: "I will not lie, cheat or steal, nor tolerate those who do. And if I am caught lying, cheating or stealing, I shall receive a punishment almost as stiff as turning in a major paper a day late."

[Class of '94]

Thanks for the update...that is absolutely disgusting. Ask Zack Asack how Burney would have fared at Duke.

The kid cheats by having his tutor write his (or at the very least overly contribute) paper and all he gets is half a letter grad drop??!!??? That's terrible.......

Well, as much as I would like to deny it, it looks like UNC is well on its way to becoming the next "shady" school, a la Kentucky. When we talked about SEC expansion back in the summer, I was one of the people that couldn't see UNC leaving the ACC and the Duke rivalry for the SEC. But now with all of this stuff coming out, Carolina would now be a natural fit for the SEC....joining a league with other shady schools.

[Highlander]

The kid cheats by having his tutor write his (or at the very least overly contribute) paper and all he gets is half a letter grad drop??!!??? That's terrible.......

Well, as much as I would like to deny it, it looks like UNC is well on its way to becoming the next "shady" school, a la Kentucky. When we talked about SEC expansion back in the summer, I was one of the people that couldn't see UNC leaving the ACC and the Duke rivalry for the SEC. But now with all of this stuff coming out, Carolina would now be a natural fit for the SEC....joining a league with other shady schools.

Well, two things: 1) we don't know what %age of his grade the paper represented. It may be he got a zero in the class and that dropped his grade. 2) A C- in the class means it doesn't count towards eligibility, so he might as well have gotten an F. It says he has to retake the course in the spring to graduate. Of course he did get to take an extra course halfway through the semester to stay eligible, but I don't see that as a huge bending of the rules because I could see them doing the same for a non-athlete on track to graduate early who had a credit fall through under review (summer school, ap, etc).

All that being said, why not give him an F if it's the same as a C-? A C- in a class you admittedly cheated is pretty shady, even if the consequences are the same as a failing grade. That, coupled with the adding of the class makes UNC look bad.

And I agree that the Asack, Newton, Price, Beard comparisons are apt to show that Duke doesn't tolerate this crap the way UNC has.

[Class of '94]

Excellent points Highlander.......And as you mentioned, regardless of how his work was graded, this mess and how they handle it continues to make UNC look bad. Heck, I'm not even a UNC grad or fan and I'm fired up about this. Although it does appear that many of us view these allegations more serioulsy than many of the UNC "fans and supporters". It just continues to amaze me at how it appears that there is a concerterd effort by the school's administration to "protect" UNC in a dishonorable way.

[OldPhiKap]

http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/plagiarism.html

"If you're interested in exactly how plagiarism is defined for the UNC community, see the Honor System webpage. Because it is considered a form of academic cheating and constitutes a serious violation of the University's Honor Code, the usual punishment for a student found guilty of plagiarizing is suspension for one semester and an "F" in the course."

Unless you're a football player, of course . . . .

[Olympic Fan]

Well, two things: 1) we don't know what %age of his grade the paper represented. It may be he got a zero in the class and that dropped his grade.

I don't understand this point ... so if you cheat on on test or one paper, the punishment is that you get a zero on that assignment, but otherwise you're okay to go?

Frankly, I've never heard of an honor code that works this way.

[Highlander]

I don't understand this point ... so if you cheat on on test or one paper, the punishment is that you get a zero on that assignment, but otherwise you're okay to go?

Frankly, I've never heard of an honor code that works this way.

Having talked to many HS teachers, that's the way most high schools deal with cheating. Also, I had a relative who did group work on a homework assignment at another ACC school which the professor classified as 'cheating' since the syllabus said group work wasn't allowed. He failed the assignment, but not the class.

And UNC is a glorified HS as we all know :)

[Highlander]

Beard transferred. I don't recall any academic issues with him. Zoubek was apparently a very good student.
Could he have meant Koubek? (jk) Dr. Chandler referred to Zoubeard more than once as Brian Koubek:o.

IIRC, Joey transferred in part due to being caught in an academic scandal.

[OldPhiKap]

The biggest scandal in my years was the revelation that Marty Nessley did, in fact, foul.

[Highlander]

Can you only edit a post once?

I wish I could edit it more, because I realized that the "Joey caught cheating" thing is a rumor, not fact. I don't recall any official reason beyond him needing a "change". And he transferred during his sophomore year, before the season really got underway.

Newton fought his suspension throughout the season, so he didn't miss significant time either. IIRC, he was suspended 2 semesters, but those two semesters consisted of the 2 summer sessions and the fall, before the next season really got underway.

I've got no way to validate why Beard transferred, as I don't have a copy of his transcript. As a student at the time he transferred, that was the unofficial word around campus from people who ran with the basketball team, so take it for what its worth.

[devildeac]

IIRC, Joey transferred in part due to being caught in the same academic scandal that nabbed Beard.

Must have had something to do with time travel;).

[Greg_Newton]

Apologies to the Z man. I think I confused him with Greg Newton, who I believe had some academic trouble. I had big white guys on the brain and typed the wrong one.

Um, guys, I'm literally standing right here... :p

[gus]

I've got no way to validate why Beard transferred, as I don't have a copy of his transcript. As a student at the time he transferred, that was the unofficial word around campus from people who ran with the basketball team, so take it for what its worth.

Right, so it's rumor. That the player found guilty turned down an offer to quietly transfer feeds into the rumor, but it's still rumor.

[CameronBornAndBred]

So the media is getting pretty fed up with the stonewalling and silence, and has sued the heels for access to records and documents.

http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/story/8529950/


Several Triangle media companies on Thursday sued the University of North Carolina in an attempt to get records relating to investigations of the football team.

