PDA

View Full Version : New Article in BusinessWeek re: UNC Scandal



J_C_Steel
02-27-2014, 08:44 AM
"In Fake Classes Scandal, UNC Fails Its Athletes—and Whistle-Blower"

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-02-27/in-fake-classes-scandal-unc-fails-its-athletes-whistle-blower

This is a fairly comprehensive look at things. Worth a read for those interested.

J_C_Steel
02-27-2014, 09:23 AM
What's all the more interesting is that Peter Grauer, chairman of Bloomberg LP, owner of Bloomberg Businessweek (where this article is the cover page story), is a UNC graduate. Yikes.

JasonEvans
02-27-2014, 09:24 AM
The article is complete, thorough, and lays everything out in easy-to-understand terms. The allegations in it, which seem fairly well documented and not the product of hyperbole or wild speculation, are tremendously damning. It even points a finger at the NCAA for not looking into all this further. I love the part where it openly says UNC is trying to cover everything up to protect Dean Dome banners.

Of special note is the part where Roy goes off half cocked about what good people his players are. He talks about how he would have any of his kids babysit his grandchildren. Sigh. Sadly, Roy seems to think all of this is an attack on players. He could not be more mistaken. No one blames the kids. No one says the kids are bad. This is about the University and especially the folks who were employed to educate the kids failing in that mission.

Is Roy really so dumb as to not understand that? Or, is he part of the folks who failed and just wants to deflect things away from the real issue?

To me, one of the most damning quotes to come out of this whole mess is the one from Sean May almost a decade ago when he stated that he wanted to major in something else, but had been steered (told) to major in AfAm instead because it would be easier. That is a kid who wanted an education being denied it. Pathetic!

-Jason "I am not sure I can think of a worse article. How can the NCAA sit back and continue to do nothing? Shame... such shame" Evans

JasonEvans
02-27-2014, 09:27 AM
What's all the more interesting is that Peter Grauer, chairman of Bloomberg LP, owner of Bloomberg Businessweek (where this article is the cover page story), is a UNC graduate. Yikes.

I know several UNC alums (and I am sure there are many, many more out there) who are disgusted at the way the school has handled all this. They want to get back to the real Carolina Way where educating the kids was almost as important as winning games. But, most of them are keeping quiet and not making waves. I would not be at all surprised if Grauer felt similarly.

And, it is worth noting, that if he tried to insert himself into the editorial process to slant coverage toward UNC, it would be a huuuuge journalistic scandal. He wants no part of that!

-Jason "BusinessWeek is just killing Carolina on this thing. I love it!" Evans

FerryFor50
02-27-2014, 09:29 AM
The article is complete, thorough, and lays everything out in easy-to-understand terms. The allegations in it, which seem fairly well documented and not the product of hyperbole or wild speculation, are tremendously damning. It even points a finger at the NCAA for not looking into all this further. I love the part where it openly says UNC is trying to cover everything up to protect Dean Dome banners.

Of special note is the part where Roy goes off half cocked about what good people his players are. He talks about how he would have any of his kids babysit his grandchildren. Sigh. Sadly, Roy seems to think all of this is an attack on players. He could not be more mistaken. No one blames the kids. No one says the kids are bad. This is about the University and especially the folks who were employed to educate the kids failing in that mission.

Is Roy really so dumb as to not understand that? Or, is he part of the folks who failed and just wants to deflect things away from the real issue?

To me, one of the most damning quotes to come out of this whole mess is the one from Sean May almost a decade ago when he stated that he wanted to major in something else, but had been steered (told) to major in AfAm instead because it would be easier. That is a kid who wanted an education being denied it. Pathetic!

-Jason "I am not sure I can think of a worse article. How can the NCAA sit back and continue to do nothing? Shame... such shame" Evans

I suppose he'd want Will Graves or PJ Hairston watching his kids?

PackMan97
02-27-2014, 09:36 AM
What's all the more interesting is that Peter Grauer, chairman of Bloomberg LP, owner of Bloomberg Businessweek (where this article is the cover page story), is a UNC graduate. Yikes.

He is actually on the Board of Trustees, not just a graduate.


To me, one of the most damning quotes to come out of this whole mess is the one from Sean May almost a decade ago when he stated that he wanted to major in something else, but had been steered (told) to major in AfAm instead because it would be easier. That is a kid who wanted an education being denied it. Pathetic!


The original story from the Indianapolis Star: http://www.indystar.com/article/20100402/SPORTS0609/4020331/They-got-game-do-NCAA-players-graduate-


May said he started as a double major with communications, but dropped it so he could graduate faster after leaving for the NBA.

Afro-American and African studies, May said, offered "more independent electives, independent study. I could take a lot of classes during the season. Communications, I had to be there in the actual classroom. We just made sure all the classes I had to take, I could take during the summer."

ikiru36
02-27-2014, 09:46 AM
Could someone please print this up as a T-shirt or Jersey?
3964

As a jersey, I certainly would have to wear something (Duke Blue) under it, but a Carolina jersey with "F" as the number and "No Class" for the name on the back might sell pretty well leading up to the game next week. Probably sell pretty well to State fans at the Tourney in Greensboro as well!

Go Devils!!!!!!!!!!!! GTHCGTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

brevity
02-27-2014, 09:50 AM
Strong article. There's even a separate backstory (http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-02-27/businessweeks-unc-no-class-cover-how-we-made-it) on how they selected the cover. I kind of liked the ram mascot covering his face, but their eventual choice is pretty good too:

3966


Of special note is the part where Roy goes off half cocked about what good people his players are. He talks about how he would have any of his kids babysit his grandchildren.

No, Jason. He said, "Every one of the kids that we’ve recruited in 10 years you’d take home and let guard your grandchildren." He's not talking about babysitting at all. That's how Roy Williams teaches defense.


To me, one of the most damning quotes to come out of this whole mess is the one from Sean May almost a decade ago when he stated that he wanted to major in something else, but had been steered (told) to major in AfAm instead because it would be easier. That is a kid who wanted an education being denied it. Pathetic!

Let's be fair here. Sean May was suggesting another major, but was advised that the AFAM building was closer to the cafeteria. He steered himself to the cafeteria.

CameronBlue
02-27-2014, 09:54 AM
-Jason "I am not sure I can think of a worse article. How can the NCAA sit back and continue to do nothing? Shame... such shame" Evans

Probably for a lot of reasons, here are two of the more obvious:
1) The possibility, perhaps likelihood, that further investigation forces the NCAA to vacate the 2005 & 2009 titles, damaging the CBB brand by impugning the reputation of one of the game's marquee programs
2) That such an investigation may lead to unpredictable results, a backlash among the major conferences that threatens the NCAAs existence

Brooder at dawn: I imagine Mark Emmert awakening from a nightmare to an even colder reality in his most vulnderable, paranoid moments. Of course at his salary he can afford a cabinet full of presciption sedatives.

Atlanta Duke
02-27-2014, 10:27 AM
I know several UNC alums (and I am sure there are many, many more out there) who are disgusted at the way the school has handled all this. They want to get back to the real Carolina Way where educating the kids was almost as important as winning games. But, most of them are keeping quiet and not making waves. I would not be at all surprised if Grauer felt similarly.

And, it is worth noting, that if he tried to insert himself into the editorial process to slant coverage toward UNC, it would be a huuuuge journalistic scandal. He wants no part of that!

-Jason "BusinessWeek is just killing Carolina on this thing. I love it!" Evans

Provost Dean made an apparently unsuccessful weekend trip to New York to meet with the author of the Business Week cover story and engage in damage control. His big accomplishment was antagonizing Paul Barrett when Dean test marketed the "Mary Willingham is a liar" meme.

“She’s said that our students can’t read, our athletes can’t read, and that’s a lie,” he said. “Mary Willingham has done our students a great disservice.”...

