UNC Athletics Scandal: Roy/Hat lying to recruits

[PackMan97]

I had sent another inquiry to SACS:


I received this response:

I still predict a Warning sanction because UNC only had two months to comply with or respond to the issues that SACS pointed in the letter (http://oira.unc.edu/files/2014/11/UNC-Chapel-Hill.pdf) they sent UNC after they saw the Wainstein Report. Then its maximum two year monitoring period ran out.

Dan Kane ‏@dankanenando 14m14 minutes ago
The commission that accredits UNC has found it violated seven standards, including academic integrity, failure to monitor sports.
The accreditation board has put UNC on a year's probation, the most serious sanction it has aside from pulling accreditation
SACSCOC President Belle Wheelan said "It's the most serious sanction we have," but gave UNC's current admin credit for addressing scandal.
Other standards UNC didn't meet: Operation of academic support services, the faculty's role in governance & handling of financial aid.

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article23751628.html

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Dan Kane ‏@dankanenando 14m14 minutes ago
The commission that accredits UNC has found it violated seven standards, including academic integrity, failure to monitor sports.
The accreditation board has put UNC on a year's probation, the most serious sanction it has aside from pulling accreditation
SACSCOC President Belle Wheelan said "It's the most serious sanction we have," but gave UNC's current admin credit for addressing scandal.
Other standards UNC didn't meet: Operation of academic support services, the faculty's role in governance & handling of financial aid.

/makes some more popcorn... looks like it's going to be heavy carbs

[GGLC]

A year's probation doesn't sound like a particularly serious sanction, but maybe I'm wrong.

[PackMan97]

A year's probation doesn't sound like a particularly serious sanction, but maybe I'm wrong.

From ProfessorWolf over at PP, I believe probation isn't pleasant as it sounds. SACS comes back in a year and you have to prove everything is fixed or you stay on probation for another year or possibly even have your accreditation revoked. Normal "review" cycle is once every 10 years, so having to answer to SACCS two years ago and this year and then again next year is a lot of work for a lot of academics that likely don't like their integrity being called into question.

If some academic eggheads could chime in their insight would be invaluable. It certainly looks like a slap on the wrist and a stern look to someone used to the real world, but I've been told this isn't someone academic types like.

I will say the part about handling financial aid intrigues me...combined with the Pell Grant fraud that was touched briefly in the last thread there may be a new prong of this story approaching. UNC can only keep all the balls juggling for so long before some start getting dropped.

[Duke95]

Wait, SACS found UNC violated financial aid standards? Now, that's a problem. Financial aid is funded through government grants. If they did something illegal there, that could be the impetus for a qui tam case.

Of course, that's in addition to the humiliation associated with being on probation by SACS for a year for SEVEN violations.

[Tripping William]

The accreditation board has put UNC on a year's probation, the most serious sanction it has aside from pulling accreditation
SACSCOC President Belle Wheelan said "It's the most serious sanction we have," . . . .

One woman's opinion, says Bubba.:rolleyes:

[swood1000]

According to the SACS Sanction Policy (http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/081705/SanctionPolicy.pdf) here is the definition of Probation:

Probation - Failure to correct deficiencies or failure to make satisfactory progress toward compliance with the Principles of Accreditation, whether or not the institution is already on Warning, may result in the institution being placed on Probation. An institution may be placed on Probation for the same reasons as discussed above regarding Warning if the Commission's Board of Trustees deems noncompliance with the Principles to be serious enough to merit invoking Probation whether or not the institution is or has been on Warning. Probation is a more serious sanction than Warning and is usually, but not necessarily, invoked as the last step before an institution is removed from membership. Probation may be imposed upon initial institutional review, depending on the judgment of the Board regarding the seriousness of noncompliance or in the case of repeated violations recognized by the Board over a period of time. An institution must be placed on Probation when it is continued in membership for Good Cause beyond the maximum two-year monitoring period (see section on "Good Cause" below). The maximum consecutive time that an institution may be on Probation is two years.
They could have been put on the lesser sanction of Warning for two years first, but they cannot be placed on Warning after Probation, meaning that UCS now has a maximum of two years (if they received another year of probation after this one) to correct its deficiencies, after which loss of accreditation is the only other option.

[mgtr]

If I recall correctly, 88 faculty members reacted swiftly to the allegations that several athletes had done bad things and brought bad press to Duke. Now, such a group could very well accuse the Athletic Department of bringing down the NCAA to run rampant through the University and then to cause SACS to put the University on probation for seven counts.
I think there are enough opportunities for "under bus throwing" for all!

[roywhite]

They could have been put on the lesser sanction of Warning for two years first, but they cannot be placed on Warning after Probation, meaning that UCS now has a maximum of two years (if they received another year of probation after this one) to correct its deficiencies, after which loss of accreditation is the only other option.


We may need Dean Wormer to remind us of the levels of probation.

[swood1000]

This has other benefits in that many more words rhyme with 'probation' (http://rhymezone.com/r/rhyme.cgi?Word=probation&typeofrhyme=perfect&org1=syl&org2=l&org3=y) than rhyme with 'warning'.

[oldnavy]

I know that in the medical world with the Joint Commission, when you got a type I finding you had to do a ton of work and documentation to clear the finding.

So, it may not sound that bad, but I bet the folks that are responsible for correcting the issues are not very happy right now... I suspect lots and lots of work will be done to correct these issues.

I know that UNC can claim that the athletic costs associated with the scandal are covered without using tax dollars (I don't believe that for a minute), but I expect our tax dollars will be needed to pay for cleaning up this mess....

With the exception of the hospital over there, for which I have tremendous respect, I wish they would shutter the whole town!!

[moonpie23]

soooooooooooo......double secret probation.......

can we go back to the old thread so that i can at least hold out hope that they aren't going to skate?

[Lar77]

According to the SACS Sanction Policy (http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/081705/SanctionPolicy.pdf) here is the definition of Probation:

They could have been put on the lesser sanction of Warning for two years first, but they cannot be placed on Warning after Probation, meaning that UCS now has a maximum of two years (if they received another year of probation after this one) to correct its deficiencies, after which loss of accreditation is the only other option.

I agree with OP that UNC is "too big to fail" but this is serious. Where is the outrage? How many "flagship" state universities have been out on probation?

I see the SACS action as telling the NCAA that "yes there was LOIC" and "no it has not been fixed".

Poor Roy, now he has to deal with this horse----.

[hurleyfor3]

This has other benefits in that many more words rhyme with 'probation' (http://rhymezone.com/r/rhyme.cgi?Word=probation&typeofrhyme=perfect&org1=syl&org2=l&org3=y) than rhyme with 'warning'.

But Green Day never wrote a song about probation.

[BrazyATX]

I think the warning to probation step sounds serious to me. Its not likely that any organization would go from warning to death penalty without some sort of in between. Probation itself doesn't sound like much, but they only get one year. Probation and 5 years would be much more discouraging, but only 1 year to clean up 7 violations sounds like a pretty daunting task to me. SACS and NCAA procedures combined is going to mean some long hours and likely some rolling heads.

[dudog84]

This has other benefits in that many more words rhyme with 'probation' (http://rhymezone.com/r/rhyme.cgi?Word=probation&typeofrhyme=perfect&org1=syl&org2=l&org3=y) than rhyme with 'warning'.

Thank you so much for this. Just a quick glance at the possibilities filled me with joy and laughter. Won't do me much good in Florida, but I could make a mint singing songs on the campuses in Durham and Raleigh.

[Nosbleuatu]

From ProfessorWolf over at PP, I believe probation isn't pleasant as it sounds. SACS comes back in a year and you have to prove everything is fixed or you stay on probation for another year or possibly even have your accreditation revoked. Normal "review" cycle is once every 10 years, so having to answer to SACCS two years ago and this year and then again next year is a lot of work for a lot of academics that likely don't like their integrity being called into question.

If some academic eggheads could chime in their insight would be invaluable. It certainly looks like a slap on the wrist and a stern look to someone used to the real world, but I've been told this isn't someone academic types like.

I will say the part about handling financial aid intrigues me...combined with the Pell Grant fraud that was touched briefly in the last thread there may be a new prong of this story approaching. UNC can only keep all the balls juggling for so long before some start getting dropped.


This is right. Accreditation is a hassle and typically very stressful for all those involved. The "punishment" by SACS isn't being put on probation, it's being told that their response was insufficient and they'll have to go through it all again in the next year. This is really all SACS can do. They won't revoke accreditation. They'll just line up more hoops and make UNC keep jumping through them until they're satisfied.

[oldnavy]

I agree with OP that UNC is "too big to fail" but this is serious. Where is the outrage? How many "flagship" state universities have been out on probation?
I see the SACS action as telling the NCAA that "yes there was LOIC" and "no it has not been fixed".

Poor Roy, now he has to deal with this horse----.

Great question. When has a university, especially one that prided itself on academics gone on record during an NCAA investigation to claim that the academic side of the house was the problem??

I find it odd that the "leadership" (I use that term very loosely) went with this tactic, basically saying that we care more what you think about our sports programs than we do about our PRIMARY mission of education...

Just another in a long list of reasons I share Roy's sentiment when he says "he doesn't give a #$@# about Carolina".

[uh_no]

This is right. Accreditation is a hassle and typically very stressful for all those involved. The "punishment" by SACS isn't being put on probation, it's being told that their response was insufficient and they'll have to go through it all again in the next year. This is really all SACS can do. They won't revoke accreditation. They'll just line up more hoops and make UNC keep jumping through them until they're satisfied.

and that's ultimately what their job is. to ensure that students are getting a valid education....not to serve punitive punishment for past crimes.

[Nosbleuatu]

and that's ultimately what their job is. to ensure that students are getting a valid education....not to serve punitive punishment for past crimes.

If SACS were going to "punish" UNC, it would have to be something like mandating a shorter review period going forward. It might not be the worst idea to check in on UNC every 3-4 years to make sure they're following through. I don't know if the SACS bylaws would allow that though.

[OldPhiKap]

I agree with OP that UNC is "too big to fail" but this is serious. Where is the outrage? How many "flagship" state universities have been out on probation?

I see the SACS action as telling the NCAA that "yes there was LOIC" and "no it has not been fixed".

Poor Roy, now he has to deal with this horse----.


Great question. When has a university, especially one that prided itself on academics gone on record during an NCAA investigation to claim that the academic side of the house was the problem??

I find it odd that the "leadership" (I use that term very loosely) went with this tactic, basically saying that we care more what you think about our sports programs than we do about our PRIMARY mission of education...

Just another in a long list of reasons I share Roy's sentiment when he says "he doesn't give a #$@# about Carolina".


IIRC, Auburn went through something about ten years ago like this. Not recalling any other major university, and (with no disrespect to Auburn) it is not widely considered to be in the same academic realm as UNC used to be.

Any others?

[sammy3469]

Great question. When has a university, especially one that prided itself on academics gone on record during an NCAA investigation to claim that the academic side of the house was the problem??

I find it odd that the "leadership" (I use that term very loosely) went with this tactic, basically saying that we care more what you think about our sports programs than we do about our PRIMARY mission of education...

Just another in a long list of reasons I share Roy's sentiment when he says "he doesn't give a #$@# about Carolina".

It's especially galling since that argument doesn't even hold water with the NCAA anymore. They're throwing their academic integrity out the window for some meaningless short-term PR victories.

[swood1000]

I think the warning to probation step sounds serious to me. Its not likely that any organization would go from warning to death penalty without some sort of in between. Probation itself doesn't sound like much, but they only get one year. Probation and 5 years would be much more discouraging, but only 1 year to clean up 7 violations sounds like a pretty daunting task to me. SACS and NCAA procedures combined is going to mean some long hours and likely some rolling heads.
No, they've been given one year of probation but they're allowed a maximum of two, so they would probably be given another year of probation after this one if needed.

[oldnavy]

It's especially galling since that argument doesn't even hold water with the NCAA anymore. They're throwing their academic integrity out the window for some meaningless short-term PR victories.

I agree with your point, but I would argue that they aren't "winning" any PR victories either. I doubt many folks are on the fence about this issue, either you are in the UNC camp and blinded with arrogance or you see them for what they are.... a bunch of frauds who sold out the university for a fair amount of basketball success and VERY LIMITED Football success...

I still chuckle at the very small gains UNC has made in football, which is where I think this whole thing began. I don't care enough to research it, but how many top tens rankings have they had since this all began? Not many, so they basically jeopardized and ruined the reputation of what was a HIGHLY respected basketball program in an attempt to get the football program to a top tier program, and they FAILED. Priceless.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Coach Larry Fedora has been vocal about the negative recruiting while the NCAA investigation has continued. He went into more detail about that in an interview with an online publication posted Thursday, saying schools are recruiting against him by simply handing out copies of the Wainstein report, which lays bare all the problems North Carolina had in its now discredited Department of African and Afro-American Studies.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!

http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/82589/larry-fedora-sounds-off-on-north-carolina-scandal

[oldnavy]

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!

http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/82589/larry-fedora-sounds-off-on-north-carolina-scandal

GOOD!

Schools should be using this to recruit against UNC.... does he expect sympathy???

Just when you think that they can't be more arrogant...

[dpslaw]

There are only a handful of schools that are currently on probation from SACS. Most, if not all, of the other schools were placed on probation based primarily on financial issues. UNC may well be only school that is now on probation solely for academic issues.

[swood1000]

The irony is that just before the Wainstein Report came out SACS had sent them a letter (http://www.unc.edu/sacs/Jan2015/Document Repository/Overview/07_14_14-BELLE-WHEELAN-SACS.pdf) saying that all their questions had been answered, and that apparently all issues had been resolved. So it was their hiring of Wainstein that caused this probation. I would expect to hear them say that they're being punished as a result of their own attempt to do the right thing, but I don't see that getting much traction.

[roywhite]

I'm no fan of Larry "the Hat" Fedora, but at least he can claim this:


Fedora went on to say his biggest frustration is reminding everybody -- from recruits to parents to the media -- that his staff had nothing to do with the scandal

Even with Ole Roy's talent for self-pity, it would be a real stretch for him to say that.

[Bostondevil]

The irony is that just before the Wainstein Report came out SACS had sent them a letter (http://www.unc.edu/sacs/Jan2015/Document Repository/Overview/07_14_14-BELLE-WHEELAN-SACS.pdf) saying that all their questions had been answered, and that apparently all issues had been resolved. So it was their hiring of Wainstein that caused this probation. I would expect to hear them say that they're being punished as a result of their own attempt to do the right thing, but I don't see that getting much traction.

Nor should it.

Either

1) The SACS should have been ashamed of itself for not doing a thorough enough job.

Or

2) That letter was the result of UNC lying and (temporarily) getting away with it.

Maybe both.

But if UNC had done the right thing when the SACS first came calling, we all might be in a different situation now.

[Tom B.]

The irony is that just before the Wainstein Report came out SACS had sent them a letter (http://www.unc.edu/sacs/Jan2015/Document Repository/Overview/07_14_14-BELLE-WHEELAN-SACS.pdf) saying that all their questions had been answered, and that apparently all issues had been resolved. So it was their hiring of Wainstein that caused this probation. I would expect to hear them say that they're being punished as a result of their own attempt to do the right thing, but I don't see that getting much traction.

There's already a pretty big contingent in the Carolina camp who think Folt and the BOG were wrong to hire Wainstein because the scandal was "contained" at that point, and all Wainstein did was breathe new life into it. Yes, it's a deluded worldview ("Hey, let's blame the people who tried to discover the extent of the fraud, rather than the fraud itself, for our woes"), and yes, it doesn't get much traction outside of TarheelWorld. But don't underestimate how prevalent this thread of, um...."logic" is among the UNC faithful. Just this week, good ol' Art Chansky penned this gem, discussing the NCAA's NOA against Carolina:



Some serious stuff, sure. But if UNC gets severely nailed on any of this, whoever was responsible for commissioning the Wainstein Report, long after the problems were found and fixed, needs to pack up and leave town. How about spending three-and-a-half million dollars of your own money to re-open a case that was closed. To use a sports cliché, there was a lack of savvy from the people in charge thinking Wainstein would end all this. Instead, he threw kerosene on a fire that was just about out.



Here is Art's full column (http://chapelboro.com/featured/arts-angle-hang-on-its-almost-over/), if you dare. Just remember to shower afterwards.

[Reilly]

... They'll just line up more hoops and make UNC keep jumping through them ...

Jumping through hoops? In June?? Why, it must be field day at Glenwood Elementary. What fun -- remember to wear sunscreen and pack a water bottle!

[hudlow]

Carolina response....

http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/updates/message-from-chancellor-carol-l-folt-on-accreditation-decision/

[OldPhiKap]

Carolina response....

http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/updates/message-from-chancellor-carol-l-folt-on-accreditation-decision/

"As the University recognized in its January submission to SACSCOC, all great institutions encounter challenges at one time or another. Recent years prove that Carolina is no exception."

The hubris is dripping off my monitor.

[dudog84]

Carolina response....

http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/updates/message-from-chancellor-carol-l-folt-on-accreditation-decision/

What a bunch of hooey (this is a family site, there may be children reading). What hubris. She mentions twice their "extraordinary" efforts. Also amused by their complete integrity and complete good faith. The only extraordinary efforts I've seen from them is their initial 20-year scam and their attempts to sweep it under the rug.

I'm so glad we have one of their leaders in charge of Trinity now.

[swood1000]

A few of the banners in jeopardy:

5193


"It's a big deal," said Belle Whelan, SACS president. "This issue was bigger than anything with which we've ever dealt, and it went on for longer than anything else. This is the first one I can recall in the 10 years I've been here that we put an institution on probation for academic fraud or academic integrity."

UNC will report back to SACS in Spring 2016, when the board will vote on whether or not the probationary period will continue.

The group said UNC-CH violated seven principles, including integrity, program content, control of intercollegiate athletics, academic support services, academic freedom, faculty role in governance and Title IV program responsibilities.

SACS defines program content as: degree programs that embody a coherent course of study that is compatible with its stated mission and is based upon fields of study appropriate to higher education.

"It's the root of what an academic institution does," Whelan said. "If you can't count on the quality of the program that students enroll and are granted a degree then what can you do? Why do you exist as an institution?" http://www.wral.com/accrediting-organization-puts-unc-ch-on-12-month-probation/14704731/

[BD80]

From ProfessorWolf over at PP, I believe probation isn't pleasant as it sounds. SACS comes back in a year and you have to prove everything is fixed or you stay on probation for another year or possibly even have your accreditation revoked. Normal "review" cycle is once every 10 years, so having to answer to SACCS two years ago and this year and then again next year is a lot of work for a lot of academics that likely don't like their integrity being called into question. ...