[Greg_Newton]

So the media is getting pretty fed up with the stonewalling and silence, and has sued the heels for access to records and documents.

http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/story/8529950/

WOW. Capital Broadcasting is the headliner in the lawsuit. About time the stepped up to the plate a little bit. This could be big.

I really continue to be amazed by how UNC is handling all this. The amount of respect they're losing as a university - not just as a football program - is huge, and growing by the day.

[Duvall]

I really continue to be amazed by how UNC is handling all this. The amount of respect they're losing as a university - not just as a football program - is huge, and growing by the day.

Is it?

I mean, people are losing respect for the Athletic Department, but that can always be cured by winning. I doubt this has much of an effect on the University generally, and I haven't seen much to indicate that it might.

[LSanders]

Is it?

I mean, people are losing respect for the Athletic Department, but that can always be cured by winning. I doubt this has much of an effect on the University generally, and I haven't seen much to indicate that it might.

True for the fan base, but not for everyone else. UNC (despite the anal fissures it causes for those of us in royal blue) has pretty much been held in esteem across the country. As this drags on and on, they're in danger of becoming UCONN, et al.

[Newton_14]

Is it?

I mean, people are losing respect for the Athletic Department, but that can always be cured by winning. I doubt this has much of an effect on the University generally, and I haven't seen much to indicate that it might.

I agree with you that winning on the field is curing this ill with a big part of the fanbase, but I agree with the OP that UNC's handling of this scandal is hurting their rep outside their fanbase and even in parts of their Alumni base.

I am hearing from non-UNC folks and from UNC Grads that they are shocked and dismayed with how this is being handled. It is embarassing and it should be. The principal at one of my children's school is a UNC grad and he is highly upset with how UNC is approaching this. He told me without hesitation 3 weeks ago, that Baddour and Butch should both lose their jobs no questions asked.

I have spoken with several UNC grads at work that feel the academic offenders should have been kicked out of school for the semester and thus off the team for this year. They are ok with the agent/gift offenders serving suspensions and then coming back, but they too state disappointment and a bit of shock in the handling of the scandal.

Having lived here all of my life, I would have bet the farm that UNC would have cleaned house without hesitation should a scandal like this ever come to fruition, but here we are and they have taken the exact opposite approach.

I believe they are going to take a huge hit to the "Carolina Way" reputation, unless they very quickly change the course here and take action. I do not see that happening though. Listening to local radio call-in shows and listening to the average fan, they have bought into the party line being told and actually believe that Butch should not be fired, there is not going to be any probation, and no further penalties beyond the game suspensions that have taken place. Unreal.

I am afraid they have no idea that storm approaching on the radar that they think is a small thunderstorm that will pass by with minimal damage, is in reality a Cat 3 Hurricane....

[oldnavy]

I agree with you that winning on the field is curing this ill with a big part of the fanbase, but I agree with the OP that UNC's handling of this scandal is hurting their rep outside their fanbase and even in parts of their Alumni base.

I am hearing from non-UNC folks and from UNC Grads that they are shocked and dismayed with how this is being handled. It is embarassing and it should be. The principal at one of my children's school is a UNC grad and he is highly upset with how UNC is approaching this. He told me without hesitation 3 weeks ago, that Baddour and Butch should both lose their jobs no questions asked.

I have spoken with several UNC grads at work that feel the academic offenders should have been kicked out of school for the semester and thus off the team for this year. They are ok with the agent/gift offenders serving suspensions and then coming back, but they too state disappointment and a bit of shock in the handling of the scandal.

Having lived here all of my life, I would have bet the farm that UNC would have cleaned house without hesitation should a scandal like this ever come to fruition, but here we are and they have taken the exact opposite approach.

I believe they are going to take a huge hit to the "Carolina Way" reputation, unless they very quickly change the course here and take action. I do not see that happening though. Listening to local radio call-in shows and listening to the average fan, they have bought into the party line being told and actually believe that Butch should not be fired, there is not going to be any probation, and no further penalties beyond the game suspensions that have taken place. Unreal.

I am afraid they have no idea that storm approaching on the radar that they think is a small thunderstorm that will pass by with minimal damage, is in reality a Cat 3 Hurricane....

This fits with most of the UNC fans that I know, arrogant beyond reason. I really do think that they believe that nothing bad will happen to them, because, they are UNC.

[BD80]

[/B]

This fits with most of the UNC fans that I know, arrogant beyond reason. I really do think that they believe that nothing bad will happen to them, because, they are UNC.

OK, I am about as fanatic a Duke supporter as breathes on this planet, but for a Dukie to refer to any other school as "arrogant beyond reason" strikes me as a bit funny. Of course, I find Duke's arrogance to be completely deserved, so I would suggest you rephrase your description of carolina's misplaced feelings of superiority to:

"Arrogant WITHOUT reason"

[killerleft]

[/B]

This fits with most of the UNC fans that I know, arrogant beyond reason. I really do think that they believe that nothing bad will happen to them, because, they are UNC.

These fans have always trusted (I expect with good reason) that their AD and coaches would react in a pro-active manner to punish wrongdoers within the department. It could be that UNC fans just can't believe that Baddour and Butch would act as they have unless there was optimism that the penalties will be light.

We know that's unrealistic as far as the agent/monies part goes, but nobody outside UNC and the NCAA really knows the extent of the cheating scandal.

[OldPhiKap]

These fans have always trusted (I expect with good reason) that their AD and coaches would react in a pro-active manner to punish wrongdoers within the department. It could be that UNC fans just can't believe that Baddour and Butch would act as they have unless there was optimism that the penalties will be light.