When I interrupted Dean to point out his distortion of Willingham’s claims, he immediately conceded he had misspoken and restated his criticism in more precise terms. He also said that he doesn’t think Willingham is a liar—then why use the word “lie”?

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-02-27/in-fake-classes-scandal-unc-fails-its-athletes-whistle-blower

I agree it would be insane for Grauer to try and spin the Business Week coverage in favor of UNC. But I would guess he would know that his magazine is very committed to this story and would not be surprised if he was made aware in advance or even facilitated Dean's failed field trip to New York. Grauer probably has a lot more faith in the competence of the organization he oversees in his day job than he does with regard to the organization for which he is a Trustee. So I doubt Dean will get far with Grauer is he contends this cover story is just hating on Chapel Hill. When corporate officers are floundering the board of directors is supposed to be more assertive - we may be getting to that point here.


-Jason "I am not sure I can think of a worse article. How can the NCAA sit back and continue to do nothing? Shame... such shame" Evans

My bet is Carolina knows the NCAA will have to come back. I do not think it is coincidental that the attorney hired to conduct the latest internal investigation at UNC was hired by the NCAA in 2013 to conduct an internal investigation of the NCAA's botched Miami investigation. UNC will have to live with whatever Kenneth Wainstein concludes and at least be able to respond to potential NCAA contentions it is a whitewash by noting the NCAA hired teh same law firm to conduct a review of its screw-ups.

We really need a 60 Minutes piece to run during the tournament next month.:)

ArnieMc
02-27-2014, 10:36 AM
Probably for a lot of reasons, here are two of the more obvious:
1) The possibility, perhaps likelihood, that further investigation forces the NCAA to vacate the 2005 & 2009 titles, damaging the CBB brand by impugning the reputation of one of the game's marquee programs
2) That such an investigation may lead to unpredictable results, a backlash among the major conferences that threatens the NCAAs existence

Brooder at dawn: I imagine Mark Emmert awakening from a nightmare to an even colder reality in his most vulnderable, paranoid moments. Of course at his salary he can afford a cabinet full of presciption sedatives.3) That this negates the NCAA's argument that players are paid by receiving a college education when unc actively prevents some athletes from receiving an education.
4) This probably started on John Swofford's watch as AD at unc. If it is established that he initiated, encouraged, or just knew about the paper classes, it would be tremendously embarrassing to him and to the ACC.

TKG
02-27-2014, 12:46 PM
Bloomberg TV running a story on the UNC scandal right now - began at 12:40pm. Mary Willingham was on camera and spelled out the situation in brief. A journalist that was interviewed after the Willingham segment siad that what sets the UNC scandal apart from other college athletic/academic scandals is that UNC involved the entire athletic department being engaged.

OldPhiKap
02-27-2014, 01:12 PM
'Coach Williams? There's a Mr. Steve Croft here to see if you can speak with him. He is in the lobby with a camera crew . . . ."

wilson
02-27-2014, 01:23 PM
The carolina Way:
3968

throatybeard
02-27-2014, 02:33 PM
I was going to say I'm experiencing schadenfreude about this, but then I realized there's no schade about feeling the freude.

Indoor66
02-27-2014, 02:37 PM
I was going to say I'm experiencing schadenfreude about this, but then I realized there's no schade about feeling the freude.

The only "schade" is the attept by unc to put the truth and the facts in the shadows.

hurleyfor3
02-27-2014, 02:42 PM
I feel more weltschmerz than schadenfreude myself. (Not kidding; what unc deserves will not be the punishment it ends up with.)

throatybeard
02-27-2014, 03:05 PM
I feel more weltschmerz than schadenfreude myself. (Not kidding; what unc deserves will not be the punishment it ends up with.)

Well the problem is, even if the NCAA forced them to vacate the 2005 and 2009 titles, they could always go to the Helms foundation for replacement banners.

BD80
02-27-2014, 03:36 PM
Well the problem is, even if the NCAA forced them to vacate the 2005 and 2009 titles, they could always go to the Helms foundation for replacement banners.

And if they act now, it is buy 2, get 1 free!

cspan37421
02-27-2014, 07:14 PM
the comments section is filled with (paid?) respondents who are apparently thoroughly coached in promoting the meme that M.W. is a "liar and a fraud" (without providing evidence of course), but the effort is pathetically transparent.

What was done to M.W. professionally, however, strikes me as an absolute gold-mine/slam dunk/(pick your metaphor) for an attorney specializing in employment matters. She is patiently going through the process but there's no doubt she will prevail. UNC will probably and ultimately settle with her, if she chooses to accept.

UNC's constant denial and lashing out at the inconvenient facts is breathtaking to me - not to mention how they're trumpeting all their claimed monumental reforms of a system they deny had much wrong with it at all. They keep finding new lows; they are utterly despicable.

devildeac
02-27-2014, 07:56 PM
That shirt is missing something:



Could someone please print this up as a T-shirt or Jersey?
9 3964

As a jersey, I certainly would have to wear something (Duke Blue) under it, but a Carolina jersey with "F" as the number and "No Class" for the name on the back might sell pretty well leading up to the game next week. Probably sell pretty well to State fans at the Tourney in Greensboro as well!

Go Devils!!!!!!!!!!!! GTHCGTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Edouble
02-27-2014, 08:24 PM
Well the problem is, even if the NCAA forced them to vacate the 2005 and 2009 titles, they could always go to the Helms foundation for replacement banners.

Do you think the NCAA could actually locate two championship banners for removal in that sea of "NIT"s and "Round of 32"s ???

throatybeard
02-27-2014, 10:28 PM
the comments section is filled with (paid?) respondents who are apparently thoroughly coached in promoting the meme that M.W. is a "liar and a fraud" (without providing evidence of course), but the effort is pathetically transparent.

What was done to M.W. professionally, however, strikes me as an absolute gold-mine/slam dunk/(pick your metaphor) for an attorney specializing in employment matters. She is patiently going through the process but there's no doubt she will prevail. UNC will probably and ultimately settle with her, if she chooses to accept.

UNC's constant denial and lashing out at the inconvenient facts is breathtaking to me - not to mention how they're trumpeting all their claimed monumental reforms of a system they deny had much wrong with it at all. They keep finding new lows; they are utterly despicable.

In the late 1980s when I was a kid in Georgia, there was a woman who whistle-blew on UGA for issues related to academic fraud related to the football team. The university stomped on her. When I have my weekly talk with my parents, I'll ask them her name. I'm sure my mother will remember.

DukeDiva
02-27-2014, 10:38 PM
In the late 1980s when I was a kid in Georgia, there was a woman who whistle-blew on UGA for issues related to academic fraud related to the football team. The university stomped on her. When I have my weekly talk with my parents, I'll ask them her name. I'm sure my mother will remember.

Jan Kemp?

OldPhiKap
02-27-2014, 10:42 PM
Jan Kemp?

Beat me to it.

throatybeard
02-27-2014, 10:45 PM
Jan Kemp?

Yes, thank you, AND OMG, she's been dead for five years due to raucously early-onset Alzheimer's, per her Wiki. Like, dead by the age Pat Summitt got it.

jacone21
02-27-2014, 10:46 PM
And if they act now, it is buy 2, get 1 free!

Just pay separate shipping and processing.

DukeDiva
02-27-2014, 10:53 PM
Yes, thank you, AND OMG, she's been dead for five years due to raucously early-onset Alzheimer's, per her Wiki. Like, dead by the age Pat Summitt got it.


http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/09/us/ncaa-athlete-literacy-whistle-blowers/

She was one of the earliest whistle blowers, there are several listed in this article. Funny you mentioned her, I had just came across this article today.

Atlanta Duke
02-27-2014, 10:59 PM
In the late 1980s when I was a kid in Georgia, there was a woman who whistle-blew on UGA for issues related to academic fraud related to the football team. The university stomped on her. When I have my weekly talk with my parents, I'll ask them her name. I'm sure my mother will remember.