I will say the part about handling financial aid intrigues me...combined with the Pell Grant fraud that was touched briefly in the last thread there may be a new prong of this story approaching. UNC can only keep all the balls juggling for so long before some start getting dropped.


The irony is that just before the Wainstein Report came out SACS had sent them a letter (http://www.unc.edu/sacs/Jan2015/Document Repository/Overview/07_14_14-BELLE-WHEELAN-SACS.pdf) saying that all their questions had been answered, and that apparently all issues had been resolved. So it was their hiring of Wainstein that caused this probation. I would expect to hear them say that they're being punished as a result of their own attempt to do the right thing, but I don't see that getting much traction.

As a certain megalomaniac in Germany discovered in WWII, it is quite challenging to fight battles on two discrete fronts, no matter how discreet one may attempt to be.

Particularly in this age, responses to one investigation get used in the other investigation.

The NCAA won't be going away anytime soon, particularly as unc continues to prolong the battle to save the upcoming basketball post season. So the NCAA may be able to peek at what unc is claiming to have "fixed" to escape the SACS probation. There just might be some admissions of NCAA violations.


"As the University recognized in its January submission to SACSCOC, all great institutions encounter challenges at one time or another. Recent years prove that Carolina is no exception."

The hubris is dripping off my monitor.

Sure don't smell like hubris.

[Tripping William]

A few of the banners in jeopardy:

5193

"It's the root of what an academic institution does," Whelan said. "If you can't count on the quality of the program that students enroll and are granted a degree then what can you do? Why do you exist as an institution?"

Why, to hang more title banners in your basketball arena than the school down the road, of course. If post-hoc bakery banners and paper classes are necessary to do so, then so be it.

[oldnavy]

"As the University recognized in its January submission to SACSCOC, all great institutions encounter challenges at one time or another. Recent years prove that Carolina is no exception."

The hubris is dripping off my monitor.

This after decades of telling everyone that they were the exception, the lie that was "the Carolina way" can finally be put to rest now that the Chancellor is on record as saying UNC is just like everyone else.

[Duke95]

This after decades of telling everyone that they were the exception, the lie that was "the Carolina way" can finally be put to rest now that the Chancellor is on record as saying UNC is just like everyone else.

See, I disagree. I think UNC really is exceptional. They engaged in over two decades of fraud. Even SACS said this was "bigger than anything with which we've ever dealt."

I guess UNC was right. They really are something "special."

[BigWayne]

So, what are the consequences of redaction beyond the scope of FERPA requirements? Seems like a violation of FOIA rules, but I am no expert in this realm, and I have no idea how this gets addressed. Pretty pathetic on Carolina's part, IMO, but if they're not going to get penalized for it, they're going to try and keep that golden calf as clean as possible.

UNC released the documents on their own volition, so there are no FOIA requirements to follow. This is why hopefully someone at PP or the N&O will do an FOIA on that specific email.

[swood1000]

This after decades of telling everyone that they were the exception, the lie that was "the Carolina way" can finally be put to rest now that the Chancellor is on record as saying UNC is just like everyone else.The meaning of "The Carolina Way" has merely been clarified and exemplified. The term has not been put to rest.

[Bostondevil]

"It's the root of what an academic institution does," Whelan said. "If you can't count on the quality of the program that students enroll and are granted a degree then what can you do? Why do you exist as an institution?"

Why, to hang more title banners in your basketball arena than the school down the road, of course. If post-hoc bakery banners and paper classes are necessary to do so, then so be it.

Careful - you might convince some Carolina faithful that this is all Duke's fault! If Duke hadn't won the tourney so many times . . .

;)

[PackMan97]

There's already a pretty big contingent in the Carolina camp who think Folt and the BOG were wrong to hire Wainstein because the scandal was "contained" at that point, and all Wainstein did was breathe new life into it. Yes, it's a deluded worldview ("Hey, let's blame the people who tried to discover the extent of the fraud, rather than the fraud itself, for our woes"), and yes, it doesn't get much traction outside of TarheelWorld. But don't underestimate how prevalent this thread of, um...."logic" is among the UNC faithful. Just this week, good ol' Art Chansky penned this gem, discussing the NCAA's NOA against Carolina:

I disagree that it was contained.

July 2011 - The ball gets rolling when McAdoo sues and part of the exhibit is a heavily plagiarized assignment for a "paper class". Marvin Austin's transcript also leaks which shows a high level AFAM course in the summer followed by remdial instruction in the fall semester of his freshman year.
June 2012. Their FB team got busted, they did an internal faculty review saying there were 50 or so bad courses in AFAM from 2007-2011, 9 of which appear to have no professor and no coursework. Nyang’oro retires. Let's put this all behind us. UNC goes into bunker mode to ride out the storm and appears successful.
August 2012. UNC leaves Julius Peppers transcript on a public web server and the crap hits the fan again. His transcript shows a clear use of AFAM courses to regain eligibility with exceptionally high grades compared to his legit coursework. Within days, UNC has to scramble and hires Martin to do a whitewash of the scandal, but his report still expands the scope of to dates earlier than 2007.
Sept - Nov 2012 - While Gov. Martin is busy writing some BS, it comes out that freshmen FB players were enrolled in upper level AFAM courses during summer school before their first semester. The laughibly easy NAVS 302 course also gets exposed. We learn Erik Hightower can indeed plagerize some 5th graders. Willingham comes forward.
Dec 2012 - Martin reports the malfeasance dates back to 1994 (how convenient for that '93 banner) encompass 200 lecture courses that never met, suspicious independent study courses and 500+ highly irregular courses. Martin claims this had nothing to do with academics because purple.
Jan - Feb 2013 - Baker Tiley retracts a key finding of the report, no one believes it. The N&O has some dirt on meeting minutes that Martin got incorrect. UNC starts hiring class checkers to see if classes across the university are really being held.
June-July 2013 - Boxill is discovered to have edited parts of the report to try and provide cover from the NCAA.
Things settle down for a bit
Jan 2014 - Mary Willignham goes on the offensive saying a few of the kids were functionally illiterate and the stories bring the attention of the national media. Michael McAdoo also chimes in.
Feb 2014 - Wainstein hired after the national media deluge.

UNC had to hire Wainstein and we owe it all to Mary Willingham, imo. Reading back through the timeline, it is amazing how little UNC wanted to look into the matter. Even now PHIL, EXSS, DRAM and COMM are all implicated in supporting documents but UNC has done NOTHING to investigate those departments.

/smfh

[PackMan97]

From PackPride....I thought it was worth passing along. Carolina is no longer a public Ivy...check out their new academic peers!



PrimalScream wrote:

UNC should consider itself privileged to be associated with such institutes of Higher Learning. These are all of the Colleges that faced sanctions in December of 2015

Alabama State University, Montgomery, Alabama
The Art Institute of Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia
The Art Institute of Houston, Houston, Texas
Bethel University, McKenzie, Tennessee
Emmanuel Christian Seminary, Johnson City, Tennessee
Erskine College, Due West, South Carolina
Georgetown College, Georgetown, Kentucky
Interdenominational Theological Center, Atlanta, Georgia
Miami International University of Art & Design, Miami, Florida
Mid-Continent University, Mayfield, Kentucky
Norfolk State University, Norfolk, Virginia
South University, Savannah, Georgia

[plimnko]

From PackPride....I thought it was worth passing along. Carolina is no longer a public Ivy...check out their new academic peers!

isn't it unfair to call them "peers"? did any of the schools listed commit academic fraud for EIGHTEEN years? i think carolina is shamefully in a class by themselves.

[Tripping William]

careful - you might convince some carolina faithful that this is all duke's fault! If duke hadn't won the tourney back-to-back times . . .



fify. :)

[Bostondevil]

fify. :)

Thanks!

[swood1000]

From PackPride....I thought it was worth passing along. Carolina is no longer a public Ivy...check out their new academic peers!


PrimalScream wrote:

UNC should consider itself privileged to be associated with such institutes of Higher Learning. These are all of the Colleges that faced sanctions in December of 2015

Alabama State University, Montgomery, Alabama
The Art Institute of Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia
The Art Institute of Houston, Houston, Texas
Bethel University, McKenzie, Tennessee
Emmanuel Christian Seminary, Johnson City, Tennessee
Erskine College, Due West, South Carolina
Georgetown College, Georgetown, Kentucky
Interdenominational Theological Center, Atlanta, Georgia
Miami International University of Art & Design, Miami, Florida
Mid-Continent University, Mayfield, Kentucky
Norfolk State University, Norfolk, Virginia
South University, Savannah, Georgia


These are not academic peers. Each of these institutions was sanctioned for reasons having to do with financial stability. UNC stands by itself in being sanctioned for academic integrity.

"It's a big deal," said Belle Whelan, SACS president. "This issue was bigger than anything with which we've ever dealt, and it went on for longer than anything else. This is the first one I can recall in the 10 years I've been here that we put an institution on probation for academic fraud or academic integrity."

[Tripping William]

These are not academic peers. Each of these institutions was sanctioned for reasons having to do with financial stability. UNC stands by itself in being sanctioned for academic integrity.

But, but, but . . . . *everyone* does it. :rolleyes:

[Tom B.]

I disagree that it was contained.

July 2011 - The ball gets rolling when McAdoo sues and part of the exhibit is a heavily plagiarized assignment for a "paper class". Marvin Austin's transcript also leaks which shows a high level AFAM course in the summer followed by remdial instruction in the fall semester of his freshman year.
June 2012. Their FB team got busted, they did an internal faculty review saying there were 50 or so bad courses in AFAM from 2007-2011, 9 of which appear to have no professor and no coursework. Nyang’oro retires. Let's put this all behind us. UNC goes into bunker mode to ride out the storm and appears successful.
August 2012. UNC leaves Julius Peppers transcript on a public web server and the crap hits the fan again. His transcript shows a clear use of AFAM courses to regain eligibility with exceptionally high grades compared to his legit coursework. Within days, UNC has to scramble and hires Martin to do a whitewash of the scandal, but his report still expands the scope of to dates earlier than 2007.
Sept - Nov 2012 - While Gov. Martin is busy writing some BS, it comes out that freshmen FB players were enrolled in upper level AFAM courses during summer school before their first semester. The laughibly easy NAVS 302 course also gets exposed. We learn Erik Hightower can indeed plagerize some 5th graders. Willingham comes forward.
Dec 2012 - Martin reports the malfeasance dates back to 1994 (how convenient for that '93 banner) encompass 200 lecture courses that never met, suspicious independent study courses and 500+ highly irregular courses. Martin claims this had nothing to do with academics because purple.
Jan - Feb 2013 - Baker Tiley retracts a key finding of the report, no one believes it. The N&O has some dirt on meeting minutes that Martin got incorrect. UNC starts hiring class checkers to see if classes across the university are really being held.
June-July 2013 - Boxill is discovered to have edited parts of the report to try and provide cover from the NCAA.
Things settle down for a bit
Jan 2014 - Mary Willignham goes on the offensive saying a few of the kids were functionally illiterate and the stories bring the attention of the national media. Michael McAdoo also chimes in.
Feb 2014 - Wainstein hired after the national media deluge.

UNC had to hire Wainstein and we owe it all to Mary Willingham, imo. Reading back through the timeline, it is amazing how little UNC wanted to look into the matter. Even now PHIL, EXSS, DRAM and COMM are all implicated in supporting documents but UNC has done NOTHING to investigate those departments.

/smfh


I also disagree that it was contained. I'm just saying that's the prevailing narrative among many UNC faithful. They truly believe that the scandal was a dying fire that would've gone out if Wainstein hadn't thrown gasoline on it, and that he and the people who hired him are the sole reason for all the problems UNC is still experiencing.

[Duvall]

These are not academic peers. Each of these institutions was sanctioned for reasons having to do with financial stability. UNC stands by itself in being sanctioned for academic integrity.

Which makes sneering at UNC for being "diminished" by association with schools in financial straits a bit distasteful.

[devildeac]

These are not academic peers. Each of these institutions was sanctioned for reasons having to do with financial stability. UNC stands by itself in being sanctioned for academic integrity.


5194

[swood1000]

These are not academic peers. Each of these institutions was sanctioned for reasons having to do with financial stability. UNC stands by itself in being sanctioned for academic integrity.

5194
It's part of the updated lexicon. As they relate to UNC we have clarified meanings for:

• The Carolina Way
• Peerless

[swood1000]

From the Chronical of Higher Education (http://http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2014/10/24/unc-chapel-hill-should-lose-accreditation/):

Reducing the number of athletic scholarships at Chapel Hill, or vacating wins, or banning teams from postseason competition, is in each case a punishment wholly unsuitable to the crime. The crime involves fundamental academic integrity. The response, regardless of the visibility or reputation or wealth of the institution, should be to suspend accredited status until there is evidence that an appropriate level of integrity is both culturally and structurally in place.

Anything less would be dismissive of the many institutions whose transcripts actually have meaning.

Though perhaps there would be nothing wrong with also vacating the wins.

[OldPhiKap]

These are not academic peers. Each of these institutions was sanctioned for reasons having to do with financial stability. UNC stands by itself in being sanctioned for academic integrity.

This bears repeating. The other schools have financial issues. UNC has ethical issues.

[devildeac]

Not sure if this has been linked:

http://www.wral.com/accrediting-organization-puts-unc-ch-on-12-month-probation/14704731/


Money quote:

"SACS vice president Cheryl Cardell told UNC-Chapel Hill officials in a November letter that Wainstein's findings didn't jibe with information the university provided to the accrediting organization in 2013, when officials insisted the fraud was limited to the activities of two people in the Department of African and Afro-American Studies.

Willingham said she believes that the trickle of revelations only served to aggravate SACS."


Google translator gives me this: You lying bastards. Don't @#$% with us!

(more or less:o)

[porcophile]

A friend tells me that just before the NCAA NOA was released, UNC announced two new groups charged with preventing future "irregularities." One will "identify any redundancies, gaps and inconsistencies," the other "has been charged with reinforcing ethical high-integrity behavior." (It takes a college degree to write prose like that.)
If this is being orchestrated by UNC's p.r. consultants, the university isn't getting its money's worth.

[hudlow]

A friend tells me that just before the NCAA NOA was released, UNC announced two new groups charged with preventing future "irregularities." One will "identify any redundancies, gaps and inconsistencies," the other "has been charged with reinforcing ethical high-integrity behavior." (It takes a college degree to write prose like that.)
If this is being orchestrated by UNC's p.r. consultants, the university isn't getting its money's worth.


a preemptive strike?

[BD80]

A friend tells me that just before the NCAA NOA was released, UNC announced two new groups charged with preventing future "irregularities." One will "identify any redundancies, gaps and inconsistencies," the other "has been charged with reinforcing ethical high-integrity behavior." (It takes a college degree to write prose like that.)
If this is being orchestrated by UNC's p.r. consultants, the university isn't getting its money's worth.

I don't believe FRE 407. "Subsequent Remedial Measures" applies here. Tell us what you fixed.

[porcophile]

a preemptive strike?

"Strike" is too bold a word for this flabby response.

[JBDuke]

I'm curious about the basis for the SACS finding that the principle of academic freedom was violated. I think I understand the basis for the others. Any clue how academic freedom was damaged by Carolina's actions?

[bedeviled]

I'm curious about the basis for the SACS finding that the principle of academic freedom was violated. I think I understand the basis for the others. Any clue how academic freedom was damaged by Carolina's actions?I suspect the finding is in reference to steering students into specific disciplines. Not only did they encourage athletes to take specific classes/majors, but evidence seems to indicate that they sometimes signed students up for courses without the students' knowledge or choice.

[Nosbleuatu]

I'm curious about the basis for the SACS finding that the principle of academic freedom was violated. I think I understand the basis for the others. Any clue how academic freedom was damaged by Carolina's actions?

I would guess that it has to do with steering players into specific classes and majors.

[JBDuke]

I suspect the finding is in reference to steering students into specific disciplines. Not only did they encourage athletes to take specific classes/majors, but evidence seems to indicate that they sometimes signed students up for courses without the students' knowledge or choice.


I would guess that it has to do with steering players into specific classes and majors.

That makes sense. Thanks for the replies.

[oldnavy]

A friend tells me that just before the NCAA NOA was released, UNC announced two new groups charged with preventing future "irregularities." One will "identify any redundancies, gaps and inconsistencies," the other "has been charged with reinforcing ethical high-integrity behavior." (It takes a college degree to write prose like that.)
If this is being orchestrated by UNC's p.r. consultants, the university isn't getting its money's worth.

Well they HAVE to do SOMETHING the clock has started ticking....

I am sure that the next 12 months are going to be painful for the folks responsible for demonstrating how they have "fixed" the problems.

I don't know about the rest of you, but it has gotten to the point for me that anytime I read a response from UNC, the voice in my head translates it into the teacher noise from Charlie Brown.... "wa, wa, wa, wa, wa".

They are so full of it that I can't even hear them anymore....

[MarkD83]

Well they HAVE to do SOMETHING the clock has started ticking....

I am sure that the next 12 months are going to be painful for the folks responsible for demonstrating how they have "fixed" the problems.

I don't know about the rest of you, but it has gotten to the point for me that anytime I read a response from UNC, the voice in my head translates it into the teacher noise from Charlie Brown.... "wa, wa, wa, wa, wa".

They are so full of it that I can't even hear them anymore....

I actually think about Kevin Bacon in one of the last scenes in Animal House. Right before he gets stampeded at the parade he is shouting "Remain calm. All is well."

[75Crazie]

I still chuckle at the very small gains UNC has made in football, which is where I think this whole thing began. I don't care enough to research it, but how many top tens rankings have they had since this all began? Not many, so they basically jeopardized and ruined the reputation of what was a HIGHLY respected basketball program in an attempt to get the football program to a top tier program, and they FAILED. Priceless.
Small quibble: It didn't begin with football, it was exposed by the football program piling on to a good thing that was set up for basketball. There is significant evidence that the whole AFAM no-show class mess was up and running in the early 90s. I think it is more than coincidence that their nearest neighbor was finishing up a run of four straight MBB final fours, the last two of which were championships, around the same time.

But the point is well made: The whole system was exposed by the football program trying to get in on a good thing and being so inept at doing so. The poor results on the field is the icing on the cake that is Carolina hubris.

[rocketeli]

for those who think this isn't much of a punishment-this is the academic equivalent of a sanction on your medical license or law license from your state medical board or bar. It might not sound harsh to the layperson, but it's devastating for the professional involved.

[Tripping William]

Small quibble: It didn't begin with football, it was exposed by the football program piling on to a good thing that was set up for basketball. There is significant evidence that the whole AFAM no-show class mess was up and running in the early 90s. I think it is more than coincidence that their nearest neighbor was finishing up a run of five straight MBB final fours, the last two of which were championships, around the same time.

