RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Zero punishment for UNC
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/17 10:13 am    ::: Zero punishment for UNC Reply Reply with quote

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/latest-unc-avoids-major-penalties-ncaa-academic-case-50461710

Like most people I was awaiting UNC receiving it's comeuppance, but all along there was a serious issues of why the bona fides of UNC academic coursework was a matter for the NCAA.

What hasn't gotten enough attention is how useless accreditation groups are in addressing serious issues at major universities. The failure really rests with UNC's accreditors.

The reality is, though, that nobody (other than fans of rival schools) rationally thinks that the overall academic quality of UNC is any less after this scandal than it was before. Not applicants, not students, not employers, not those handing out research grants, awards or prizes, not graduate or professional schools reviewing applications from it's grads. It was embarrassing, but in the big picture it just doesn't matter, and it wasn't really about sports.

And I'm not sure I want the NCAA deciding whether an African American Studies course, or a Ballroom Dancing Class, are "legitimate" or worthy of credit towards a degree. It's not why the NCAA exists.

It would be nice if universities cared and could be shamed into acting more responsibly, but this is hardly the only way they sell out to big time athletics, and it's not new.

Well at least everyone all exercised about how Sylvia Hatchell and WBB were being set up and unfairly treated can now relax.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/17 10:46 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The intriguing thing is whether a school could consciously use this outcome to set up some courses specifically designed to keep athletes eligible.

The NCAA allows schools to give preferential course selection and scheduling to athletes without running afoul of "extra benefits" rules. It's justified by the need for athletes to schedule around practices and games. So athletes have always gotten first crack at notorious gut classes and easy professors, which EVERY college has, and which every college student knows about.

So if you purposely set up some reeeeeeeealy easy, minimal effort, guaranteed high grade classes, and limited scholarship athlete registration to half of each class, opening the remaining spots to your normal seniority/gpa/lottery/stand-in-line registration process, you could keep eligible your most at risk athletes. They might never graduate, but who cares. They can play.

NCAA evidently says it's not an NCAA issue. Your accreditors won't do anything to your accreditation. If you're willing to take the public relations hit, and certainly there are schools that are if the result is success on the field or court, then why not?

Will anyone be that blatant about it and institutionalize it, or will it have to remain in the shadows so that schools can blame a few rogue professors and administrators? It looks like this outcome actually provides that choice.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/17 11:22 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

If there was any doubt about the inherent corruption of the NCAA, this should remove it.

So UNC ran its athletes through bogus courses to keep them eligible, but that's OK, because some other students took the same courses.

Rationally, one would think that the bogus courses, regardless of who gets to take them, would result in the ineligibility of all such students for extracurricular activities -- oops, forgot that the only extracurricular activity that anyone cares about is athletics -- but not so. Who cares if they don't go to class? Clearly not the NCAA, which is just more proof that the "student" segment of the "student-athlete" is completely irrelevant in this billion-dollar industry.

As Art points out, any school can now set up bogus, keep-them-eligible classes and as long as other students can also take advantage (maybe children of boosters or other influential sorts), it's totally fine.

Which means, then, that the degree those athletes receive indicates as much about their academic achievement, and the value of their scholarship in terms of actual academic accomplishment, as does their on-field performance.

Sad and disgusting that UNC would protect its athletic department by relying on a technicality. If the administration had any concern for its academic reputation and the education it delivered to athletes, it would forfeit wins, fire coaches, and fire administrators. But UNC is no better than the NCAA, corrupt to the core.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 4229
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/17 11:28 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Disgusting, and shows exactly what the NCAA is worth.....NOTHING. Who paid them for this ruling, is what I want to know.



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/17 11:47 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
If there was any doubt about the inherent corruption of the NCAA, this should remove it.

So UNC ran its athletes through bogus courses to keep them eligible, but that's OK, because some other students took the same courses.

Rationally, one would think that the bogus courses, regardless of who gets to take them, would result in the ineligibility of all such students for extracurricular activities -- oops, forgot that the only extracurricular activity that anyone cares about is athletics -- but not so. Who cares if they don't go to class? Clearly not the NCAA, which is just more proof that the "student" segment of the "student-athlete" is completely irrelevant in this billion-dollar industry.

As Art points out, any school can now set up bogus, keep-them-eligible classes and as long as other students can also take advantage (maybe children of boosters or other influential sorts), it's totally fine.

Which means, then, that the degree those athletes receive indicates as much about their academic achievement, and the value of their scholarship in terms of actual academic accomplishment, as does their on-field performance.

Sad and disgusting that UNC would protect its athletic department by relying on a technicality. If the administration had any concern for its academic reputation and the education it delivered to athletes, it would forfeit wins, fire coaches, and fire administrators. But UNC is no better than the NCAA, corrupt to the core.


Actually the silliness is manifest when compared to the forfeiture of wins imposed on Note Dame because five or six football players got help from one student tutor.