We know that's unrealistic as far as the agent/monies part goes, but nobody outside UNC and the NCAA really knows the extent of the cheating scandal.

It could also be that some of them learned a lesson from the Duke Lacrosse case, and are waiting to see what a truly neutral party determines before making any decisions. (For us, unfortunately, the first level reviewer was not neutral and should rot in Hell. But I digress).

Also, I think there is a distinction between UNC fans with no actual relation to the university, and alums who think (rightly so, IMO) that they went to a pretty darn good school and that the integrity of the institution is a first tier priority.

[blueduke59]

Is it?

I mean, people are losing respect for the Athletic Department, but that can always be cured by winning. I doubt this has much of an effect on the University generally, and I haven't seen much to indicate that it might.

Their "honor court" has lost a lot of it's honor recently

[alteran]

OK, I am about as fanatic a Duke supporter as breathes on this planet, but for a Dukie to refer to any other school as "arrogant beyond reason" strikes me as a bit funny. Of course, I find Duke's arrogance to be completely deserved, so I would suggest you rephrase your description of carolina's misplaced feelings of superiority to:

"Arrogant WITHOUT reason"

I like the joke but I want to reject this meme. Just because people say Dukies are arrogant does not make it so.

Duke, like UNC and all other schools, has random fans you can point to and say, "wow, that dude is arrogant," but to say it about a fan base as a whole is really a stretch.

Except, of course, when the fan base is UNC's. :D

Seriously, having grown up in Durham a Duke fan, listening to the sanctimony from UNC and the UNC-graduated local press, well, it's a bit much. To have them then lard on from their high-and-mighty perches, "oh, and you guys are smug and arrogant," well, that bugs me, but that's life in the, well, Tarheel State.

But to buy into it? Nope. That's a bridge too far. ;)

[alteran]

It could also be that some of them learned a lesson from the Duke Lacrosse case, and are waiting to see what a truly neutral party determines before making any decisions. (For us, unfortunately, the first level reviewer was not neutral and should rot in Hell. But I digress).


This is a good point, although I don't get the vibe that UNC's caution is about the presumption of innocence.

Sign me up in the "surprised UNC isn't getting ahead of this" camp. I saw some things in my time at UNC that made me wonder if they were always as clean as they pretended to be, but I always thought that-- worst case-- they cared at least enough that, if exposed, they'd fix things pronto. And I honestly never thought we'd see something like this.

Reputation-wise, I don't think they've crossed the Rubicon yet. They just sure as hell look like they're going to. I think if they clean house after the season, they keep their reputation.

Otherwise, they're going to be another big state school that does whatever it takes to win. All joking aside, I'd prefer they not go there.

[oldnavy]

OK, I am about as fanatic a Duke supporter as breathes on this planet, but for a Dukie to refer to any other school as "arrogant beyond reason" strikes me as a bit funny. Of course, I find Duke's arrogance to be completely deserved, so I would suggest you rephrase your description of carolina's misplaced feelings of superiority to:

"Arrogant WITHOUT reason"


Well I guess it just depends on your perspective. Not to say that there are no arrogant Duke fans, but the sense of entitlement that comes from the hill is beyond belief IMO.
It isn’t limited to the athletic (i.e., basketball) program, but it permeates the entire school. I graduated from pharmacy school there in 1985. In 1990 I applied to graduate school through a Navy program. The selections for the Navy's program were done a year in advance, so I needed to get a letter from the school saying that I was a viable candidate for their program in order to be selected for the Navy’s program. Since I was asking for the letter for the class beginning in 1992 and they were currently looking at the 1991 class UNC would not talk to me. They said that they could not say if I would be competitive for the 1992 class yet. Unbelievable! Here I was an alumnus who had graduated from their school with a solid GPA and yet they did not know if I was good enough to compete for their graduate school. Basically, they didn’t want to take the time and had the attitude that I needed them more than they needed me.
Needless to say, I applied and was accepted into another program and that is where I attended. UNC eventually sent me a letter of acceptance which I tossed in the garbage.
BTW, after attending the other program and eventually teaching at three schools of pharmacy I can tell you that UNC is a good school, but not near as good as they think they are.

[JStuart]

Seriously, having grown up in Durham a Duke fan, listening to the sanctimony from UNC and the UNC-graduated local press, well, it's a bit much. To have them then lard on from their high-and-mighty perches, "oh, and you guys are smug and arrogant," well, that bugs me, but that's life in the, well, Tarheel State.

But to buy into it? Nope. That's a bridge too far. ;)

I second this statement, and raise you $100. It is all-pervasive in the Durham area, and I've lived here all my life. That the local news organizations are combining to sue UNC under the FOIA is truly something I never thought I'd live to see.

[CameronBornAndBred]

That was one well paid tutor.
http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/story/8610622/



In the most recent release of public documents by the University (http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/story/8610622/#) of North Carolina, the university released a letter to the tutor, Jennifer L. Wiley, of 6307 Spring Meadow Dr. in Chapel Hill, outlining how she helped student-athletes with both financial and academic assistance that was “impermissible."
The letter says, in 2010 Wiley provided “in excess of $2,000 in connection with travel and transportation issues.” Dick Baddour, UNC director of athletics, wrote that Wiley also "provided impermissible academic assistance" in 2009 and 2010. The letter concludes “the eligibility status of several of our student athletes (http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/story/8610622/#) has been adversely affected.”

[davekay1971]

That was one well paid tutor.
http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/story/8610622/

Or a well paid nanny...