Jan Kemp - a sad story

Jan Kemp Dies at 59; Exposed Fraud in Grades of Players

While coordinator of Georgia’s remedial English program, Dr. Kemp was among several faculty members who had complained that officials at Georgia intervened in the fall of 1981 to enable nine football players to pass a remedial English course in which they had received failing grades.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/12/education/12kemp.html

The sordid details of UGA football in the 80s in this linked 1986 SI story. Following a federal district court trial, the jury awarded Ms. Kemp $2.5 million (reduced to $1 million) for her wrongful demotion and subsequent termination.

From an attorney for the defendants during trial

"We may not make a university student out of him, but if we can teach him to read and write, maybe he can work at the post office rather than as a garbage man when he gets through with his athletic career."

Testimony from the UGA president at the time

"We have to compete [with rival schools] on a level playing field." Referring to Georgia athletes, Davison also said: "If they leave us being able to read, write, communicate better, we simply have not done them any damage."
http://www.sportsillustrated.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1064531/1/index.htm


“History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme.” ― Mark Twain

Atlanta Duke
02-27-2014, 11:00 PM
Props to those who beat me to it while I was looking for links to Ms. Kemp

JasonEvans
02-28-2014, 08:51 AM
Of course, Georgia learned their lesson from the Jan Kemp academic scandal affair and set up a legitimate academic structure for athletes.

Oh wait. I'm sorry. I accidentally left a couple works out of that sentence. It should read:

Of course, Georgia never learned their lesson from the Jan Kemp academic scandal affair and failed to set up a legitimate academic structure for athletes.

There, that's better.

Anyone recall the Jim Harrick basketball academics scandal at UGA in the early 00s? Jim Harrick Jr taught Coaching Principles and Strategies of Basketball and everyone who enrolled was a member of his father's team. The course included one test. You can read all the questions here. (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/2004-03-03-harrick-exam_x.htm#exam) I've always been intrigued by Harrick Jr's obsession with Duke on the test. He mentioned Cameron, Coach K, and Wojo. Seems sorta strange considering UGA would have had natural rivals in SEC schools that you would think Harrick and the players would have focused upon more than Duke, who they never played.


8. How many points does a three-point field goal account for in a Basketball Game?

11. What is the name of the exam which all high school seniors in the State of Georgia must pass?
a. Eye Exam
b. How Do The Grits Taste Exam
c. Bug Control Exam
d. Georgia Exit Exam

19. If you go on to become a huge coaching success, to whom will you tribute [sic ] the credit?
a. Mike Krzyzewski
b. Bobby Knight
c. John Wooden
d. Jim Harrick Jr.

The irony of that last question is that Harrick Jr is clearly not teaching the kids in this class anything, making it highly unlikely any of them will go on to be a coaching success. I bet K, Knight, and Wooden could have taught a masters level class on motivation, strategy, and leadership that would be an incredible boost to a potential coaching career... or any other career.

-Jason "Harrick (the dad) was a scoundrel and a horrible person... but I am sorta surprised (and very pleased) that no one has been desperate enough to hire him again. The NCAA's show cause clause on him expired a couple years ago" Evans

cspan37421
02-28-2014, 10:57 AM
I can see it now, a revision to UNC talking points.

From: It's not a UNC athletics scandal, it's a UNC academic scandal
To: It's not a UNC academic scandal, it's a challenge facing all colleges with sports programs. Because ... Georgia!!

MarkD83
02-28-2014, 12:42 PM
-Jason "I am not sure I can think of a worse article. How can the NCAA sit back and continue to do nothing? Shame... such shame" Evans

The NCAA can't go after UNC without admitting that their defense in the O'Bannon case is weak. As I understand it their defense is that a scholarship and an education is fair compensation. As an athlete at UNC maybe you are not compensated by getting a scholarship and degree so you will need the NCAA to give you some money.

On second thought maybe the NCAA will have to punish UNC. If they can show that UNC is an outlier by punishing them they can still hold on to their defense strategy.

JTH
02-28-2014, 12:56 PM
The NCAA can't go after UNC without admitting that their defense in the O'Bannon case is weak. As I understand it their defense is that a scholarship and an education is fair compensation. As an athlete at UNC maybe you are not compensated by getting a scholarship and degree so you will need the NCAA to give you some money.

On second thought maybe the NCAA will have to punish UNC. If they can show that UNC is an outlier by punishing them they can still hold on to their defense strategy.

I would appreciate hearing the opinion of some of the legal experts on this board. I have thought that the NCAA might try to settle this suit with the plaintiffs, rather than risk going to court and having to defend the whole unc mess, plus similar problems from the past (i.e. the Georgia incidents, etc.)

Personally, I hope there is no settlement and that all this gets played out in court.

Atlanta Duke
02-28-2014, 12:56 PM
The NCAA can't go after UNC without admitting that their defense in the O'Bannon case is weak. As I understand it their defense is that a scholarship and an education is fair compensation. As an athlete at UNC maybe you are not compensated by getting a scholarship and degree so you will need the NCAA to give you some money.

On second thought maybe the NCAA will have to punish UNC. If they can show that UNC is an outlier by punishing them they can still hold on to their defense strategy.

If the O'Bannon case actually goes to trial in June we may see how these issues play out - Ms. Willingham is on plaintiffs' witness list and the NCAA presumably will consider filing a motion in limine to exclude her testimony - the grounds for any such motion might make for some interesting reading

BD80
02-28-2014, 05:29 PM
... - Ms. Willingham is on plaintiffs' witness list and the NCAA presumably will consider filing a motion in limine to exclude her testimony - the grounds for any such motion might make for some interesting reading

Grounds for the motion? Her testimony will be highly prejudicial!

If anyone hears her testimony, our client is doomed!

OldPhiKap
02-28-2014, 05:45 PM
If the O'Bannon case actually goes to trial in June we may see how these issues play out - Ms. Willingham is on plaintiffs' witness list and the NCAA presumably will consider filing a motion in limine to exclude her testimony - the grounds for any such motion might make for some interesting reading


Grounds for the motion? Her testimony will be highly prejudicial!

If anyone hears her testimony, our client is doomed!

I assume, among other grounds to be argued:

FRE 403 -- prejudice outweighs probative value -- even if UNC had a few sham classes, that does not defeat the argument that non-corrupt schools offer educations in exchange for scholarships. The fact that there is one bad apple cannot be smeared against the rest of the educational system, and UNC is simply an abhorrent example.

FRE 702 -- her study is not the result of a reliable application of sufficient facts through a reliable method (a/k/a "Daubert challenge," a/k/a "UNC Chancellor Defense") -- no one knows this, but any brief would have a lot of interesting tidbits.

FRE 401 -- lack of relevance to the certified class (the fact that Carolina helped student athletes get a degree through lowered standards is not a uniform condition across the class, thus admission of this evidence suggests a lack of commonality and typicality under FRCP 23).

lotusland
02-28-2014, 08:00 PM
Of course, Georgia learned their lesson from the Jan Kemp academic scandal affair and set up a legitimate academic structure for athletes.

Oh wait. I'm sorry. I accidentally left a couple works out of that sentence. It should read:

Of course, Georgia never learned their lesson from the Jan Kemp academic scandal affair and failed to set up a legitimate academic structure for athletes.

There, that's better.

Anyone recall the Jim Harrick basketball academics scandal at UGA in the early 00s? Jim Harrick Jr taught Coaching Principles and Strategies of Basketball and everyone who enrolled was a member of his father's team. The course included one test. You can read all the questions here. (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/2004-03-03-harrick-exam_x.htm#exam) I've always been intrigued by Harrick Jr's obsession with Duke on the test. He mentioned Cameron, Coach K, and Wojo. Seems sorta strange considering UGA would have had natural rivals in SEC schools that you would think Harrick and the players would have focused upon more than Duke, who they never played.