In the normal course of ND's own normal disciplinary process, a couple players were expelled. Others grades were revised downwards to Fs or D's but remained in school. Because those revised grades dropped their GPAs below ND's own standards for athletic eligibility ( not any NCAA rule, but ND's own rule), they were retroactively deemed to have played ineligible players and forfeited those games. ( Even though they were actually eligible at the time they played and were only later deemed ineligible because their grades were revised downwards.)

Be clear, ND wasn't disciplined because the tutor helped the players or because of cheating. They were sanctioned for playing retroactively ineligible players who were still eligible under NCAA rules but were ineligible under ND's own rules. If ND had simply expelled all of them rather than lowering the grades of some, no one would ever have been ineligible and there would have been no NCAA violation. But that's not what was called for under their code of conduct and not the penalty imposed by the standard student disciplinary system. So because ND discovered the violation, followed their disciplinary system to the letter, and self reported, they got dinged, but a school that created phony courses and fought the NCAA to the death, doesn't.

Now I don't think the NCAA should be judging academic bona fides. I think that's up to the University and accreditors. If the school says " this class meets our standards for academic credit," that should not be subject to NCAA review. I think if the school is willing to risk devaluing all of their degrees, then the marketplace will address it when employers won't hire their grads. Realistically, a school with the reputation of UNC runs zero risk of that ever happening even if they hand out bogus BAs to basketball players. But I think the completely inconsistant outcomes is what discredits the NCAA.


bballjunkie



Joined: 12 Aug 2014
Posts: 337



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/17 11:53 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Wow, I guess this will be the futurešŸ˜¢


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/17 11:58 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:


Rationally, one would think that the bogus courses, regardless of who gets to take them, would result in the ineligibility of all such students for extracurricular activities -- oops, forgot that the only extracurricular activity that anyone cares about is athletics -- but not so.


The flaw in that argument is that no one ever deemed any of those classes "bogus."

If they did, there would be thousands of degrees that would have to be withdrawn because thousands of students and grads would be short of the required credits for graduation.

So those credits and grades all continue to count at UNC, for ALL students who took those classes.

If they still count towards graduation as entered in the students' transcripts, why should anyone be ineligible? If the A counts towards Frat Boy receiving his degree in pre med, magna cum laude, why shouldn't it count towards basketball player being eligible to play? (Frankly I consider the former far more significant than the latter.) Regardless of what we think, the dean and president and trustees of UNC say those are valid grades in valid courses. And they still say that. And UNC's academic accreditors accept that determination. And they still count towards graduation and class rank and honors. I don't see that it's the NCAA'S job to second guess that.




Last edited by ArtBest23 on 10/13/17 12:09 pm; edited 2 times in total
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 55041
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/17 12:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

UNC student-athletes will be thrilled once someone reads this story to them.



_________________
A long time ago being crazy meant something. Nowadays everybody's crazy
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/17 12:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
UNC student-athletes will be thrilled once someone reads this story to them.


Very Happy


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/17 12:30 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
UNC student-athletes will be thrilled once someone reads this story to them.


Perfect ...

The fact that the UNC administration is doing nothing may be the most damning non-action of all. One expects nothing, or even less, from the NCAA, but the willingness of the UNC leadership to just roll over on this is stunning.

With a straight face, they claim these classes met the standards of the university ... amazing.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/17 12:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
pilight wrote:
UNC student-athletes will be thrilled once someone reads this story to them.


Perfect ...

The fact that the UNC administration is doing nothing may be the most damning non-action of all. One expects nothing, or even less, from the NCAA, but the willingness of the UNC leadership to just roll over on this is stunning.

With a straight face, they claim these classes met the standards of the university ... amazing.


I agree. The administration and trustees should be ashamed of themselves, as should their accreditation organization.

But the reality is that UNC is too big and its reputation too well established for this incident to have any real adverse impact. Nobody's going to refuse to hire or to admit into medical or law school UNC grads, and any effect on fundraising will be minimal to nonexistent.

I wouldn't want to be applying for a prestigious grad school or fellowship if I had one of those courses on my transcript (might be an awkward interview trying to explain why you took that class) but for most students and grads, it's a non-event.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/17 1:46 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Thinking about this, and assuming the "we're not going to second guess the bona fides of courses actually listed by UNC in the school course catalog and available to all students" is valid, what happened to the other offenses for which they were charged?

Wouldn't you think that having athletic department people calling professors and having grades changed to maintain eligibility would be a violation worthy of punishment by itself? What happened to all of those type of things in the reports? That certainly wasn't a benefit available to all students, athlete and non-athlete.


blaase22



Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 3510
Location: Paradise


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/14/17 12:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Disgusting and yet they over punish the small schools
I hate this bs!