Despite the simple fact that Butch sits squarely in the center of all these improprieties and violations, we now know that UNC is the kind of school that will decide whether or not to retain him based on the win-loss tally, rather than how much evidence point to him knowingly participating in running a dirty football program.

[Jderf]

That was one well paid tutor.
http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/story/8610622/

The eligibility of several student-athletes has been "adversely affected?" Interesting choice of words. I might have opted for "has been ended completely," or maybe "negated entirely," or perhaps "utterly erased from existence."

[wilko]

The eligibility of several student-athletes has been "adversely affected?" Interesting choice of words. I might have opted for "has been ended completely," or maybe "negated entirely," or perhaps "utterly erased from existence."

Perhaps this whole football fiasco dealie is really just hazing initiation ritual.
Could UNC be pledging SEC?

[dchen09]

Am I reading this right? So the letter basically blames the tutor for all the wrongdoings? It's not the student's fault for not doing the work in the first place and its not the coach's or administration's fault for hiring the tutor in the first place?

That's just sad. If they wanted to put the blame on the tutor, then fire her... Show that the department is actually taking some action to prevent academic fraud from happening, not only with the student athletes, but the general student body as well. But it seems like she can still work, just not with the athletics department.

This just makes them seem more guilty. Someone hired her to help students cheat, and now that she's been found out, they can't fire her without being sued for termination without reason.

[Newton_14]

Am I reading this right? So the letter basically blames the tutor for all the wrongdoings? It's not the student's fault for not doing the work in the first place and its not the coach's or administration's fault for hiring the tutor in the first place?

That's just sad. If they wanted to put the blame on the tutor, then fire her... Show that the department is actually taking some action to prevent academic fraud from happening, not only with the student athletes, but the general student body as well. But it seems like she can still work, just not with the athletics department.

This just makes them seem more guilty. Someone hired her to help students cheat, and now that she's been found out, they can't fire her without being sued for termination without reason.

Well at least they are consistent. That letter read much like the letter to the Miami jewelry store owner.

So, for those following along, by my count they have:
- Blamed the agent issues on one rogue assistant coach (John Blake) who operated totally on his own without the head coach, AD, or any other university official's knowledge
- Blamed the improper benefits in the form of jewelry on one rogue jewelry store owner in Miami, Florida, who received a similar letter as the nanny-tutor alerting him he was banned for 5 years and would have to petition to be "unbanned" after 5 years
- Blamed the improper term papers on one rogue nanny-tutor who operated totally on her own without the knowledge of the Head Coach, AD, or any other university official
- Publically cleared the Head Coach of any knowledge of all of the improper things going on in the program

I have come to the conclusion UNC is simply going to rationalize this all away and not take any real action, including not firing Butch Davis. His job is as safe as it was the day he accepted the position. Will they put any self-imposed penalties on the PROGRAM? Any at all? Reduce scholarships? Ban themselves from a Bowl game? I am beginning to think the answers to all of those questions are "No".

It is going to take the NCAA dropping the hammer here. UNC is not going to do a thing.

[wilko]

It is going to take the NCAA dropping the hammer here. UNC is not going to do a thing.

I wonder if the NCAA will realize that the best way to punish UNC would be penalize the basketball team....

[Olympic Fan]

I wonder if the NCAA will realize that the best way to punish UNC would be penalize the basketball team....

You say this in jest, but it has happened before -- in reverse.

In 1954, NC State basketball coach Everett Case was found guilty of running an illegal tryout camp ... as a penalty, they were banned from the NCAA Tournament in 1955 (runnerup Duke got to go -- Duke's first NCAA appearance).

In 1956, N.C. State was found guilty of giving Louisiana prep basketball player Jackie Moreland illegal benefits. Because it was State's second penalty in three years, the punishment was hard -- a five-year postseason ban IN ALL SPORTS.

The penalty kept State's 1959 ACC champions from playing in the NCAA (UNC got to go instead), but it also kept State's 1957 ACC championship football team from playing in the Orange Bowl -- runnerup Duke got to go instead.

To this day, I think State and South Carolina are the only two traditional BCS schools (a few late-comer BCS schools such as UConn and South Florida excluded) that have never played in a major bowl -- State's one chance was erased by a basketball scandal.

Of course, that's not going to happen today. UNC basketball will only be penalized if they find violations in the basketball program -- and no real hint of that (and Greg little playing 10 games in 2008 doesn't really qualify ... his sins occurred more recently than his hoop service).

[4decadedukie]

So, for those following along, by my count they have:
- Blamed the agent issues on one rogue assistant coach (John Blake) who operated totally on his own without the head coach, AD, or any other university official's knowledge
- Blamed the improper benefits in the form of jewelry on one rogue jewelry store owner in Miami, Florida, who received a similar letter as the nanny-tutor alerting him he was banned for 5 years and would have to petition to be "unbanned" after 5 years
- Blamed the improper term papers on one rogue nanny-tutor who operated totally on her own without the knowledge of the Head Coach, AD, or any other university official
- Publicly cleared the Head Coach of any knowledge of all of the improper things going on in the program

I have come to the conclusion UNC is simply going to rationalize this all away and not take any real action, including not firing Butch Davis. His job is as safe as it was the day he accepted the position. Will they put any self-imposed penalties on the PROGRAM? Any at all? Reduce scholarships? Ban themselves from a Bowl game? I am beginning to think the answers to all of those questions are "No".

It is going to take the NCAA dropping the hammer here. UNC is not going to do a thing.