The irony of that last question is that Harrick Jr is clearly not teaching the kids in this class anything, making it highly unlikely any of them will go on to be a coaching success. I bet K, Knight, and Wooden could have taught a masters level class on motivation, strategy, and leadership that would be an incredible boost to a potential coaching career... or any other career.

-Jason "Harrick (the dad) was a scoundrel and a horrible person... but I am sorta surprised (and very pleased) that no one has been desperate enough to hire him again. The NCAA's show cause clause on him expired a couple years ago" Evans

I just aced that test so Coach K should pay special attention to my DBR posts henceforth. I know how many quarters are in a game or anything for that matter. I can do halves too.

BD80
02-28-2014, 08:02 PM
Grounds for the motion? Her testimony will be highly prejudicial!

If anyone hears her testimony, our client is doomed!


... FRE 403 -- prejudice outweighs probative value -- ...

But your honor, you miss my point. It is too probative, and thus prejudicial

OldPhiKap
02-28-2014, 08:11 PM
But your honor, you miss my point. It is too probative, and thus prejudicial

Overruled. Judgment entered against Maryland for $50 million.

throatybeard
02-28-2014, 08:28 PM
I can see it now, a revision to UNC talking points.

From: It's not a UNC athletics scandal, it's a UNC academic scandal
To: It's not a UNC academic scandal, it's a challenge facing all colleges with sports programs. Because ... Georgia!!

If my Facebook contact with the few UNC people I can still abide is a guide, "everybody is doing it" is the current defense. So, because everybody, not just Georgia.

chaosmage
03-01-2014, 10:31 AM
IC has gone on to bashing their own professor; I won't link it or anything to give them credit. The most hilarious statement was... *drum roll*

"Hey Jay [Smith], maybe you should go get a real job in the real world."

I have no words that can speak to this comment any further.

Dr. Rosenrosen
03-01-2014, 10:59 AM
IC has gone on to bashing their own professor; I won't link it or anything to give them credit. The most hilarious statement was... *drum roll*

"Hey Jay [Smith], maybe you should go get a real job in the real world."

I have no words that can speak to this comment any further.
Ignoramus Central

CameronBlue
03-01-2014, 12:46 PM
Ignoramus Central

You're giving ignoramuses a bad name. I'm sure there are many who are productive members of society, not that I'd want to hang out with them.

OldPhiKap
03-01-2014, 01:57 PM
IC has gone on to bashing their own professor; I won't link it or anything to give them credit. The most hilarious statement was... *drum roll*

"Hey Jay [Smith], maybe you should go get a real job in the real world."

I have no words that can speak to this comment any further.

You cannot spell "uncouth" without starting with UNC.

hurleyfor3
03-01-2014, 02:31 PM
You cannot spell "uncouth" without starting with UNC.

Uncouth? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-SrQ-Oz1k4) We already went there. (http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?32506-Latest-Updates-on-UNC-CH-Academic-Scandal-National-Media-hammers-UNC&p=697314#post697314)

ancienteagle
03-01-2014, 05:41 PM
You cannot spell "uncouth" without starting with UNC.

You can't spell DUNCES without UNC smack dab in the middle!

Indoor66
03-02-2014, 08:16 AM
You can't spell DUNCES without UNC smack dab in the middle!

Maybe we should use DuncES now?

BD80
03-02-2014, 08:50 AM
Maybe we should use DuncES now?

Capital idea

Henderson
03-02-2014, 09:00 AM
You can't spell DUNCES without UNC smack dab in the middle!

And the unc-ch athletes can't spell it at all. That word doesn't show up on vocabulary lists until 5th grade.

OldPhiKap
03-02-2014, 09:33 AM
Maybe we should use DuncES now?

Nice. So whenever UNC plays in the DES Center, they a a bunch of DUNCES.

Very well-played.

In related news, I hear that they are naming a building after Roy and Butch. Turns out, though, that the building is a bit crooked and the lot kinda shady.

Duke95
03-02-2014, 09:37 AM
As much as I like to see UNC get their comeuppance, this isn't a problem indigenous to UNC, but rather a byproduct of the fact that college athletics are big money.
Football, basketball, baseball, etc. at the collegiate level are huge revenue sources for schools, so the decision to bend the rules becomes a cost-benefit analysis for them. I'm not justifying it by any means. Schools should be about academics, not sports. Our society would be better off that way.

roywhite
03-02-2014, 10:15 AM
As much as I like to see UNC get their comeuppance, this isn't a problem indigenous to UNC, but rather a byproduct of the fact that college athletics are big money.
Football, basketball, baseball, etc. at the collegiate level are huge revenue sources for schools, so the decision to bend the rules becomes a cost-benefit analysis for them. I'm not justifying it by any means. Schools should be about academics, not sports. Our society would be better off that way.

Sounds like the "everybody does it" excuse from UNC.

Atlanta Duke
03-02-2014, 10:21 AM
As much as I like to see UNC get their comeuppance, this isn't a problem indigenous to UNC, but rather a byproduct of the fact that college athletics are big money.
Football, basketball, baseball, etc. at the collegiate level are huge revenue sources for schools, so the decision to bend the rules becomes a cost-benefit analysis for them. I'm not justifying it by any means. Schools should be about academics, not sports. Our society would be better off that way.

I respectfully submit massive academic fraud and a cover-up by senior officials within a university is a little more than "bending the rules."

Making an illegal U-turn is "bending the rules" - deciding to engage in drunk driving is not.

Henderson
03-02-2014, 04:14 PM
As much as I like to see UNC get their comeuppance, this isn't a problem indigenous to UNC, but rather a byproduct of the fact that college athletics are big money.
Football, basketball, baseball, etc. at the collegiate level are huge revenue sources for schools, so the decision to bend the rules becomes a cost-benefit analysis for them. I'm not justifying it by any means. Schools should be about academics, not sports. Our society would be better off that way.

Yes, you're right. To cast aspersions on unc-ch here would be to indict America, and I won't stand for that.

As Otter put it so well in 1978: "[Y]ou can't hold a whole [university] responsible for the behavior of a few, sick twisted individuals. For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the whole [university] system? And if the whole [university] system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, Greg - isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America."

Atlanta Duke
03-03-2014, 10:16 AM
I don't want to interrupt the fanboys.

Such as Business Week?


It seems some of you want to score points with your buddies around the water cooler, but this is a bit more important than that.

If you want to personalize the argument go for it. Good luck prompting a substantive discussion by going down that road.


When I was at Duke, the SocPsych class was stacked with athletes. We all know that many are steered towards easier classes wherever they go.

So the AFAM department as it operated at Chapel Hill and the SocPsych classes at Duke that you appear to hold in contempt are comparable? Got it.

PackMan97
03-03-2014, 03:35 PM
When I was at Duke, the SocPsych class was stacked with athletes. We all know that many are steered towards easier classes wherever they go.

I have bolded the appropriate portions of these sentences. There is a big difference between easier class and fake class.

Atlanta Duke
03-03-2014, 05:10 PM
The attacks on Ms. Willingham resume on another front

Learning specialist Bradley Bethel wasn’t at UNC-Chapel Hill when counselors at the tutoring program for athletes were steering them to classes that never met. He was hired to help athletes in September 2011, just as the university was coming to grips with the long-running scandal.

But in recent days, Bethel, 33, who came to the university from a similar job at Ohio State, has become a leading critic of whistle-blower Mary Willingham...