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 4229
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/16/17 11:23 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I had a Twitter argument with whoever runs @hoopism after the UNC decision. It went something like this:

me: NCAA is toothless...worthless and corrupt, just like the NFL.
them: That's incorrect.
me: Why, please?
them:Wondering how you could liken a collection of privately-owned, all about profit-owned, mostly-Republican-owned teams to the NCAA.
them: No comparison. It's like comparing Microsoft to the Boys and Girls Club of America.
them: You asked, I answered.
them: the NCAA is non-profit, has a governing body, is research-based, represents all schools, and always seeks ways to get better.
me: And both, IMO, are susceptible to the hand with the most money in it.
me: that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. PS: My dad was on the athletic board at a P5 school.

Their last statement was about as stupid as any I've heard on the subject, IMNSHO. My father would probably agree if he were here to say anything on the subject. His years on the athletic board soured him considerably on the NCAA. I suppose that person has now muted me, although we've had many friendly exchanges prior to this one. Sad



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 4026
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/16/17 3:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I don't recall what all the specific charges were against UNC and don't know how each was concluded, but I certainly don't think the NCAA should be in the business of determining the academic validity of any school's curriculum. That's the job of UNC and academic credentialing agencies.

I thought it was actually clever for UNC to embed most (all?) of their gut courses for jocks in an African-American studies program. If you criticize that, you're a racist.
FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 527



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/17/17 7:54 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
I don't recall what all the specific charges were against UNC and don't know how each was concluded, but I certainly don't think the NCAA should be in the business of determining the academic validity of any school's curriculum. That's the job of UNC and academic credentialing agencies.

I thought it was actually clever for UNC to embed most (all?) of their gut courses for jocks in an African-American studies program. If you criticize that, you're a racist.


Of course it's not racist nor exploitative to enroll African-American athletes in valueless classes so you can put them in a suit with the school's name on it and gain ticket sales and media contracts.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/17/17 9:44 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

FrozenLVFan wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
I don't recall what all the specific charges were against UNC and don't know how each was concluded, but I certainly don't think the NCAA should be in the business of determining the academic validity of any school's curriculum. That's the job of UNC and academic credentialing agencies.

I thought it was actually clever for UNC to embed most (all?) of their gut courses for jocks in an African-American studies program. If you criticize that, you're a racist.


Of course it's not racist nor exploitative to enroll African-American athletes in valueless classes so you can put them in a suit with the school's name on it and gain ticket sales and media contracts.


So are you telling us that no white athletes or non-athletes took these classes? Can you lay out your evidence for that?


Nixtreefan



Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 1257



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/17/17 10:13 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
I don't recall what all the specific charges were against UNC and don't know how each was concluded, but I certainly don't think the NCAA should be in the business of determining the academic validity of any school's curriculum. That's the job of UNC and academic credentialing agencies.

I thought it was actually clever for UNC to embed most (all?) of their gut courses for jocks in an African-American studies program. If you criticize that, you're a racist.



Damn is there like a like button I can put on this Laughing Laughing


CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 16691
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/17/17 10:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
I don't recall what all the specific charges were against UNC and don't know how each was concluded, but I certainly don't think the NCAA should be in the business of determining the academic validity of any school's curriculum. That's the job of UNC and academic credentialing agencies.

I thought it was actually clever for UNC to embed most (all?) of their gut courses for jocks in an African-American studies program. If you criticize that, you're a racist.


The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges put UNC on probation, which was the first time in over ten years that the accrediting organization put an institution on probation for academic fraud or academic integrity.

The Wainstain Report detailed that employees at the university knowingly steered about 1,500 athletes toward no-show courses that never met and were not taught by any faculty members, and in which the only work required was a single research paper that received a high grade no matter the content.

UNC athletes were 38% of irregular AFAM course enrollments, but only 4% of student body.

The message is this...an institution can create whatever fictitious classes with barely-there curricula, as long as there is at least a few non-athletes in the class to show that it is for the exclusive use by athletes.


willtalk



Joined: 13 Apr 2012
Posts: 247
Location: NorCal


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/17 9:13 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CamrnCrz1974 wrote:
r

The message is this...an institution can create whatever fictitious classes with barely-there curricula, as long as there is at least a few non-athletes in the class to show that it is for the exclusive use by athletes.


Yes and that message is a biggie.I believe this portend the effective death toll of the NCAA in respect to any eligibility control. It creates a huge loop hole that I am sure will be taken advantage of.

I for one have felt that the higher educational system has long become goal displaced. The value of a degree has paralleled the declining value of the dollar. Actual education has taken a back seat to profit.


CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 16691
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/17 9:49 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

willtalk wrote:
CamrnCrz1974 wrote:
r

The message is this...an institution can create whatever fictitious classes with barely-there curricula, as long as there is at least a few non-athletes in the class to show that it is for the exclusive use by athletes.


Yes and that message is a biggie.I believe this portend the effective death toll of the NCAA in respect to any eligibility control. It creates a huge loop hole that I am sure will be taken advantage of.


If only Louisville had procured strippers for non-athletes and funneled shoe payments to non-athletes...


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/17 9:53 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CamrnCrz1974 wrote:


UNC athletes were 38% of irregular AFAM course enrollments, but only 4% of student body.