But the point is well made: The whole system was exposed by the football program trying to get in on a good thing and being so inept at doing so. The poor results on the field is the icing on the cake that is Carolina hubris.

FIFY. :)

Otherwise agree completely.

[dukebluesincebirth]

Does anyone know if the info contained in the SACS report will be accessible and used as part of the sanctions discussion by the NCAA. If so, does the NCAA even need to hear an argument from unc regarding LOIC? They can simply hold up a copy of the SACS report, and the discussion ends. Sort of like what other coaches are doing with fedora's recruits😊. It's gonna get worse Larry! Get out before the ship goes completely under!

[devildeac]

I dug around last evening and heard this late-breaking response from the ACC office:

5197

In fact, I think I heard more responses the longer the night went on :p :

5198

[dchen09]

Does anyone know the impact on research funding this could possibly have? I imagine scholarships will be minimally impacted since I doubt anyone wants to punish kids but I can easily see NIH and various other organizations decide to fund grant proposals from other schools due to the probation. That will be a huge impact on the University.

[sagegrouse]

There's already a pretty big contingent in the Carolina camp who think Folt and the BOG were wrong to hire Wainstein because the scandal was "contained" at that point, and all Wainstein did was breathe new life into it. Yes, it's a deluded worldview ("Hey, let's blame the people who tried to discover the extent of the fraud, rather than the fraud itself, for our woes"), and yes, it doesn't get much traction outside of TarheelWorld. But don't underestimate how prevalent this thread of, um...."logic" is among the UNC faithful. Just this week, good ol' Art Chansky penned this gem, discussing the NCAA's NOA against Carolina:



Here is Art's full column (http://chapelboro.com/featured/arts-angle-hang-on-its-almost-over/), if you dare. Just remember to shower afterwards.

Thanks, Tom B.

We see a new movement at UNC and a new activity, "self-immolation."

The UNC Board of Governors (and probably the Chancellor Carol Folt) were horribly embarrassed with what had been revealed, particularly the incomplete, inconsistent and incorrect responses that were being given by the Athletic Department and certain administrators to the chancellor, Board itself, and outside regulators. To the Board's credit, the members said, in essence: "Not on my watch. We're going to get to the bottom of this and clean it up." Thus, the Wainstein Report was commissioned.

Now the UNC diehards, best given voice by dopey Art Chansky, are blaming the whole problem on the Board of Governors. In other words, "Never mind that we did wrong, this problem was 'contained' until the Wainstein Report. This predicament is totally the fault of the Board and the Chancellor." If this movement to blame the Wainstein Report gets traction, I wouldn't be surprised if the Board turns over and Carol Folt departs for calmer waters. But it could be really ugly and prolong the agony in Chapel Hill. It will be interesting to see of the faculty voice is heard.

No surprise to Duke fans: the fires of hell are beginning to burn in Chapel Hill.

[mgtr]

for those who think this isn't much of a punishment-this is the academic equivalent of a sanction on your medical license or law license from your state medical board or bar. It might not sound harsh to the layperson, but it's devastating for the professional involved.

This is a key point, and I am shocked that we have not heard en masse from the tenured faculty - it is really their ox which has been gored.

[BD80]

... No surprise to Duke fans: the fires of hell are beginning to burn in Chapel Hill.

It is bad enough when crap hits the fan.

But when it starts to burn?

Now imagine 20+ years of crap, from prodigious crap producers, burning.

And the school I love just 8 miles away, downwind.

Sad, Sad times.

[moonpie23]

for those who think this isn't much of a punishment-this is the academic equivalent of a sanction on your medical license or law license from your state medical board or bar. It might not sound harsh to the layperson, but it's devastating for the professional involved.

right, but everyone, including SACS is missing the POINT!!!! they DON'T CARE ABOUT "probation"!! as long as those banners are left un-touched, they don't care if the school burns to the ground.

Look at how every single reference to the entire scandal is finalized.........."NO BANNERS VACATED".......


they got away with it........that's not a sigh of relief you hear coming from chapel hill, that's laughter.......

[Duke95]

This is a key point, and I am shocked that we have not heard en masse from the tenured faculty - it is really their ox which has been gored.

The report has just been released, and I expect quite a few of the faculty are on vacation.

[moonpie23]

Just this week, good ol' Art Chansky penned this gem, discussing the NCAA's NOA against Carolina:



Here is Art's full column (http://chapelboro.com/featured/arts-angle-hang-on-its-almost-over/), if you dare. Just remember to shower afterwards.

i got a bit sick just reading the first couple of paragraphs there...

[swood1000]

But, but, but . . . . *everyone* does it. :rolleyes:
This is the klutz defense: "We only differ from everybody else in that we are klutzes and get caught."

[Atlanta Duke]

for those who think this isn't much of a punishment-this is the academic equivalent of a sanction on your medical license or law license from your state medical board or bar. It might not sound harsh to the layperson, but it's devastating for the professional involved.

Assuming you care about your reputation I suppose it would be devastating, but since there apparently is no financial impact on federal funding, a point emphasized yesterday by Chancellor Fort, and this is being spun as "an expected consequence" I wonder how devastating it is given the brazen attempts to cover up the conduct.

For honorable professionals this would cause anguish - OTOH if you are a shyster attorney or quack doctor and the sanction does not raise your malpractice insurance premiums while allowing you to continue to practice (since you are too big to fail) maybe you just shrug your shoulders and continue to spout platitudes about mistakes being made while looking forward to a better tomorrow

[sammy3469]

Assuming you care about your reputation I suppose it would be devastating, but since there apparently is no financial impact on federal funding, a point emphasized yesterday by Chancellor Fort, and this is being spun as "an expected consequence" I wonder how devastating it is given the brazen attempts to cover up the conduct.

For honorable professionals this would cause anguish - OTOH if you are a shyster attorney or quack doctor and the sanction does not raise your malpractice insurance premiums while allowing you to continue to practice (since you are too big to fail) maybe you just shrug your shoulders and continue to spout platitudes about mistakes being made while looking forward to a better tomorrow

It would also explain why they continue the long con since the only real financial penalty would be the NCAA fine which could be substantial depending on how much has to be vacated (ie 5K per game vacated, bball tourney money, etc, overall LOIC fine).

The cynic in me wouldn't be surprised if there were some high level discussions at some point on the best path to take to minimize those fines, all else be damned since everything else can be minimized with the proper PR/ESPN campaign.

[El_Diablo]

This is a key point, and I am shocked that we have not heard en masse from the tenured faculty - it is really their ox which has been gored.

Except for the ones who publicly insist that people should just "move on" from the scandal and then get hired by Duke to serve as deans. :(

[Faison1]

Here is Art's full column (http://chapelboro.com/featured/arts-angle-hang-on-its-almost-over/), if you dare. Just remember to shower afterwards.

An article like that truly makes me question my own perspective?

It makes me think, "Am I off on this?"

Or, "Is Art absolutely crazy?"

The other thing it does is prep me for future conversations with UNC fans. It's the blueprint for defense and acceptance of the situation. So much so, that I don't see myself discussing it with any Chapel Hill friends (not even good friends).

[hurleyfor3]

for those who think this isn't much of a punishment-this is the academic equivalent of a sanction on your medical license or law license from your state medical board or bar. It might not sound harsh to the layperson, but it's devastating for the professional involved.

Or an SEC/Finra action. Those things stay with you for life.

[Tripping William]

All these puns give me a nervous tick. I'm about to flea from this thread.

[cspan37421]

right, but everyone, including SACS is missing the POINT!!!! they DON'T CARE ABOUT "probation"!! as long as those banners are left un-touched, they don't care if the school burns to the ground.

Look at how every single reference to the entire scandal is finalized.........."NO BANNERS VACATED".......


they got away with it........that's not a sigh of relief you hear coming from chapel hill, that's laughter.......

Shows you what is most important to them. If Duke was found to have cheated to win championships, I'd WANT those banners removed. I don't care who has the most, if principles of fair play are going to be ignored in the tally.

[swood1000]

I'm curious about the basis for the SACS finding that the principle of academic freedom was violated. I think I understand the basis for the others. Any clue how academic freedom was damaged by Carolina's actions?
One of the SACS elements of accreditation is academic freedom, which refers to academic freedom of faculty.

3.7.4 The institution ensures adequate procedures for safeguarding and protecting academic freedom. (Academic freedom)


Academic freedom is described as follows:


The essential role of institutions of higher education is the pursuit and dissemination of knowledge. Academic freedom respects the dignity and rights of others while fostering intellectual freedom of faculty to teach, research, and publish. Responsible academic freedom enriches the contributions of higher education to society. http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/Resource%20Manual.pdf

In their November 13, 2014 letter (right after Wainstein hit the fan), SACS made this request:


The institution is requested to define and provide current policies and practices related to academic freedom. Demonstrate how the application of the policy plays a role with regard to responsibility for academic integrity. Identify the elements in the institution's definition of academic freedom that excuses faculty from accountability for academic integrity and creates barriers for faculty and staff reporting academic irregularities.


So there's always a trade-off between academic freedom of faculty and rules designed to keep faculty from doing the kinds of things that Nyang’oro did (which UNC blamed on academic freedom). Looks like from the wording of this request SACS had doubts as to whether the procedures that UNC had put in place to govern academic freedom were compatible with the requirements of academic integrity, though they may also have wanted to make sure that UNC did not go too far in the other direction, at the expense of academic freedom.

The UNC response to this is here (https://oira.unc.edu/files/2015/01/UNC-Chapel-Hill-Report-to-SACSCOC-Redacted-for-Public-Release.pdf) starting on page 132.

[Gewebe14]

One of the SACS elements of accreditation is academic freedom, which refers to academic freedom of faculty.


Academic freedom is described as follows:

In their November 13, 2014 letter (right after Wainstein hit the fan), SACS made this request:



So there's always a trade-off between academic freedom of faculty and rules designed to keep faculty from doing the kinds of things that Nyang’oro did (which UNC blamed on academic freedom). Looks like from the wording of this request SACS had doubts as to whether the procedures that UNC had put in place to govern academic freedom were compatible with the requirements of academic integrity, though they may also have wanted to make sure that UNC did not go too far in the other direction, at the expense of academic freedom.

The UNC response to this is here (https://oira.unc.edu/files/2015/01/UNC-Chapel-Hill-Report-to-SACSCOC-Redacted-for-Public-Release.pdf) starting on page 132.

This is borderline off topic, but does anyone know if there is are any single good place to look at a whole timeline and explanation of events around the unc scam? Every time I try to think back to 2010 when it started blowing up I can never remember all the great, amazing little side-bars like Mcadoo's paper, Greg Little, Hansbro's mom, Pepper's transcript getting accidentally released and showing evidence of cheating, etc. and I want to refresh. Mostly just to make sure that I'm on top of my facts when "people" argue all that happened is "unc has some easy classes that some athletes happened to take."

Thanks!

[BigWayne]

NY Post calls out UNC and Roy. (http://nypost.com/2015/06/11/fifa-scandal-has-nothing-on-sham-that-is-big-time-college-hoops/)

So, we’re expected to believe that at no time since 2003 was Williams moved to inquire about the academic eligibility — and the means to that end — of his players. It wasn’t, after all, that they had to miss classes for practice. There were no classes!

[PackMan97]

This is borderline off topic, but does anyone know if there is are any single good place to look at a whole timeline and explanation of events around the unc scam? Every time I try to think back to 2010 when it started blowing up I can never remember all the great, amazing little side-bars like Mcadoo's paper, Greg Little, Hansbro's mom, Pepper's transcript getting accidentally released and showing evidence of cheating, etc. and I want to refresh. Mostly just to make sure that I'm on top of my facts when "people" argue all that happened is "unc has some easy classes that some athletes happened to take."

Thanks!

N&O probably has the best timeline though it is only updated through Oct 2014.

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article15573848.html

[alteran]

This is borderline off topic, but does anyone know if there is are any single good place to look at a whole timeline and explanation of events around the unc scam? Every time I try to think back to 2010 when it started blowing up I can never remember all the great, amazing little side-bars like Mcadoo's paper, Greg Little, Hansbro's mom, Pepper's transcript getting accidentally released and showing evidence of cheating, etc. and I want to refresh. Mostly just to make sure that I'm on top of my facts when "people" argue all that happened is "unc has some easy classes that some athletes happened to take."

Thanks!

The Daily Tarheel's timeline is pretty complete, but it only covers events directly related to the AFAM schedule.

http://www.dailytarheel.com/section/academic-scandal

[Duke95]

Except for the ones who publicly insist that people should just "move on" from the scandal and then get hired by Duke to serve as deans. :(

Honestly, the more I think about it, the more I'm inclined to give Duke the benefit of the doubt here. I'm willing to entertain the hypothesis that this individual had to toe the party line at UNC and perhaps was disinclined to continue to acquiesce to their proposition, to borrow a phrase from Captain Barbosa. I would expect that Duke did their homework here.

[swood1000]

This is borderline off topic, but does anyone know if there is are any single good place to look at a whole timeline and explanation of events around the unc scam? Every time I try to think back to 2010 when it started blowing up I can never remember all the great, amazing little side-bars like Mcadoo's paper, Greg Little, Hansbro's mom, Pepper's transcript getting accidentally released and showing evidence of cheating, etc. and I want to refresh. Mostly just to make sure that I'm on top of my facts when "people" argue all that happened is "unc has some easy classes that some athletes happened to take."

Thanks!
Some of the documents are referenced in this thread (http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?35842-UNC-Athletics-Scandal-SACS-to-announce-June-11&p=809311#post809311).

[porcophile]

Now the UNC diehards, best given voice by dopey Art Chansky, are blaming the whole problem on the Board of Governors. In other words, "Never mind that we did wrong, this problem was 'contained' until the Wainstein Report. This predicament is totally the fault of the Board and the Chancellor."

These are probably the same morons who wanted to fire Roy Williams recently, not because he was fielding players who should have been ineligible, but because Carolina didn't make the Final Four.

[bedeviled]

One of the SACS elements of accreditation is academic freedom, which refers to academic freedom of facultyAh, ok, that makes sense. Thanks for digging into that. Thanks for locating sources. And, to a much lesser degree, thanks for correcting my suspicion;)

[MarkD83]

These are probably the same morons who wanted to fire Roy Williams recently, not because he was fielding players who should have been ineligible, but because Carolina didn't make the Final Four.

You can't field a team that wins and you cheated to do that....Let's do the logical thing and give you a contract extension? Maybe they need a logic class at UNC. Wait logic is usually taught as part of Philosophy and Ethics, now I know the problem.

[dudog84]

Honestly, the more I think about it, the more I'm inclined to give Duke the benefit of the doubt here. I'm willing to entertain the hypothesis that this individual had to toe the party line at UNC and perhaps was disinclined to continue to acquiesce to their proposition, to borrow a phrase from Captain Barbosa. I would expect that Duke did their homework here.

Have to disagree. Somewhat vehemently. I want someone with integrity to lead Trinity. Who will not "toe the line" on something as egregious as what has happened at UNC for close to 20 years. She did not have to sign that letter. From what I saw, very few faculty did.

Real integrity means fighting injustice and crime, whether it's your boss or not. Yeah she can walk away, but she can go somewhere else. Not my University.

I'm sure many very capable people applied for that position. We certainly did not have to hire someone who so recently exhibited either bad judgment or cowardice.

[Duke95]

Have to disagree. Somewhat vehemently. I want someone with integrity to lead Trinity. Who will not "toe the line" on something as egregious as what has happened at UNC for close to 20 years. She did not have to sign that letter. From what I saw, very few faculty did.

Real integrity means fighting injustice and crime, whether it's your boss or not. Yeah she can walk away, but she can go somewhere else. Not my University.

I'm sure many very capable people applied for that position. We certainly did not have to hire someone who so recently exhibited either bad judgment or cowardice.

Disagree with what? I'm just stating that I'm willing to entertain the hypothesis, not that I've made up my mind.

Look, if she lacks integrity and moral fortitude, then I'm sure Duke has realized that. Given that knowledge, if Duke still hired her, I'd say we also have a problem. It's not as though Duke didn't know she signed that letter. That's why I still have not made up my mind regarding this hire.

[uh_no]

Disagree with what? I'm just stating that I'm willing to entertain the hypothesis, not that I've made up my mind.

Look, if she lacks integrity and moral fortitude, then I'm sure Duke has realized that. Given that knowledge, if Duke still hired her, I'd say we also have a problem. It's not as though Duke didn't know she signed that letter. That's why I still have not made up my mind regarding this hire.

Given the Potti Scandal, the lacrosse scandal, and the Kunshan debacle, I'd say this is status quo for this administration.

[Duke95]

Given the Potti Scandal, the lacrosse scandal, and the Kunshan debacle, I'd say this is status quo for this administration.

That thought does worry me too. I'd just as soon see Duke steer clear of anyone even remotely close to the UNC disgrace.

[crdaul]

Given the Potti Scandal, the lacrosse scandal, and the Kunshan debacle, I'd say this is status quo for this administration.

She fits in perfectly with the gang of 88....still waiting for their apology....not holding my breath, though

[devildeac]

soooooooooooo......double secret probation.......

can we go back to the old thread so that i can at least hold out hope that they aren't going to skate?

I like ya a lot, moonie, but I think this is a lot bigger deal than your picture would indicate. A warning would have been the wrist slap and SACS really couldn't suspend them, considering all the federal/state/private $$$$, degrees, accreditations, faculty, students, etc that would have been hugely affected by that. So, probation was their only other option. I guess the cheating bastards could thumb their noses/lift their middle digits at SACS and feign reforms but I think the stakes are just too large now as they've been publicly/nationally exposed and are the only school in the last 10 years (or more? or ever?) to receive this citation and The Chronicle of Higher Education is none too pleased with unc's actions (or even the SACS decision) as swood1000 linked. One of my brothers-in-law, who has been in higher/university education for the last 15 years, believes this is an enormous threat to them now and they have to prove they've changed their evil ways (Santana reference intended). He also thinks this gives the NCAA even more evidence to mete out harsh punishment. I hope the doubters are wrong on this as I just can't imagine the COI is gentle on them with a 59 page NOA, 732 pages of supporting evidence and the 120+ page Wainstein report as their ammunition. And I'd be happy to discuss more, either here or at Shane's Rib Shack over a plate of 'cue/ribs and some un/sweet tea. I've even got BOGO coupons, I think;).