Bethel acknowledged he has not seen Willingham’s research data, or the underlying tests that were given to the 183 athletes over an eight-year period. However, he says, her methodology is so flawed that the results could not be valid.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/03/02/3668170/unc-learning-specialist-defends.html#storylink=cpy

According to his blog, this may just be an issue of accommodating reading disabilities

In my nearly four years as a reading and writing specialist, at two universities, I have had only three student-athletes whose fluency was as limited as those Willingham described. All three had been diagnosed with a reading disability, and I highly suspect the two athletes to which Willingham was referring also had a reading disability.

http://coachingthemind.blogspot.com/2014/02/truth-and-literacy-at-unc.html

But if players were steered to no-show classes Mr. Bethel knows it was with the best of intentions

“From what I can discern,” Bethel wrote in an email to The News & Observer, “when the academic counselors at times recommended the easy, no-show classes to underprepared students, the counselors did so because they were already working long hours to help those students develop the skills they needed to succeed in their other classes.”

http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/03/02/3668170/unc-learning-specialist-defends.html#storylink=cpy

Mr. Bethel has declined to be interviewed by Dan Kane at the N&O - wise move. He might be asked about this pesky matter e-mail Mr. Bethel sent to Chancellor Folt.

“There have been many student-athletes who were specially admitted whose academic preparedness is so low they cannot succeed here.”

http://www.wralsportsfan.com/athletic-integrity-remains-key-issue-at-unc-as-new-chancellor-settles-in/12981154/

Duke95
03-03-2014, 05:53 PM
Such as Business Week?

If you want to personalize the argument go for it. Good luck prompting a substantive discussion by going down that road.

So the AFAM department as it operated at Chapel Hill and the SocPsych classes at Duke that you appear to hold in contempt are comparable? Got it.


Actually no. You don't "got it" all all.

You seem to think that because UNC is a complete failure on this point, this somehow makes Duke look better. It doesn't. I'm not cheering UNC's downfall on this because it's bad for EVERYONE. It's bad for UNC, it's bad for education, and it's bad for college athletics. I don't give a crap if they have zero championships after this plays out. It gives me very little marginal utility. What does give me considerable utility is knowing that my Duke degree maintains its value.

My point is that this UNC debacle should give everyone some pause about mixing big business with academia.

Atlanta Duke
03-03-2014, 07:09 PM
You seem to think that because UNC is a complete failure on this point, this somehow makes Duke look better.

Well as a factual matter the complete collapse of academic standards at Chapel Hill does makes virtually any athletic department, including but not limited to Duke, look better by comparison, just as the existence of the Cleveland Browns makes any other NFL front office look better by comparison.


I don't give a crap if they have zero championships after this plays out. It gives me very little marginal utility. What does give me considerable utility is knowing that my Duke degree maintains its value.

And how have whatever academic compromises you contend have been made for the greater good of sports at Duke had the slightest impact upon maintaining however you think the value of your degree is measured?


My point is that this UNC debacle should give everyone some pause about mixing big business with academia.

I assume you mean the potential dangers of mixing college sports and big business should give everyone pause, although I was unaware that college baseball at most schools is the huge source of revenue you believe it to be. Post-secondary education in the U.S. is a very big business and that ship sailed some time ago.

However, just because others on this board and I do not buy into your apparent argument that the UNC scandal and practices at Duke are just more and less egregious assaults upon academic integrity in the name of big time college sports does not mean only you are sensitive to the consequences of an athletic department being the decider when it comes maintaining to the eligibility of athletes. My impression is Duke has not engaged in practices that improperly compromise the mission of the university in order operate the football and basketball programs.


Schools should be about academics, not sports. Our society would be better off that way.

It is my further impression this is where you and I, to use the applicable cliche, agree to disagree. My personal opinion is both universities and society can be benefit by maintaining a role for major college sports, just as Duke University can be better off by providing students the opportunity to take classes in sociology and psychology rather than only those subjects you or I might deem to be of value.

Newton_14
03-03-2014, 07:24 PM
Only unc@ch could come up with a crock of poop that deep. I wonder which PR rep wrote those comments for Bethel...

-jk
03-03-2014, 08:16 PM
...

My point is that this UNC debacle should give everyone some pause about mixing big business with academia.

The mix of business (or government) with academia goes back to the Dark Ages. That ship has (very long since) sailed.

-jk

Duke95
03-03-2014, 09:26 PM
The mix of business (or government) with academia goes back to the Dark Ages. That ship has (very long since) sailed.

-jk

Yeah, well slavery was around for a very long time, and that ship was stopped from sailing, at least for the most part.
The fact that something bad has always existed should not be a deterrent against advocating for its cessation.

Duke95
03-03-2014, 09:30 PM
It is my further impression this is where you and I, to use the applicable cliche, agree to disagree. My personal opinion is both universities and society can be benefit by maintaining a role for major college sports, just as Duke University can be better off by providing students the opportunity to take classes in sociology and psychology rather than only those subjects you or I might deem to be of value.

I am happy to agree to disagree, as long as you agree not to misinterpret what I am saying. I was not casting any aspersions against SocPsych. I place no greater value on one major versus another, since it is not my place to do so, but rather the persons deciding on their majors.

Atlanta Duke
03-03-2014, 10:06 PM
I am happy to agree to disagree, as long as you agree not to misinterpret what I am saying. I was not casting any aspersions against SocPsych. I place no greater value on one major versus another, since it is not my place to do so, but rather the persons deciding on their majors.

You were the one that singled out classes in those departments as providing safe harbors for athletes. I assumed you contend those classes enable the corruption of academic standards.

I apologize if your statement was not intended to denigrate those classes. If you are not criticizing those classes I am uncertain why there is anything improper about athletes or other students securing academic credits by enrolling in those classes.

crdaul
03-03-2014, 10:20 PM
Only unc@ch could come up with a crock of poop that deep. I wonder which PR rep wrote those comments for Bethel...

I know a former UNC football player who told me that he was "directed" to take Portuguese as his language because it was an easy class and the professor REALLY likes football.....and that's one of the courses now sited as proving that there was no institutional academic fraud in the past.....I call big BS on this guy's "defense"

oldnavy
03-04-2014, 11:22 AM
Only unc@ch could come up with a crock of poop that deep. I wonder which PR rep wrote those comments for Bethel...

Maybe it's just me, but I can't believe that they are still commenting on this, because Bethel really doesn't make a great case for the University... his points are laughable.

More footballer's were not taking cheat classes than were? Hum.. OK, not sure how that helps.

The advisors (or whatever they call themselves), steered players into cheat class because they were tired from working so hard to keep them eligible?

Honestly, I think the NCAA is TRYING their best to ignore this, but if those morons over on the hill don't stop talking, they are going to force them to go back and re-look all this.

Dr. Rosenrosen
03-04-2014, 11:34 AM
Maybe it's just me, but I can't believe that they are still commenting on this, because Bethel really doesn't make a great case for the University... his points are laughable.

More footballer's were not taking cheat classes than were? Hum.. OK, not sure how that helps.

The advisors (or whatever they call themselves), steered players into cheat class because they were tired from working so hard to keep them eligible?

Honestly, I think the NCAA is TRYING their best to ignore this, but if those morons over on the hill don't stop talking, they are going to force them to go back and re-look all this.
Seriously, I'm no lawyer, but talk about self-incrimination...

JasonEvans
03-04-2014, 05:03 PM
Hmmm, I'm not sure what to think of the latest news.

The DA will not be charging Deborah Crowder with anything because she has decided to cooperate (http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/03/04/3673229/former-unc-african-studies-manager.html) with the newly launched investigation into UNC's academic troubles.


(District Attorney Jim) Woodall said he could not discuss what Crowder has told investigators. But he said the criminal investigation was not intended to get at the cause of the academic fraud, which involved disproportionately high numbers of enrolled athletes. The new inquiry will dig into that.

“I really feel like this is the best opportunity for the university to learn what happened, and a criminal investigation was never the vehicle to do that, regardless of what anyone thought,” Woodall said.

I had hoped that Crowder would be charged and, like Nyang'oro, would sing sing sing about all the bad stuff she knew was going on as a way of ensuring she stayed out of jail. Still, I guess it is good that she will be talking to the new investigator... if you believe that the new investigation will be more complete and not a whitewash like the shame that was the Martin Report.

-Jason "hmmmm... need to think more about the implications of this" Evans

oldnavy
03-04-2014, 05:16 PM
Hmmm, I'm not sure what to think of the latest news.

The DA will not be charging Deborah Crowder with anything because she has decided to cooperate (http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/03/04/3673229/former-unc-african-studies-manager.html) with the newly launched investigation into UNC's academic troubles.



I had hoped that Crowder would be charged and, like Nyang'oro, would sing sing sing about all the bad stuff she knew was going on as a way of ensuring she stayed out of jail. Still, I guess it is good that she will be talking to the new investigator... if you believe that the new investigation will be more complete and not a whitewash like the shame that was the Martin Report.

-Jason "hmmmm... need to think more about the implications of this" Evans

Hey all we need to do is wait for those idiots on the hill to disclose everything they ever did by telling us how wonderful everyone over there is!

Faustus
03-04-2014, 05:35 PM
Then again it's just possible that Crowder has cut a plea bargain deal for immunity and to save herself, and is finally talking. Sadly, likely not the case, but one can hope...

Atlanta Duke
03-04-2014, 06:04 PM
Then again it's just possible that Crowder has cut a plea bargain deal for immunity and to save herself, and is finally talking. Sadly, likely not the case, but one can hope...

For whatever reason she no longer has any fears about self-incrimination. Usually a plea deal requires you to plead to something and then get favorable treatment at sentencing for your assistance in advancing an ongoing investigation. I guess the DA concluded she has not engaged in any criminal conduct.

Hard to figure out what the prosecutor is up to at this point. Maybe he is keeping his options open in the event Crowder implicates Roy or Holden Thorp.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Woodall said he didn't expect anyone else to be charged in the case.

"You can never say never, understand that, because of course information can come up that I'm unaware of," Woodall said. "But at this point, I don't anticipate anybody else being charged."

But this might cause some sleepless nights for somebody

Brian Vick, Crowder's attorney, issued a statement saying she looked forward to cooperating with Wainstein's investigation.

"She believes that it is important for the full and unvarnished truth to come out and intends to provide Mr. Wainstein with as much knowledge as she has about the independent study classes that were offered during her tenure with the Department of African and Afro-Studies at UNC," Vick said.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10551679/no-charges-deborah-crowder-north-carolina-fraud-case

sagegrouse
03-04-2014, 06:53 PM
I had hoped that Crowder would be charged and, like Nyang'oro, would sing sing sing about all the bad stuff she knew was going on as a way of ensuring she stayed out of jail. Still, I guess it is good that she will be talking to the new investigator... if you believe that the new investigation will be more complete and not a whitewash like the shame that was the Martin Report.
-Jason "hmmmm... need to think more about the implications of this" Evans

Jason, UNC is paying for --errr, "renting" -- a lawyer with a strong record in investigations. UNC is his client.

Here is a passage from the Cadwalader Wickersham and Taft website:


Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP ... announced that Kenneth L. Wainstein was appointed by the University of North Carolina to conduct an independent inquiry of academic irregularities at the Chapel Hill campus.

Wainstein was a long-time federal prosecutor and a former U.S. Attorney, Assistant Attorney General for National Security, and homeland security advisor to President George W. Bush, and heads Cadwalader’s White Collar Group, which specializes in conducting independent reviews and investigations for a variety of clients.

Wainstein and his team will work closely with the university and others to develop a full understanding of the facts underlying the allegations of academic irregularities and to provide an independent and comprehensive assessment of those facts for the university and the public as a whole. As a part of his investigation, Wainstein will have access to previously unreleased information acquired by the State Bureau of Investigation and the Orange County District Attorney’s Office during their related criminal investigation. Following the investigation’s conclusion, Wainstein and his team will produce a written report on his findings that will be made available to the public.

UNC, as the client, will get first shot at the findings of the investigation, both to offer explanations (i.e., "blame the individuals or the last AD and Chancellor") and to take remedial actions. ("UNC is already actively addressing these matters.")

The public report will be pretty weak stuff, I feel sure.

Newton_14
03-04-2014, 09:12 PM
Jason, UNC is paying for --errr, "renting" -- a lawyer with a strong record in investigations. UNC is his client.

Here is a passage from the Cadwalader Wickersham and Taft website:



UNC, as the client, will get first shot at the findings of the investigation, both to offer explanations (i.e., "blame the individuals or the last AD and Chancellor") and to take remedial actions. ("UNC is already actively addressing these matters.")

The public report will be pretty weak stuff, I feel sure.

Does this mean unc will get to control what is and what is not in the report that is shared with the public? If yes, then this is all a big waste of time just like the Martin fraud.

WiJoe
03-04-2014, 11:14 PM
Bethel NEVER mentioned basketball in his discourse. How convenient.

sagegrouse
03-04-2014, 11:25 PM
Does this mean unc will get to control what is and what is not in the report that is shared with the public? If yes, then this is all a big waste of time just like the Martin fraud.

I'll let the Legal Eagles weigh in, but there would certainly be a "discussion" of the contents of the report between UNC and the lawyers. The net effect would be to cast things in a positive or neutral tone, such as by adding a second sentence to a totally made-up finding: "One-half of scholarship football players took 400-level AFAM courses that never had a single lecture class. UNC has acknowledged the problem and cancelled all such courses."

Actually, the report can say, "Once UNC hired Jennifer Townsend in 2009 as the academic advisor for the basketball team, no basketball players were allowed to take 'no-show' classes." Apparently she went ballistic when she arrived from the U. of Minne. and saw what was going on with the AFAM courses.

Newton_14
03-04-2014, 11:39 PM
I'll let the Legal Eagles weigh in, but there would certainly be a "discussion" of the contents of the report between UNC and the lawyers. The net effect would be to cast things in a positive or neutral tone, such as by adding a second sentence to a totally made-up finding: "One-half of scholarship football players took 400-level AFAM courses that never had a single lecture class. UNC has acknowledged the problem and cancelled all such courses."

Actually, the report can say, "Once UNC hired Jennifer Townsend in 2009 as the academic advisor for the basketball team, no basketball players were allowed to take 'no-show' classes." Apparently she went ballistic when she arrived from the U. of Minne. and saw what was going on with the AFAM courses.

Thanks Sage. That is what I feared.

This is, in my humble opinion, the final chance for the full truth to come out once and for all. If unc is allowed to control or spin the content prior to the public getting to see it, they will do just that. They will also move heaven and earth to ensure that the 2005/2009 banners remain up.... and that's a drop in the bucket compared to the lengths they would go to, to protect that 1993 banner.

devil84
03-05-2014, 08:23 AM
Does this mean unc will get to control what is and what is not in the report that is shared with the public? If yes, then this is all a big waste of time just like the Martin fraud.

And at up to $990 per hour (http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/02/25/3653683/wainsteins-work-for-unc-could.html), it'll be quite the waste of money, too. The linked article says taxpayer money nor tuition money will be used.

PackMan97
03-05-2014, 08:48 AM
Jason, UNC is paying for --errr, "renting" -- a lawyer with a strong record in investigations. UNC is his client.

Any guesses as to how often UNC will claim client-attorney privilege in response to freedom of information requests by the press?

JBDuke
03-05-2014, 08:53 AM
Any guesses as to how often UNC will claim client-attorney privilege in response to freedom of information requests by the press?

The attorney can make that claim, but the client is UNC-CH, is not a private person. As a public institution, don't they have to respond to FOIA requests? They can certainly conceal justify not complying with the request if it violates privacy laws, but otherwise, I assume they have to cough it up.

PackMan97
03-05-2014, 09:03 AM
The attorney can make that claim, but the client is UNC-CH, is not a private person. As a public institution, don't they have to respond to FOIA requests? They can certainly conceal justify not complying with the request if it violates privacy laws, but otherwise, I assume they have to cough it up.

That's simple, they have the attorney keep the records.

Early when it was just FB, UNC quickly talked to employees about not writing down notes, about not sending emails, about not doing things that would expose UNC to a public records request. One of their favorite tactics was making sure a lawyer was present and they were the ones that took notes.

Atlanta Duke
03-05-2014, 09:33 AM
Does this mean unc will get to control what is and what is not in the report that is shared with the public? If yes, then this is all a big waste of time just like the Martin fraud.

DBR posters who practice in North Carolina obviously can provide better guidance than I can, but here is my guess as to how this might play out.

Assuming UNC does not elect to release the full report you can bet the N&O will be filing suit for the full report. Internal investigations are subject to the attorney-client privilege. Under the North Carolina public records act, written communications to a state agency are exempted from mandatory disclosure if they are:


made within the scope of the attorney-client relationship by any attorney-at-law serving such governmental body, concerning any claim against or on behalf of the governmental body or governmental entity for which the body acts, or concerning the prosecution, defense, settlement or litigation of any judicial action, or any administrative or other type of proceeding to which the governmental body is a party or by which it is or may be directly affected.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 132-1.1(a)

In 2012, the N&O filed suit under the public records act to get records relating to UNC's investigation of allegations concerning the football program that were under investigation by the NCAA. Superior Court Judge Howard Manning held that the NCAA investigation was an administrative proceeding within the meaning of the North Carolina statutes, so attorney-client communications and trial preparation materials related to the investigation would be protected. Judge Manning further held that with regard to information submitted by UNC to the NCAA:

[R]edactions in the public version of the document were appropriate to protect employees and academic student records. However, portions of the response relating to impermissible benefit violations resulting in sanctions and ineligibility are not protected and must be disclosed in unredacted form. In the Court’s words, “the cloak of secrecy must be lifted and the sun let in for all to see.”

http://www.newsroomlawblog.com/2012/08/articles/public-records/court-rules-in-unc-football-public-records-dispute/

At this time, there is no NCAA administrative proceeding to cite as grounds for not releasing the report. And if there were to be a NCAA enforcement action, UNC presumably would be turning the Wainstein report over to the NCAA, at which point any privilege would be waived if Judge Manning's rationale were applied in any disclosure action filed by the NCAA.

Use of the NC open records act to obtain this sort of information has greatly distressed a UNC law student who appears to bleed Carolina blue. In a 2013 law review comment titled Giving Away the Playbook: How North Carolina’s Public Records Law Can Be Used to Harass, Intimidate, and Spy, the author expressed his concern that:

Nothing in North Carolina law indicates that Roy Williams’s half-time plays are protected from a public records request.

http://nclawreview.org/documents/91/6/fairchild.pdf

cato
03-05-2014, 09:45 AM
Any guesses as to how often UNC will claim client-attorney privilege in response to freedom of information requests by the press?

It sounds like the attorney will be merely conducting an investigation, not providing confidential legal advice (or preparing confidential work product). I don't think the report would be privileged, at least in CA.

ChicagoHeel
03-05-2014, 10:46 AM
I used to post somewhat regularly but have been away for a while, primarily because this scandal has dampened my enthusiasm for college sports. I still watch with passion- couldn't sleep after we beat you last month- but that passion is mixed with guilt. Call it cognitive or emotional dissonance.

I would place myself among those alumns to whom Jason is referring. I am disappointed, although not completely surprised, by the level of denial among the UNC community as well as the repeated attempts to make this issue about Mary Willingham rather than academic fraud. Regardless of what you think of Willingham's data or motives, it is clear that we offered a very large number of fake courses that disproportionately enrolled athletes. The idea that it is all the work of a single rogue chair, which is the story UNC is peddling, is ridiculous. Universities, even ones where there is little oversight of a department, simply don't work that way. Others had to know what was happening. The bottom line is that it is quite possible, although far from proven, that some person(s) at UNC engaged in academic fraud to keep our athletes eligible, possibly including members from the national championship team. I would like to see a full investigation of that allegation, although I don't expect one.

I know most of you are convinced that Duke is different and that such a thing could never happen to you, but I thought that about UNC too. This is part of a larger conversation about the relationship between academics and revenue sports that I think the country needs to have. Given the money sports generate, there is just too much of an incentive to admit students that are fundamentally unprepared to succeed, or even survive, in the university without hours and hours of tutoring, which their schedules of practices and travel make exceedingly difficult. That doesn't mean I think that other universities are engaging in fraud the way UNC potentially was, but at this point I no longer trust that any high profile program is really comprised entirely of student-athletes.



I know several UNC alums (and I am sure there are many, many more out there) who are disgusted at the way the school has handled all this. They want to get back to the real Carolina Way where educating the kids was almost as important as winning games. But, most of them are keeping quiet and not making waves. I would not be at all surprised if Grauer felt similarly.

And, it is worth noting, that if he tried to insert himself into the editorial process to slant coverage toward UNC, it would be a huuuuge journalistic scandal. He wants no part of that!

-Jason "BusinessWeek is just killing Carolina on this thing. I love it!" Evans

Matches
03-05-2014, 11:05 AM
That's simple, they have the attorney keep the records.

Early when it was just FB, UNC quickly talked to employees about not writing down notes, about not sending emails, about not doing things that would expose UNC to a public records request. One of their favorite tactics was making sure a lawyer was present and they were the ones that took notes.

Attorney-client privilege only covers communications with an attorney. UNC can't make an otherwise-discoverable document privileged just by putting it in its attorney's possession.

If the report itself is being prepared by the attorney, one could argue that is is attorney work-product, and therefore privileged. Not sure how that interacts with a FOI request though. Having made a show of commissioning the report, though, UNC would look awfully ridiculous to then claim the results are confidential and refuse to share them.

(Not that they don't already look completely ridiculous at this point, but still....)

gumbomoop
03-05-2014, 12:36 PM
I used to post somewhat regularly but have been away for a while, primarily because this scandal has dampened my enthusiasm for college sports. I still watch with passion- couldn't sleep after we beat you last month- but that passion is mixed with guilt. Call it cognitive or emotional dissonance.

I would place myself among those alumns to whom Jason is referring. I am disappointed, although not completely surprised, by the level of denial among the UNC community as well as the repeated attempts to make this issue about Mary Willingham rather than academic fraud. Regardless of what you think of Willingham's data or motives, it is clear that we offered a very large number of fake courses that disproportionately enrolled athletes. The idea that it is all the work of a single rogue chair, which is the story UNC is peddling, is ridiculous. Universities, even ones where there is little oversight of a department, simply don't work that way. Others had to know what was happening. The bottom line is that it is quite possible, although far from proven, that some person(s) at UNC engaged in academic fraud to keep our athletes eligible, possibly including members from the national championship team. I would like to see a full investigation of that allegation, although I don't expect one.

I know most of you are convinced that Duke is different and that such a thing could never happen to you, but I thought that about UNC too. This is part of a larger conversation about the relationship between academics and revenue sports that I think the country needs to have. Given the money sports generate, there is just too much of an incentive to admit students that are fundamentally unprepared to succeed, or even survive, in the university without hours and hours of tutoring, which their schedules of practices and travel make exceedingly difficult. That doesn't mean I think that other universities are engaging in fraud the way UNC potentially was, but at this point I no longer trust that any high profile program is really comprised entirely of student-athletes.

I'm pleased - very much so - to see ChicagoHeel back on EK. This is a strong, heartfelt post, and much of it can't have been easy to write. I'd fervently hope - as the rest of this angry post will attest - not to be in denial if Duke were embroiled in an analogous scandal.