The message is this...an institution can create whatever fictitious classes with barely-there curricula, as long as there is at least a few non-athletes in the class to show that it is for the exclusive use by athletes.


So now now "a few" = 62%?

I suppose if you're creative enough with math, and loose enough with language, you can claim anything.

So what's the cutoff where the NCAA assumes the accreditors' role of assessing a university's academic quality and integrity? 30% athletes? 10% athletes? Any department or class in which a single athlete is enrolled? Any department or class in which a single athlete might potentially enroll? And what qualifies the NCAA for this role? Should the NCAA publish more rules setting forth that in all college classes of all member institutions there must be at least two three hour exams per semester consisting of no fewer than six essay questions, plus at least one research paper of at least thirty pages in no larger than 11 pt New Times Roman with no larger than 1 inch margins?

And should the NCAA as part of its sanctions decision declare courses it considers academically unsuitable to be null and void just as it declares games retroactively forfeited and require the school to withdraw the degrees of any graduate who relied on those credits to meet the requirements for his or her degree? Is that what you want the NCAA's job to be now?

If the accrediting agency didn't do its job, then that's where the fault lies. If a UNC degree has become a joke unworthy of respect, then that's up to employers and graduate schools and fellowship boards to decide and to stop giving it unwarranted respect. But it doesn't make it the NCAA'S job.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/17 9:59 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

willtalk wrote:

I for one have felt that the higher educational system has long become goal displaced. The value of a degree has paralleled the declining value of the dollar. Actual education has taken a back seat to profit.


And the National Collegiate Athletic Association has precisely what role, if any, in addressing your vision of the collapse of the American educational system?


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/17 10:24 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
willtalk wrote:

I for one have felt that the higher educational system has long become goal displaced. The value of a degree has paralleled the declining value of the dollar. Actual education has taken a back seat to profit.


And the National Collegiate Athletic Association has precisely what role, if any, in addressing your vision of the collapse of the American educational system?


If indeed it is important for "student-athletes" to provide the labor for intercollegiate athletics, then the NCAA is not the body to supervise the "student" portion. But by the same token, it seems that transgressions on the "student" side should also have some athletic penalty ... as it is, UNC and every other college with easy courses that athletes (among others) gravitate toward -- which would be just about every college -- will suffer no athletic consequences for an action designed to benefit the athletic program.

The accreditation process is also very slow, as I understand it, and very complex, so it's possible that these violations will not even count much in terms of accreditation, and even if they do make a difference, the impact on the teams and coaches involved will be minimal.

In short, the NCAA is obviously worthless when it comes to the academic side of the equation, but if that's important -- and I don't think it is to coaches and athletic departments, and most likely isn't to those higher in the food chain -- then another agency needs to have the power to punish such blatant fraud. (It shouldn't matter if other students take the courses; if athletes do, and remain eligible thereby, there should be athletic punishment that is immediate.)

Of course, we could just admit that intercollegiate athletics have little or nothing to do with academics and put scholarship athletes in a completely different category than regular students.

#eliminatehypocrisy



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/17 10:59 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

As offended as I am by UNC's academic fraud, or even by USC allowing Matt Leinhart to finish his degree requirements with a single Ballroom Dancing class so that he could play another season of football, I don't think the NCAA has any qualifications or any role in assessing the bona fides of college classwork. It's about the last thing I want the NCAA butting into.

Honestly, I don't have a good answer of how to deal with the situation where USC or UNC presidents and trustees lack any shame and are are willing to accept and ignore the accompanying public criticism, where the institutions that should provide the check, such as the bodies responsible for accreditation, fail in their responsibility, and where the marketplace of employers and graduate school admissions boards deem it of no significance to the overall quality of the university's degrees. I just don't believe It's the NCAA's job to step into that void or that it is qualified to do so. The NCAA struggles to get the simple things directly involving athletics right. This is a lot more difficult and serious.

It's not like the issue is new. It's been 36 years since Dexter Manley received an Oklahoma State degree without ever learning to read. I haven't read that any of the UNC players graduated while illiterate.

My sense is that part of the problem is that these major universities are too big to fail. The financial and other ramifications of a loss of accreditation are so severe on so many people that the threat of such action is largely empty. You can put a school on probation, but the organizations are not about to actually withdraw accreditation from a major research institution. So the integrity of a school largely rests on the integrity and ego of the people in charge. And if they're willing to turn a blind eye and to weather the storm if exposed, there isn't much leverage.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/17 11:54 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Sad but true ...

And it even happens at the high school level. There are schools in the DMV that will allow a player to transfer in on Tuesday and play a game on Friday.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 13906
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/17 11:56 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The biggest problem here is that the accreditation process is so neutered. UNC gave credit for fake classes. If that doesn't affect a schools accreditation it is hard to imagine what could.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 55041
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/17 12:05 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

willtalk wrote:
CamrnCrz1974 wrote:
r

The message is this...an institution can create whatever fictitious classes with barely-there curricula, as long as there is at least a few non-athletes in the class to show that it is for the exclusive use by athletes.


