NCAA Rules on SMU

[luburch]

According to Andy Katz and Jeff Goodman, NCAA bans SMU from the postseason this year and Larry Brown is suspended for 30% of SMU's games. SMU will also likely be banned from the AAC tournament.

The findings were: Academic misconduct in men's basketball, unethical conduct on former secretary in basketball program, and lack of coach control by Brown. Brown had no knowledge of the violation while it occurred and was punished for not knowing and not reporting promptly when he did know(?).

All of this coming from Twitter.

[Dev11]

Can I jump right on the elephant in the room? Where is UNC now on the NCAA COI waiting list?

[OldPhiKap]

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/13769364/ncaa-bans-smu-mustangs-2016-postseason-suspends-larry-brown-10-percent-team-games


Also limits on scholarships and recruiting, apparently. Press conference to come.

Did not see anything about vacating wins.

[yancem]

Can I jump right on the elephant in the room? Where is UNC now on the NCAA COI waiting list?

I don't know but this decision will make it even harder to not punish the cheats hard. The ncaa simply can't hammer Syracuse and now SMU and then turn around and slap unc on the wrist.

[luburch]

I don't know but this decision will make it even harder to not punish the cheats hard. The ncaa simply can't hammer Syracuse and now SMU and then turn around and slap unc on the wrist.

I think you may be putting too much faith in the NCAA coming to a logical outcome.

[luburch]

Also, what does this mean for Semi?

[mattman91]

Also, what does this mean for Semi?

Means he made a terrible decision to leave an NCAA title team for a team that is going on probation:cool:

[Ichabod Drain]

Also, what does this mean for Semi?

Unfortunately he will have a short season next year since he can't play until December and won't see any post-season play. Feel bad for the kid.

[PackMan97]

Can I jump right on the elephant in the room? Where is UNC now on the NCAA COI waiting list?

I would say the "Roy" didn't know defense is gone. My guess, this is Roy's last season coaching.

[Faustus]

Doesn't this make Larry Brown four for four in getting his "school" placed on NCAA probation? What a guy. Learned from Dean and Frank McGuire too.

[English]

Doesn't this make Larry Brown four for four in getting his "school" placed on NCAA probation? What a guy. Learned from Dean and Frank McGuire too.

SMU will vacate all wins in which Keith Frazier participated, as well.

[PackMan97]

Doesn't this make Larry Brown four for four in getting his "school" placed on NCAA probation? What a guy. Learned from Dean and Frank McGuire too.

I was always hoping Brown would one day coach the Cheats...though I guess in the end they didn't need his expertise in getting caught.

[English]

I was always hoping Brown would one day coach the Cheats...though I guess in the end they didn't need his expertise in getting caught.

Per Matt Norlander of CBSSports, the SMU compliance director (no longer with the program) falsified academic documents and class sign-in sheets. This is an instance of overt malfeasance on the part of the SMU compliance department. Larry Brown has also received a two-year show cause penalty in addition to his 9 game suspension, one year post-season ban, recruiting restrictions, etc.

[oldnavy]

I would say the "Roy" didn't know defense is gone. My guess, this is Roy's last season coaching.

If Roy didn't know (I believe he knew fully)... then he should be fired for being lazy and incompetent.

Roy likes to be thought of as either the dumbest guy in the world, or the smartest guy in the world depending on the circumstances and which persona benefits him at the time.

Anyone looking at this from outside the UNC fandom can see it for what it is...

[BD80]

Can I jump right on the elephant in the room? Where is UNC now on the NCAA COI waiting list?

http://dailygrindhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Elmer_sharpening_knife.png

[devildeac]

I'll take all the above penalties for the cheaters x 10 or, if the COI wants to take the infractions machine back to 1993, X 18. Ol roy didn't know?

5534

[OldPhiKap]

Can I jump right on the elephant in the room? Where is UNC now on the NCAA COI waiting list?

According to IC, there is no correlation because (1) SMU is an athletic scandal, while UNC is an academic one; and (2) SMU had an ineligible player while no one at UNC was ineligible.

Oh, and Larry Brown is no longer on the guest list.

[sandinmyshoes]

Williams has one thing in his favor in that the Wanstein report showed that he did not like the clustering and tried to make contact with the academic side about it but was basically told to mind his own business. Ironically, that's not unusual for academic departments who are resisting cheating to say. They are far more used to the athletic side trying to at least stretch the limits of academic integrity. He instructed his assistant (Halliday?) to either guide the players away from AFAM degrees (or to make sure they made their own choices), and that was several years before the rot was found.

I think the severity of the penalties at UNC will vary program to program depending on what the coaches could know, how much they did know, and how much the fraudulent classes actually effected the eligibility of individual players.

[SCMatt33]

I wonder if Semi might try to sit the whole season and redshirt so he doesn't waste his junior year on half of a season with nothing to look forward to at the end of it.

[BigWayne]

SMU will vacate all wins in which Keith Frazier participated, as well.

Yep. Full details here in NCAA release. (http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/smu-commits-men-s-basketball-and-golf-violations)

It's interesting that this is also about the golf team. The violations there are mostly illegal contacts with recruits and a booster along with some discounts on school gear. However, the penalties are sort of synchronized between the two programs. Also, the COI members that sat on the panel are identified. I have no idea if this means the same people are more or less likely to get picked for the UNC panel.

Members of the Committee on Infractions are drawn from NCAA membership and members of the public. The members of the panel who reviewed this case are Michael F. Adams, chief hearing officer and chancellor, Pepperdine University; Greg Christopher, athletics director at Xavier University; Jack Ford, legal analyst for CBS News; Thomas Hill, senior vice president for student affairs at Iowa State University; James O’Fallon, law professor and faculty athletics representative at the University of Oregon; and Sankar Suryanarayan, university counsel, Princeton University.

[devildeac]

Yep. Full details here in NCAA release. (http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/smu-commits-men-s-basketball-and-golf-violations)

It's interesting that this is also about the golf team. The violations there are mostly illegal contacts with recruits and a booster along with some discounts on school gear. However, the penalties are sort of synchronized between the two programs. Also, the COI members that sat on the panel are identified. I have no idea if this means the same people are more or less likely to get picked for the UNC panel.

Members of the Committee on Infractions are drawn from NCAA membership and members of the public. The members of the panel who reviewed this case are Michael F. Adams, chief hearing officer and chancellor, Pepperdine University; Greg Christopher, athletics director at Xavier University; Jack Ford, legal analyst for CBS News; Thomas Hill, senior vice president for student affairs at Iowa State University; James O’Fallon, law professor and faculty athletics representative at the University of Oregon; and Sankar Suryanarayan, university counsel, Princeton University.