Absolutely correct and very well stated, sir. It is my opinion that accountability and justice may take somewhat longer to be achieved; however, the NCAA will "hammer" UNC-CH -- and in a manner that reflects the university's unwillingness/inability to self-discipline. The recent USC and UK/Kanter decisions indicate to me that the NCAA is (finally) adopting a more-stringent approach to infractions and conduct. UConn awaits . . .

[wilko]

You say this in jest, but it has happened before -- in reverse.

........

Of course, that's not going to happen today. UNC basketball will only be penalized if they find violations in the basketball program -- and no real hint of that (and Greg little playing 10 games in 2008 doesn't really qualify ... his sins occurred more recently than his hoop service).

Partial jest.... While I do appreciate the historical perspective on some ACC league members past penalties, what else is going to get UNC's FULL attention?

Penalizing UNC's BBall team would effectively be saying...
"Eh so what about football, you are a Basketball school and we are gonna hit you where it hurts most"

- It would demean their genuine football efforts and aspirations.
- It would cause the MOST pain and concern to their general fanbase.
- It would be yet another thing we get to lord over and hit them in the head with.

I am in favor of ALL of the above :cool:

[devildeac]

Partial jest.... While I do appreciate the historical perspective on some ACC league members past penalties, what else is going to get UNC's FULL attention?

Penalizing UNC's BBall team would effectively be saying...
"Eh so what about football, you are a Basketball school and we are gonna hit you where it hurts most"

- It would demean their genuine football efforts and aspirations.
- It would cause the MOST pain and concern to their general fanbase.
- It would be yet another thing we get to lord over and hit them in the head with.

I am in favor of ALL of the above :cool:

As much as I despise them, you just can't do that. The unc MBB program appears to be clean. W(h)iney, cheesy and annoying, but clean. If many/all these findings re: FB are true, they simply need to be hammered. And hard, as one poster mentioned earlier on this thread or another "scandal" thread. They must be put on several years probation (2? 3? more?), lose schollies (10? 20? more?) and have bowl bans instituted if the ncaa finds multiple key allegations to be true. And, Butch must go. Along with the Bad and Dour one. But, only if/when the investigation is complete and conclusive. And I can't wait for that time to come.

[wilko]

As much as I despise them, you just can't do that. The unc MBB program appears to be clean.

I hear ya.. and I see ya..
Its close to Christmas and I'm gonna put it on my wish list from Santa. If it doesn't come to pass... well, it wont be the 1st time I didn't get things I wanted. But I can still hope for it.

[DukeUsul]

Am I reading this right? So the letter basically blames the tutor for all the wrongdoings? It's not the student's fault for not doing the work in the first place and its not the coach's or administration's fault for hiring the tutor in the first place?

That's just sad. If they wanted to put the blame on the tutor, then fire her... Show that the department is actually taking some action to prevent academic fraud from happening, not only with the student athletes, but the general student body as well. But it seems like she can still work, just not with the athletics department.

This just makes them seem more guilty. Someone hired her to help students cheat, and now that she's been found out, they can't fire her without being sued for termination without reason.

I don't believe they can fire her, my understanding is that she already is no longer working for the university. My understanding is that she's now a schoolteacher in Durham.

[BD80]

I don't believe they can fire her, my understanding is that she already is no longer working for the university. My understanding is that she's now a schoolteacher in Durham.

So she is now teaching more difficult subjects to much better students?

What grade does she teach?

[DukeUsul]

So she is now teaching more difficult subjects to much better students?

What grade does she teach?

LOL. Something at the elementary level.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/09/24/699742/tutor-too-close-to-athletes.html

[CameronBornAndBred]

http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/story/8611998/



The 149 calls were placed between June 2009 and September 2010, according to phone records.


That's a lot of phone calls. I don't even talk to my family that often..lol.

[Rogue]

Question,, what was she paying $2000 in transportation for ?? Bus fare to be tutored ?? lol
Why is she paying for anything ??

[alteran]

Question,, what was she paying $2000 in transportation for ?? Bus fare to be tutored ?? lol
Why is she paying for anything ??

I agree. I think the tutor's explanation smells, and at least warrants a really close look.

It's quite possible that it's all innocent. But this kind of weird third-party transaction provides an excellent opportunity to launder money/benefits going from boosters to the players. Frankly, I'd bet that's why the NCAA rules regarding these kind of transactions are in place. If it really WAS a legitimate expense, immediately repaid by the school, why not self-report? These kind of no-harm-no-foul mess ups happen all the time.

We already know she was willing to write papers for players. It's not a far step from there to allowing players to obtain some proscribed benefits on a booster's dime.

She's lawyered up, and certainly doesn't warrant the benefit of the doubt. Neither, judging from their recent actions, does UNC.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Question,, what was she paying $2000 in transportation for ?? Bus fare to be tutored ?? lol
Why is she paying for anything ??
It seems to me that at some point that money belonged to Butch since he was paying her.

[arnie]

So she is now teaching more difficult subjects to much better students?

Most accurate to date!

[Reilly]

http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/story/8611998/



That's a lot of phone calls. I don't even talk to my family that often..lol.

Bet you'd keep in better touch with your loved ones if they were wiring you money ....

[JasonEvans]

And the hits keep coming...

Two more UNC players (http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/11/15/two-more-tar-heels-declared-permanently-ineligible-by-ncaa/) have been declared "permanently ineligible." That takes some work.

They are WR Devon Ramsay and DE Michael McAdoo (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5810658). Ramsay actually played in the first 4 games of the regular season before being held out. The NCAA will not require UNC to forfeit the games in which Ramsay played.

Both players are juniors and this means they will not be able to play next year as seniors.