Yes and that message is a biggie.I believe this portend the effective death toll of the NCAA in respect to any eligibility control. It creates a huge loop hole that I am sure will be taken advantage of.

I for one have felt that the higher educational system has long become goal displaced. The value of a degree has paralleled the declining value of the dollar. Actual education has taken a back seat to profit.


NCAA members are virtually all non-profit organizations.

The NCAA hasn't cared about academic eligibility in a long time. When was the last time a player was declared ineligible based on grades?



_________________
A long time ago being crazy meant something. Nowadays everybody's crazy
willtalk



Joined: 13 Apr 2012
Posts: 247
Location: NorCal


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/17 12:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
willtalk wrote:

I for one have felt that the higher educational system has long become goal displaced. The value of a degree has paralleled the declining value of the dollar. Actual education has taken a back seat to profit.


And the National Collegiate Athletic Association has precisely what role, if any, in addressing your vision of the collapse of the American educational system?


I never implied that it had a role. If anything the present issue is just one manifestation of the bigger problem. That being that the Institutions them selves care less about maintaining standards than they do about maintaining a profit margin. Nothing wrong with institutions operating out in the BLACK and out of debt, but when the purpose of Education becomes profit the quality surely suffers. Even I can remember a time when this sort of blatant disregard for academics would never have happened. If athletics were not such a cash cow this issue would not exist.

The Universities today seem to reflect the worst aspects of our society. One of those being the quest for profit and power. Athletics is only involved because it has become a major source of income for the Universities. Athletics did not corrupt the educational institutions, rather the inherent unethical dysfunction of the institutions corrupted athletics.


CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 16691
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/17 5:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
CamrnCrz1974 wrote:


UNC athletes were 38% of irregular AFAM course enrollments, but only 4% of student body.

The message is this...an institution can create whatever fictitious classes with barely-there curricula, as long as there is at least a few non-athletes in the class to show that it is for the exclusive use by athletes.


So now now "a few" = 62%?

I suppose if you're creative enough with math, and loose enough with language, you can claim anything.


I only included the AFAM classes, not all of the independent study classes and other classes that were created under the scheme.

ArtBest23 wrote:

So what's the cutoff where the NCAA assumes the accreditors' role of assessing a university's academic quality and integrity? 30% athletes? 10% athletes? Any department or class in which a single athlete is enrolled? Any department or class in which a single athlete might potentially enroll? And what qualifies the NCAA for this role? Should the NCAA publish more rules setting forth that in all college classes of all member institutions there must be at least two three hour exams per semester consisting of no fewer than six essay questions, plus at least one research paper of at least thirty pages in no larger than 11 pt New Times Roman with no larger than 1 inch margins?


The NCAA's role is to prevent improper benefits. The classes were created for athlete eligibility, but then opened up to others. That is an improper benefit.

ArtBest23 wrote:
If the accrediting agency didn't do its job, then that's where the fault lies. If a UNC degree has become a joke unworthy of respect, then that's up to employers and graduate schools and fellowship boards to decide and to stop giving it unwarranted respect. But it doesn't make it the NCAA'S job.


Again, as I said, the NCAA's job, among other things, is to ensure that improper benefits are not given to student-athletes.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/17 10:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CamrnCrz1974 wrote:


The NCAA's role is to prevent improper benefits. The classes were created for athlete eligibility, but then opened up to others. That is an improper benefit. . . ..


Again, as I said, the NCAA's job, among other things, is to ensure that improper benefits are not given to student-athletes.


Maybe you ought to actually look at the rules before you make up stuff that doesn't exist.

To start with, nowhere in the NCAA Bylaws is the term "improper benefit" used.

I expect the term you are searching for is "Extra Benefit." Now that actually is defined.

"16.02.3 Extra Benefit. [A] An extra benefit is any special arrangement by an institutional employee or representative of the institutionā€™s athletics interests to provide a student-athlete or the student-athlete family member or friend a benefit not expressly authorized by NCAA legislation. Receipt of a benefit by student-athletes or their family members or friends is not a violation of NCAA legislation if it is demonstrated that the same benefit is generally available to the institutionā€™s students or their family members or friends or to a particular segment of the student body (e.g., international students, minority students) determined on a basis unrelated to athletics ability.
(Revised: 1/10/91, 1/19/13 effective 8/1/13)"


As long as it's generally available to all students - which these classes were as shown by the reality that two thirds of the students in the classes were non-athletes - it's quite simply not a violation. If the school decides to hand out laptops or tablets to all students, or even just to all black students, or to put 60" HDTVs in all dorm rooms, or even just in some dorms which are open to all students, or to hand out SUVs to all students, it's not a violation. It doesn't matter if the motivation was to boost recruiting or to benefit athletes if the benefit isn't limited to athletes.

So under the CamrnCrz1974 Rulebook this would evidently be a violation, but under the NCAA rule book, it's not.

