Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
NCAA rejects UNC's arguments about bogus classes
#1
The original article includes a number of videos, as well as links to the source documents (both North Carolina's response to the NCAA NOA and the NCAA's response to North Carolina) and the previous articles of Kane's reporting - quite possibly the only journalist that has stayed on this story through the more than 5 years of back and forth between North Carolina and the NCAA Enforcement Staff.  If you are interested, it's worth giving the N&O the traffic.


NCAA rejects UNC’s arguments about bogus classes

By Dan Kane
dkane@newsobserver.com
October 25, 2016 11:02 AM

For two years, UNC-Chapel Hill and NCAA officials talked about the investigation into nearly two decades of fake classes as a joint probe, with both working together to find out if rules were broken.

That cooperative spirit wasn’t in evidence Tuesday, when newly released correspondence showed the NCAA no longer views the university as a partner in the investigation. It instead cited the university’s “willful violations” and “blatant disregard” for NCAA regulations.

On Friday, both sides are expected to be battling again before the NCAA’s Committee on Infractions in an unusual preliminary hearing. UNC is seeking to have a major infractions case thrown out through due-process issues. One of its arguments: The NCAA knew about the fake classes in mid-2011 while investigating other misconduct involving the football team but did not take action.

The NCAA rejected all of UNC’s arguments – and asserted that the university didn’t tell the NCAA everything it should have about the classes in 2011. The commission that accredits UNC made a similar charge in putting UNC on probation for a year in 2015.

“It is now clear that the institution did not provide the (NCAA) enforcement staff with the entire body of pertinent information at that time, and the NCAA relied to its detriment on the thoroughness of the institution’s production,” the NCAA’s enforcement staff wrote.

A recent News & Observer series, “Carolina’s Blind Side,” showed how UNC officials either downplayed the classes’ link to athletics or refused to believe something like that could happen in Chapel Hill.

UNC received the NCAA’s response a month ago. The News & Observer had been seeking its release for three weeks. During that time, UNC’s attorney had filed more legal arguments and sought to interview NCAA officials who were handling the case.

UNC’s attorney, Rick Evrard, wrote in the correspondence that the NCAA has only itself to blame for not becoming aware of the depths of the misconduct until former federal prosecutor Kenneth Wainstein’s investigation in 2014. Wainstein found that several staff within the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes were culpable.

“The fact that the Enforcement Staff made resource allocation decisions not to spend extensive time looking at huge numbers of emails and documents relating to every ASPSA employee does not mean the information was ‘not available’ or that the University withheld or failed to uncover or locate any information,” Evrard wrote.

Blame for Baddour
The NCAA saw Wainstein’s investigation as a turning point, after seven prior probes or reviews did not conclude that athletic eligibility helped drive the scandal in the African and Afro-American Studies department.

“The new information provided, for the first time, a complete picture of the athletics department’s preferential access to anomalous AFRI/AFAM courses and, in some cases, how it used those courses to retain NCAA academic eligibility for student-athletes,” the NCAA’s enforcement staff wrote. “This access provided student-athletes with advantages that other students simply did not have.”

The enforcement staff’s response laid the blame for the failure to shut down the classes on academic and athletic officials. Former longtime athletic director **** Baddour drew a mention for doing little, the NCAA said, when the former head of the athletes’ tutoring program, Robert Mercer, and a former senior associate athletic director, John Blanchard, raised questions about the classes a decade ago.

“Because of **** Baddour’s, former athletics director’s, hands-off management approach, Mercer and Blanchard also did not receive support from the athletics department on this issue,” the response said. “Institutional leaders chose not to act.”

Baddour, who retired in 2011, could not be immediately reached.

Case grinds on
The records represent the typical back-and-forth between universities and NCAA officials in infractions cases, though this has been one of the more protracted investigations in the NCAA’s history.

The infraction committee’s hearing Friday is closed to the public, and it’s unlikely any information about what took place will become public before a decision on any punishment is reached later.

The hearing will determine whether the NCAA has the legal grounds under its regulations to pursue a case against UNC regarding the fake classes. The committee is also expected to decide whether it can consider key information from the most extensive investigation into the scandal – Wainstein’s 131-page report, which was released in October 2014.

That report found 18 years of fake classes – most of them created by Deborah Crowder, a longtime office manager in the Department of African and Afro-American Studies. More than 3,100 students took at least one of the classes, with athletes making up roughly half of that group despite representing less than 4 percent of the student body.

Football and men’s basketball players were the two top beneficiaries of the classes by sport. The classes had no instruction and only required a paper to be submitted to obtain a high grade. They began as independent studies, but Crowder in 1999 began disguising them as lecture classes to get around a limit on how many independent studies a student could take.

Her boss, department chairman Julius Nyang’oro, continued the classes for two more years after Crowder retired in 2009, at the request of an academic counselor for the football team. They weren’t exposed until The News & Observer obtained a transcript for a former star football player in August 2011.

The case could end if the committee finds the NCAA lacks procedural grounds; if not, the case would proceed to an infractions hearing sometime late this year or in early 2017.

Dan Kane: 919-829-4861, @dankanenando


UNC vs. NCAA

Here are UNC’s arguments against the NCAA taking up the academic fraud scandal, and how the NCAA’s enforcement staff responded:

▪  Does the NCAA have jurisdiction?

UNC: The NCAA has no jurisdiction over academic matters such as the content and oversight of courses.

NCAA: The case isn’t about content or management of courses. It’s about “how the unmonitored athletics department used anomalous courses in a manner different than the general student body in violation of NCAA rules.”

▪  Were the bogus classes broadly available?

UNC: The classes had non-athletes enrolled, along with athletes.

NCAA: Athletes made up nearly half of the enrollments, when they account for 3 percent of the student body. “The preferential and near unfettered access the AFRI/AFAM department gave athletics to the anomalous courses provided student-athletes with advantages that others simply did not have.”

▪ What NCAA standards did UNC violate?

UNC: The NCAA accusations of UNC’s failure to monitor and lack of institutional control failed to cite any underlying bylaw for misconduct – such as unethical conduct or impermissible benefits – involving the classes.

NCAA: The failure of academic and athletic officials to put a stop to the fake classes and to the access athletes had to them justifies those violations.

▪ Does the NCAA get a second chance at the scandal?

UNC: The NCAA’s enforcement staff had the opportunity to fully investigate the classes in August 2011, when UNC first notified it during the course of an investigation into improper financial benefits from agents and improper academic help from a tutor.

NCAA: The previous case involving the football team was unrelated to the fake classes, and the full scope of the academic scandal wasn’t known until three years later with the Wainstein investigation. The NCAA also noted that seven investigations prior to Wainstein’s report failed to get to the bottom of the scandal.

▪ Is it too late?

UNC: By the time the NCAA either re-opened or began a new investigation into the classes, the four-year statute of limitations had expired.

NCAA: The four-year limit can be waived when there is a “blatant disregard” of NCAA bylaws.

▪ Is Wainstein’s investigation off-limits?

UNC: The NCAA can’t consider evidence obtained by Wainstein from the two architects of the fake classes because he did not interview them in accordance with NCAA protocols.

NCAA: The Committee on Infractions gives more weight to emails and statistical information than witness statements or observations made by Wainstein and his team. “Committee on Infractions members can assign whatever weight they choose, but they should at least have access to the publicly available report.” The NCAA also said UNC didn’t dispute the Wainstein report and made serious reforms after its release.
[-] The following 2 users Like Huckittome's post:
  • Bugmantom, icmcumin
#2
That figures. It only mentions women's basketball players. No football or men's basketball players involved. BS.
#3
http://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/17913622/north-carolina-officials-meet-ncaa-panel-multiyear-academic-case
"I like thinking big. If you're going to be thinking anything, you might as well think big." ... Donald Trump


#4
I love watching Duke come back last night to punk the blue balls. I think Cutcliff is a good coach who does a lot with the talent he has. Fedora is an arrogant coach who folds like a $3 suitcase in big games.

Now Coach K losing doesn't bother me one bit, also an arrogant dyck.
#5
UNC again faces NCAA extra-benefits charge in academic case
#6
At this point it feels like the NCAA is actually creating reasons to delay any sort of punishment.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Nevermore's post:
  • HughRichardCranium
#7
I'm sure punishing the women's basketball team will make UNC think twice.
[-] The following 1 user Likes HughRichardCranium's post:
  • Bugmantom
#8
These fake classes influenced the graduation rates at North Carolina and graduation rates are in the domain of the NCAA so the NCAA has a legitimate reason to monitor the academic side. Players maintained their eligibility by taking fake courses and that's a "no-no" that would have had any other school on a ten year probation.

I'm glad to see that the Tar Heels have raised the ire of the NCAA. Maybe the NCAA will develop some backbone and give the Heels what they justly deserve, a minimum of five years on the rock pile. DRAIN THE SWAMP !!!!!
[-] The following 1 user Likes Joe21's post:
  • Bugmantom
#9
Theoretically this one could cost them a natty.... 2005?

Theoretically......
#10
(12-22-2016, 05:19 PM)Joe21 Wrote: These fake classes influenced the graduation rates at North Carolina and graduation rates are in the domain of the NCAA so the NCAA has a legitimate reason to monitor the academic side. Players maintained their eligibility by taking fake courses and that's a "no-no" that would have had any other school on a ten year probation.

I'm glad to see that the Tar Heels have raised the ire of the NCAA. Maybe the NCAA will develop some backbone and give the Heels what they justly deserve, a minimum of five years on the rock pile.  DRAIN THE SWAMP !!!!!

Which begs the question: why isn't UNC's accreditation in question?
Uncle Salty     "...while beggars can't be choosers, choosers rarely have to be beggars."
[-] The following 2 users Like Salty's post:
  • Bugmantom, CookF16
#11
http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/north-carolinas-arrogance-might-have-backfired-in-ncaa-academic-fraud-case/
#12
I feel bad for UNC.






Said no one ever.
[-] The following 2 users Like fhellandjr's post:
  • CookF16, Salty
#13
North Carolina to get ruling from NCAA infractions panel Friday
#14
(10-12-2017, 11:43 AM)Marty Coleman Wrote: North Carolina to get ruling from NCAA infractions panel Friday

Please, oh please....bring the guillotine!
Uncle Salty     "...while beggars can't be choosers, choosers rarely have to be beggars."
#15
Can we expect to see "NCAA hammers UNC with reduction of 2 scholies in wimmens JV pole vault....."
#16
Penn State was bad...really, really bad. UNC was bad...really, really bad. Granted, child abuse trumps 'faux' higher education, but...if I'm Penn State's board, I'm taking the NCAA to court and sue it into non-existence. Any other program that has been penalized since the UNC investigation was launched, should join in as well.

Penn State's issue was criminal. UNC's was laughing in the face of the member institutions and getting away with it. In no way, shape, or form will I ever find myself feeling the slightest bit of remorse for that 'program'. Any coach who is a part of that program I would cast a wary eye. You are the company you keep.
Uncle Salty     "...while beggars can't be choosers, choosers rarely have to be beggars."
#17
So pretty much everybody on this board called this result.
#18
I don't understand how they can say this isn't an athletics issue when the athletes were steered to the fake classes by advisors.
#19
can't touch the golden goose that pays for the taj mahal in indy ... basketball tourney ...so ... let's review ... it's ok for the athletes to participate in bogus classes as long as the other student population got to attend said bogus classes ... so if i win the powerball tonight, and i decide to give athletes at clemson money ... as long as i give some money to normal students, it'll be ok?

biggest bunch of horse crap to ever come out of the ncaa ...
"I like thinking big. If you're going to be thinking anything, you might as well think big." ... Donald Trump


[-] The following 2 users Like CookF16's post:
  • Joe21, Salty
#20
(10-14-2017, 08:58 AM)CookF16 Wrote: can't touch the golden goose that pays for the taj mahal in indy ... basketball tourney ...so ... let's review ... it's ok for the athletes to participate in bogus classes as long as the other student population got to attend said bogus classes ... so if i win the powerball tonight, and i decide to give athletes at clemson money ... as long as i give some money to normal students, it'll be ok?

biggest bunch of horse crap to ever come out of the ncaa ...

I agree Mike, and the NCAA has pulled plenty of horse crap in the past hammering some schools and giving the "get out of jail free" pass to others. The Tarholes have benefitted on previous NCAA look-sees.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)