Weezie, Ozzie and I are available if they need some ad hoc members. Our credentials are (mostly? partly?) impeccable. In fact, they've been carved in DBR stone;). Can't speak for Professor T. Beard as to his interest/availability;).

[BigWayne]

Per Matt Norlander of CBSSports, the SMU compliance director (no longer with the program) falsified academic documents and class sign-in sheets. This is an instance of overt malfeasance on the part of the SMU compliance department. Larry Brown has also received a two-year show cause penalty in addition to his 9 game suspension, one year post-season ban, recruiting restrictions, etc.

This was where it started with the compliance guy, but the biggie is spelled out in the NCAA release:

A former assistant men’s basketball coach encouraged a student-athlete to enroll in an online course to meet NCAA initial eligibility standards and be admitted to the university. After he enrolled in the course, a former men’s basketball administrative assistant obtained the student’s username and password then completed all of his coursework. The student-athlete received fraudulent credit for the course and, as a result, competed while ineligible during his freshman season.

[brlftz]

Yep. Full details here in NCAA release. (http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/smu-commits-men-s-basketball-and-golf-violations)

It's interesting that this is also about the golf team. The violations there are mostly illegal contacts with recruits and a booster along with some discounts on school gear. However, the penalties are sort of synchronized between the two programs. Also, the COI members that sat on the panel are identified. I have no idea if this means the same people are more or less likely to get picked for the UNC panel.

Members of the Committee on Infractions are drawn from NCAA membership and members of the public. The members of the panel who reviewed this case are Michael F. Adams, chief hearing officer and chancellor, Pepperdine University; Greg Christopher, athletics director at Xavier University; Jack Ford, legal analyst for CBS News; Thomas Hill, senior vice president for student affairs at Iowa State University; James O’Fallon, law professor and faculty athletics representative at the University of Oregon; and Sankar Suryanarayan, university counsel, Princeton University.

Neat! Perhaps we could get Matt Christenson's dad on UNC's committee?

[oldnavy]

Williams has one thing in his favor in that the Wanstein report showed that he did not like the clustering and tried to make contact with the academic side about it but was basically told to mind his own business. Ironically, that's not unusual for academic departments who are resisting cheating to say. They are far more used to the athletic side trying to at least stretch the limits of academic integrity. He instructed his assistant (Halliday?) to either guide the players away from AFAM degrees (or to make sure they made their own choices), and that was several years before the rot was found.

I think the severity of the penalties at UNC will vary program to program depending on what the coaches could know, how much they did know, and how much the fraudulent classes actually effected the eligibility of individual players.

Roy said he didn't like the clustering.... so isn't that admission that he DID know what was going on.

Otherwise, why would Roy Williams or ANY coach for that matter care one bit which major his players declared? The ONLY reason is he knew that it was rotten, and that it would bite him and the program in the butt.

To claim he didn't know and at the same time claim credit for turning players away from what he didn't know.... well as I have said for years, Roy talks too much.

[Lar77]

Roy said he didn't like the clustering.... so isn't that admission that he DID know what was going on.

Otherwise, why would Roy Williams or ANY coach for that matter care one bit which major his players declared? The ONLY reason is he knew that it was rotten, and that it would bite him and the program in the butt.

To claim he didn't know and at the same time claim credit for turning players away from what he didn't know.... well as I have said for years, Roy talks too much.

Roy needs to retire. Get a vertigo attack, whatever. Just go.

I'm amazed that recruits buy his stuff. I can understand an in-state guy (although an in state guy would know about all the other stuff he shovels), but why would an out of state guy?

[crdaul]

I think you may be putting too much faith in the NCAA coming to a logical outcome.

The difference in outcomes will be determined IMO by the amount of revenue the schools produce for the NCAA....I doubt that SMU's contribution is more than a pimple on the butt of the UNC elephant...:)

[moonpie23]

this confirms my suspicion that unc will skate.....

[jimsumner]

I wonder if Semi might try to sit the whole season and redshirt so he doesn't waste his junior year on half of a season with nothing to look forward to at the end of it.

Wouldn't help. He's already taken a redshirt year, as a transfer.

You get four years of eligibility in a five-year window.

Ojeleye needs to finish up by the spring of 2018.

He has used up 1.5 years of eligibility.

He has 2.5 left and 3 years in which to do it.

After the mandatory sit out of the fall 2015, he would have 2.5 years of eligibility and 2.5 years in which to do it.

If he sits out all of next season, he would have 2.5 years of eligibility but only 2.0 years in which to use it.

I suppose he could get some kind of dispensation from the NCAA under the premise that he was misled. But wasn't SMU under investigation when he transferred?

And I can't imagine any ethical coach telling a potential player that his school will not be punished by the NCAA when he knows better.

[swood1000]

I would say the "Roy" didn't know defense is gone. My guess, this is Roy's last season coaching.
Unfortunately, Roy will not need a defense unless the NOA is amended to add an allegation against him (or unless the COI concludes that a "violation occurred based on information developed or discussed during the hearing.")

[Kedsy]

The difference in outcomes will be determined IMO by the amount of revenue the schools produce for the NCAA....I doubt that SMU's contribution is more than a pimple on the butt of the UNC elephant...:)

I don't understand this argument. How much revenue do you think UNC "produces" for the NCAA?

[MarkD83]

Weezie, Ozzie and I are available if they need some ad hoc members. Our credentials are (mostly? partly?) impeccable. In fact, they've been carved in DBR stone;). Can't speak for Professor T. Beard as to his interest/availability;).

To get a fair COI panel for UNC we need to nominate all members of Mt Hatemore.

[Kedsy]

And I can't imagine any ethical coach telling a potential player that his school will not be punished by the NCAA when he knows better.

Backhand slap at Ol' Roy?

Or forehand slap?

[MarkD83]

I don't understand this argument. How much revenue do you think UNC "produces" for the NCAA?

A drop in the bucket compared to one SEC football program.

[devildeac]

To get a fair COI panel for UNC we need to nominate all members of Mt Hatemore.

That was my intent;).

We accept.

[devildeac]

Backhand slap at Ol' Roy?

Or forehand slap?

I'd bet both. And at the Hat, too.

[Kedsy]

A drop in the bucket compared to one SEC football program.

To have a reasonably intelligent discussion on this topic, it might be worthwhile to see where the NCAA's operating revenues come from:

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/finances/revenue

The chart in the above link shows that 81% of the NCAA's revenues come from television and marketing rights and another 11% come from "championships," which includes ticket sales and NCAA-logoed gear. The remaining 8% comes from stuff that has little if anything to do with member institutions.

The TV contracts are fixed, so whether or not UNC is on TV will not affect that current revenue stream. So the only argument that UNC produces any]/i] revenue for the NCAA is the argument that the TV networks will refuse to pay as much money for the [i]next contract if UNC is punished (an argument which seems ridiculous to me) or that the championship events will sell fewer tickets if UNC is not playing in them (and even if that one is true, the amount of the difference is probably meaningless). Thus the difference between the amount of money UNC produces and the amount SMU produces is negligible, if not zero.