[MarkD83]

I like ya a lot, moonie, but I think this is a lot bigger deal than your picture would indicate. A warning would have been the wrist slap and SACS really couldn't suspend them, considering all the federal/state/private $$$$, degrees, accreditations, faculty, students, etc that would have been hugely affected by that. So, probation was their only other option. I guess the cheating bastards could thumb their noses/lift their middle digits at SACS and feign reforms but I think the stakes are just too large now as they've been publicly/nationally exposed and are the only school in the last 10 years (or more? or ever?) to receive this citation and The Chronicle of Higher Education is none too pleased with unc's actions (or even the SACS decision) as swood1000 linked. One of my brothers-in-law, who has been in higher/university education for the last 15 years, believes this is an enormous threat to them now and they have to prove they've changed their evil ways (Santana reference intended). He also thinks this gives the NCAA even more evidence to mete out harsh punishment. I hope the doubters are wrong on this as I just can't imagine the COI is gentle on them with a 59 page NOA, 732 pages of supporting evidence and the 120+ page Wainstein report as their ammunition. And I'd be happy to discuss more, either here or at Shane's Rib Shack over a plate of 'cue/ribs and some un/sweet tea. I've even got BOGO coupons, I think;).

I agree with the bigger deal. SACS and the NCAA have been playing this slow so that everything is "air tight". They both realize that every time UNC responds in a "we are great" attitude, UNC just reveals additional improprieties. Athletic vs academic... Time for our current reforms to work... I think what the PR folks at UNC fail to realize is that in the current internet culture every document is available for everyone to read. Interpreting the W report for everyone or the NCAA NOI or the SACS decision (once it becomes public) are futile. The COI can read all of these documents and form their own opinions. More importantly, if the COI or SACS are concerned about public opinion they can refer doubters right to the documents via a web address. There is no interpretation needed.

[moonpie23]

what i don't like is how intricate it's become.....they cheated, plain and simple for at LEAST 18 years and knowingly had athletes in fake classes......now it's all about the fine print...

i guess i'm frustrated with how many, "so the banners are prolly safe" stuff i've read here, and elsewhere....


for me, it's ALL the wins vacated for any of the athletes that attended bogus classes.......ALL of them....


and roy gets a new deal? how much harder could they thumb their noses at EVERYONE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBKXu3Kg4yg)?????




....wait.......shanes?

[Bob Green]

.....they cheated, plain and simple for at LEAST 18 years and knowingly had athletes in fake classes......

http://awesomegifs.com/wp-content/uploads/dead-horse.gif

[75Crazie]

This particular horse is far from dead.

[Jarhead]

http://awesomegifs.com/wp-content/uploads/dead-horse.gif

I agree, Bob

[devildeac]

Dan Kane does some more digging:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article24027001.html

From the front page:

"The 59-page NCAA notice came with 730 pages of exhibits. They have been significantly redacted by UNC to protect the names of athletes, but a deeper review of the documents reveals new information that Wainstein hadn’t produced or made public. That three-inch-high stack of paper contains clues on what the NCAA finds important, and where it could focus for potential penalties, likely early next year."

He does more 'splaining in the rest of the article. Another good read.

[miramar]

She fits in perfectly with the gang of 88....still waiting for their apology....not holding my breath, though

Recently I spoke to a member of the gang of 88 at an academic conference and her attitude was that the lacrosse team was a disaster waiting for a place to happen anyway. I let it drop, but at least one of the gang does not learn from her mistakes. And I suspect she is not alone.

[SilkyJ]

Dan Kane does some more digging:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article24027001.html

From the front page:

"The 59-page NCAA notice came with 730 pages of exhibits. They have been significantly redacted by UNC to protect the names of athletes, but a deeper review of the documents reveals new information that Wainstein hadn’t produced or made public. That three-inch-high stack of paper contains clues on what the NCAA finds important, and where it could focus for potential penalties, likely early next year."

He does more 'splaining in the rest of the article. Another good read.

Thanks for re-posting. The link on the DBR frontpage was behind a paywall for me, but this one worked!

As someone who believes the NCAA has no spine and will largely let UNC skate, these two quotes stood out to me:


Determining who knew what and how that information was handled speaks to one of the major allegations in the NCAA’s notice, called a “lack of institutional control.” The notice sets the start of impermissible benefits received by athletes at the fall 2002-03 semester, which is shortly after Blanchard first looked at the classes.

So that gives a pass to the first 9 years of the 18 year period we know they cheated.


The names of the athletes and their sport are redacted. But the data suggests 150 athletes took more than 12 credit hours of bogus courses, and 33 of those athletes would have run afoul of the other requirements for full-time students without the bogus courses.

The NCAA notice, however, speaks only to 10 athletes who exceeded the independent study limit. What’s key there, and may prove to be a break for UNC, is that the NCAA appears to be only counting students who exceeded the limit while at the university from 2006-07 and after.

That knocks another 4 years, so now we're down to 5 years. I'm also not exactly sure how to reconcile the two comments--does the NCAA see the impermissible benefits starting in 2002 or 2006?

(I've been skimming the thread so sorry if this has been discussed, its hard to keep up with all the posts on this topic.)

[swood1000]

Dan Kane does some more digging:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article24027001.html

From the front page:

"The 59-page NCAA notice came with 730 pages of exhibits. They have been significantly redacted by UNC to protect the names of athletes, but a deeper review of the documents reveals new information that Wainstein hadn’t produced or made public. That three-inch-high stack of paper contains clues on what the NCAA finds important, and where it could focus for potential penalties, likely early next year."

He does more 'splaining in the rest of the article. Another good read.
From this article:

"I have a difficult time with the idea of questioning majors or 'paper courses' (beyond the institution)," Mercer wrote. "Does Carolina have them - yes. Does Carolina offer on-line courses and independent study courses - yes. Do I or anyone in the Department of Athletics have any say in how departments structure their courses - NO!"

Ask any person who has taken a week of Econ 101 as to whether consumers have a say in what products producers make available, and at what price.

[swood1000]

There has been some discussion of the meaning of the provision in 16.01.1.1 that says that for extra benefits "in which there is no monetary value to the benefit…such violations shall not affect the student-athlete's eligibility."

I had thought that this applied to academic extra benefits, since they have no monetary value (except perhaps that writing a paper for someone saves him the cost of paying someone to write the paper). Then it was pointed out to me that in the Syracuse case there was improper academic support that Syracuse declined to treat as academic misconduct and which the COI found to be extra benefits resulting in ineligibility.

I finally found the official NCAA interpretation that supports this. This interpretation, available here (http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/January%202015%20Legislative%20Council%20Teleconfe rence%20Agenda%20and%20Supplements_R....pdf) at page 10, says that academic extra benefits "in which a student-athlete receives an impermissible academic arrangement or assistance from an institutional staff member or representative of an institution's athletics interests" result in ineligibility requiring reinstatement. (Syracuse had tried to avoid ineligibility by having the student-athlete make a charitable contribution, treating it as a $100 or less case for which a restitution could be made under 16.01.1.1. The interpretation said no.) So much for the notion that academic extra benefits have no monetary value (or monetary value of $100 or less).

[dudog84]

Big headline (and story) on the ESPN men's basketball page:

"OTL: UF, FSU athletes often avoid prosecution"

Word from on high in Bristol..."Direct all attention away from the University of North Carolina!!!"

(other than having a lackey like John Saunders tell us what a great man Roy Williams is)

[SilkyJ]

An interesting point -- the thread covering the NCAA's notice of allegations and UNC's march to the gallows has been closed. Now we have a thread dedicated to the SACS notification of probation, but I've noticed that it is turning back to a discussion of the NCAA/UNC conflict. It's tiresome, don't you think. Why don't we turn this over to a discussion of Roy's future at UNC? That would be lot more entertaining.

My understanding was that the updated thread/title was to indicate the status of the subject. Similar to when "John Smith's recruiting thread" turns into "John Smith welcome to Duke"...

Either way, I doubt Roy makes it much longer :)

[duke79]

Have to disagree. Somewhat vehemently. I want someone with integrity to lead Trinity. Who will not "toe the line" on something as egregious as what has happened at UNC for close to 20 years. She did not have to sign that letter. From what I saw, very few faculty did.

Real integrity means fighting injustice and crime, whether it's your boss or not. Yeah she can walk away, but she can go somewhere else. Not my University.

I'm sure many very capable people applied for that position. We certainly did not have to hire someone who so recently exhibited either bad judgment or cowardice.

Agree with you here. I don't know anything about her beyond what was in the Duke press release, but...I'm sure Duke could have had the choice of almost any academic in the US, including many capable people on the Duke faculty. I view this as a somewhat disappointing selection, and not only because of her signature on that letter.

[BigWayne]

Meanwhile over in Chapel Hill....there might be someone talking a bit more than they would like soon.

UNC Wrestling coach fired. (http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/22908/)

[sagegrouse]

Meanwhile over in Chapel Hill....there might be someone talking a bit more than they would like soon.

UNC Wrestling coach fired. (http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/22908/)

I would feel more optimistic about the truth coming out if it weren't being brought to light by a right-wing site with an axe to grind on sexual assault cases.

[BigWayne]

I would feel more optimistic about the truth coming out if it weren't being brought to light by a right-wing site with an axe to grind on sexual assault cases.

The base news is also on the N&O website. This one went into more detail about the conflict between the coach and the university, which is why I posted this one. As it relates to the scandal, the conflict on the sexual assault views is only material in that it establishes the coach and the university having an adversarial relationship, which presumably could lead him to expose scandal related information.

[oldnavy]

Meanwhile over in Chapel Hill....there might be someone talking a bit more than they would like soon.

UNC Wrestling coach fired. (http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/22908/)

Could we be so lucky?

[BD80]

I would feel more optimistic about the truth coming out if it weren't being brought to light by a right-wing site with an axe to grind on sexual assault cases.

Cases involving ALLEGATIONS of sexual assault. His point is that the mere allegation leads to an individual being suspended from school for a year with no recourse.

[sagegrouse]

Cases involving ALLEGATIONS of sexual assault. His point is that the mere allegation leads to an individual being suspended from school for a year with no recourse.

"Sexual assault cases" vs. "Cases involving allegations of sexual assault." I get your point, but I don't agree that we have to fluff up the English language with extra words when the meaning is clear.

Consider: we have a person charged with murder, who could be convicted of murder, manslaughter, negligent homicide or nothing. Are we supposed to refer to the case as an "alleged murder case?"

[dudog84]

Might have more hope of a player talking about what they were promised on the recruiting trail.

Word is that Alisha Gray is leaving UNC. She is the third member (of 4) of Sylvia Hatchell's #1 ranked 2013 recruiting class to leave.

Although thinking about it, I'm not sure that would mean anything. I'll let the post stand just because it's interesting that quite a few are abandoning ship.

[devilsadvocate85]

"Sexual assault cases" vs. "Cases involving allegations of sexual assault." I get your point, but I don't agree that we have to fluff up the English language with extra words when the meaning is clear.

Consider: we have a person charged with murder, who could be convicted of murder, manslaughter, negligent homicide or nothing. Are we supposed to refer to the case as an "alleged murder case?"


I happen to have some personal knowledge of this situation. A key difference in "allegations of sexual assault" versus a "homicide" is that typically in a homicide allegation, there is a deceased person or a person we have reason to believe is deceased. Sexual assault can be alleged and very harmful to the accused, with no evidence (other than the accuser's word) whatsoever. The point being made is that there is no recourse for a falsely accused individual than to file extremely expensive lawsuits and in the case of a suspended / dismissed athlete, if the accusation is false, they cannot get their eligibility back. That's a very big price to pay if in fact no wrong doing occurred.

[oldnavy]

Cases involving ALLEGATIONS of sexual assault. His point is that the mere allegation leads to an individual being suspended from school for a year with no recourse.

Which I would hope wouldn't be limited to a "right wing" issue. I would hope everyone would be for due process.

I would think that this fan base in particular would be well aware of the damages to lives that can be done based on "allegations" of sexual assault.

[oldnavy]

I happen to have some personal knowledge of this situation. A key difference in "allegations of sexual assault" versus a "homicide" is that typically in a homicide allegation, there is a deceased person or a person we have reason to believe is deceased. Sexual assault can be alleged and very harmful to the accused, with no evidence (other than the accuser's word) whatsoever. The point being made is that there is no recourse for a falsely accused individual than to file extremely expensive lawsuits and in the case of a suspended / dismissed athlete, if the accusation is false, they cannot get their eligibility back. That's a very big price to pay if in fact no wrong doing occurred.

Plus, when was the last time you saw someone prosecuted for falsely accusing someone of sexual assault?

[BD80]

"Sexual assault cases" vs. "Cases involving allegations of sexual assault." I get your point, but I don't agree that we have to fluff up the English language with extra words when the meaning is clear.

Consider: we have a person charged with murder, who could be convicted of murder, manslaughter, negligent homicide or nothing. Are we supposed to refer to the case as an "alleged murder case?"


This is exactly the point. A "charge" of murder or any other criminal assault requires some objective standard of proof. A mere allegation will not alone suffice without investigation into the circumstances, ie no alibi or witnesses corroborating at least portions of the accuser's story. In allegations of sexual "assault" on campuses, the bare allegation is alone sufficient to cause the suspension of the accused, there need be no investigative process. That is the very nature of the coach's issue.

I guess the comparison would be if Crystal Ray had alleged the entire lacrosse team had had non-consensual sex with her, should the entire team have been immediately suspended for the year?

[sagegrouse]

This is exactly the point. A "charge" of murder or any other criminal assault requires some objective standard of proof. A mere allegation will not alone suffice without investigation into the circumstances, ie no alibi or witnesses corroborating at least portions of the accuser's story. In allegations of sexual "assault" on campuses, the bare allegation is alone sufficient to cause the suspension of the accused, there need be no investigative process. That is the very nature of the coach's issue.

I guess the comparison would be if Crystal Ray had alleged the entire lacrosse team had had non-consensual sex with her, should the entire team have been immediately suspended for the year?


I think we are talking past each other, which is what the Internet is for.

[oldnavy]

This is exactly the point. A "charge" of murder or any other criminal assault requires some objective standard of proof. A mere allegation will not alone suffice without investigation into the circumstances, ie no alibi or witnesses corroborating at least portions of the accuser's story. In allegations of sexual "assault" on campuses, the bare allegation is alone sufficient to cause the suspension of the accused, there need be no investigative process. That is the very nature of the coach's issue.

I guess the comparison would be if Crystal Ray had alleged the entire lacrosse team had had non-consensual sex with her, should the entire team have been immediately suspended for the year?

I thought that they were! Wasn't the season cancelled?

[Kfanarmy]

I've found it fascinating, to a degree, that many want to blame principally three people, in the Acadmic side of UNC for their scandal. Any involvement by the Athletic Department was the conduct of unwise tutors and advisors.

With so many names and such a long term effort, I found it necessary to lay out the careers of the “players” in this scandal so that I could more accurately understand how / what the catalyst was / for the UNC athletic scandal. So I charted out seperately the major Faculty personnel and the Athletic Department personnel against the chart of all Independent Studies and "Paper Classes" (1998-2011), (mindingthecoach.blogspot.com). I’m not presenting anything new here, rather just displaying why I’ve come to the conclusion that the AD Department was driving this train wreck, and it is unlikely that folks in the academic staff up and decided in the middle of their career one day to start passing out grades like candy.

It Appears there is little Correlation between professional timelines (hiring and promotion) of main players of the Academic staff and the bogus classes. Jan Boxill, Deb Crowder and Julius Nyang’oro’s career paths were all well on their way, more than a decade, when these courses began to grow exponentially. I flatly do not buy some of the Wainstain’s wording on Debbie Crowder: “From the beginning of her AFAM tenure, Crowder thought about ways to help challenged students with watered-down academic requirements. Though tempted to bend the rules for the first 13 years of her AFAM service, that impulse was kept in check by strong leadership that was focused on the rigor of the curriculum. That changed, however, when Dr. Julius Nyang’oro became chair of the curriculum in 1992. Nyang’oro brought a hands-off approach to management, and was willing to delegate substantial authority to Crowder.” Debbie Crowder was so bent on helping students that she waited five years after Nyang’oro took over the department to really ramp up the bogus classes? Not likely.

 On the other hand, It Appears there is significant correlation between professional timelines (hiring and promotion) of the main players of the Athletic Department staff , initially as the hiring of AD Dick Baddour, MBB Coach Bill Guthridge and MFB Coach Carl Torbush. A second large spike in the number of these classes appears significantly related to the promotion of John Blanchard to Associate Athletic Director and promotion of Robert Mercer to Director of the ASPSA. While I know this could simply be coincidental, my gut tells me that this scandal developed in the leaership of the Athletic Department of UNC…operating at very discrete level while John Swofford was AD. It was likely administered by John Blanchard out of the ASPSA; a program that he began with the assistance of AD Swofford (I suspect Swofford would have known this activity began in the infancy of the ASPSA.) In the end, this does truly appear to be a scandal orchestrated by the athletic department with the full knowledge of the head coaches, using the tutors and advisors to take the fall when the time came. I reread pages 86-88 of the Wainstain report. As I look at these charts, I read Waintstain’s words in a whole new light: he cannot prove, but seems to imply, that the Athletic department intentionally misled and likely coordinated their statements and ultimately this whole scandal.

[BigWayne]

I thought that they were! Wasn't the season cancelled?

Getting back to UNC, my point is that we can expect the wrestling coach might feel like Pressler and the players felt.
If he does, and he has dirt on Bubba, et. al., he might be inclined to let it out.

[madscavenger]

I have no real intention of hijacking the thread, but what's all this "right-wing" BS? You can debate issues intelligently without dragging personal politics into any serious topic. I hope.

[swood1000]

Is there a club here for people who have been banned on IC? I went to their "NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS RELEASED" thread and made what I thought were a series of cogent arguments in favor of the proposition that the penalty for academic extra benefits can be ineligibility, as shown by both the Syracuse decision and an official interpretation I cited. I was really trying to find out if there were any flaws in my theory, and what better place to find them out? I very carefully avoided anything that was inflammatory (or should I say unnecessarily inflammatory since I suppose that my very presence there was inflammatory, although in response to a question as to what I am going to do if they come through this unscathed I did say that I would scratch my head and marvel at the supernatural abilities of the UNC legal team. Maybe that's what did it.) They assumed that I had come from PackPride. Today I logged on to find that I have been banned.

What are the criteria for banning people here? Is it done in response to reasoned and calm, non-harassing and respectful logical arguments? Is it in bad taste to go to one's opponent's website and argue against the received opinion there, out of a curiosity to see how they would respond to an argument that does not pre-suppose all the truths that they find self-evident?

[SilkyJ]

This is exactly the point. A "charge" of murder or any other criminal assault requires some objective standard of proof. A mere allegation will not alone suffice without investigation into the circumstances, ie no alibi or witnesses corroborating at least portions of the accuser's story. In allegations of sexual "assault" on campuses, the bare allegation is alone sufficient to cause the suspension of the accused, there need be no investigative process. That is the very nature of the coach's issue.