If you're really worried about "extra benefits" maybe you ought to focus on things
Iike laser tag facilities and float tube rivers and and movie theaters being built in football locker rooms exclusively for the football players. Now those things are definitely not made available to the student body at large.


CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 16691
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/19/17 1:47 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Maybe you should not attack posters, as I am way more knowledgeable on this than you.

The extra benefit was not available to everyone; it was done later on as a coverup.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/19/17 9:36 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CamrnCrz1974 wrote:
Maybe you should not attack posters, as I am way more knowledgeable on this than you.


Ok, Mr. Know-It-All, please identify the specific sections of the NCAA Bylaws that define "improper benefits" and which support your supposed violations.

Maybe you ought to learn something about the actual rules before you spout off.


CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 16691
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/17 10:53 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
CamrnCrz1974 wrote:
Maybe you should not attack posters, as I am way more knowledgeable on this than you.


Ok, Mr. Know-It-All, please identify the specific sections of the NCAA Bylaws that define "improper benefits" and which support your supposed violations.

Maybe you ought to learn something about the actual rules before you spout off.


Perhaps you should read the facts and learn that the classes were developed only for student athletes and other non-athletes were added later on. This goes back 18 years.

But you can sit and attack posters, like you usually do. You got shut down on multiple threads when you were wrong about UNC, going back a few years. A shame no lesson was learned...


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/17 1:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CamrnCrz1974 wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
CamrnCrz1974 wrote:
Maybe you should not attack posters, as I am way more knowledgeable on this than you.


Ok, Mr. Know-It-All, please identify the specific sections of the NCAA Bylaws that define "improper benefits" and which support your supposed violations.

Maybe you ought to learn something about the actual rules before you spout off.


Perhaps you should read the facts and learn that the classes were developed only for student athletes and other non-athletes were added later on. This goes back 18 years.

But you can sit and attack posters, like you usually do. You got shut down on multiple threads when you were wrong about UNC, going back a few years. A shame no lesson was learned...


One thing is for sure. You have a very active imagination. About many things.

I notice the conspicuous lack of citations to rules supposedly violated. Just more ad hominum attacks. Rinse and repeat.


CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 16691
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/17 5:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
One thing is for sure. You have a very active imagination. About many things.

I notice the conspicuous lack of citations to rules supposedly violated. Just more ad hominum attacks. Rinse and repeat.


Literally have been posting about UNC, with all of the evidence and analysis for two years, in this forum and the MCBB forum. Either you conveniently forgot about all of that, or you choose not to remember. Feel free to reference those posts; plenty of information, sources, citations, etc. are there.

Literally called you out several times in both threads and demonstrated why you were wrong in your statements. You went on the offensive and attacked me personally, as you do with other posters who dare to question your analysis.

Literally laughed out loud at you criticizing someone over "attacks," given your checkered history on this board.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/17 5:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Last comment.

That's all you ever do is, as you term it "call people out" with juvenile name calling.

What you never do is answer very specific questions such as that posed above - "please identify the specific sections of the NCAA Bylaws that define "improper benefits" and which support your supposed violations." You duck and dodge and weave and try to change the subject, but you never have the most fundamental answers.

Your whole silly crusade has gotten really stale.


PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 13906
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/17 9:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
Sad but true ...

And it even happens at the high school level. There are schools in the DMV that will allow a player to transfer in on Tuesday and play a game on Friday.


Why should she have to wait. Shouldn't the player's be able to control their own labor and where they play? If a coach is hired midseason, she doesn't have to wait to start coaching. Why isn't what's good for the coach good for the player?


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/17 9:40 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PUmatty wrote:
ClayK wrote:
Sad but true ...

And it even happens at the high school level. There are schools in the DMV that will allow a player to transfer in on Tuesday and play a game on Friday.


Why should she have to wait. Shouldn't the player's be able to control their own labor and where they play? If a coach is hired midseason, she doesn't have to wait to start coaching. Why isn't what's good for the coach good for the player?


Excellent point ...

I would say that one of my restrictions on player movement would be that high school or college players, once enrolled and attending a school, are committed to that school for the entire academic year.

No system is perfect, and a completely free system has flaws, just as any other does, and this is one way I would limit it.

In a completely fair world, I would say the same rule should apply to coaches, but I don't think that's a necessary restriction. Coaches can be given this privilege and the impact on the fairness of a more free system would be minimal.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
readyAIMfire53



Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 5262
Location: Durham, NC


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/17 10:33 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:


That's all you ever do is, as you term it "call people out" with juvenile name calling.


Mirror, mirror on the wall,
Show Art the most juvenile name caller of all

Of all the people in the running for "most juvenile name-caller" CamCrz is nowhere on the list. CamCrz is known for being detailed and factual. All of the topics and questions you ask were previously answered in GREAT detail on earlier threads. CamCrz has a different legal interpretation of the rules than the NCAA does which he has explained in excruciating detail. I can't really blame him for not wanting to post it all over again since you can go look it up yourself.