--Jason "UNC is angry and will 'vigorously appeal' -- I still say take you medicine and pray that they do not gut your program" Evans

[OldPhiKap]

And the hits keep coming...

Two more UNC players (http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/11/15/two-more-tar-heels-declared-permanently-ineligible-by-ncaa/) have been declared "permanently ineligible." That takes some work.

They are WR Devon Ramsay and DE Michael McAdoo (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5810658). Ramsay actually played in the first 4 games of the regular season before being held out. The NCAA will not require UNC to forfeit the games in which Ramsay played.

Both players are juniors and this means they will not be able to play next year as seniors.

--Jason "UNC is angry and will 'vigorously appeal' -- I still say take you medicine and pray that they do not gut your program" Evans

Does this mean that we're just down to (1) whatever fall-out (if any) there is from the academic fraud issue; and (2) a ruling on what penalty (if any) will be applied to the institution because of the agent issue?

[CameronBornAndBred]

They are WR Devon Ramsay and DE Michael McAdoo (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5810658). Ramsay actually played in the first 4 games of the regular season before being held out. The NCAA will not require UNC to forfeit the games in which Ramsay played.

Not only did he play, he scored a TD against LSU.

[94duke]

How can they NOT vacate the 2 wins?
Was it the show of "good faith" in holding him out after the first 4 games?
This doesn't make sense to me.

[roywhite]

Does this mean that we're just down to (1) whatever fall-out (if any) there is from the academic fraud issue; and (2) a ruling on what penalty (if any) will be applied to the institution because of the agent issue?

I think that's right.

Baddour has been a hostage in the damage control bunker for several months now. I'm surprised the light blue crew dooesn't preface their press releases with "Day 124, etc..."

Talk about self-inflicted wounds, though.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

Does this mean that we're just down to (1) whatever fall-out (if any) there is from the academic fraud issue; and (2) a ruling on what penalty (if any) will be applied to the institution because of the agent issue?
Based on currently known information, this would be a correct description of the status. What is unknown is whether more may surface as a little more time passes.....

[johnb]

Two types of infractions:
As punishment for accepting fairly small gifts from boosters and for abusing the tutoring system (aka cheating), these players are getting kicked off the team, thereby reducing their chances to achieve the NFL and/or graduation. Fairly small offenses (apparently, when Duke guys have been caught cheating, they wind up on their feet playing basketball at another school).

As punishment for running an out-of control system, the adults have gotten off relatively unscathed.

If the NCAA wants to be fair, it wouldn't punish players from other sports or the fans or ESPN (which loves Carolina basketball almost as much as it loves Duke basketball), they'd go after the coaches and ban them for a while.

[wilko]

If the NCAA wants to be fair, it wouldn't punish players from other sports or the fans or ESPN (which loves Carolina basketball almost as much as it loves Duke basketball), they'd go after the coaches and ban them for a while.

How about they put a moratorium on selling that horrid pastel swag (Financial Pain in lost Revenue)
And refer to ALL of their sports teams as "Duke Jr" for a certain time-frame (Humiliation)

[devildeac]

How can they NOT vacate the 2 wins?
Was it the show of "good faith" in holding him out after the first 4 games?
This doesn't make sense to me.

Expounding on this a bit, it raises doubts in my mind now that the ncaa will bring the hammer down hard and repeatedly on unc now or whenever the investigation is completed as many folks here thought would happen. C'mon folks (ncaa that is, not readers here), you start with making them forfeit wins for using an ineligible player. That makes them 4-6 and on the verge of bowl ineligibility. Then, you take the time to finish your work and start handing out bowl bans, suspensions and scholarships restrictions. They may end up escaping with far less sanctions than we have been suspecting (hoping) since this mess began.:mad:

[killerleft]

How can they NOT vacate the 2 wins?
Was it the show of "good faith" in holding him out after the first 4 games?
This doesn't make sense to me.

Just a guess, but maybe the NCAA originally cleared them to play?

[BD80]

And the hits keep coming...

Two more UNC players (http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/11/15/two-more-tar-heels-declared-permanently-ineligible-by-ncaa/) have been declared "permanently ineligible." That takes some work.

They are WR Devon Ramsay and DE Michael McAdoo (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5810658). Ramsay actually played in the first 4 games of the regular season before being held out. The NCAA will not require UNC to forfeit the games in which Ramsay played.

Both players are juniors and this means they will not be able to play next year as seniors.

--Jason "UNC is angry and will 'vigorously appeal' -- I still say take you medicine and pray that they do not gut your program" Evans

Let's just condense it to:

"McAdoo not eligible to play for unc."

Has a nice ring to it, no?

[JasonEvans]

Let's just condense it to:

"McAdoo not eligible to play for unc."

Has a nice ring to it, no?

Alex, I'll take "Things that terrify Chapel Hill for $400..."

-Jason "good one, BD!" Evans

[SCMatt33]

Expounding on this a bit, it raises doubts in my mind now that the ncaa will bring the hammer down hard and repeatedly on unc now or whenever the investigation is completed as many folks here thought would happen. C'mon folks (ncaa that is, not readers here), you start with making them forfeit wins for using an ineligible player. That makes them 4-6 and on the verge of bowl ineligibility. Then, you take the time to finish your work and start handing out bowl bans, suspensions and scholarships restrictions. They may end up escaping with far less sanctions than we have been suspecting (hoping) since this mess began.:mad:

Unless the NCAA hands down a specific post season ban, UNC is bowl eligible for this season, regardless of any vacated wins. Even if the NCAA came out right now and said that UNC had to lose those two wins, the penalty would not go into effect until after the appeals process, at which time they would have already played in a bowl game with a presumably legal roster. If the penalty was upheld, they would likely only vacate the wins in which an ineligible player played, which would not include a bowl game.