I guess the comparison would be if Crystal Ray had alleged the entire lacrosse team had had non-consensual sex with her, should the entire team have been immediately suspended for the year?


I think we are talking past each other, which is what the Internet is for.

The things we argue about

#offseason

[SilkyJ]

Is there a club here for people who have been banned on IC? I went to their "NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS RELEASED" thread and made what I thought were a series of cogent arguments in favor of the proposition that the penalty for academic extra benefits can be ineligibility, as shown by both the Syracuse decision and an official interpretation I cited. I was really trying to find out if there were any flaws in my theory, and what better place to find them out? I very carefully avoided anything that was inflammatory (or should I say unnecessarily inflammatory since I suppose that my very presence there was inflammatory, although in response to a question as to what I am going to do if they come through this unscathed I did say that I would scratch my head and marvel at the supernatural abilities of the UNC legal team. Maybe that's what did it.) They assumed that I had come from PackPride. Today I logged on to find that I have been banned.

What are the criteria for banning people here? Is it done in response to reasoned and calm, non-harassing and respectful logical arguments? Is it in bad taste to go to one's opponent's website and argue against the received opinion there, out of a curiosity to see how they would respond to an argument that does not pre-suppose all the truths that they find self-evident?

post on IC at your own peril my friend. most of us realized that god left that place a long, long time ago.

[BD80]

Is there a club here for people who have been banned on IC? I went to their "NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS RELEASED" thread and made what I thought were a series of cogent arguments in favor of the proposition that the penalty for academic extra benefits can be ineligibility, as shown by both the Syracuse decision and an official interpretation I cited. I was really trying to find out if there were any flaws in my theory, and what better place to find them out? I very carefully avoided anything that was inflammatory (or should I say unnecessarily inflammatory since I suppose that my very presence there was inflammatory, although in response to a question as to what I am going to do if they come through this unscathed I did say that I would scratch my head and marvel at the supernatural abilities of the UNC legal team. Maybe that's what did it.) They assumed that I had come from PackPride. Today I logged on to find that I have been banned.

What are the criteria for banning people here? Is it done in response to reasoned and calm, non-harassing and respectful logical arguments? Is it in bad taste to go to one's opponent's website and argue against the received opinion there, out of a curiosity to see how they would respond to an argument that does not pre-suppose all the truths that they find self-evident?

I believe cogency is ipso facto grounds for banishment.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Roy sure as hell didn't start the cheating. But looking at that graph, how could anyone conclude that he was anything other than complicit in this ugly scheme. He doesn't seem to understand that neither plausible deniability nor woeful ignorance are acceptable excuses. Poor Roy. Caught in a web of lies and deception so twisted and warped that he could not possibly have had a full night's sleep in many a year.

[MarkD83]

I would love to see the reactions if you posted the two graphics on IC and PackPride :)

[DukieInKansas]

Is there a club here for people who have been banned on IC? I went to their "NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS RELEASED" thread and made what I thought were a series of cogent arguments in favor of the proposition that the penalty for academic extra benefits can be ineligibility, as shown by both the Syracuse decision and an official interpretation I cited. I was really trying to find out if there were any flaws in my theory, and what better place to find them out? I very carefully avoided anything that was inflammatory (or should I say unnecessarily inflammatory since I suppose that my very presence there was inflammatory, although in response to a question as to what I am going to do if they come through this unscathed I did say that I would scratch my head and marvel at the supernatural abilities of the UNC legal team. Maybe that's what did it.) They assumed that I had come from PackPride. Today I logged on to find that I have been banned.

What are the criteria for banning people here? Is it done in response to reasoned and calm, non-harassing and respectful logical arguments? Is it in bad taste to go to one's opponent's website and argue against the received opinion there, out of a curiosity to see how they would respond to an argument that does not pre-suppose all the truths that they find self-evident?

Wear your banishment as a badge of honor!

[timmy c]

Is there a club here for people who have been banned on IC? I went to their "NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS RELEASED" thread and made what I thought were a series of cogent arguments in favor of the proposition that the penalty for academic extra benefits can be ineligibility, as shown by both the Syracuse decision and an official interpretation I cited. I was really trying to find out if there were any flaws in my theory, and what better place to find them out? I very carefully avoided anything that was inflammatory (or should I say unnecessarily inflammatory since I suppose that my very presence there was inflammatory, although in response to a question as to what I am going to do if they come through this unscathed I did say that I would scratch my head and marvel at the supernatural abilities of the UNC legal team. Maybe that's what did it.) They assumed that I had come from PackPride. Today I logged on to find that I have been banned.

What are the criteria for banning people here? Is it done in response to reasoned and calm, non-harassing and respectful logical arguments? Is it in bad taste to go to one's opponent's website and argue against the received opinion there, out of a curiosity to see how they would respond to an argument that does not pre-suppose all the truths that they find self-evident?
“You just watch yourself. We’re wanted men. I have the death sentence on 12 systems.”

[camion]

“You just watch yourself. We’re wanted men. I have the death sentence on 12 systems.”

Linky (http://soundbible.com/grab.php?id=484&type=mp3)

[swood1000]

Clint Jackson @clintjackson1 Jun 15
Roy Williams has been proactively talking with recruits about his expectations of the NCAA outcome. And we are hearing he is very confident. https://twitter.com/midwestdrummer

[Duke95]

What's Roy going to say? If he doesn't say he's confident, then he might as well stop recruiting.

[swood1000]

Clint Jackson @clintjackson1 Jun 15
Roy Williams has been proactively talking with recruits about his expectations of the NCAA outcome. And we are hearing he is very confident. https://twitter.com/midwestdrummer
I guess that confidence is relative. Perhaps Roy is confident that the penalties assessed will be near the middle range of the penalty guidelines for a Level I aggravated violation (e.g. that the postseason ban will be three years instead of four):
5214
5215

[moonpie23]

had an old friend for 30 years unfriend me on facebook when he initially posted some crap about tar heels getting more rings and owning more rings than duke, so i whimsically started some back and forth regarding unc/duke has-been rivalry........i was funning and brought up the words "possible vacated wins" and then............he was gone......


wow...

[Skitzle]

Roy's got the NCAA inside scoop. They will give him a chance to set his own punishment.

1) Roy will only allowed to speak in 3rd Person
2) Roy will only drink 1 coke per day
3) Roy will lose 3 timeouts per game through the 2017 season, but keep all scholarships
4) Roy will not be allowed to chose the restaurant the players will eat at during the 2015-2016 season

Feel free to add more! :D

[swood1000]

had an old friend for 30 years unfriend me on facebook when he initially posted some crap about tar heels getting more rings and owning more rings than duke, so i whimsically started some back and forth regarding unc/duke has-been rivalry........i was funning and brought up the words "possible vacated wins" and then............he was gone......


wow...
Touchy. Your comments were meant jocularly and he obviously took them as a mean-spirited taunt. These events must be really tormenting for him. Not that I blame you for failing to realize how raw his emotions were.

[MarkD83]

had an old friend for 30 years unfriend me on facebook when he initially posted some crap about tar heels getting more rings and owning more rings than duke, so i whimsically started some back and forth regarding unc/duke has-been rivalry........i was funning and brought up the words "possible vacated wins" and then............he was gone......


wow...

This is probably a sign that reality is setting in for some UNC fans. Unfortunately, Roy seems to live in a different world and reality might crash in on him very rudely.

[roywhite]

This is probably a sign that reality is setting in for some UNC fans. Unfortunately, Roy seems to live in a different world and reality might crash in on him very rudely.

Yeah, but a pretty bad year for Roy so far anyway.
Dean Smith dies, Duke wins a national championship, Bill Guthridge dies, and the NCAA has UNC in it's sights. That's a lot of stress points for anyone.

[TKG]

Yeah, but a pretty bad year for Roy so far anyway.
Dean Smith dies, Duke wins a national championship, Bill Guthridge dies, and the NCAA has UNC in it's sights. That's a lot of stress points for anyone.

Well, he could always go back to selling team calendars..........

[oldnavy]

Cases involving ALLEGATIONS of sexual assault. His point is that the mere allegation leads to an individual being suspended from school for a year with no recourse.

A major change happened in 2011 when the Feds stepped in and said not enough was being done on college campuses to address sexual assault.

Once Federal Funding gets tied to an issue, Katy bar the doors.... schools are going to do amazing things (right or wrong) to show that they are taking sexual assault very serious.

So couple this, with knowing that claiming sexual assault is a hot topic button and Voila! Get accused, you basically loose many if not all of your rights as a defendant, all because schools want to be seen as TOUGH on sexual assault cases.

Knee jerk over reaction by powers to be trying to NOT lose fed money....

Basically I blame the federal government for about 95% or all of this countries current issues!! :D

[sagegrouse]

A major change happened in 2011 when the Feds stepped in and said not enough was being done on college campuses to address sexual assault.

Once Federal Funding gets tied to an issue, Katy bar the doors.... schools are going to do amazing things (right or wrong) to show that they are taking sexual assault very serious.

So couple this, with knowing that claiming sexual assault is a hot topic button and Voila! Get accused, you basically loose many if not all of your rights as a defendant, all because schools want to be seen as TOUGH on sexual assault cases.

Knee jerk over reaction by powers to be trying to NOT lose fed money....

Basically I blame the federal government for about 95% or all of this countries current issues!! :D
"Oh,my," to quote my friend Verne Lundquist.

Can we all agree on four things?

1. Sexual assault allegations and cases on campus -- and how schools respond to them -- is a huge issue on campus.

2. College coaches and ADs have not been making public comments on the issue, leaving those to universities presidents, counsels, and other officials. (Remember when Lefty almost got fired when he made derogatory comments about Herman Veal's accuser?)

3. C.D. Mock, ex-UNC wrestling coach and UNC alum, was all over social media after his son, a wrestler at UT Chattanooga, was accused of rape. "Let's all acknowledge that this 'yes means yes' idea sucks." Criminal charges were never filed but the son went though the university's judicial process. (Uhhh... C.D., do you really want to push that "Send" key?)

4. A coach at the top of his profession would probably have difficulty surviving these outbursts -- I mean, do AD's want to spend hundreds of hours defending such statements, which are surely against policy in every athletic department? But Old C.D, despite early success, has had few winning seasons of late. It's a simple business decision by a beleaguered athletic department at UNC. He probably would have been fired at most other places, as well.

Sage


,"

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Tell me the front page image of Sylvia doesn't remind you of Miracle Max (Billy Crystal) in the Princes Bride?

http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/the-princess-bride/quiz/show/11088/what-does-miracle-max-classify-westley

[devildeac]

Tell me the front page image of Sylvia doesn't remind you of Miracle Max (Billy Crystal) in the Princes Bride?

http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/the-princess-bride/quiz/show/11088/what-does-miracle-max-classify-westley

Somehow, I just can't bring myself to click on that link with "image of Sylvia" included in your "invitation" or question:eek:.

[Duvall]

Meanwhile over in Chapel Hill....there might be someone talking a bit more than they would like soon.

UNC Wrestling coach fired. (http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/22908/)

Mock speaks. (http://www.heraldsun.com/sports/colleges/x110773679/Former-UNC-wrestling-coach-blown-away-by-his-firing) Doesn't seem likely to say anything worth hearing, though.

[aimo]

Tell me the front page image of Sylvia doesn't remind you of Miracle Max (Billy Crystal) in the Princes Bride?

http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/the-princess-bride/quiz/show/11088/what-does-miracle-max-classify-westley

Don't insult Miracle Max.

[Duvall]

Tell me the front page image of Sylvia doesn't remind you of Miracle Max (Billy Crystal) in the Princes Bride?

http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/the-princess-bride/quiz/show/11088/what-does-miracle-max-classify-westley

What is the point of this post?

[dahntaysdawg]

What is the point of this post?

Isn't it obvious? It's been so long since your last lecture that they felt the need to incite one. Let's hear it great Duvall.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

What is the point of this post?
Sorry for attempting to inject a little levity into the UNC thread at Sylvia's expense. By all means, let's get back to the sexual assault tangent. It's much more relevant.

[BD80]

Sorry for attempting to inject a little levity into the UNC thread at Sylvia's expense. By all means, let's get back to the sexual assault tangent. It's much more relevant.

Alleged levity.

There are times on this site that the mere allegation of levity is enough to incur sanction. It not need be proven to be funny, or that there be anyone who admits to thinking it is funny.

Irony, on the other hand, is VERY closely scrutinized. Something Sylvia' visage should never be.

[swood1000]

Is anybody here knowledgeable about the North Carolina public records policy? Exhibits FI216 through FI247 are described in the NOA simply as "The University has not received and does not have custody of this record" and it has been suggested that the reason for this is that if the NCAA does not give UNC physical copies of the interviews but only makes them available via a secure website, that this allows UNC to avoid making them public.

However, if you look at the NC Public Records Act, N.C.G.S. § 132 (http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/ByChapter/Chapter_132.html) it says that:


A "Public record" includes all documents...or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance in connection with the transaction of public business by any agency of North Carolina government.
The public records and public information compiled by the agencies of North Carolina government or its subdivisions are the property of the people. Therefore, it is the policy of this State that the people may obtain copies of their public records and public information free or at minimal cost unless otherwise specifically provided by law. As used herein, "minimal cost" shall mean the actual cost of reproducing the public record or public information.

Wouldn't "regardless of physical form or characteristics" and "received" cover viewing these documents online by employees or agents of UNC? Am I misreading this? The language in the version of the NOA made public says that "The University has not received…" which seems designed to head off any inquiries under this statute but is it truly the case that UNC has not "received" these records as that term is understood in the statute? Either UNC has seen them or has not seen them. If it has seen them then have they not been received?

Is it possible that the only problem is that nobody has made a formal request for this material? The UNC web page dealing with that is here (http://policies.unc.edu/policies/public-records/). I assume that they would respond to any inquiry by asserting that these are not "public records" that have been "received" and are therefore not subject to this statute. What would be the next step?

[swood1000]

Is anybody here knowledgeable about the North Carolina public records policy? Exhibits FI216 through FI247 are described in the NOA simply as "The University has not received and does not have custody of this record" and it has been suggested that the reason for this is that if the NCAA does not give UNC physical copies of the interviews but only makes them available via a secure website, that this allows UNC to avoid making them public.

However, if you look at the NC Public Records Act, N.C.G.S. § 132 (http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/ByChapter/Chapter_132.html) it says that:


A "Public record" includes all documents...or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance in connection with the transaction of public business by any agency of North Carolina government.
The public records and public information compiled by the agencies of North Carolina government or its subdivisions are the property of the people. Therefore, it is the policy of this State that the people may obtain copies of their public records and public information free or at minimal cost unless otherwise specifically provided by law. As used herein, "minimal cost" shall mean the actual cost of reproducing the public record or public information.

Wouldn't "regardless of physical form or characteristics" and "received" cover viewing these documents online by employees or agents of UNC? Am I misreading this? The language in the version of the NOA made public says that "The University has not received…" which seems designed to head off any inquiries under this statute but is it truly the case that UNC has not "received" these records as that term is understood in the statute? Either UNC has seen them or has not seen them. If it has seen them then have they not been received?

Is it possible that the only problem is that nobody has made a formal request for this material? The UNC web page dealing with that is here (http://policies.unc.edu/policies/public-records/). I assume that they would respond to any inquiry by asserting that these are not "public records" that have been "received" and are therefore not subject to this statute. What would be the next step?
UNC has a list here (http://publicrecords.unc.edu/public-records/) of the Public Records Requests that have been made. I didn't see any for NOA exhibits FI216 through FI247.

[swood1000]

Is anybody here knowledgeable about the North Carolina public records policy? Exhibits FI216 through FI247 are described in the NOA simply as "The University has not received and does not have custody of this record" and it has been suggested that the reason for this is that if the NCAA does not give UNC physical copies of the interviews but only makes them available via a secure website, that this allows UNC to avoid making them public.

However, if you look at the NC Public Records Act, N.C.G.S. § 132 (http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/ByChapter/Chapter_132.html) it says that:


A "Public record" includes all documents...or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance in connection with the transaction of public business by any agency of North Carolina government.
The public records and public information compiled by the agencies of North Carolina government or its subdivisions are the property of the people. Therefore, it is the policy of this State that the people may obtain copies of their public records and public information free or at minimal cost unless otherwise specifically provided by law. As used herein, "minimal cost" shall mean the actual cost of reproducing the public record or public information.

Wouldn't "regardless of physical form or characteristics" and "received" cover viewing these documents online by employees or agents of UNC? Am I misreading this? The language in the version of the NOA made public says that "The University has not received…" which seems designed to head off any inquiries under this statute but is it truly the case that UNC has not "received" these records as that term is understood in the statute? Either UNC has seen them or has not seen them. If it has seen them then have they not been received?

Is it possible that the only problem is that nobody has made a formal request for this material? The UNC web page dealing with that is here (http://policies.unc.edu/policies/public-records/). I assume that they would respond to any inquiry by asserting that these are not "public records" that have been "received" and are therefore not subject to this statute. What would be the next step?

The federal government uses the same terminology. According to federal law:

Several key terms, phrases, and concepts in the statutory definition of records are defined as follows:


Regardless of physical form or characteristics means that the medium may be paper, film, disk, or other physical type or form; and that the method of recording may be manual, mechanical, photographic, electronic, or any other combination of these or other technologies.
Received means the acceptance or collection of documentary materials by agency personnel in the course of their official duties regardless of their origin (for example, other units of their agency, private citizens, public officials, other agencies, contractors, Government grantees) and regardless of how transmitted (in person or by messenger, mail, electronic means, or by any other method). In this context, the term does not refer to misdirected materials. It may or may not refer to loaned or seized materials depending on the conditions under which such materials came into agency custody or were used by the agency. Advice of legal counsel should be sought regarding the "record" status of loaned or seized materials. http://www.epa.gov/records/what/quest2.htm


So in federal law, "received" includes "acceptance...by agency personnel in the course of their official duties...regardless of how transmitted (...electronic means, or by any other method).

[OldPhiKap]

Alleged levity.

There are times on this site that the mere allegation of levity is enough to incur sanction. It not need be proven to be funny, or that there be anyone who admits to thinking it is funny.

Irony, on the other hand, is VERY closely scrutinized. Something Sylvia' visage should never be.

Whatever you do, DO NOT MAKE FUN OF HER CLOTHES!!!

Sardonic wit is appreciated. Sartorial wit is not. You really have to thread that needle pretty neatly.

[Duvall]

Whatever you do, DO NOT MAKE FUN OF HER CLOTHES!!!


Clothes?

[devildeac]

Whatever you do, DO NOT MAKE FUN OF HER CLOTHES!!!