Unless I'm missing something. If so, I would appreciate it if the many people who have made this argument in favor of UNC show me where my calculations are off.

[BD80]

To get a fair COI panel for UNC we need to nominate all members of Mt Hatemore.

It should be noted that the NCAA "Death Penalty" sanction is NOT literal

sorry

[Stray Gator]

The difference in outcomes will be determined IMO by the amount of revenue the schools produce for the NCAA....I doubt that SMU's contribution is more than a pimple on the butt of the UNC elephant...:)

I'm puzzled by the recurring comments here suggesting that the NCAA Committee On Infractions is likely to be lenient towards UNC because UNC is "too big to fail" or is an "elephant" with respect to the revenues generated for the NCAA. Based on the most recent information I could find, UNC ranks only #31 in college athletics revenues, barely edging out Missouri and trailing South Carolina by 9 spots.

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/5/27/8663047/college-sports-revenue-oregon

Moreover, judging from a summary of the NCAA's finances, it seems highly unlikely that the organization could be influenced by any one school, because 92% of its revenue is derived from television and marketing rights fees or income from championship events -- sums that would not appear to be substantially affected by the absence of a particular program.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/finances/revenue

I understand that UNC may be perceived as a major player by residents within the state, and to some degree among the traditional member schools of the ACC. But on the national stage, outside the confines of the region, I don't sense that UNC is regarded as such a significant presence.

[madscavenger]

Neat! Perhaps we could get Matt Christenson's dad on UNC's committee?

No disrespect, but take a deeper look at Clayton Christenson. If approached, he'd not have any dilemma turning it down. But that offer would never happen, even as a joke. Maybe you were joking yourself and it just sailed over my head. It wouldn't be the first time (that was when Hubie Brown offered to buy me a haircut and a shave).

[sandinmyshoes]

Roy said he didn't like the clustering.... so isn't that admission that he DID know what was going on.

Otherwise, why would Roy Williams or ANY coach for that matter care one bit which major his players declared? The ONLY reason is he knew that it was rotten, and that it would bite him and the program in the butt.

To claim he didn't know and at the same time claim credit for turning players away from what he didn't know.... well as I have said for years, Roy talks too much.

Unfortunately, there is a huge gap in thinking that something looks suspicious or out of place and actually knowing what is going on. The fact that he tried to investigate it and was rebuffed is likely to work in his favor in relation to the NCAA's punishment.

I know it is difficult, but sometimes it is worth looking at things without our royal blue lenses in place. I'm thinking that our best hope is in the NCAA finding that key players were definitely ineligible because of the fraudulent classes. If not, the case is going to have to rest on impermissible benefits, which is more prickly because any student could take them.

[OldPhiKap]

It doesn't matter whether Roy knew IMO. It was his job to know, and his responsibility if he did not. His underling Wayne Welden certainly knew per Wainstein, IIRC, and Deputy Dawg is the guy who brought him to UNC from Kansas.

UNC is not going to skate. As repeatedly beaten until dead, we all disagree perhaps on what "getting hammered" is (except over on the "Ymmm, beer" thread although they are discussing something different). But the scandal over there is unprecedented in size, scope and duration AFAIK. There will be a revolt from schools that have gotten hit over the years, many of whom are bigger players than UNC frankly, if there is not some accountability at the end of this thing for the heels. USC and FSU in football, Kentucky in basketball, etc.

[MChambers]

I understand that UNC may be perceived as a major player by residents within the state, and to some degree among the traditional member schools of the ACC. But on the national stage, outside the confines of the region, I don't sense that UNC is regarded as such a significant presence.
You mean NCAA doesn't stand for North Carolina Athletic Association?

[BigWayne]

If not, the case is going to have to rest on impermissible benefits, which is more prickly because any student could take them.

This is not the case. From the NOA:

Athletics academic counselors in the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes (ASPSA) leveraged their relationships with faculty and staff members in the African and Afro-American Studies (AFRI/AFAM) department to obtain and/or provide special arrangements to student-athletes that were not generally available to the student body. The special arrangements athletics academic counselors provided to student-athletes constituted impermissible extra benefits...

The addendums to the Wainstein report clearly show Crowder having added non-athletes to the courses as a cover mechanism. If UNC tries to argue the "any student" angle, it will not succeed.

[crdaul]

To have a reasonably intelligent discussion on this topic, it might be worthwhile to see where the NCAA's operating revenues come from:

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/finances/revenue

The chart in the above link shows that 81% of the NCAA's revenues come from television and marketing rights and another 11% come from "championships," which includes ticket sales and NCAA-logoed gear. The remaining 8% comes from stuff that has little if anything to do with member institutions.

The TV contracts are fixed, so whether or not UNC is on TV will not affect that current revenue stream. So the only argument that UNC produces any]/i] revenue for the NCAA is the argument that the TV networks will refuse to pay as much money for the [i]next contract if UNC is punished (an argument which seems ridiculous to me) or that the championship events will sell fewer tickets if UNC is not playing in them (and even if that one is true, the amount of the difference is probably meaningless). Thus the difference between the amount of money UNC produces and the amount SMU produces is negligible, if not zero.

Unless I'm missing something. If so, I would appreciate it if the many people who have made this argument in favor of UNC show me where my calculations are off.

I would think that the TV contracts are based in part on the ratings that the televised games produce. I doubt that SMU has ratings that come close to those of UNC games. If so, then why are so many UNC games on national TV? Not wanting to argue, just seems to make sense to me.....

[wsb3]

If Roy didn't know (I believe he knew fully)... then he should be fired for being lazy and incompetent. ..

Been my thoughts from Day One.. Any UNC fan that has said to me that Roy did not know.. I have replied that not knowing is just as bad. But yes I agree with you oldnavy..he knew.

[SCMatt33]

Wouldn't help. He's already taken a redshirt year, as a transfer.

You get four years of eligibility in a five-year window.

Ojeleye needs to finish up by the spring of 2018.

He has used up 1.5 years of eligibility.

He has 2.5 left and 3 years in which to do it.

After the mandatory sit out of the fall 2015, he would have 2.5 years of eligibility and 2.5 years in which to do it.

If he sits out all of next season, he would have 2.5 years of eligibility but only 2.0 years in which to use it.

I suppose he could get some kind of dispensation from the NCAA under the premise that he was misled. But wasn't SMU under investigation when he transferred?

And I can't imagine any ethical coach telling a potential player that his school will not be punished by the NCAA when he knows better.