I am curious at the wording though. The NCAA is typically not in the business of forcing teams to "forfeit" wins, which would change the result of the game from a win to a loss for UNC and a loss to a win for its opponents. Typically, they only "vacate" wins, in which it would appear in the UNC record books as if the game never happened and opponents records would be unchanged. Since the school that said this and not the NCAA, it could just be that the spokesperson mistakenly assumed that the two were the same thing, but if the NCAA used the word "forfeit," it could specifically mean that they aren't ready to change any records that would affect a teams' (UNC or an opponent) bowl eligibility right now, but is allowing current records to stand for the time being and could force them to "vacate" the wins later on.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Let's just condense it to:

"McAdoo not eligible to play for unc."

Has a nice ring to it, no?
Doesn't "permanently ineligible" mean they can't play college ball again, ever, for anyone? (Alluding to the earlier post from JohnB of possible transfer.)

[roywhite]

UNC satisfied with own investigation (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5821249)


CHAPEL HILL, N.C. -- University of North Carolina chancellor Holden Thorp says there are currently no plans for self-imposed sanctions on the school's football program amid an NCAA investigation into agent-related benefits and academic misconduct.



See no evil?

[camion]

I find myself flipping between two implausibles.

1. The UNC administration is right and this is all just a tempest in a teapot. The agents, the bling, the academic fraud are just isolated incidents and bad luck.

2. The UNC administration is so deluded they think they can bluff their way out of the situation when the NCAA has them dead to rights.

[BD80]

UNC satisfied with own investigation (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5821249)



See no evil?

In the carolina version of those three monkeys, the third is covering his southern-most orifice instead of his mouth.

[JasonEvans]

I find myself flipping between two implausibles.

1. The UNC administration is right and this is all just a tempest in a teapot. The agents, the bling, the academic fraud are just isolated incidents and bad luck.

2. The UNC administration is so deluded they think they can bluff their way out of the situation when the NCAA has them dead to rights.

It is also possible the Administration has no idea what an appropriate punishment should be for this kind of thing and they are leaving it up to the NCAA. The players who took benefits and committed academic fraud have been punished. UNC simply does not know how to deal with the allegations against the coaching staff.

I dunno, that is all I can come up with. It sure seems flimsy.

How can there be no punishment for a school who's associate head coach is a runner for an agent; a school where there appears to be widespread academic fraud and a school where multiple players were getting improper benefits from a number of agents/runners. How can the NCAA turn a blind eye to that?

--Jason "the NCAA moves like a glacier-- we are still waiting to hear about Calhoun and UConn" Evans

[SCMatt33]

I don't see anything wrong with this...yet. The NCAA hasn't actually charged the program with any violations yet, merely investigated the eligibility of individual athletes. I'll take the UConn case as the most recent example. The NCAA first investigated the issue, then said that they believe that the program committed x, y, and z violations. UConn responded that they only committed x and y, and believe that z didn't happen. UConn then said that for committing x and y, we impose punishment a and b. They appeared before the NCAA to argue the case, and we're waiting for the NCAA to say either "we accept a and b as punishment" or "z did happen, and we're adding c and d as additional punishment."

UNC as a program is still only on step 1 of that process. It just seems like it's further along because it dealt with current athletes, and not former athletes, so their eligibility had to be determined first. If the NCAA tells them that the program committed specific violations, and then UNC tries to avoid any punishment, it will then be ridiculous. For now, this just seems like UNC putting the ball back in the NCAA's court, which is appropriate.

[OldPhiKap]

How long can it take the NCAA to act, though? What happens if UNC gets a bowl invite, and then it is determined before the bowl that they should not participate?

I fear that Cameon Theorem Number One is correct -- ain't nothin' gonna happen to the boys in baby blue. After all -- it's a flagship institution and all.

[Devilsfan]

I vote to SMU'em. Let's give them the Death Penalty".

[SCMatt33]

How long can it take the NCAA to act, though? What happens if UNC gets a bowl invite, and then it is determined before the bowl that they should not participate?

I fear that Cameon Theorem Number One is correct -- ain't nothin' gonna happen to the boys in baby blue. After all -- it's a flagship institution and all.

Nothing can possibly happen that quickly. Even if the NCAA officially accused UNC of violations tomorrow, the time it would take UNC to respond, the NCAA to make a ruling, and then UNC appeal would take way too long to have that happen. The only way they could possibly not play in a bowl is if they self imposed a bowl ban right now, sort of like what USC basketball did. Otherwise, UNC is playing in a bowl.

[roywhite]

Nothing can possibly happen that quickly. Even if the NCAA officially accused UNC of violations tomorrow, the time it would take UNC to respond, the NCAA to make a ruling, and then UNC appeal would take way too long to have that happen. The only way they could possibly not play in a bowl is if they self imposed a bowl ban right now, sort of like what USC basketball did. Otherwise, UNC is playing in a bowl.

That's probably true.

The first reasonable test of consequences for all this will be whether UNC retains Butch Davis after the season. IMO it's an open question.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

That's probably true.

The first reasonable test of consequences for all this will be whether UNC retains Butch Davis after the season. IMO it's an open question.
I agree with you regarding whatever happens to Butch Davis after the investigation is finally concluded. I hope it's still an open question despite all the supportive comments made during press conferences.

I also wonder what Dick Baddour's future. How many discoveries of improprieties in the athletic department can be tolerated before he's told to leave?

[Acymetric]

That's probably true.