Sardonic wit is appreciated. Sartorial wit is not. You really have to thread that needle pretty neatly.

Sartorial? Thread? Needle?

I see what you did there and I can't imagine how may puns we'll button down here...

[OldPhiKap]

Sartorial? Thread? Needle?

I see what you did there and I can't imagine how may puns we'll button down here...

But to get back on topic before the whole thing gets moved -- go to Hell, you cheating lying Tar Heels.

[Tripping William]

Sartorial? Thread? Needle?

I see what you did there and I can't imagine how may puns we'll button down here...

Is there a puns equivalent of Godwin's Law? Cuz damn if this site isn't suited to that. Perfectly tailored to it, actually.

[devildeac]

But to get back on topic before the whole thing gets moved -- go to Hell, you cheating lying Tar Heels.

Yea, what's the number of days we have remaining until the COI issues their preliminary "sentence" to these cheating bastards?

521952195219

[Ultrarunner]

Sartorial? Thread? Needle?

I see what you did there and I can't imagine how may puns we'll button down here...

Personally, I'm just keeping it zipped rather than appear unseamly.

[Duke95]

No need to get one's knickers in a twist over a bit of humor. Hard not to pick on those loafers who inhabit the Hill.

[camion]

No need to get one's knickers in a twist over a bit of humor. Hard not to pick on those loafers who inhabit the Hill.

I agree. No reason to get tweed off.

[BD80]

Wow. This thread unraveled quickly.

[hudlow]

Seams to be a pattern here.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Paisley.

Always funny.

Sorry, not very amusing, but at least I'm tartan do to sumthin.

[Ultrarunner]

Seams to be a pattern here.

"Hmmm", he said, head bobbin in agreement. "How long until the season starts?"

[Indoor66]

"Hmmm", he said, head bobbin in agreement. "How long until the season starts?"

Can't remember - too occupied with my bodkin.

[OldPhiKap]

What is the date that UNC has to respond to the NCAA?

[Duke95]

What is the date that UNC has to respond to the NCAA?

UNC has 90 days from receipt of the NOA, I believe.

[gam7]

Sartorial? Thread? Needle?

I see what you did there and I can't imagine how may puns we'll button down here...


UNC has 90 days from receipt of the NOA, I believe.

So, August 18. And not too much longer until the Committee on Infractions says (in effect), "it's time to pull the cord, Roy."

[moonpie23]

had an old friend for 30 years unfriend me on facebook when he initially posted some crap about tar heels getting more rings and owning more rings than duke, so i whimsically started some back and forth regarding unc/duke has-been rivalry........i was funning and brought up the words "possible vacated wins" and then............he was gone......


wow...


so, 2 days later, got a friend request from my old bud, along with a message apologizing and saying it was just a temper tantrum, BUT, he was tired of having to defend his school because, (are y'all ready?) ----- "IT SEEMS LIKE EVERYONE IS BUYING INTO ALL THE LIES ABOUT THEM!"....


whewwwwwwwwww......iiieeee...

[porcophile]

Every time I hear Roy Williams talk about what he knows and doesn't know I'm reminded of this song, from The Best Little Wh*rehouse in Texas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl8ajhu_e5Y

[Duvall]

UNC makes the Roy Williams contract extension, and by implication its utter lack of shame, official. (http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article24971122.html)


North Carolina coach Roy Williams has received a contract extension that could keep him as the Tar Heels' coach through the 2019-2020 season, the university announced Friday.

Before the extension, Williams' contract had been due to expire in 2018. If he coaches through the duration of his new deal, Williams, who has said for years that he wants to coach six to 10 more seasons, would be 69 at the end of the 2019-20 season.

The announcement of Williams' extension comes at a difficult time for the UNC athletic department, which recently received from the NCAA a Notice of Allegations after an investigation into a long-running scheme of bogus African Studies paper classes that disproportionately benefited athletes.

The NCAA alleged UNC committed five major violations, including allowing athletes extra benefits associated with those courses, and a lack of institutional control. Neither Williams nor any member of his staff was alleged to have committed any violations.

[hudlow]

UNC makes the Roy Williams contract extension, and by implication its utter lack of shame, official. (http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article24971122.html)

I'd guess that APR bonus is in the bag....

[DukieInKansas]

Every time I hear Roy Williams talk about what he knows and doesn't know I'm reminded of this song, from The Best Little Wh*rehouse in Texas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl8ajhu_e5Y

I'm not sure what it says about me that I knew which song you were linking. Charles Durning did a great job with that one.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Roy contract extension = middle finger to the rest of the world. What an embarrassment. I hope the NCAA takes note and gives them an extra nice present that lasts all of Roy's remaining days in hell.

[Pghdukie]

Dig as deep as you will - find what you want - reveal even less !

[TKG]

It would appear that IC has infiltrated the Raleigh News & Observer under the pseudonym of Andrew Carter

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article24971122.html

[roywhite]

It would appear that IC has infiltrated the Raleigh News & Observer under the pseudonym of Andrew Carter

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article24971122.html

Yeah, amazing; not everybody sees it that way.

Bob Lee says (http://bobleesays.com/2015/06/20/a-cardinal-sin-and-roys-re-ward/)


Roy Williams is (1) a Hall-of-Fame Coach and either (2) a Crook or (3) a Fool. Two of those three or maybe all three. Neither of the latter should merit an AttaBoyRoy Reward.....

Bubba is the front man that is uttering the unbelievable banalities to a disbelieving media while trying not to giggle, but it can NOT have been A 100% Bubba Call. No way. I’d like to hang this on “Carol From Dartmouth” but it’s well above her “have-a-clue” level. I smell me some Fat Rams behind this.

[dudog84]

It would appear that IC has infiltrated the Raleigh News & Observer under the pseudonym of Andrew Carter

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article24971122.html

From the article, "...the way he cares for his students are truly unmatched" says Bubba.

Yeah, but he doesn't know what classes his students are taking, and whether they are really getting an education. Funny that he should actually say "students" instead of "players". PR in overdrive.

Even at the great Carolina, how many of their players make a living playing basketball? An education really is a nice thing to have. Though maybe they can all work as interns at ESPN, I hear they have a high-ranking connection there.

My disdain for Carolina was always in a good-natured rivalry way. I even respected them. I think most of us felt that way, maybe the dislike was more intense for those of you who stayed in North Carolina and had to deal with their fans and alumni more often. But now I despise what they've done, and continue to do, to a great university. Only the most rabid among us, if any, would not admit that it was a pretty good school. How can the academics on the Hill remain silent?

[OldPhiKap]

Extension for Roy doesn't mean anything one way or the other regarding sanctions.

1. UNC doesn't know what the ultimate penalty will be.

2. UNC takes the line that Roy didn't know, and neither the NOA or the Wainstein Report refute that. Putting aside how implausible that may be, that is apparently the facts the NCAA seems to be taking as true. (Which of course shows lack of institutional control).

3. Even if the MBB has a year or two of post-season ban, and/or scholarship reductions, they want stability through the end of the process. Same reason Boeheim has committed to coach beyond the penalty period at Syracuse.

[BigWayne]

https://twitter.com/jaysmith711/status/612165889413222400

Jay Smith ‏@jaysmith711 11h11 hours ago

Roy extended but Sylvia prepped for the chopping block? Deal with this fact: the 2005 men's team took well over 100 paper classes. WELL OVER

[BigWayne]

North Carolina's rewarding of Roy Williams has a whiff about it ... and it's not the smell of posies (http://www.syracuse.com/poliquin/index.ssf/2015/06/north_carolinas_rewarding_of_roy_williams_has_a_wh iff_about_it_and_its_not_the_s.html)
Syracuse fans don't seem to appreciate the way UNC is handling the scandal.

With the news wafting from North Carolina that Roy Williams, who's learned the value of looking to the left when trouble brews on the right, has been given both more money and added security by his superiors, it's possible that Old Testament scholars will invite us to repent.

Because the end of the world may be nigh. Or, at least, we could be in for a few plagues.

[JStuart]

From the article, "...the way he cares for his students are truly unmatched" says Bubba.

Yeah, but he doesn't know what classes his students are taking, and whether they are really getting an education. Funny that he should actually say "students" instead of "players". PR in overdrive.

Even at the great Carolina, how many of their players make a living playing basketball? An education really is a nice thing to have. Though maybe they can all work as interns at ESPN, I hear they have a high-ranking connection there.

My disdain for Carolina was always in a good-natured rivalry way. I even respected them. I think most of us felt that way, maybe the dislike was more intense for those of you who stayed in North Carolina and had to deal with their fans and alumni more often. But now I despise what they've done, and continue to do, to a great university. Only the most rabid among us, if any, would not admit that it was a pretty good school. How can the academics on the Hill remain silent?

Well, that is a truly unmatched level of concern, correct? He's concerned, but knows nothing, and collects a bonus for APR success, but Wayne Walden wasn't really on the staff, and hid everything from Roy, dagnabbit!

The big question is, we're ANY of the teams in any sport fully eligible over the past 20 years? Will unc ever address that?

[SilkyJ]

Only the most rabid among us, if any, would not admit that it was a pretty good school. How can the academics on the Hill remain silent?

Meh, it's a solid school, but I always thought its academic prowess was overblown. I took a couple classes there while I was at Duke and I used to say that Duke classes compared to UNC classes was like college versus high school. I basically slept my way to As in those classes (both in Chemistry, my major).

That said, I consider myself pretty rabid :):):):)

[JasonEvans]

North Carolina's rewarding of Roy Williams has a whiff about it ... and it's not the smell of posies (http://www.syracuse.com/poliquin/index.ssf/2015/06/north_carolinas_rewarding_of_roy_williams_has_a_wh iff_about_it_and_its_not_the_s.html)
Syracuse fans don't seem to appreciate the way UNC is handling the scandal.

Across the ACC, opposing fans have always hated UNC (we always hate the guys who are constantly beating us) but they really, really, really hated Duke. Duke was the worst. Duke was the team you wanted to beat the most. Duke had the most arrogant fans and players and were worthy of all your scorn.

Well, maybe it is just me but it feels like UNC has taken over for us in the most-hated category. They are cheaters, and even if we come across as arrogant rich kids, that's better than being an unrepentant cheater.

-Jason "I could be wrong -- winning a national title inspires a good bit of hate from your rivals" Evans

[TKG]

Across the ACC, opposing fans have always hated UNC (we always hate the guys who are constantly beating us) but they really, really, really hated Duke. Duke was the worst. Duke was the team you wanted to beat the most. Duke had the most arrogant fans and players and were worthy of all your scorn.

Well, maybe it is just me but it feels like UNC has taken over for us in the most-hated category. They are cheaters, and even if we come across as arrogant rich kids, that's better than being an unrepentant cheater.

-Jason "I could be wrong -- winning a national title inspires a good bit of hate from your rivals" Evans

Part of the hatred of UNC was tinged with respect because they won. IMO no one (other than media types whose livelihood depends upon perpetuating the UNC myth) respects Carolina anymore.

[Chillduck]

Dan Kane: I just have one last question for the witness. If this was an academic issue, why would it be necessary to provide sham classes for non-athletes? If The University of North Carolina is such a fine institution, why would ordinary students need to take non-existent classes? Because those sham classes were created for your ball players who couldn't pass a class, and when they clustered in AFAM classes, you tried to throw non-students into the mix!
Bubba Cunningham: Objection your honor! Lead counsel is trying to ruin the career of a fine Hall of Fame Coach! We feel the court should erase all mention of this alleged scandal and kick Mr. Kane off of the N & O!
NCAA: Objection is noted but overruled. Please answer the question.
Roy Williams: Is that all you have Mr. Kane? The Wainstein Report, Mary Willingham, Rashad McCants please tell me that you have more?
Dan Kane: You had Wayne Walden steer basketball players into phony classes! You had tutors take tests and write papers for your boys! You provided cars, mouth guards, and home accommodations for players who could not function in normal universities! Then you tried to hide behind that "aw shucks" grin! DID YOU ORDER THE COVERUP!
NCAA: You don't have to answer that!
Roy Williams: That's alright! What do you want Mr. Kane?
Dan Kane: I think we are entitled to answers!
Roy Williams: What do YOU want, Mr. Kane?
Dan Kane: I WANT THE TRUTH!
Roy Williams: YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH! I'm here to do something greater than you can even fathom! I must make sure that Carolina basketball can keep up with that school 8 miles to the North! Who's going to do that? You Mr. Kane, you Ms. Keeley? I use phrases like independent study, throw under the bus, and The Carolina Way as a code to live by. You use them as a punchline! Either way, I don't give a durn what you think you are entitled to! You need me on that sideline; you want me on that sideline! I'd rather you just grab a clipboard, and sit the bench!
Dan Kane: DID YOU ORDER THE COVERUP!
Roy Williams: YOU'RE DADGUM RIGHT I DID!!!
Dan Kane: Your honor, if it pleases the court, we would like to have the jury dismissed. The witness has rights.
Roy Williams: What is this? I'm being charged with a crime? You picked the wrong DADGUM coach to mess with son!
Dan Kane: I'm not your son! I'm a fan of the greatest conference ever! And you're forever black-balled yoU SOB!

[Indoor66]

Dan Kane: I just have one last question for the witness. If this was an academic issue, why would it be necessary to provide sham classes for non-athletes? If The University of North Carolina is such a fine institution, why would ordinary students need to take non-existent classes? Because those sham classes were created for your ball players who couldn't pass a class, and when they clustered in AFAM classes, you tried to throw non-students into the mix!
Bubba Cunningham: Objection your honor! Lead counsel is trying to ruin the career of a fine Hall of Fame Coach! We feel the court should erase all mention of this alleged scandal and kick Mr. Kane off of the N & O!
NCAA: Objection is noted but overruled. Please answer the question.
Roy Williams: Is that all you have Mr. Kane? The Wainstein Report, Mary Willingham, Rashad McCants please tell me that you have more?
Dan Kane: You had Wayne Walden steer basketball players into phony classes! You had tutors take tests and write papers for your boys! You provided cars, mouth guards, and home accommodations for players who could not function in normal universities! Then you tried to hide behind that "aw shucks" grin! DID YOU ORDER THE COVERUP!
NCAA: You don't have to answer that!
Roy Williams: That's alright! What do you want Mr. Kane?
Dan Kane: I think we are entitled to answers!
Roy Williams: What do YOU want, Mr. Kane?
Dan Kane: I WANT THE TRUTH!
Roy Williams: YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH! I'm here to do something greater than you can even fathom! I must make sure that Carolina basketball can keep up with that school 8 miles to the North! Who's going to do that? You Mr. Kane, you Ms. Keeley? I use phrases like independent study, throw under the bus, and The Carolina Way as a code to live by. You use them as a punchline! Either way, I don't give a durn what you think you are entitled to! You need me on that sideline; you want me on that sideline! I'd rather you just grab a clipboard, and sit the bench!
Dan Kane: DID YOU ORDER THE COVERUP!
Roy Williams: YOU'RE DADGUM RIGHT I DID!!!
Dan Kane: Your honor, if it pleases the court, we would like to have the jury dismissed. The witness has rights.
Roy Williams: What is this? I'm being charged with a crime? You picked the wrong DADGUM coach to mess with son!
Dan Kane: I'm not your son! I'm a fan of the greatest conference ever! And you're forever black-balled yoU SOB!

Well done. How tall is Dan Kane?

[Ima Facultiwyfe]

Well, THAT felt good!
Love, Ima

[howardlander]

Meh, it's a solid school, but I always thought its academic prowess was overblown. I took a couple classes there while I was at Duke and I used to say that Duke classes compared to UNC classes was like college versus high school. I basically slept my way to As in those classes (both in Chemistry, my major).

That said, I consider myself pretty rabid :):):):)

I think the UNC reputation is based more on it's graduate and professional programs than on the quality of it's undergraduate school. There is simply no way a large public university in a state with the 48th lowest SAT scores (or whatever it is now) can conduct classes at the same level that Duke does. I taught my way through grad school there, and I can tell you from first hand experience that, at least then, there was a large difference in the undergraduate student bodies. There are bright undergrads at Carolina; some number of them, maybe 800 or 1000 or 1500, would compete at Duke. But there are about 14000 others that would simply be in the wrong place.

Howard

[sagegrouse]

I think the UNC reputation is based more on it's graduate and professional programs than on the quality of it's undergraduate school. There is simply no way a large public university in a state with the 48th lowest SAT scores (or whatever it is now) can conduct classes at the same level that Duke does. I taught my way through grad school there, and I can tell you from first hand experience that, at least then, there was a large difference in the undergraduate student bodies. There are bright undergrads at Carolina; some number of them, maybe 800 or 1000 or 1500, would compete at Duke. But there are about 14000 others that would simply be in the wrong place.

Howard

We have enough trouble being liked: we shouldn't "cook" the numbers or push "elitism." The UNC SAT range is 1800-2080, which represents the 25th and 75th percentiles. The Duke range is higher, 2000-2300. But note that UNC percentiles 75+ are all within the Duke 25-75 range. About one-third of the UNC student body, by rough calculation, would fall in the middle range of Duke students. Virtually all of Duke students would be in the middle range (or higher) of UNC students.

There are over 18,000 UNC undergraduates; by this reasoning, 6,000 would fit in the middle range of the Duke student body.

[alteran]

We have enough trouble being liked: we shouldn't "cook" the numbers or push "elitism." The UNC SAT range is 1800-2080, which represents the 25th and 75th percentiles. The Duke range is higher, 2000-2300. But note that UNC percentiles 75+ are all within the Duke 25-75 range. About one-third of the UNC student body, by rough calculation, would fall in the middle range of Duke students. Virtually all of Duke students would be in the middle range (or higher) of UNC students.

There are over 18,000 UNC undergraduates; by this reasoning, 6,000 would fit in the middle range of the Duke student body.

It was my understanding that there would be no math...

[PackMan97]

I think the UNC reputation is based more on it's graduate and professional programs than on the quality of it's undergraduate school. There is simply no way a large public university in a state with the 48th lowest SAT scores (or whatever it is now) can conduct classes at the same level that Duke does. I taught my way through grad school there, and I can tell you from first hand experience that, at least then, there was a large difference in the undergraduate student bodies. There are bright undergrads at Carolina; some number of them, maybe 800 or 1000 or 1500, would compete at Duke. But there are about 14000 others that would simply be in the wrong place.

Howard

I disagree. NC State runs a very difficult course of study in their engineering, vet and design undergrad programs. Of course that's also why we only have a 60% graduation rate or so...unlike Carolina who hands out As and degrees to just about everyone.

[cspan37421]

NC State runs a very difficult course of study in their engineering, vet and design undergrad programs. Of course that's also why we only have a 60% graduation rate or so...unlike Carolina who hands out As and degrees to just about everyone.