On denial at UNC, the single most disturbing thing I've read since the scandal started is the response of the UNC faculty who attended the special faculty meeting convened by Chancellor Folt on 1/17/14, at which Provost Dean blasted Willingham's research as "a travesty." To which, according to the Bloomberg BusinessWeek article linked in this thread's OP, "The assembled scholars erupted in applause."

So despicable do I find this, that I try to explain it away. Maybe, I think, the vast majority of the UNC faculty in attendance were somehow self-selected, Heel sports fanatics. Maybe, I think, there just weren't all that many faculty there, and those who aren't in denial knew what Folt and Dean had in mind, and didn't want to sit there and listen to more coverup. Maybe, I think, there were lots of faculty there, and enough "erupted in applause" that the BusinessWeek author or source simply recorded their immediate response, but [still thinking/rationalizing] missed the stunned silence of many others.

At least, thank heaven, the article did record one prof's pointed retort to the despicable applause: PolSci Prof Frank Baumgartner "mused aloud about the university's focusing on Willingham as a form of coverup."

Subsequent to this travesty - i.e., Folt/Dean's performance and the applauding faculty goons - Folt and Dean began to backtrack, admitting years of academic oversight failure and shameful, horrible things. I doubt they want the whole truth to come out. I doubt they want even half of it to come out.

And I wonder whether the applauding "assembled scholars" have backtracked. I wonder whether they've been criticized by not-in-denial colleagues, by lots of such colleagues, not just Jay Smith and Frank Baumgartner. Having admired the scholarly work of several UNC faculty, I wonder, what is the percentage, roughly, of pathetic apologists among UNC's faculty scholars? I wonder, most of all, whether I'd be in denial if it were Duke.

An eruption of applause, indeed.

hurleyfor3
03-05-2014, 01:02 PM
I would place myself among those alumns to whom Jason is referring. I am disappointed, although not completely surprised, by the level of denial among the UNC community as well as the repeated attempts to make this issue about Mary Willingham rather than academic fraud. Regardless of what you think of Willingham's data or motives, it is clear that we offered a very large number of fake courses that disproportionately enrolled athletes. The idea that it is all the work of a single rogue chair, which is the story UNC is peddling, is ridiculous. Universities, even ones where there is little oversight of a department, simply don't work that way. Others had to know what was happening. The bottom line is that it is quite possible, although far from proven, that some person(s) at UNC engaged in academic fraud to keep our athletes eligible, possibly including members from the national championship team. I would like to see a full investigation of that allegation, although I don't expect one.

I know most of you are convinced that Duke is different and that such a thing could never happen to you, but I thought that about UNC too. This is part of a larger conversation about the relationship between academics and revenue sports that I think the country needs to have. Given the money sports generate, there is just too much of an incentive to admit students that are fundamentally unprepared to succeed, or even survive, in the university without hours and hours of tutoring, which their schedules of practices and travel make exceedingly difficult. That doesn't mean I think that other universities are engaging in fraud the way UNC potentially was, but at this point I no longer trust that any high profile program is really comprised entirely of student-athletes.

Thanks for posting. I think the difference between what is going on at UNC, and what could happen if it took place at Duke, is the extent of complicity among everyone at unc.

Most of what I'd say has already been said, but if something like this broke out at Duke, a lot of the faculty, and most of the trustees, would be making a lot of noise. Yeah, I know David Rubenstein tried to buy the Original Rules of Basketball and all the trustees get really good tickets (confirmed from talking to one in an airport after an ACC Tournament). Still, I look at the UNC BoT and see mostly good old boys -- all but two have NC addresses; it is telling that one that isn't is the chairman of Bloomberg. Would Duke's board act the same way? I'll let others decide. Duke does have the advantage of being private, so it would be easier to have a few people "resign" and such.

As always, its not the crime so much as the cover-up.

77devil
03-05-2014, 01:37 PM
And at up to $990 per hour (http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/02/25/3653683/wainsteins-work-for-unc-could.html), it'll be quite the waste of money, too. The linked article says taxpayer money nor tuition money will be used.

UNC spin. Money is fungible. Presumably the foundation will have less to contribute toward university operations producing the same burden on taxpayers and tuition payers.

77devil
03-17-2014, 06:12 PM
For those with access to HBO, the next installment of Real Sports will include a long form segment on academic issues in college sports. The piece is broader than UNC, though it appears that it will be prominently featured as Mary Willingham is front and center in the promo.

Atlanta Duke
03-17-2014, 10:15 PM
For an excellent article on how internal investigations operate and the hazards of hiring your regular outside counsel (which UNC has not done) this NYT article on GM's dialing up an internal investigation in response to a pending criminal investigation is instructive

http://nyti.ms/OrToc7

In its recall crisis, General Motors is doing what many scandal-plagued companies do. It’s trying to manage the problem with an internal investigation.

Newton_14
03-17-2014, 10:41 PM
I'm pleased - very much so - to see ChicagoHeel back on EK. This is a strong, heartfelt post, and much of it can't have been easy to write. I'd fervently hope - as the rest of this angry post will attest - not to be in denial if Duke were embroiled in an analogous scandal.

On denial at UNC, the single most disturbing thing I've read since the scandal started is the response of the UNC faculty who attended the special faculty meeting convened by Chancellor Folt on 1/17/14, at which Provost Dean blasted Willingham's research as "a travesty." To which, according to the Bloomberg BusinessWeek article linked in this thread's OP, "The assembled scholars erupted in applause."

So despicable do I find this, that I try to explain it away. Maybe, I think, the vast majority of the UNC faculty in attendance were somehow self-selected, Heel sports fanatics. Maybe, I think, there just weren't all that many faculty there, and those who aren't in denial knew what Folt and Dean had in mind, and didn't want to sit there and listen to more coverup. Maybe, I think, there were lots of faculty there, and enough "erupted in applause" that the BusinessWeek author or source simply recorded their immediate response, but [still thinking/rationalizing] missed the stunned silence of many others.

At least, thank heaven, the article did record one prof's pointed retort to the despicable applause: PolSci Prof Frank Baumgartner "mused aloud about the university's focusing on Willingham as a form of coverup."

Subsequent to this travesty - i.e., Folt/Dean's performance and the applauding faculty goons - Folt and Dean began to backtrack, admitting years of academic oversight failure and shameful, horrible things. I doubt they want the whole truth to come out. I doubt they want even half of it to come out.

And I wonder whether the applauding "assembled scholars" have backtracked. I wonder whether they've been criticized by not-in-denial colleagues, by lots of such colleagues, not just Jay Smith and Frank Baumgartner. Having admired the scholarly work of several UNC faculty, I wonder, what is the percentage, roughly, of pathetic apologists among UNC's faculty scholars? I wonder, most of all, whether I'd be in denial if it were Duke.

An eruption of applause, indeed.

Great post G. I stand side by side with you in the digust of the faculty that are either in said denial, or worse, care so much about the athletic success, that they are not bothered by players not getting a fair education. I fear though, that there are several in both categories.

MCFinARL
03-18-2014, 08:18 AM
Great post G. I stand side by side with you in the digust of the faculty that are either in said denial, or worse, care so much about the athletic success, that they are not bothered by players not getting a fair education. I fear though, that there are several in both categories.

Yes, and there may be a third category operating here. Many university faculty (everywhere, not just at UNC) are extremely protective of their own prerogatives and can suffer from tunnel vision. It's quite possible some might have opposed Willingham just because she was investigating the quality of the education some students were receiving--which they might perceive as a potential threat to their own academic freedom even if they were not implicated in any way in this case. The administration's willingness to defend faculty "independence" by attacking Willingham might have appealed to some faculty from a political/institutional perspective regardless of what they thought about the actual situation of student athletes or the Af-Am classes, or whether they cared about Carolina basketball.

This is not a defense--just another possible explanation.