The first reasonable test of consequences for all this will be whether UNC retains Butch Davis after the season. IMO it's an open question.

I disagree...everything unc is doing points to keeping him. Getting rid of him means he is culpable, and if the head coach is culpable the school is culpable. Is keeping him part of the "nothing to see here" bluff?

I'm starting to think unc skates here. I thought all along that they were going to get hit, but the more time passes the more I think people that matter are buying the story being told by the guys in baby blue.

Hope I'm wrong, because simply looking at the facts (what has been reported by legitimate newspapers and acknowledged by the school) they should be done. That they're saying the punishments for players is too harsh and no further punishments are warranted for the school just totally baffles me. I can't imagine that they would misjudge how much trouble they're in that badly, and just wow if they know full well and have the balls to bluff.

[Newton_14]

I disagree...everything unc is doing points to keeping him. Getting rid of him means he is culpable, and if the head coach is culpable the school is culpable. Is keeping him part of the "nothing to see here" bluff?

I'm starting to think unc skates here. I thought all along that they were going to get hit, but the more time passes the more I think people that matter are buying the story being told by the guys in baby blue.

Hope I'm wrong, because simply looking at the facts (what has been reported by legitimate newspapers and acknowledged by the school) they should be done. That they're saying the punishments for players is too harsh and no further punishments are warranted for the school just totally baffles me. I can't imagine that they would misjudge how much trouble they're in that badly, and just wow if they know full well and have the balls to bluff.

I must say I am starting to feel the same way. UNC cannot bring itself to admit wrong. They are explaining all away as "somebody's else's fault".

"We investigated, found 'rogue athlete's', 'agent's', 'jewelry store owner', nanny', tutor', 'former kicked out player turned friend of the program runner', and 'assistant coach', were not subscribing to the Carolina Way. We were so appalled we immediately removed all of the rogue parties and banned them for life to keep the reputation of our fine university and athletic programs intact. During this tumultuous time of rogue party's disgracing our fine university, our tremendous man and Football Coach Butch Davis did a remarkable job of keeping the team and program together and leading the team to a well deserved Bowl Bid which we look forward to participating in. Now that we have all of this behind us and have satisfied all of the NCAA's requests, we look forward to having Butch Davis lead us into the future where we can contend for championships while continuing to uphold the Carolina Way".

UNC will not be announcing any self-imposed sanctions. Not now, not ever. They just do not have it in them to admit it. The ball is truly in the NCAA's court. I still believe they impose sanctions when all is said and done, but I am starting to even doubt that.

[4decadedukie]

I must say I am starting to feel the same way. UNC cannot bring itself to admit wrong. They are explaining all away as "somebody's else's fault".

"We investigated, found 'rogue athlete's', 'agent's', 'jewelry store owner', nanny', tutor', 'former kicked out player turned friend of the program runner', and 'assistant coach', were not subscribing to the Carolina Way. We were so appalled we immediately removed all of the rogue parties and banned them for life to keep the reputation of our fine university and athletic programs intact. During this tumultuous time of rogue party's disgracing our fine university, our tremendous man and Football Coach Butch Davis did a remarkable job of keeping the team and program together and leading the team to a well deserved Bowl Bid which we look forward to participating in. Now that we have all of this behind us and have satisfied all of the NCAA's requests, we look forward to having Butch Davis lead us into the future where we can contend for championships while continuing to uphold the Carolina Way".

UNC will not be announcing any self-imposed sanctions. Not now, not ever. They just do not have it in them to admit it. The ball is truly in the NCAA's court. I still believe they impose sanctions when all is said and done, but I am starting to even doubt that.


I have never agreed with this overall conclusion, but I must admit it has considerable merit. The fact is, I always believed (and I still do, although less firmly) that eventually the "humiliation level" for UNC and the "Carolina Way" (and for alumni, supporters, faculty and officials, for the State's political leadership and other germane elites, and so forth) would compel a major internal reckoning (step #1, Davis' termination for cause).

However, there is one significant problem with the "we did nothing wrong" approach. Traditionally, NCAA sanctions are far more difficult when a university does not admit its deficiencies and wrongdoing, and when it fails to take reasonable, self-imposed corrective actions. Therefore, UNC-CH's unwillingness to acknowledge the several ethical "truths" that have now emerged, could eventually result in much harsher NCAA penalties. Only time will tell, with certainty.

[4decadedukie]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101204/ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_nflpa_wichard_suspension

AP reports this morning that Gary Wichard has been suspended for nine months by the NFLPA, "for having impermissible communication with University of North Carolina player Marvin Austin at a time Austin was not eligible for the NFL draft under the NFL/NFLPA Collective Bargaining Agreement."

[Papa John]

UNC cannot bring itself to admit wrong.

Perhaps they're just acknowledging the brand new world that the NCAA has created and claiming ignorance. Ah, ignorance is bliss... If we didn't know, and they didn't know, then it really doesn't matter...

I jest, of course, but am truly perplexed by the Cam Newton ruling this week. The NCAA essentially just reversed itself.

[Indoor66]

I have come to the conclusion that the Dump on the Hump is covered by one huge rug and the athletic department is working really hard with a broom.

[Devilsfan]

Tar Heels are capable of anything and then trying to minamize it if discovered. Remember John Edwards and Nifong are two of their poster boys.

[billy]

Usually the N&O is more pro-UNC than this - hilarious. From sports writer Luke DeCock:

A group of North Carolina fans chanted "cheater" at Kentucky coach John Calipari as he entered the court after halftime, never mind those ongoing NCAA investigations of the UNC football program.

Pot, kettle, blue.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/12/05/843836/observations.html