And that's why I put no stock in the touting of high graduation rates ... for athletes or the student body in general. It means nothing without some sort of context of the difficulty of the achievement. UNC's follies of late have illustrated this point just about perfectly. Let's hope Duke's high numbers weren't achieved similarly.

[J.Blink]

I think the UNC reputation is based more on it's graduate and professional programs than on the quality of it's undergraduate school. There is simply no way a large public university in a state with the 48th lowest SAT scores (or whatever it is now) can conduct classes at the same level that Duke does. I taught my way through grad school there, and I can tell you from first hand experience that, at least then, there was a large difference in the undergraduate student bodies. There are bright undergrads at Carolina; some number of them, maybe 800 or 1000 or 1500, would compete at Duke. But there are about 14000 others that would simply be in the wrong place.

Howard

I hate this kind of post.

North Carolina is not anywhere near being the state with the "48th lowest SAT scores." It's a stupid statement to start with, since students in many states don't regularly take the SAT, thus skewing the results towards high achievers who want to take an extra test. North Dakota (or rather the 2% of North Dakotan students who took the SAT) has the highest average SAT student. Of the the 30 states with 15% or more of students taking the SAT, North Carolina comes in at #15. Even out of all states, NC is not near the bottom. Hardly matches your assertion.

I am completely appalled by the UNC scandal, I want the death penalty, and I also think I might be the only person in North Carolina who works with a UNC alum (undergrad and PhD) who feels the same way--there certainly don't seem to be too many of them! Having said that, UNC still has a strong faculty and "it's [sic] undergraduate school" (we're allowed to be snarky about spellings, right?) is quite good. As sage grouse has pointed out, the undergraduate student body is very solid for a public university (comparable to Berkeley or UVA) and a large percentage of the student body has SAT scores that are compatible with Duke. I do wonder what the SAT picture would look like with ineligible athletes across all sports taken out.

Growing up in Durham, my high school's valedictorian and salutatorian both went to Duke. #3 and #4 in the class were both accepted to Duke and UNC, and both went to UNC for reasons of money. I was farther down the list but was lucky enough to go to Duke. There's no doubt in my mind that Duke is the better school.

The academic scandal is already beyond appalling; you don't need to make up assertions and statistics to belittle to UNC.

[oldnavy]

Having attended and graduated from UNC's School of Pharmacy (B.S. Pharmacy) and also Campbell University (Doctor of Pharmacy). I can tell you without hesitation that Campbell's program is every bit as good or better in a number of ways.

With regards to the Pharmacy Program, UNC is good but NO WHERE near as good as they believe they are. At one point for a few years after Campbell's program began in the 90's they had a 100% passing rate (1st attempt) on the NC Board exam which is amazing when you think about it. I am not sure how the rates compare now, but I would be surprised if Campbell's isn't higher still.

My problem with UNC is less about the quality of their program and more with the arrogant, elitist and often down right mean attitude that a majority of the administration and staff display towards others and even their own at times. I experienced it personally when I applied for the Doctorate program at UNC, as an alumnus from that very school. It is a long story, but condensed, I had traveled from Adak, Alaska, via Washington, DC to interview with a faculty member who essentially blew off the appointment and told me he really didn't have the time for it at the moment because he was running late (he showed up 45 minutes passed the appointment time) and that I needed to reschedule. UNC had insisted on an in person interview despite the fact that I was stationed in the Aleutian Islands at the time. So, I had traveled for two days (layovers and connecting flights were a nightmare) and rented a car to drive down to CH for the interview that I had confirmed with the interviewer's secretary the day before I drove down. Being a bit older than the average applicant, and into my second tour of duty in the Navy at the time, I made if very clear to the professor that I was not leaving until he had "officially" conducted the interview. So, he asked me to walk with him to his car and talk on the way. Needless to say at that point I was not concerned with making a good impression and I told him what he could do with his interview plus as a bonus, I offered him a few extra opinions (much of it in salty language) I had about his character, his attitude and even his choice in clothing (he looked sloppy) that I am certain he had not heard before from a prospective Doctorate Candidate. Believe it or not I actually received an acceptance letter a few months later that I tossed in the trash.

Campbell agreed to do our interview over the phone and could not have been more accommodating and polite during the process.

Given the choice to recommend Pharmacy programs to prospective students (which is quite often), I ALWAYS recommend Campbell.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I hate this kind of post.

North Carolina is not anywhere near being the state with the "48th lowest SAT scores." It's a stupid statement to start with, since students in many states don't regularly take the SAT, thus skewing the results towards high achievers who want to take an extra test. North Dakota (or rather the 2% of North Dakotan students who took the SAT) has the highest average SAT student. Of the the 30 states with 15% or more of students taking the SAT, North Carolina comes in at #15. Even out of all states, NC is not near the bottom. Hardly matches your assertion.

I am completely appalled by the UNC scandal, I want the death penalty, and I also think I might be the only person in North Carolina who works with a UNC alum (undergrad and PhD) who feels the same way--there certainly don't seem to be too many of them! Having said that, UNC still has a strong faculty and "it's [sic] undergraduate school" (we're allowed to be snarky about spellings, right?) is quite good. As sage grouse has pointed out, the undergraduate student body is very solid for a public university (comparable to Berkeley or UVA) and a large percentage of the student body has SAT scores that are compatible with Duke. I do wonder what the SAT picture would look like with ineligible athletes across all sports taken out.

Growing up in Durham, my high school's valedictorian and salutatorian both went to Duke. #3 and #4 in the class were both accepted to Duke and UNC, and both went to UNC for reasons of money. I was farther down the list but was lucky enough to go to Duke. There's no doubt in my mind that Duke is the better school.

The academic scandal is already beyond appalling; you don't need to make up assertions and statistics to belittle to UNC.

FWIW, NC is ranked 36th as of 2014

http://www.commonwealthfoundation.org/policyblog/detail/sat-scores-by-state-2014

[howardlander]

We have enough trouble being liked: we shouldn't "cook" the numbers or push "elitism." The UNC SAT range is 1800-2080, which represents the 25th and 75th percentiles. The Duke range is higher, 2000-2300. But note that UNC percentiles 75+ are all within the Duke 25-75 range. About one-third of the UNC student body, by rough calculation, would fall in the middle range of Duke students. Virtually all of Duke students would be in the middle range (or higher) of UNC students.

There are over 18,000 UNC undergraduates; by this reasoning, 6,000 would fit in the middle range of the Duke student body.

Well far be it from me to argue with the numbers. I will say that my impression is based on actually teaching there for 2 years and interacting with a 150 or so undergraduates. Now maybe the kids taking Computer Science weren't representative, or maybe things have changed since I taught there. As a teacher I had more discipline problems (kids talking in class, not paying attention etc) in any individual class than I saw in 4 years as a Duke undergrad. I was very unimpressed.

The grad programs are completely different. My Computer Science education there was VERY rigorous, as befits what was then a top 6 or 8 department. The law, business and medical schools are excellent.

Howard

[MarkD83]

Well far be it from me to argue with the numbers. I will say that my impression is based on actually teaching there for 2 years and interacting with a 150 or so undergraduates. Now maybe the kids taking Computer Science weren't representative, or maybe things have changed since I taught there. As a teacher I had more discipline problems (kids talking in class, not paying attention etc) in any individual class than I saw in 4 years as a Duke undergrad. I was very unimpressed.

The grad programs are completely different. My Computer Science education there was VERY rigorous, as befits what was then a top 6 or 8 department. The law, business and medical schools are excellent.

Howard

And all of this discussion is what is the biggest casualty of the ATHLETIC scandal at unc. We are are actually having a discussion about the quality of unc academics. This never was in question 5 to 10 years ago.

[dudog84]

Meh, it's a solid school, but I always thought its academic prowess was overblown. I took a couple classes there while I was at Duke and I used to say that Duke classes compared to UNC classes was like college versus high school. I basically slept my way to As in those classes (both in Chemistry, my major).

That said, I consider myself pretty rabid :):):):)

Thanks for giving me another reason to dislike (rabidly) our administration's choice of the UNC Chemistry professor/chair to lead Trinity.

[porcophile]

And all of this discussion is what is the biggest casualty of the ATHLETIC scandal at unc. We are are actually having a discussion about the quality of unc academics. This never was in question 5 to 10 years ago.

As recently as five years ago the World University Rankings compiled by Times (London) Higher Education put Carolina ahead of Duke in social sciences and in arts and humanities. Since then, however, UNC's rankings have gone down and Duke's have gone up. In the social sciences UNC has gone from 3 places ahead to 6 places down, in the arts and humanities from four places ahead to fifteen places behind. Overall, UNC started off behind Duke (30th place to their 24th) but the gap has grown: UNC has lost 16 places and Duke has gained 6.


Times Higher Education World University Rankings, 2014-2015
Here's the url:
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2014-15/world-ranking

Overall
UNC is tied with Minnesota at 46th (30th in 2010)
11th among U.S. public universities
Behind Berkeley (8), UCLA (12), Michigan (17), Washington (26), Georgia Tech (27), Texas (28), Illinois and Wisconsin (29 – tie), UC-Santa Barbara (37), UC- San Diego (41).
Duke is 18th, up from 24th in 2010

Arts and Humanities
UNC is 35th (23rd in 2010)
7th among U.S. public universities
Duke is 20th, up from 27th

Social Sciences
UNC is 28th (18th in 2010)
6th among U.S. public universities
Duke is 22nd, 21st in 2010

Life Sciences
UNC is 42nd (31st in 2010)
9th among U.S. public universities
Duke is 12th, 13th in 2010

Clinical, Pre-Clinical, and Health
UNC is 21st (17th in 2010)
4th among U.S. public universities
Duke is 17th, 14th in 2010

Physical Sciences
UNC is not in top 100
Behind at least 24 U.S. public universities that are in top 100
Duke is 63rd, in 2010 wasn’t in top 100

Engineering and Technology
UNC is not in top 100
Behind at least 22 U.S. public universities that are in top 100
Duke is 67th – was in top 100 in 2010, but only top 50 listed

[SilkyJ]

I think the UNC reputation is based more on it's graduate and professional programs than on the quality of it's undergraduate school. There is simply no way a large public university in a state with the 48th lowest SAT scores (or whatever it is now) can conduct classes at the same level that Duke does. I taught my way through grad school there, and I can tell you from first hand experience that, at least then, there was a large difference in the undergraduate student bodies. There are bright undergrads at Carolina; some number of them, maybe 800 or 1000 or 1500, would compete at Duke. But there are about 14000 others that would simply be in the wrong place.

Howard

I was thinking about this. Their grad programs are quite good.


Well far be it from me to argue with the numbers. I will say that my impression is based on actually teaching there for 2 years and interacting with a 150 or so undergraduates. Now maybe the kids taking Computer Science weren't representative, or maybe things have changed since I taught there. As a teacher I had more discipline problems (kids talking in class, not paying attention etc) in any individual class than I saw in 4 years as a Duke undergrad. I was very unimpressed.

The grad programs are completely different. My Computer Science education there was VERY rigorous, as befits what was then a top 6 or 8 department. The law, business and medical schools are excellent.

Howard

That said, "excellent" is a strong word. The Med School has an excellent reputation, but in my experience neither the law nor biz schools have a truly excellent reputation. They are solid, maybe even good, but not excellent....but you know, that's just like, my opinion man.


I hate this kind of post.

North Carolina is not anywhere near being the state with the "48th lowest SAT scores." It's a stupid statement to start with, since students in many states don't regularly take the SAT, thus skewing the results towards high achievers who want to take an extra test. North Dakota (or rather the 2% of North Dakotan students who took the SAT) has the highest average SAT student. Of the the 30 states with 15% or more of students taking the SAT, North Carolina comes in at #15. Even out of all states, NC is not near the bottom. Hardly matches your assertion.

I am completely appalled by the UNC scandal, I want the death penalty, and I also think I might be the only person in North Carolina who works with a UNC alum (undergrad and PhD) who feels the same way--there certainly don't seem to be too many of them! Having said that, UNC still has a strong faculty and "it's [sic] undergraduate school" (we're allowed to be snarky about spellings, right?) is quite good. As sage grouse has pointed out, the undergraduate student body is very solid for a public university (comparable to Berkeley or UVA) and a large percentage of the student body has SAT scores that are compatible with Duke. I do wonder what the SAT picture would look like with ineligible athletes across all sports taken out.

Growing up in Durham, my high school's valedictorian and salutatorian both went to Duke. #3 and #4 in the class were both accepted to Duke and UNC, and both went to UNC for reasons of money. I was farther down the list but was lucky enough to go to Duke. There's no doubt in my mind that Duke is the better school.

The academic scandal is already beyond appalling; you don't need to make up assertions and statistics to belittle to UNC.

I hate this kind of post. You aggressively dispute and assert facts but provide no links--you just stated random statistics as created by your own criteria (i.e. states with >15% SAT participation). And Mountain Devil makes my point for me by providing a link, which you never did, and I'd say 36th isn't that far from 48th--its certainly not good. If you're going to post stats and make aggressive statements, include a link or something otherwise you might as well be making stuff up.


FWIW, NC is ranked 36th as of 2014

http://www.commonwealthfoundation.org/policyblog/detail/sat-scores-by-state-2014

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I was thinking about this. Their grad programs are quite good.



That said, "excellent" is a strong word. The Med School has an excellent reputation, but in my experience neither the law nor biz schools have a truly excellent reputation. They are solid, maybe even good, but not excellent....but you know, that's just like, my opinion man.



I hate this kind of post. You aggressively dispute and assert facts but provide no links--you just stated random statistics as created by your own criteria (i.e. states with >15% SAT participation). And Mountain Devil makes my point for me by providing a link, which you never did, and I'd say 36th isn't that far from 48th--its certainly not good. If you're going to post stats and make aggressive statements, include a link or something otherwise you might as well be making stuff up.

I agree with several of your points regarding the difficulty in comparing SAT scores and what exactly it tells us, but pretending that there's no difference between being in the bottom 4 percent versus the bottom 28 percent is rather disingenuous. Granted, neither is lighting the world on fire, but I see a drastic difference, IMHO.

[Furniture]

Not a Duke or UNC grad myself but I can't understand why any of you would even bother comparing UNC to Duke. Some of you have even managed to fall out about it. Mind blowing!

[alteran]

Not a Duke or UNC grad myself but I can't understand why any of you would even bother comparing UNC to Duke. Some of you have even managed to fall out about it. Mind blowing!

Excellent point. UNC has pretty much-- and by its own volition-- chosen to make comparisons between the two schools meaningless.

[OldPhiKap]

UNC was, and is, a fine academic institution. it sold out parts of the school for the riches and pride of sports. That does not take away from the fact that it is, otherwise, a high-quality school.

[Duke95]

UNC was, and is, a fine academic institution. it sold out parts of the school for the riches and pride of sports. That does not take away from the fact that it is, otherwise, a high-quality school.

Yep, this. Completely agree. We should be wary of confounding the institution with the clowns who post on IC.

[J.Blink]

That said, "excellent" is a strong word. The Med School has an excellent reputation, but in my experience neither the law nor biz schools have a truly excellent reputation. They are solid, maybe even good, but not excellent....but you know, that's just like, my opinion man.

With law schools, I would think tier 1 and "excellent" would be equivalent. There's no strict definition of tier 1, and I've heard it range from anything from about the top 14 schools to the top 50. I would lean more towards the top 20 or so. Duke is a solid tier 1 law school. IMHO, UNC is not generally considered tier 1. It's a good law school (with multiple Duke grads!), and probably the best to attend if you're a North Carolinian who wants to practice in NC, but that's that.




I hate this kind of post. You aggressively dispute and assert facts but provide no links--you just stated random statistics as created by your own criteria (i.e. states with >15% SAT participation). And Mountain Devil makes my point for me by providing a link, which you never did, and I'd say 36th isn't that far from 48th--its certainly not good. If you're going to post stats and make aggressive statements, include a link or something otherwise you might as well be making stuff up.

I'm sorry that my post came across as aggressive to you. The numbers are all very easy to google--I found them immediately and on my first search. I also don't see how my posting of correct (but not fully cited) information is worse than saying that NC has the "48th lowest SAT scores or whatever it is now". Fortunately, I bookmarked my links, so here you go:

(1) http://blog.prepscholar.com/average-sat-scores-by-state-most-recent -- This site has the data in the easiest to read format.
(2) https://www.collegeboard.org/program-results/2014/sat -- From the source. Has some very interesting statistics.

I can't say I've run any regressions, but as a general trend, high participation seems correlated with lower average scores. Demographics, unfortunately, are probably the biggest factor in scores.

North Carolina is ahead of states like Pennsylvania and New York and right around other states that spend a huge amount on primary ed, like California. No, 36th is not the same as 48th.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Yep, this. Completely agree. We should be wary of confounding the institution with the clowns who post on IC.
But maintaining a culture of true academic excellence and achievement through strong institutional leadership is absolutely critical. And right now, they have little to no real leadership over there. Unless you count the Ram's Club. That's the truly sad part -- seeing Folt, the BOG, et al, sell their collective souls for a few banners.

Or is it that the real story is so much worse than anyone outside UNX can imagine that they absolutely have no choice but to continue to lie, obfuscate and cover up???

[diablesseblu]

But maintaining a culture of true academic excellence and achievement through strong institutional leadership is absolutely critical. And right now, they have little to no real leadership over there. Unless you count the Ram's Club. That's the truly sad part -- seeing Folt, the BOG, et al, sell their collective souls for a few banners.

Or is it that the real story is so much worse than anyone outside UNX can imagine that they absolutely have no choice but to continue to lie, obfuscate and cover up???

I don't know if they "have no choice", but I do think the real story is exponentially worse than the public knows. UNX was running a "shadow university" for athletes and there are many more unnamed employees who were complicit in allowing it to exist. (Most were probably going along out of fear for their jobs.)

To me, the scope of this is one of the worst academic frauds in American educational history. That it went on so long under the noses of the NCAA and SACS is an embarassment to those organizations. It is also a testament to their having double standards for the colleges/universities under their purview.

[OldPhiKap]

I don't know if they "have no choice", but I do think the real story is exponentially worse than the public knows. UNX was running a "shadow university" for athletes and there are many more unnamed employees who were complicit in allowing it to exist. (Most were probably going along out of fear for their jobs.)

To me, the scope of this is one of the worst academic frauds in American educational history. That it went on so long under the noses of the NCAA and SACS is an embarassment to those organizations. It is also a testament to their having double standards for the colleges/universities under their purview.

To be fair, I'm not sure how SACS or the NCAA would have found out about these on their own. Hell, even Roy didn''t know.


In seriousness, I agree with most of your post but I do not fault SACS or the NCAA for its failure to find these. Both groups rely to some extent on the honest cooperation of their members. UNC probably got some leeway in the trust department because of their reputation, but still.

[SilkyJ]

I agree with several of your points regarding the difficulty in comparing SAT scores and what exactly it tells us, but pretending that there's no difference between being in the bottom 4 percent versus the bottom 28 percent is rather disingenuous. Granted, neither is lighting the world on fire, but I see a drastic difference, IMHO.

I guess, but I don't think its being disingenuous. One is "really bad," the other is "really, really bad."

My 10th grade math teacher used to grade our tests down to a 40% and after that point he decided it wasn't worth his time to keep taking off points and he just wrote "40" on your test and circled it. He called that grade a "circle 40," which is of course lower than an F. To him, it didn't matter if you you got 4% or 28%, you needed to see him.


Not a Duke or UNC grad myself but I can't understand why any of you would even bother comparing UNC to Duke. Some of you have even managed to fall out about it. Mind blowing!

Welcome to the offseason at the DBR pub, where we drink just as much, but argue about less important stuff!

[diablesseblu]

To be fair, I'm not sure how SACS or the NCAA would have found out about these on their own. Hell, even Roy didn''t know.


In seriousness, I agree with most of your post but I do not fault SACS or the NCAA for its failure to find these. Both groups rely to some extent on the honest cooperation of their members. UNC probably got some leeway in the trust department because of their reputation, but still.



My comments were predicated on my having participated in SACS and other accrediting association audits as a member of universities' professional staffs. How they missed the egregious number of independent studies is beyond me. That is a huge red flag and should have warranted further investigation.

It seems to me that these inquiries seem too limited in scope. I wonder if that was by design? You know, too big to fail and all.

[Kfanarmy]

UNC was, and is, a fine academic institution. it sold out parts of the school for the riches and pride of sports. That does not take away from the fact that it is, otherwise, a high-quality school.

That depends on how this scandal has affected hiring outside the state, if at all. It has certainly affected my opinion of UNC academics because of the obvious lack of control over the departments.

[swood1000]

My comments were predicated on my having participated in SACS and other accrediting association audits as a member of universities' professional staffs. How they missed the egregious number of independent studies is beyond me. That is a huge red flag and should have warranted further investigation.

It seems to me that these inquiries seem too limited in scope. I wonder if that was by design? You know, too big to fail and all.
When a CPA firm is auditing a company their job is not to examine every transaction but rather (a) to determine whether the company has the procedures in place necessary to reduce fraud, and (b) to select a few transactions at random, particularly in areas more susceptible to fraud or in areas that give them a funny feeling, and examine them closely. SACS no doubt does things the same way, so they probably wouldn't have been looking at the number of independent study classes in every department but rather at the procedures that UNC had in place to keep such things from happening. (Perhaps they should look closer at classes taken by student-athletes, since that is a known stress point.)

If the person in the organization that the system relies on to be on the lookout for such actions is not paying attention, or not reporting what he sees, or is in collusion, it's very difficult for that to be discovered in an audit. An auditor might be justified in concluding that a jewelry store had a certain level of security if told that there was an armed guard there at all times but if the guard never shows up and nobody reports it then it's hard to blame the auditor if a crime ensues as a result. For example, there was Senior Associate Dean for Undergraduate Education Roberta “Bobbi” Owen. She told Nyang’oro in 2006 that he had to “get [Crowder] under control” because AFAM was enrolling far too many students in independent study classes, and she knew that Crowder was signing grade-change forms, and she discussed with Senior Associate Athletics Director John Blanchard the propriety of AFAM lecture courses that were reportedly being conducted as independent studies, yet she did not cause the situation to be investigated. Over the years there were other clues that were not followed-up on by other people as well. When the system is not working as it's supposed to on paper it's very difficult for an auditor to discover it.

UNC made some significant changes to their procedures after all of this hit the fan, in particular more stringent controls on independent study classes, and if their original procedures were inadequate (as Chancellor Folt said they were) then that would be a reason to question whether SACS was doing its job.

[Kfanarmy]

But maintaining a culture of true academic excellence and achievement through strong institutional leadership is absolutely critical. And right now, they have little to no real leadership over there. Unless you count the Ram's Club. That's the truly sad part -- seeing Folt, the BOG, et al, sell their collective souls for a few banners.

Or is it that the real story is so much worse than anyone outside UNX can imagine that they absolutely have no choice but to continue to lie, obfuscate and cover up???

When your primary athletic booster is the Educational Foundation Inc, but has as it nickname the school's mascot, you might have the basis for confusion about what is important. I'd bet most of the current members of "the Educational Foundation" aren't overly concerned with education, at least by their athletes. It would be difficult to find an organization with a more misaligned mission and vision. Apparently as some point in time, they simply threw away the notion of "financial aid to worthy young men and women seeking an education at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill."

[dpslaw]

My comments were predicated on my having participated in SACS and other accrediting association audits as a member of universities' professional staffs. How they missed the egregious number of independent studies is beyond me. That is a huge red flag and should have warranted further investigation.

It seems to me that these inquiries seem too limited in scope. I wonder if that was by design? You know, too big to fail and all.

Weren't most of the paper classes improperly designated as lecture classes, at least in later years? So on paper (pun intended), it would appear to SACS that if there had been an issue with independent studies, it had been largely addressed and resolved.

[diablesseblu]

Weren't most of the paper classes improperly designated as lecture classes, at least in later years? So on paper (pun intended), it would appear to SACS that if there had been an issue with independent studies, it had been largely addressed and resolved.

I may be wrong, but I don't think this was the case with Jan Boxill's independent studies. They should have shown up as IS on a "by professor" course lists that SACS should have reviwed.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I guess, but I don't think its being disingenuous. One is "really bad," the other is "really, really bad."

My 10th grade math teacher used to grade our tests down to a 40% and after that point he decided it wasn't worth his time to keep taking off points and he just wrote "40" on your test and circled it. He called that grade a "circle 40," which is of course lower than an F. To him, it didn't matter if you you got 4% or 28%, you needed to see him.



Welcome to the offseason at the DBR pub, where we drink just as much, but argue about less important stuff!

Wildly different. In 10th grade math class, everyone could learn math and get an A. SAT scores are a zero sum game - if NC goes up, someone else goes down. Half the states will be ranked below 25th. Going from ranked 48th to ranked 36th is not "bad." It's a steady march up the ladder and a sign of improvement.

Now then, I agree with the rest of your argument, but insisting that there's no difference between 48th and 36th is, in fact, disingenuous.

[sagegrouse]

Wildly different. In 10th grade math class, everyone could learn math and get an A. SAT scores are a zero sum game - if NC goes up, someone else goes down. Half the states will be ranked below 25th. Going from ranked 48th to ranked 36th is not "bad." It's a steady march up the ladder and a sign of improvement.

Now then, I agree with the rest of your argument, but insisting that there's no difference between 48th and 36th is, in fact, disingenuous.

Up thread, someone pointed out that the participation rates vary wildly by state, in part, I guess, because the ACT is the standard in much of the West (such as here in Colorado where HS juniors are required to take the ACT). If that indeed be true, then the results of the 5-10 percent of the SAT test takers in Western States are basically meaningless as a population statistic, since -- duh -- only the very best students take the SAT or both ACT and SAT. In which case, the rank of North Carolina, where a high percentage of HS seniors and juniors take the test, should only be compared with states with comparable participation rates.

Moreover, the state of NC could be dead last and still assemble a group of academic stars for UNC. So, I am having multiple problems with the North Carolina SAT scores argumentation.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Up thread, someone pointed out that the participation rates vary wildly by state, in part, I guess, because the ACT is the standard in much of the West (such as here in Colorado where HS juniors are required to take the ACT). If that indeed be true, then the results of the 5-10 percent of the SAT test takers in Western States are basically meaningless as a population statistic, since -- duh -- only the very best students take the SAT or both ACT and SAT. In which case, the rank of North Carolina, where a high percentage of HS seniors and juniors take the test, should only be compared with states with comparable participation rates.

Moreover, the state of NC could be dead last and still assemble a group of academic stars for UNC. So, I am having multiple problems with the North Carolina SAT scores argumentation.

I agree with all these points too. My only quarrel is whether or not being 36th is significantly better than ranked 48th.

Sorry, as a kid who took the SAT in Charlotte 20 years ago, seems I am a bit defensive.

Comparing it to a student getting 36% on a test is like comparing apples to rocks.

[77devil]

We have enough trouble being liked: we shouldn't "cook" the numbers or push "elitism." The UNC SAT range is 1800-2080, which represents the 25th and 75th percentiles. The Duke range is higher, 2000-2300. But note that UNC percentiles 75+ are all within the Duke 25-75 range. About one-third of the UNC student body, by rough calculation, would fall in the middle range of Duke students. Virtually all of Duke students would be in the middle range (or higher) of UNC students.

There are over 18,000 UNC undergraduates; by this reasoning, 6,000 would fit in the middle range of the Duke student body.

Why are you assuming UNC reports accurate numbers? It perpetuated an unprecedented 20 year institutional scandal.

I have a relative who was turned down twice by Duke but was Phi Beta Kappa at UNC. Not impressed.

[-jk]

I agree with all these points too. My only quarrel is whether or not being 36th is significantly better than ranked 48th.

Sorry, as a kid who took the SAT in Charlotte 20 years ago, seems I am a bit defensive.

Comparing it to a student getting 36% on a test is like comparing apples to rocks.

1-50 distribution correlates nicely with a 1-100 bell curve, even if blurring the points a bit.

4th percentile is very different than 28th. 28th is still not stellar, but is within a biscuit toss of "normal"...

(Of course, I'm not the best at stats. I'll defer...)

-jk

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

1-50 distribution correlates nicely with a 1-100 bell curve, even if blurring the points a bit.

4th percentile is very different than 28th. 28th is still not stellar, but is within a biscuit toss of "normal"...

(Of course, I'm not the best at stats. I'll defer...)

-jk

Right, but comparing a student taking a test (everyone can get an "A") to a ranking of 1-50 (someone comes in last, someone comes in first, one to one distribution) is just silly. It's like saying "36th out of 50 is bad because I am 36 years old and I felt better when I was 25." Wild non sequitur.

48th out of 50 is potentially much worse than 36th. Then again, it depends on other factors. Perhaps everyone IS getting a metaphorical "A" on their SATs

[sagegrouse]

1-50 distribution correlates nicely with a 1-100 bell curve, even if blurring the points a bit.

4th percentile is very different than 28th. 28th is still not stellar, but is within a biscuit toss of "normal"...

(Of course, I'm not the best at stats. I'll defer...)

-jk

We are really talking past each other. ALL of the top 19 states in average SAT scores have very low participation rates (8 percent or less, except for one state at 14 percent). FORGET ALL OF THESE STATES! If one limits the sample of states to those with participation rates above 50 percent, then North Carolina ranks at #10 of 25 such states. That's a good rating -- especially since from time immemorial (i.e., when I applied to college) the New England states, excluding Maine, lap the field in test scores.

[-jk]

We are really talking past each other. ALL of the top 19 states in average SAT scores have very low participation rates (8 percent or less, except for one state at 14 percent). FORGET ALL OF THESE STATES! If one limits the sample of states to those with participation rates above 50 percent, then North Carolina ranks at #10 of 25 such states. That's a good rating -- especially since from time immemorial (i.e., when I applied to college) the New England states, excluding Maine, lap the field in test scores.

Fits my argument even better - 10th of 25 is 60th percentile! Way solid on that bell curve...

-jk

[SilkyJ]

Wildly different. In 10th grade math class, everyone could learn math and get an A. SAT scores are a zero sum game - if NC goes up, someone else goes down. Half the states will be ranked below 25th. Going from ranked 48th to ranked 36th is not "bad." It's a steady march up the ladder and a sign of improvement.

Now then, I agree with the rest of your argument, but insisting that there's no difference between 48th and 36th is, in fact, disingenuous.

You're a) not remembering what I said and b) being way too literal. WRT to a), I said


...I'd say 36th isn't that far from 48th--its certainly not good...

I didn't say or insist that there's "no difference" between them. I said they aren't that far apart to me--one is really bad, the other really really bad. The point being it stinks either way, which leads to b): I'm not trying to have a technical discussion on how to analyze percentiles. My point was that sometimes bad is just bad and I was just trying to use a funny analogy with my math teacher.

Maybe this one would work better: if you're in the 28th percentile or the 4th percentile on your GMAT, you aren't getting into HBS either way. To them, there really is no difference b/w the 28th and 4th percentile. Neither one is good enough.

[swood1000]

A listing of top public universities (http://collegeapps.about.com/od/sat/a/SAT_Public_Univ.htm):

5223

[swood1000]

Why are you assuming UNC reports accurate numbers? It perpetuated an unprecedented 20 year institutional scandal.
If they don't, they risk being publicly shamed by U.S. News and World Report and put in the "unranked" category like these schools (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/05/15/another-college-admits-it-gave-us-news-incorrect-data). So clearly, it does happen.

[BigWayne]

Sickening article at the N&O about UNC football camp event. (http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article25178989.html)

It states and then agrees with the premise that the NCAA NOA does not make allegations against the UNC football team. This is used to justify telling recruits not to worry about possible sanctions, etc. Once the recruits figure out they have been lied to, it could get ugly.

[devildeac]

Sickening article at the N&O about UNC football camp event. (http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article25178989.html)

It states and then agrees with the premise that the NCAA NOA does not make allegations against the UNC football team. This is used to justify telling recruits not to worry about possible sanctions, etc. Once the recruits figure out they have been lied to, it could get ugly.

Think of the irony of this quote:

"The dodge ball game came toward the end. Before it started, a clip from the movie “DodgeBall” played on the video board, the volume turned up. It was the part of the movie when the fictional dodge ball legend Patches O'Houlihan breaks down the five Ds of the sport: dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge."

Sounds like what the cheating, lying bastards have done for the last several years:mad:.

[swood1000]

Sickening article at the N&O about UNC football camp event. (http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article25178989.html)

It states and then agrees with the premise that the NCAA NOA does not make allegations against the UNC football team. This is used to justify telling recruits not to worry about possible sanctions, etc. Once the recruits figure out they have been lied to, it could get ugly.
From that article:

Fox, the linebacker who had "T-Monsta" written on his arm, committed Saturday night after his fears of possible sanctions had been quelled, he said, thanks to discussions with Fedora and Bubba Cunningham, the UNC athletic director. Elder, the offensive lineman, said he had questions, too, that had been answered.

"The more I talk to coach about it and the more he says the same thing, (which) I 100 percent am with him on, and it's that the NCAA, in the (NOA), they never named football specifically," Elder said. "So I just trusted him and I knew he wouldn't lie to me or anything like that. I know they'll be OK."
They didn't name football specifically but of the emails cited in the NOA,


40 were to or from Cynthia Reynolds, the Associate Director for ASPSA and Director of Football,
23 were to or from Beth Bridger of the ASPSA football counseling staff,
31 were to or from Jaimie Lee of the ASPSA football counseling staff,
1 contained screens from a PowerPoint presentation to the football coaches explaining how the paper classes worked and that they were going away because a secretary was retiring.

But no, they didn't name football specifically in the NOA.

[Neals384]

I think the UNC reputation is based more on it's graduate and professional programs than on the quality of it's undergraduate school. There is simply no way a large public university in a state with the 48th lowest SAT scores (or whatever it is now) can conduct classes at the same level that Duke does. I taught my way through grad school there, and I can tell you from first hand experience that, at least then, there was a large difference in the undergraduate student bodies. There are bright undergrads at Carolina; some number of them, maybe 800 or 1000 or 1500, would compete at Duke. But there are about 14000 others that would simply be in the wrong place.

Howard

Uh, hello out there. Has no one noticed that "48th lowest" is the same as "3rd highest"? Whether the statement is true or not, it should be "48th highest" or "48th best". Right?

[DukieInKansas]

Uh, hello out there. Has no one noticed that "48th lowest" is the same as "3rd highest"? Whether the statement is true or not, it should be "48th highest" or "48th best". Right?

Did we lose a state? Shouldn't it be 48th lowest is the same as 4th highest? :confused:

(Just looking at the numbers not discussing the semantics of lowest and highest.)

[Kedsy]

Did we lose a state? Shouldn't it be 48th lowest is the same as 4th highest? :confused:

(Just looking at the numbers not discussing the semantics of lowest and highest.)

Not unless they added a state and nobody told us.

[DukieInKansas]

Not unless they added a state and nobody told us.

Never mind! (In my best Emily Litella voice) That's what I get for trying to count cards instead of states.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

From that article:

They didn't name football specifically but of the emails cited in the NOA,


40 were to or from Cynthia Reynolds, the Associate Director for ASPSA and Director of Football,
23 were to or from Beth Bridger of the ASPSA football counseling staff,
31 were to or from Jaimie Lee of the ASPSA football counseling staff,
1 contained screens from a PowerPoint presentation to the football coaches explaining how the paper classes worked and that they were going away because a secretary was retiring.

But no, they didn't name football specifically in the NOA.
Wouldn't be surprised if they feel football has "done its time already" and are betting they get through this with no additional penalties.

I mean, DA-AMN!!! What a bunch of insolent SOBs -- continuing to give the world the middle finger. I hope the NCAA is paying attention and readying to wallop those arrogant bastards.

I've hated the holes for as long as I can remember. But behind that hatred there was always a degree of respect for both them and the rivalry. No more. I could not care less if we ever play them again in any sport. Can't they just disappear? Go to the SEC or something? Hell, I bet even the SEC wouldn't want those shameless cheaters hanging around. Makes my blood boil.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Think of the irony of this quote:

"The dodge ball game came toward the end. Before it started, a clip from the movie “DodgeBall” played on the video board, the volume turned up. It was the part of the movie when the fictional dodge ball legend Patches O'Houlihan breaks down the five Ds of the sport: dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge."

Sounds like what the cheating, lying bastards have done for the last several years:mad:.
Diagnosis: Chronic tone deafness (accompanied by frequent, extreme delusion and psychotic episodes in response to the success of others)

[BigWayne]

From that article:

They didn't name football specifically but of the emails cited in the NOA,


40 were to or from Cynthia Reynolds, the Associate Director for ASPSA and Director of Football,
23 were to or from Beth Bridger of the ASPSA football counseling staff,
31 were to or from Jaimie Lee of the ASPSA football counseling staff,
1 contained screens from a PowerPoint presentation to the football coaches explaining how the paper classes worked and that they were going away because a secretary was retiring.

But no, they didn't name football specifically in the NOA.

After having gone back and read some of the quotes from the new UNC football commits, I believe UNC football is continuing to recruit players that can only be expected to maintain eligibility by means of "impermissible benefits."