There's no such thing as half a year of eligibility. Unless he got a medical redshirt for last season that I wasn't aware of a la Jamal Boykin, he has 2 years of eligibility left with 3 years to complete it. If he plays at all next year, it would count as his entire junior year making 2017 his last year. If he sits the entire year, he can play In 2018. If he did have a redshirt granted for last year (once you play a game, I think a medical redshirt is the only way you get the year back provided you played in less than 30% of the total games), he has 3 years of eligibility left, but only 2.5 years to do it in meaning he would definitely play.

[Olympic Fan]

I would think that the TV contracts are based in part on the ratings that the televised games produce. I doubt that SMU has ratings that come close to those of UNC games. If so, then why are so many UNC games on national TV? Not wanting to argue, just seems to make sense to me.....

TV contracts are negotiated through conferences ... and the NCAA negotiates contracts for the NCAA Tournament. But those deals are already in place. If a school like UNC gets a postseason ban, it won't impact the exposure UNC gets from the ACC/ESPN deal. And the $11 billion dollar NCAA/CBS deal for the tournament runs through 2024 and is not impacted by UNC's absence. The NCAA's money does not go up and down based on the viewership of any one game or the tournament as a whole.

Look, the NCAA Tournament ratings were fine in 2010, when UNC was not in the field. They were fine in 2013, when Kentucky was not in the field. They were fine in 2012 when defending champion UConn was banned from the tournament. They were record-setting last year when Syracuse was not in the tournament.

There may be reasons to think UNC will or will not be punished, but TV money is not one of those reasons.

In my view, the news that Larry Brown was nailed, not for what he knew, but for what he should have known, is significant. The same reasoning is why Jim Boeheim will sit out the first third of this season -- nothing he did or knew ... but the fact that he should have known. At UNC, academic advisor Wayne Walden is hip deep in the scandal and is cited numerous times in the NOA (atb least a dozen of his e-mails arranging phony classes are included) -- he's a guy Roy brought with him from Kansas and frequently called the "most important person in the program". Walden has refused to link Roy to the scandal -- he told Wainstein that he "can't remember" if he ever discussed it with Williams. Well, based on the Brown and Boeheim rulings, it doesn't seem to matter if Roy knew or not -- he SHOULD have known.

And for those Carolina apologists who keep claiming that men's basketball was not specifically named in the NOA, I keep repeating the summary on page 49:

The AFRI/AFAM department created anomalous courses that went unchecked for 18 years. This allowed individuals within ASPSA to use these courses through special arrangements to maintain the eligibility of academically at-risk student-athletes, particularly in the sports of football, men's basketball and women's basketball.

Although the general student body also had access to the anomalous AFRI/AFAM courses, student-athletes received preferential access to these anomalous courses, enrolled in these anomalous courses at a disproportionate rate to that of the general student body and received other impermissible benefits not available

PS I repeat what I said earlier -- the NCAA is under TREMENDOUS pressure due to a number of lawsuits by student-athletes to come down hard on UNC. The Tar Heels are going to be hammered -- and not just women's basketball.

PPS Dean Smith disciple Larry Brown (who played and coached under the sainted Smith) has now gotten three schools put on probation -- UCLA, Kansas and now SMU. Can any other coach match that trifecta? I was trying to think -- Jim Harrick was nailed at Georgia and Rhode Island ... was he also hit at UCLA? I cant remember.

[JasonEvans]

Just so we are clear... the major crime committed by SMU was that 1 player was given course credit for 1 class in which he did no work. The credit allowed him to remain eligible.

Do I have that right? Am I missing something? Sure, SMU lied and covered stuff up an that exacerbates the penalties, but this really comes down to an athlete taking a class and getting a grade he did not deserve, doesn't it?

...And SMU got 1 year probation plus 9 scholarships stripped.

-Jason "I figure Carolina's various sports will get a millennium or two of probation. That seems fair, doesn't it?" Evans

[BigWayne]

PPS Dean Smith disciple Larry Brown (who played and coached under the sainted Smith) has now gotten three schools put on probation -- UCLA, Kansas and now SMU. Can any other coach match that trifecta? I was trying to think -- Jim Harrick was nailed at Georgia and Rhode Island ... was he also hit at UCLA? I cant remember.

But of course he was:

Fired in 1996. (http://articles.philly.com/1996-11-07/sports/25647441_1_baron-davis-two-days-mountains-and-miles-ucla)
Probation handed down in 1998. (http://www.socalhoops.tierranet.com/archive/prepnotes/498/ucla430.htm)

[jv001]

Just so we are clear... the major crime committed by SMU was that 1 player was given course credit for 1 class in which he did no work. The credit allowed him to remain eligible.

Do I have that right? Am I missing something? Sure, SMU lied and covered stuff up an that exacerbates the penalties, but this really comes down to an athlete taking a class and getting a grade he did not deserve, doesn't it?

...And SMU got 1 year probation plus 9 scholarships stripped.

-Jason "I figure Carolina's various sports will get a millennium or two of probation. That seems fair, doesn't it?" Evans

I'll sign off on that punishment for the cheaters. GoDuke!

[SCMatt33]

Just so we are clear... the major crime committed by SMU was that 1 player was given course credit for 1 class in which he did no work. The credit allowed him to remain eligible.

Do I have that right? Am I missing something? Sure, SMU lied and covered stuff up an that exacerbates the penalties, but this really comes down to an athlete taking a class and getting a grade he did not deserve, doesn't it?

...And SMU got 1 year probation plus 9 scholarships stripped.

-Jason "I figure Carolina's various sports will get a millennium or two of probation. That seems fair, doesn't it?" Evans

Lying is the major crime here. Bruce Pearl hosted a barbecue. That didn't get him a show cause. Lying about it did.

[BigWayne]

Lying is the major crime here. Bruce Pearl hosted a barbecue. That didn't get him a show cause. Lying about it did.

Yes and based on what UNC has said to the public and to potential recruits, I would expect they probably did some storytelling when the NCAA came to town. Except for Debbie and Julius who just refused to talk. NCAA rates that right up there with lying.

[MarkD83]

It should be noted that the NCAA "Death Penalty" sanction is NOT literal

sorry

Party Pooper!!! I really wanted the stakes to be high....
By the way are any of the members of Mt. Hatemore Sicilian.....

[arnie]

I'm puzzled by the recurring comments here suggesting that the NCAA Committee On Infractions is likely to be lenient towards UNC because UNC is "too big to fail" or is an "elephant" with respect to the revenues generated for the NCAA. Based on the most recent information I could find, UNC ranks only #31 in college athletics revenues, barely edging out Missouri and trailing South Carolina by 9 spots.

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/5/27/8663047/college-sports-revenue-oregon

Moreover, judging from a summary of the NCAA's finances, it seems highly unlikely that the organization could be influenced by any one school, because 92% of its revenue is derived from television and marketing rights fees or income from championship events -- sums that would not appear to be substantially affected by the absence of a particular program.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/finances/revenue

I understand that UNC may be perceived as a major player by residents within the state, and to some degree among the traditional member schools of the ACC. But on the national stage, outside the confines of the region, I don't sense that UNC is regarded as such a significant presence.

The difference IMO is the presence of John Swofford. He was AD when all this started and clearly has strong desire to see them skate. He carries a big stick and will fight to the end to protect the Heels. Politics can be greater than money. At any rate, will be fun to watch.

[sagegrouse]

The difference IMO is the presence of John Swofford. He was AD when all this started and clearly has strong desire to see them skate. He carries a big stick and will fight to the end to protect the Heels. Politics can be greater than money. At any rate, will be fun to watch.

John Swofford has no say whatsoever (he is not on the COI or the NCAA Board) and has to play this totally straight, or he can be replaced by another suit willing to do an easy job for more than $2.2 million per year. ("Take me! Take me!")

One would have to believe that the ACC member schools have blood in their eyes with respect to the sanctimonious behavior of UNC over the years and the egregious nature of their violations.

The only ACC-linked NCAA board members are the president of Georgia Tech and the sr. assoc. AD at Virginia.

[Stray Gator]

The difference IMO is the presence of John Swofford. He was AD when all this started and clearly has strong desire to see them skate. He carries a big stick and will fight to the end to protect the Heels. Politics can be greater than money. At any rate, will be fun to watch.

Swofford may carry a big stick in some college athletics circles, but take a look at the composition of the Committee On Infractions and you'll see that the overwhelming weight of authority rests in the hands of academic officials. I suspect that any attempt by Swofford to influence their decision regarding the sanctions to be imposed on UNC would more than likely evoke a negative reaction -- especially since the COI members will recognize that he's not only trying to protect UNC, but seeking to minimize damage to his own reputation based on institutional misconduct that occurred on his watch and for which he arguably bears at least some responsibility.

[gumbomoop]

There's no such thing as half a year of eligibility. Unless he got a medical redshirt for last season that I wasn't aware of a la Jamal Boykin, he has 2 years of eligibility left with 3 years to complete it. If he plays at all next year, it would count as his entire junior year making 2017 his last year. If he sits the entire year, he can play In 2018. If he did have a redshirt granted for last year (once you play a game, I think a medical redshirt is the only way you get the year back provided you played in less than 30% of the total games), he has 3 years of eligibility left, but only 2.5 years to do it in meaning he would definitely play.

I'm pretty sure jimsumner is correct. I think Semi is eligible to play this season for SMU after the end of their first semester. His competing in the second half of SMU's 2015-26 season will complete his second year. He will then be eligible for the 2016-17 and 2017-18 seasons.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24918868/duke-transfer-semi-ojeleye-commits-to-smu-eligible-next-season

[OldPhiKap]

The difference IMO is the presence of John Swofford. He was AD when all this started and clearly has strong desire to see them skate. He carries a big stick and will fight to the end to protect the Heels. Politics can be greater than money. At any rate, will be fun to watch.

He also has to answer to FSU, Miami, and Syracuse among others who have been hit by the NCAA. And although I don't buy the whole "UNC creates too much revenue to punish" argument for the reasons above, football revenue from FSU dwarfs basketball revenue from, well, anywhere.

[FerryFor50]

I'm pretty sure jimsumner is correct. I think Semi is eligible to play this season for SMU after the end of their first semester. His competing in the second half of SMU's 2015-26 season will complete his second year. He will then be eligible for the 2016-17 and 2017-18 seasons.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24918868/duke-transfer-semi-ojeleye-commits-to-smu-eligible-next-season

Yep. This is why Semi - and many other transfers, including Alex Murphy - decide to leave before spring semester. To salvage as much of their eligibility as they can.

[FerryFor50]

TV contracts are negotiated through conferences ... and the NCAA negotiates contracts for the NCAA Tournament. But those deals are already in place. If a school like UNC gets a postseason ban, it won't impact the exposure UNC gets from the ACC/ESPN deal. And the $11 billion dollar NCAA/CBS deal for the tournament runs through 2024 and is not impacted by UNC's absence. The NCAA's money does not go up and down based on the viewership of any one game or the tournament as a whole.

Look, the NCAA Tournament ratings were fine in 2010, when UNC was not in the field. They were fine in 2013, when Kentucky was not in the field. They were fine in 2012 when defending champion UConn was banned from the tournament. They were record-setting last year when Syracuse was not in the tournament.

There may be reasons to think UNC will or will not be punished, but TV money is not one of those reasons.

In my view, the news that Larry Brown was nailed, not for what he knew, but for what he should have known, is significant. The same reasoning is why Jim Boeheim will sit out the first third of this season -- nothing he did or knew ... but the fact that he should have known. At UNC, academic advisor Wayne Walden is hip deep in the scandal and is cited numerous times in the NOA (atb least a dozen of his e-mails arranging phony classes are included) -- he's a guy Roy brought with him from Kansas and frequently called the "most important person in the program". Walden has refused to link Roy to the scandal -- he told Wainstein that he "can't remember" if he ever discussed it with Williams. Well, based on the Brown and Boeheim rulings, it doesn't seem to matter if Roy knew or not -- he SHOULD have known.

And for those Carolina apologists who keep claiming that men's basketball was not specifically named in the NOA, I keep repeating the summary on page 49:

The AFRI/AFAM department created anomalous courses that went unchecked for 18 years. This allowed individuals within ASPSA to use these courses through special arrangements to maintain the eligibility of academically at-risk student-athletes, particularly in the sports of football, men's basketball and women's basketball.

Although the general student body also had access to the anomalous AFRI/AFAM courses, student-athletes received preferential access to these anomalous courses, enrolled in these anomalous courses at a disproportionate rate to that of the general student body and received other impermissible benefits not available

PS I repeat what I said earlier -- the NCAA is under TREMENDOUS pressure due to a number of lawsuits by student-athletes to come down hard on UNC. The Tar Heels are going to be hammered -- and not just women's basketball.

PPS Dean Smith disciple Larry Brown (who played and coached under the sainted Smith) has now gotten three schools put on probation -- UCLA, Kansas and now SMU. Can any other coach match that trifecta? I was trying to think -- Jim Harrick was nailed at Georgia and Rhode Island ... was he also hit at UCLA? I cant remember.

Gosh, I wonder where Larry Brown and Roy Williams learned such tricks?


(Dean knew)

[Kedsy]

I would think that the TV contracts are based in part on the ratings that the televised games produce. I doubt that SMU has ratings that come close to those of UNC games. If so, then why are so many UNC games on national TV? Not wanting to argue, just seems to make sense to me.....

As Olympic Fan said, this is not correct. And as he also said, by the time they negotiate a new contract, UNC's punishment will be past. As far as I can tell, there is absolutely no economic disadvantage/advantage to the NCAA for punishing/not punishing UNC.

[devildeac]

Party Pooper!!! I really wanted the stakes to be high....
By the way are any of the members of Mt. Hatemore Sicilian.....

I'm not. Darn close to 100% certain Ozzie is not. Not sure about weezie but she has 8 fingers, 2 opposable thumbs and 10 million posts here so I'll trust she can answer for herself. T-beard? Never met the fellow but I'm kinda/sorta thinking a no for him, too.

[ikiru36]

Williams has one thing in his favor in that the Wainstein report showed that he did not like the clustering and tried to make contact with the academic side about it but was basically told to mind his own business. Ironically, that's not unusual for academic departments who are resisting cheating to say. They are far more used to the athletic side trying to at least stretch the limits of academic integrity. He instructed his assistant (Halliday?) to either guide the players away from AFAM degrees (or to make sure they made their own choices), and that was several years before the rot was found.

I understand your line of argument, but I just want to re-state some facts that belie Williams' contention that he sought to address this issue (while simulataneously claiming that there wasn't anything ever wrong in the first place). From an earlier post of mine:

"I think that there is altogether too much focus on trying to parse the meaning of reduced majoring in AFAM Studies (a line of inquiry offered as defense by Williams himself) during Williams' tenure. Instead, the focus should be squarely on the number of bogus courses being taken by Men's Basketball players, since that is the actual crime. As already noted elsewhere, while majoring in African American Studies probably is some indication of an increased likelihood of having taken such courses, it is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for having been enrolled in the sham paper classes at all.

In any event, elsewhere in the Wainstein report it is noted that "There were 54 basketball player enrollments in AFAM independent studies during Dean Smith's 36 years, 17 during Bill Guthridge's three years, 42 during Matt Doherty's three years, and 167 in Williams' 11 years."

Let's do the math:
Dean Smith - 1.5 per year (though if the scandal began in 1993, Dean was only involved for 4 years, bringing his average up to 13.5 per year. In fairness, more of the classes during Dean's full tenure were likely legitimate courses, but who knows?)
Bill Guthridge - 5.67 per year
Matt Doherty - 14 per year
Roy Williams - 15.18 per year (though if this practice was truly curtailed in 2009, Roy's average increases to 27.8 per year)

This math is very difficult to square whatsoever with a narrative that Roy sought a reduction in these courses being taken, over the course of his tenure.

These facts (if I've correctly reported and interpreted the data) point to an increase in these sham classes being taken under the Williams/Welden regime, at the same time there was a reduction in AFAM majors on the team. A cynic (or one otherwise interested in Occam's razor) might interpret this to mean that Roy sought to diminish majoring (which happens to be the one aspect of his players academic pursuits that is PUBLIC and could therefore draw scrutiny), while doing nothing to diminish (and perhaps increasing) the taking of easy/fake classes by his players?

Hmmmm, methinks he doth protest too much?"

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

[MarkD83]

I'm not. Darn close to 100% certain Ozzie is not. Not sure about weezie but she has 8 fingers, 2 opposable thumbs and 10 million posts here so I'll trust she can answer for herself. T-beard? Never met the fellow but I'm kinda/sorta thinking a no for him, too.

My reference was too obscure...I am hoping someone one on the COI is Sicilian because you should never bet against them when the death penalty is on the line...

[OldPhiKap]

My reference was too obscure...I am hoping someone one on the COI is Sicilian because you should never bet against them when the death penalty is on the line...

Too obscure for this board? Inconceivable!

[BD80]

I'm puzzled by the recurring comments here suggesting that the NCAA Committee On Infractions is likely to be lenient towards UNC because UNC is "too big to fail" or is an "elephant" with respect to the revenues generated for the NCAA. ...

But if it is repeated enough times, doesn't that make it true?


...I am hoping someone one on the COI is Sicilian because you should never bet against them when the death penalty is on the line...

But NEVER get involved in a ground war in the SEC

[SCMatt33]

I'm pretty sure jimsumner is correct. I think Semi is eligible to play this season for SMU after the end of their first semester. His competing in the second half of SMU's 2015-26 season will complete his second year. He will then be eligible for the 2016-17 and 2017-18 seasons.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24918868/duke-transfer-semi-ojeleye-commits-to-smu-eligible-next-season


Yep. This is why Semi - and many other transfers, including Alex Murphy - decide to leave before spring semester. To salvage as much of their eligibility as they can.

This is definitely not the case. Any competition regardless of how small counts as a season of eligibility. In very specific cases, most notably due to injury for which the player has played in less than 30 percent of games and not during the second half of the year, an additional season may be granted. Here is the NCAA rule on what constitutes using a season of eligibilty (http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D116.pdf) (see page 80 of the linked document which is page 94 of the pdf itself):


12.8.3.1 Minimum Amount of Competition. Any competition, regardless of time, during a season in an intercollegiate sport shall be counted as a season of competition in that sport, except as provided in Bylaws 12.8.3.1.1, 12.8.3.1.2, 12.8.3.1.3 and 12.8.3.1.4. This provision is applicable to intercollegiate athletics competition conducted by a two-year or four-year collegiate institution at the varsity or subvarsity level. (Revised: 1/11/94, 4/28/05 effective 8/1/05, 5/9/06, 1/16/10 effective 8/1/10, 7/31/14)

I won't bore you with the details of those exceptions, but they all describe different types of exhibitions/scrimmages that wouldn't count or sport specific exceptions not related to basketball. In order to "get a year back" through a medical redshirt or the like, officially called a "Hardship waiver" described here (page 82 of the previously linked document which is page 96 of the actual pdf):


12.8.4 Hardship Waiver. A student-athlete may be granted an additional year of competition by the conferenceor the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement for reasons of “hardship.” Hardship is defined as an incapacity resulting from an injury or illness that has occurred under all of the following conditions: (Revised:1/10/92 effective 8/1/92, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97, 4/26/01 effective 8/1/01, 11/1/01, 4/3/02, 8/8/02, 3/10/04, 5/11/05, 8/4/05, 4/26/07, 9/18/07, 11/1/07 effective 8/1/08, 4/24/08, 7/31/14)

Again, I'm leaving out some details as to what "the following conditions" are, but they simply describe at length the 30% and first half of the season rule. I don't know where Jon Rothstein got the idea of 2.5 years for that article, but it's wrong, and it appears some others mistakenly picked up on it as well based on a google search.

It can happen where someone gets an extra half year, but that hardship waiver must be granted. The best example of this is Jamal Boykin, who transferred to Cal during his sophomore year, but had a bad case of mono and got a redshirt for it. From the original transfer announcement by Cal (http://www.calbears.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=30100&ATCLID=207739316):


Boykin played in just three games this past November for Duke, scoring four points and grabbing 12 rebounds in 30 minutes of action, before being sidelined with a severe case of mononucleosis. Cal intends to apply for a medical hardship waiver this spring to enable Boykin, who is still recovering from his illness and has not been cleared to practice, to retain his sophomore status for the 2007-08 campaign.

He was later granted that hardship waiver. For further reference, Semi is listed on SMU's official roster (http://www.smumustangs.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/smu-m-baskbl-mtt.html) as a junior for this season. If he were to have that extra half year, they would list him as a sophomore or redshirt sophomore. Alex Murphy is listed as a redshirt senior this year (http://www.gatorzone.com/basketball/men/bios.php). Remember, he redshirted his freshman year at Duke, played a full redshirt freshman year, half of his sophomore year at Duke, sat out the second half of his sophomore year and first half of his junior year at Florida, played the second half of his junior year there, and will now be a senior. Even though he only played 1.5 years at Duke, he only had 1.5 years of eligibility left at Florida, regardless of the fact that his 5 year clock is up. The same thing also happened with Olek Czyz, who played 1.5 years at Duke, transferred to Nevada, and played another 1.5 years there. He was a Senior on their 2012 roster (http://www.nevadawolfpack.com/sports/m-baskbl/archive/2011-12-m-baskbl-roster.html) after transferring during the 2009-10 season and playing half of the 2010-11 season for Nevada.

I apologize if I'm missing some big exception to this rule that I couldn't find (please link it for me should it exist!), but I'm fairly certain based on these examples that whenever Semi plays, it will be his junior year and it might be a good idea for that year to be a full season for which the postseason is a possibility as opposed to half of a lost year, but then again, maybe he just wants to be out on the court the next two seasons and be able to move on, which is a fine choice as well.

[gumbomoop]

Any competition regardless of how small counts as a season of eligibility.... Semi is listed on SMU's official roster (http://www.smumustangs.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/smu-m-baskbl-mtt.html) as a junior for this season. If he were to have that extra half year, they would list him as a sophomore or redshirt sophomore. Alex Murphy is listed as a redshirt senior this year (http://www.gatorzone.com/basketball/men/bios.php). Remember, he redshirted his freshman year at Duke, played a full redshirt freshman year, half of his sophomore year at Duke, sat out the second half of his sophomore year and first half of his junior year at Florida, played the second half of his junior year there, and will now be a senior. Even though he only played 1.5 years at Duke, he only had 1.5 years of eligibility left at Florida, regardless of the fact that his 5 year clock is up. The same thing also happened with Olek Czyz, who played 1.5 years at Duke, transferred to Nevada, and played another 1.5 years there. He was a Senior on their 2012 roster (http://www.nevadawolfpack.com/sports/m-baskbl/archive/2011-12-m-baskbl-roster.html) after transferring during the 2009-10 season and playing half of the 2010-11 season for Nevada.

This turns out to be, for me, an interesting mystery. The unpleasant thought crosses my mind that I may be wrong. Yet more unpleasant the thought that the estimable Messrs. FerryFor50 and jimsumner may be wrong, too.

As we seek Enlightenment and Truth on this most important issue to appear on EK in years, I think it unwise, first off, to mix the cases of Alex Murphy and Semi Ojeleye, as Alex redshirted his first year but Semi did not. However, it does appear that Semi's case exactly matches that of Olek Czyz: each played for 1 and 1/2 seasons at Duke, then transferred.

Now, despite this article ....

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/wac/2010-01-13-czyz-nevada_N.htm

.... which said that the transferring Olek had 2 and 1/2 years of eligibility remaining (thus supporting the jim-bo-For50 position), Olek appears to have played only an additional 1 and 1/2 seasons at Nevada. That appears to support your insistence that there is no such thing as a half-year of eligibility.

But just to cross every T and dot every I, is it possible -- here a pathetic attempt to avoid saying, "I'm wrong" -- that Olek had another year of eligibility but chose to forego it in order to start playing professionally in Poland?

You know, it's 3 a.m., and I just sent an email to the Athletic Dept. at SMU. Speaking of pathetic. But just in case they report back that Semi has 2 and 1/2 years of eligibility, and so he plays through the 2017-18 season, but in fact he has but 1 and 1/2 years of eligibility, well, what the heck do you expect of Larry Brown?

And what do you expect the penalty will be? Death penalty squared for the Mustangs? Or should Cleveland State be worried?

[El_Diablo]

As is generally the case, SCMatt33 is right per the text of the NCAA rules. It also makes a lot of policy sense; otherwise players could simply sit out meaningless November and December games to get an extra half season that could be applied to a later January-March timeframe.

Czyz faced a choice after he transferred mid-season (and had burned two "seasons" of eligibility remaining). He sat out the second semester of his second year and first semester of his third year, and he was eligible to return for the second semester of his third year. He could have either (a) started playing then and spend another year of eligibility, or (b) sit out the remainder of that third year to preserve his two seasons for years four and five. He chose (a) and thus only played another 1.5 seasons that counted as two seasons.

Semi will be in the same boat. He has to sit out the first semester anyway, and he can choose to play in the second semester this year (using up his junior year in year 3) or wait until next fall to start playing again (using up his junior year next year and his senior year after that, in years 4 and 5, respectively). He can't play this fall and then another two years without some sort of hardship waiver applied to last fall or one of the future years (e.g., if he gets injured in the first game back).

[wsb3]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/aac/2015/09/29/smu-president-gerald-turner-ncaa-sanctions-larry-brown/73055362/



Third paragraph...

Turner criticized the harshness of the penalties, and without mentioning the University of North Carolina by name, said other schools facing NCAA investigations and/or infractions rulings must be "shaking in their boots" after seeing the sanctions handed SMU.


We can only hope...:D

[OldPhiKap]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/aac/2015/09/29/smu-president-gerald-turner-ncaa-sanctions-larry-brown/73055362/



Third paragraph...

Turner criticized the harshness of the penalties, and without mentioning the University of North Carolina by name, said other schools facing NCAA investigations and/or infractions rulings must be "shaking in their boots" after seeing the sanctions handed SMU.


We can only hope...:D

Well, deterrence is a goal of punishment. I hope they level the heels.

And while the penalty may be a bit higher than expected at SMU for a relatively isolated infraction, this is Larry Brown's third time getting caught cheating and/or failing to follow compliance requirements. That probably brings a multiplier, and SMU hired the dude knowing his background. He who plays with fire often gets blisters.

St. Dean's legacy takes another lump.

[moonpie23]

massive denial (http://www.scout.com/college/north-carolina/forums/1410-basketball/14137935-smu-banned) over at IC.....

[sammy3469]

Just so we are clear... the major crime committed by SMU was that 1 player was given course credit for 1 class in which he did no work. The credit allowed him to remain eligible.

Do I have that right? Am I missing something? Sure, SMU lied and covered stuff up an that exacerbates the penalties, but this really comes down to an athlete taking a class and getting a grade he did not deserve, doesn't it?

...And SMU got 1 year probation plus 9 scholarships stripped.

-Jason "I figure Carolina's various sports will get a millennium or two of probation. That seems fair, doesn't it?" Evans

Sort of...it was later determined that the credit wasn't even needed to remain eligible (footnote 15). It was still academic fraud so the student-athlete was ineligible, but the actual credit itself wasn't needed.

The more interesting part as it pertains to UNC is the Infractions Committee decided this didn't amount to LOIC (which the enforcement staff wanted) even with their previous violation in 2011 since they put certain compliance systems in place. Without having SMU's NOA, it's tough to know how prominently the NCAA enforcement staff had the LOIC charge, but it just shows that the Infractions Committee can make up it's own mind on certain things. The other note is these are the least onerous penalties they could have given for Standard Level 1 violations at the institutional level, so basically these are at least full level down from least penalties UNC c/should be expecting.

You didn't make this point, but others are worried about Roy getting off, but Bylaw 11.1.1.1 Responsibility of the Head Coach has been on the books since 4/28/2005, so if the Infractions Committee wants to hammer Roy, they certainly can since it was his responsibility to promote an atmosphere of compliance.

[sammy3469]

Well, deterrence is a goal of punishment. I hope they level the heels.

And while the penalty may be a bit higher than expected at SMU for a relatively isolated infraction, this is Larry Brown's third time getting caught cheating and/or failing to follow compliance requirements. That probably brings a multiplier, and SMU hired the dude knowing his background. He who plays with fire often gets blisters.

St. Dean's legacy takes another lump.

I said this to Jason, but this is the least amount of penalties the Infractions Committee could give them once they decided these were Standard Level 1 violations (which is saying something vis a vis UNC's allegations). Heck, from the way the release is worded the Enforcement Staff wanted to basically nuke the whole thing at SMU with a LOIC charge as well which the Infractions Committee didn't find.

I still don't think the people over at UNC realize how big a cudgel having men's basketball named in LOIC charge is. That implicates Roy even under the old penalty regime under Bylaw 11.1.1.1 (the bylaw that got Brown and Boeheim). Yes, the penalty regime is different now, but even back then, the NCAA could suspend coaches if they "condoned a major violation". It's pretty easy to make that determination with Roy if the Infraction Committee wants to.

[AustinDevil]

Sort of...it was later determined that the credit wasn't even needed to remain eligible (footnote 15). It was still academic fraud so the student-athlete was ineligible, but the actual credit itself wasn't needed.

The more interesting part as it pertains to UNC is the Infractions Committee decided this didn't amount to LOIC (which the enforcement staff wanted) even with their previous violation in 2011 since they put certain compliance systems in place. Without having SMU's NOA, it's tough to know how prominently the NCAA enforcement staff had the LOIC charge, but it just shows that the Infractions Committee can make up it's own mind on certain things. The other note is these are the least onerous penalties they could have given for Standard Level 1 violations at the institutional level, so basically these are at least full level down from least penalties UNC c/should be expecting.

You didn't make this point, but others are worried about Roy getting off, but Bylaw 11.1.1.1 Responsibility of the Head Coach has been on the books since 4/28/2005, so if the Infractions Committee wants to hammer Roy, they certainly can since it was his responsibility to promote an atmosphere of compliance.

I have nothing to add to sammy's excellent summary on the points discussed, but I want to raise another aspect that hasn't been discussed on DBR yet: the NCAA leveled these sanctions based on the actions of an administrative assistant, with no evidence presented whatsoever that anyone more senior either knew of or directed her actions. There are aspects to the SMU situation that are worse than what we know of UNC (head coach knew of allegations for at least a month before they were self-reported; head coach "lied" in his interview, and then corrected himself half an hour later in the same interview), and there are aspects that are far worse (pretty much everything else). But this administrative assistant piece sounds very, very much like UNC, except it was a decade-plus, not one student for one course.

It will be very interesting to see what UNC gets. My heart says they should get the Death Penalty; my head says Jerry Tarkanian will be quoted a lot on Twitter.

[gumbomoop]

1.5, per SMU athletic rep's email back to me.

I was wrong. SCMatt33 is correct.

[grad_devil]

1.5, per SMU athletic rep's email back to me.

I was wrong. SCMatt33 is correct.

That, as I understand it, is technically incorrect, too.

Semi has 2 years of eligibility remaining - he used 2 at Duke (see SCMatt33's post above).

He has to do a year-in-residence at SMU. He can begin playing in Spring of 2016. At that point, he will use another season of eligibility.

When he plays in the 16-17 season, that will be his 4th, and final year of eligibility.

He will play 1.5 more seasons, but technically use 2 years of eligibility.

[El_Diablo]

That, as I understand it, is technically incorrect, too.

Semi has 2 years of eligibility remaining - he used 2 at Duke (see SCMatt33's post above).

He has to do a year-in-residence at SMU. He can begin playing in Spring of 2016. At that point, he will use another season of eligibility.

When he plays in the 16-17 season, that will be his 4th, and final year of eligibility.

He will play 1.5 more seasons, but technically use 2 years of eligibility.

Or he could (in theory) sit out Spring '16 and get two full years in '16-17 and '17-18. Something to consider if the '16 postseason is off the table.

[gumbomoop]

That, as I understand it, is technically incorrect, too.

Semi has 2 years of eligibility remaining - he used 2 at Duke (see SCMatt33's post above).

He has to do a year-in-residence at SMU. He can begin playing in Spring of 2016. At that point, he will use another season of eligibility.

When he plays in the 16-17 season, that will be his 4th, and final year of eligibility.

He will play 1.5 more seasons, but technically use 2 years of eligibility.

I'm wrong, again. [I sure hope Luke gets off the bench......]

Technically, then, I'm considering upstaging Joe Biden and throwing my hat in the ring for Pres, I guess on the Deez Nuts ticket. I'll be a single-issue candidate, with a platform of removing the designation ".5 years" from all discussions of eligibility for college athletes.

I do wonder whether any transfers have in the past chosen to sit out that half-season, in order to retain their full two years. I could see that circumstances such as an injury might necessitate a player delaying resumption of playing, and thus playing 2 years, after a long delay. I assume most coaches want an incoming transfer, especially one likely to play significant minutes, to play as soon as possible. Since the "second half" of a college bball season is more like 2/3 of a season, I'd be surprised if many delayed resuming playing. Semi's situation, though, could become complicated.

I'm preparing myself to be found further, technically and otherwise, deficient.