This whole ordeal has been outrageous. UNC committed academic fraud over 18 years to keep prized athletes on the floor or field. And the NCAA is overlooking the whole thing. It's just sick.



_________________
Follow your passion and your life will be true down to your core.

~rAf
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/17 12:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

readyAIMfire53 wrote:
This whole ordeal has been outrageous. UNC committed academic fraud over 18 years to keep prized athletes on the floor or field. And the NCAA is overlooking the whole thing. It's just sick.


And yet many will claim the system is fine as it is and doesn't need to be overhauled.

And yet giving players freedom within this broken system will be a disaster, because, well, just because ...

And yet coaches and administrators make millions and some players aren't paid anything near what they're worth, and others are overpaid. (Consider this: The star quarterback and the No. 13 women's basketball player get the same benefits.)

And yet reform is anathema.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11858



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/17 1:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

So, per ready-aim-miss, "CamCrz has a different legal interpretation of the [NCAA] rules than the NCAA [i.e. the author and promulgator of the rules] does which he has explained in excruciating detail."

In plain English, CamCrz writes about fictional violations of his own fictional set of rules that have bupkis to do with the actual NCAA rules.

And to think you evidently wrote your post with a straight face. Amazing.


Nixtreefan



Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 1257



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/17 3:36 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The problem arises when all schools decide to cheat and ask for compensation for losses that they feel could have been wins if the NCAA had allowed their transfer to play and not sit Laughing Laughing Laughing Cool Rolling Eyes


Davis4632



Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 263



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/17 3:49 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Jay Bilas told his fellow Dookies and that NCAA wasn't going punish UNC but they preferred to listen to Dan Kane of the the Raleigh News and Observer, obsessed rival school posters like DevilDJ from the DevilsDen and Manalishi from the Pack Pride, and anti UNC Twitter trolls like CheatingBlueRam. They were so intent and desperate on destroying UNC, they were willing to accept any information that would lead to that goal. Their obsession lead to the one of the biggest catfish jobs ever.

https://storify.com/AcademicsTho/catfishing-with-the-count


Queenie



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 15198
Location: Queens


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/17 5:50 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Knock off the name calling.



_________________
We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty.
FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 527



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/22/17 9:40 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
readyAIMfire53 wrote:
This whole ordeal has been outrageous. UNC committed academic fraud over 18 years to keep prized athletes on the floor or field. And the NCAA is overlooking the whole thing. It's just sick.


And yet many will claim the system is fine as it is and doesn't need to be overhauled.

And yet giving players freedom within this broken system will be a disaster, because, well, just because ...

And yet coaches and administrators make millions and some players aren't paid anything near what they're worth, and others are overpaid. (Consider this: The star quarterback and the No. 13 women's basketball player get the same benefits.)

And yet reform is anathema.


I don't see how some of the reforms that you've been advocating, such as allowing agents and unrestricted transfers, are going to avoid academic scandals like bogus classes or allow athletes to meet schools' graduation requirements. In fact, fewer restrictions are likely to make academic achievement less relevant.

Maybe the answer is to have all the real student-athletes enroll in the Ivies, Patriot League, Div I "minor sports", and Div II/III schools, and let the pro-leagues set up their own farm systems, thereby removing the controversial financial and academic issues from collegiate sports and the NCAA's purview entirely.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/22/17 12:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

FrozenLVFan wrote:
ClayK wrote:
readyAIMfire53 wrote:
This whole ordeal has been outrageous. UNC committed academic fraud over 18 years to keep prized athletes on the floor or field. And the NCAA is overlooking the whole thing. It's just sick.


And yet many will claim the system is fine as it is and doesn't need to be overhauled.

And yet giving players freedom within this broken system will be a disaster, because, well, just because ...

And yet coaches and administrators make millions and some players aren't paid anything near what they're worth, and others are overpaid. (Consider this: The star quarterback and the No. 13 women's basketball player get the same benefits.)

And yet reform is anathema.


I don't see how some of the reforms that you've been advocating, such as allowing agents and unrestricted transfers, are going to avoid academic scandals like bogus classes or allow athletes to meet schools' graduation requirements. In fact, fewer restrictions are likely to make academic achievement less relevant.

Maybe the answer is to have all the real student-athletes enroll in the Ivies, Patriot League, Div I "minor sports", and Div II/III schools, and let the pro-leagues set up their own farm systems, thereby removing the controversial financial and academic issues from collegiate sports and the NCAA's purview entirely.


My point is this: Power 5 NCAA sports are a big business that has little or nothing to do with the academic aspects of a university. Rather than try to shoehorn this huge industry into the educational process, drop the hypocrisy and change the standards for athletes, especially those in football and men's basketball.

So, for example, the rule could be that any athlete in those two money-making sports need not worry about being on track for graduation, and need only take eight units a quarter in any subject he desires. His compensation would be negotiated, and he could leave the system at any time.

Some, if not most, athletes would not be compensated over and above the scholarship and would likely attend classes and try to get a degree, as they will have no future in professional sports -- but the difference would be that they are not required to do so.

So UNC, for example, wouldn't have to come up with some goofy courses. Just have the stars take some easy courses while they polish up their games for the pros, and pay them what they're worth.

My goals would be to eliminate the sham academics that have nothing to do with football and men's basketball; acknowledge that the industry has nothing to do with education (except to fund it); and allow players to benefit from the skills according to their market value.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
scfastpitch



Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 531



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/23/17 8:12 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
FrozenLVFan wrote:
ClayK wrote:
readyAIMfire53 wrote:
This whole ordeal has been outrageous. UNC committed academic fraud over 18 years to keep prized athletes on the floor or field. And the NCAA is overlooking the whole thing. It's just sick.


And yet many will claim the system is fine as it is and doesn't need to be overhauled.

And yet giving players freedom within this broken system will be a disaster, because, well, just because ...

And yet coaches and administrators make millions and some players aren't paid anything near what they're worth, and others are overpaid. (Consider this: The star quarterback and the No. 13 women's basketball player get the same benefits.)

And yet reform is anathema.


I don't see how some of the reforms that you've been advocating, such as allowing agents and unrestricted transfers, are going to avoid academic scandals like bogus classes or allow athletes to meet schools' graduation requirements. In fact, fewer restrictions are likely to make academic achievement less relevant.

Maybe the answer is to have all the real student-athletes enroll in the Ivies, Patriot League, Div I "minor sports", and Div II/III schools, and let the pro-leagues set up their own farm systems, thereby removing the controversial financial and academic issues from collegiate sports and the NCAA's purview entirely.


My point is this: Power 5 NCAA sports are a big business that has little or nothing to do with the academic aspects of a university. Rather than try to shoehorn this huge industry into the educational process, drop the hypocrisy and change the standards for athletes, especially those in football and men's basketball.

So, for example, the rule could be that any athlete in those two money-making sports need not worry about being on track for graduation, and need only take eight units a quarter in any subject he desires. His compensation would be negotiated, and he could leave the system at any time.

Some, if not most, athletes would not be compensated over and above the scholarship and would likely attend classes and try to get a degree, as they will have no future in professional sports -- but the difference would be that they are not required to do so.

So UNC, for example, wouldn't have to come up with some goofy courses. Just have the stars take some easy courses while they polish up their games for the pros, and pay them what they're worth.

My goals would be to eliminate the sham academics that have nothing to do with football and men's basketball; acknowledge that the industry has nothing to do with education (except to fund it); and allow players to benefit from the skills according to their market value.


I think to " acknowledge the industry has nothing to do with education " is the tricky part , especially when there is lots of tax-free revenue involved .


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/23/17 9:03 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

You're right about the tricky part -- but really, the issue is that fundamentally the whole idea of Power 5 football and men's basketball has zero connection to education except to generate income, directly and indirectly, for the universities.

It's like property the university rents out, or investment income, or taking a percentage of research projects developed on campus.

I haven't really thought much about it, but it would seem there would be a way to take those two sports and put them in some kind of accounting/special division that would make it clear that the players are only incidentally students and the rules are different.

There's no need to do that with the golf team, or water polo, and it would be even better if they could be taken out of the Title IX equation.

Basically, I guess, we're talking some kind of legislation to formalize the relationship between the two professional teams on campus -- football and men's basketball -- and the university system.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
scfastpitch



Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 531



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/23/17 11:15 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
You're right about the tricky part -- but really, the issue is that fundamentally the whole idea of Power 5 football and men's basketball has zero connection to education except to generate income, directly and indirectly, for the universities.

It's like property the university rents out, or investment income, or taking a percentage of research projects developed on campus.

I haven't really thought much about it, but it would seem there would be a way to take those two sports and put them in some kind of accounting/special division that would make it clear that the players are only incidentally students and the rules are different.

There's no need to do that with the golf team, or water polo, and it would be even better if they could be taken out of the Title IX equation.

Basically, I guess, we're talking some kind of legislation to formalize the relationship between the two professional teams on campus -- football and men's basketball -- and the university system.


The last time congress looked into taxing big-time college football , there was one congressman who said something like " You know , it's like these schools are running these multi-million dollar businesses on the side . " Gee, ya think ? I don't know if he slapped himself in the forehead when he said that or not .
There has been talk on football message boards forever ( or since the advent of title IX ) about treating football differently . Title IX advocates call it the three sex argument . Males, females & football players .
And the rationale for treating football differently is that it makes a lot of money . At least it does at some places . Last time I saw the stats , 40% of division one football programs were losing money . Or at least they claimed to be . You think an NCAA investigation promotes anxiety . Imagine if the IRS were coming to look at your books to see how much you really owe .
So if they ever starting treating a sport or sports differently because they make money , I don't think it will be the schools themselves leading the way .




Last edited by scfastpitch on 10/23/17 6:11 pm; edited 1 time in total
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin