Former UNC Distance Runner Blasts UNC's Response to Cheating Scandal Allegations

New
  • The Big Cheat
    2 years ago 06/03/2017 5:29am CDT
    Forum Index
    She ran in early 2000s during the height of the 20+ year academic/athletic cheating period at UNC.

    “The amount of time and resources UNC has exhausted to fight the idea that systemic academic fraud existed is frustrating and angering,†Jackson wrote. “Wouldn’t it have been better, and honest and ethical, to stop resisting, admit the academic fraud also included people employed in Athletics, investigate to learn how this played out, and set up best practices going forward?â€

    UNC has spent close to $20 million dollars in PR and legal fees to fight the NCAA on the decades long cheating scandal that kept athletes eligible through fake classes.


    http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article154080394.html

    https://victoriajacksonsports.com/2017/06/01/thoughts-on-unc-response-to-ncaas-to-2nd-amended-noa/
  • Former D1
    2 years ago 06/03/2017 7:48am CDT
    re: The Big Cheat
    Forum Index
    That place is a cesspool.
  • mellow seeds
    registered
    2 years ago 06/03/2017 8:44am CDT
    re: Former D1
    Forum Index
    There is no price they won't pay to protect that scumbag dean smith.
  • xcvxcvcx
    2 years ago 06/03/2017 8:58am CDT
    re: mellow seeds
    Forum Index
    Dean Smith retired in 1997.
  • Pop_pop!_v2.2.1
    2 years ago 06/03/2017 9:00am CDT
    re: Former D1
    Forum Index
    Former D1 wrote:

    That place is a cesspool.

    Sure. No other D1 ball sports programs pass kids through. Not one!

    NCAA needs to manage this carefully so it doesn't spread.
  • Monkeys typing
    2 years ago 06/03/2017 2:21pm CDT
    Forum Index
    Will UNC get SMU's death penalty? Supposedly the first NCAA punishment (that UNC fought) was a real slap on the wrist. That really pissed off NCAA, who dug further.

    Is this a fair interpretation of the facts?
  • Former D9
    2 years ago 06/04/2017 7:20am CDT
    re: Monkeys typing
    Forum Index
    Monkeys typing wrote:

    Will UNC get SMU's death penalty? Supposedly the first NCAA punishment (that UNC fought) was a real slap on the wrist. That really pissed off NCAA, who dug further.

    Is this a fair interpretation of the facts?

    It's a lot deeper than that.

    The five LOICs the NCAA charged them with pales in comparison to what one investigative reporter for the local newspaper has dug up and a whistleblower has revealed has been going on.

    Basically, their defense is that the NCAA has no authority to tell them that they can not set up fake classes to keep athletes eligible, have tutors write papers for athletes, have the director of their ethics school and the rep for the faculty athletic council write papers for athletes, plus a lot more.

    They were put on probation by their academic accrediting agency for the same transgressions.

    In short, they admit cheating, but say the NCAA has no jurisdiction over how they run their academics, no matter how apparent it is that they just want a system to keep athletes eligible.
  • mellow seeds
    registered
    2 years ago 06/04/2017 9:02am CDT
    re: xcvxcvcx
    Forum Index
    xcvxcvcx wrote:

    Dean Smith retired in 1997.

    And the cheating started under him. Do you think roy Williams is smart enough to come up with anything on his own?
  • Avid Reader
    2 years ago 06/04/2017 9:35am CDT
    re: mellow seeds
    Forum Index
    To quote Sargent Shultz: "Roy Williams knew nothing, knew nothing"
  • Big baller
    2 years ago 06/04/2017 10:14am CDT
    re: Avid Reader
    Forum Index
    Has UNC ever had an athlete flunk out or be suspended for academics?
  • For profit
    2 years ago 06/04/2017 5:11pm CDT
    re: The Big Cheat
    Forum Index
    Imagine if this happened at a for profit school? Not the athletics tie in, but systematic efforts to enable cheating and not require students to attend classes.

    How has unc not lost its accreditation and title iV eligibility? Where's the outrage Elizabeth Warren?
  • Modern Drunkard
    2 years ago 06/05/2017 7:47am CDT
    re: Monkeys typing
    Forum Index
    Monkeys typing wrote:

    Will UNC get SMU's death penalty?

    In a word, no. If the piece-of-crap NCAA didn't give Penn State the death penalty for the JoePa/Sandusky child rape enabling and subsequent cover-up, they'll never give any program the death penalty ever again.
  • University of National Champs
    2 years ago 06/05/2017 7:58am CDT
    re: Modern Drunkard
    Forum Index
    Ya'll just bitter because we won ANOTHER championship. Try to keep up.
  • Mr. Obvious
    registered
    2 years ago 06/05/2017 7:59am CDT
    re: Former D9
    Forum Index
    Former D9 wrote:

    Monkeys typing wrote:

    Will UNC get SMU's death penalty? Supposedly the first NCAA punishment (that UNC fought) was a real slap on the wrist. That really pissed off NCAA, who dug further.

    Is this a fair interpretation of the facts?

    It's a lot deeper than that.

    The five LOICs the NCAA charged them with pales in comparison to what one investigative reporter for the local newspaper has dug up and a whistleblower has revealed has been going on.

    Basically, their defense is that the NCAA has no authority to tell them that they can not set up fake classes to keep athletes eligible, have tutors write papers for athletes, have the director of their ethics school and the rep for the faculty athletic council write papers for athletes, plus a lot more.

    They were put on probation by their academic accrediting agency for the same transgressions.

    In short, they admit cheating, but say the NCAA has no jurisdiction over how they run their academics, no matter how apparent it is that they just want a system to keep athletes eligible.


    Here is what the NCAA themselves argued in court: The NCAA wrote that it “did not assume a duty to ensure the quality of education student-athletes received at member institutions or to protect student-athletes from the independent, voluntary acts of those institutions or their employees.†Added the NCAA: “… it was not secret that the NCAA did not review the substance of college courses.â€

    So they are arguing they are no the right body to monitor course quality over there and then over here they are arguing that they can punish a member institution over course quality.

    For better or worse, I think UNC is going to largely escape this unscathed.

    They did get a warning or probationary period from their accreditation body, which is the right body to enforce academic standards.
  • not a pedo u fan
    2 years ago 06/05/2017 8:15am CDT
    re: Modern Drunkard
    Forum Index
    Modern Drunkard wrote:

    Monkeys typing wrote:

    Will UNC get SMU's death penalty?

    In a word, no. If the piece-of-crap NCAA didn't give Penn State the death penalty for the JoePa/Sandusky child rape enabling and subsequent cover-up, they'll never give any program the death penalty ever again.


    I hope that Joepa is rotting in his jail cell after what he did to those kids in the showers.
  • The Great Escape
    2 years ago 06/05/2017 8:24am CDT
    re: Mr. Obvious
    Forum Index
    Mr. Obvious wrote:

    Former D9 wrote:

    Monkeys typing wrote:

    Will UNC get SMU's death penalty? Supposedly the first NCAA punishment (that UNC fought) was a real slap on the wrist. That really pissed off NCAA, who dug further.

    Is this a fair interpretation of the facts?

    It's a lot deeper than that.

    The five LOICs the NCAA charged them with pales in comparison to what one investigative reporter for the local newspaper has dug up and a whistleblower has revealed has been going on.

    Basically, their defense is that the NCAA has no authority to tell them that they can not set up fake classes to keep athletes eligible, have tutors write papers for athletes, have the director of their ethics school and the rep for the faculty athletic council write papers for athletes, plus a lot more.

    They were put on probation by their academic accrediting agency for the same transgressions.

    In short, they admit cheating, but say the NCAA has no jurisdiction over how they run their academics, no matter how apparent it is that they just want a system to keep athletes eligible.


    Here is what the NCAA themselves argued in court: The NCAA wrote that it “did not assume a duty to ensure the quality of education student-athletes received at member institutions or to protect student-athletes from the independent, voluntary acts of those institutions or their employees.†Added the NCAA: “… it was not secret that the NCAA did not review the substance of college courses.â€

    So they are arguing they are no the right body to monitor course quality over there and then over here they are arguing that they can punish a member institution over course quality.

    For better or worse, I think UNC is going to largely escape this unscathed.

    They did get a warning or probationary period from their accreditation body, which is the right body to enforce academic standards.



    You may want to review Jenkins v. NCAA and the implications if the COI rules lightly or not at all in UNC's case.
  • Mr. Obvious
    registered
    2 years ago 06/05/2017 9:31am CDT
    re: The Great Escape
    Forum Index
    The Great Escape wrote:

    Mr. Obvious wrote:

    Former D9 wrote:

    Monkeys typing wrote:

    Will UNC get SMU's death penalty? Supposedly the first NCAA punishment (that UNC fought) was a real slap on the wrist. That really pissed off NCAA, who dug further.

    Is this a fair interpretation of the facts?

    It's a lot deeper than that.

    The five LOICs the NCAA charged them with pales in comparison to what one investigative reporter for the local newspaper has dug up and a whistleblower has revealed has been going on.

    Basically, their defense is that the NCAA has no authority to tell them that they can not set up fake classes to keep athletes eligible, have tutors write papers for athletes, have the director of their ethics school and the rep for the faculty athletic council write papers for athletes, plus a lot more.

    They were put on probation by their academic accrediting agency for the same transgressions.

    In short, they admit cheating, but say the NCAA has no jurisdiction over how they run their academics, no matter how apparent it is that they just want a system to keep athletes eligible.


    Here is what the NCAA themselves argued in court: The NCAA wrote that it “did not assume a duty to ensure the quality of education student-athletes received at member institutions or to protect student-athletes from the independent, voluntary acts of those institutions or their employees.†Added the NCAA: “… it was not secret that the NCAA did not review the substance of college courses.â€

    So they are arguing they are no the right body to monitor course quality over there and then over here they are arguing that they can punish a member institution over course quality.

    For better or worse, I think UNC is going to largely escape this unscathed.

    They did get a warning or probationary period from their accreditation body, which is the right body to enforce academic standards.



    You may want to review Jenkins v. NCAA and the implications if the COI rules lightly or not at all in UNC's case.


    Only somewhat familiar with the case but am failing to see the link that you are proposing.

    Except possibly if this is your point: They (NCAA) are arguing in a variety of cases on amateurism that the key to their scheme is that athletics are tied to academic and here their argument would be undermined.

    I agree, but my cynicism is that the tie between academics and athletics is a sham anyway, and the NCAA is a hypocritical organization.

    I think just as the sanctions on Penn State had to be largely abandoned for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (not what they said but this is what it basically amounts to) that academic fraud sanctions at UNC is likely to die under the same idea.
  • pop_pop!_v2.2.1
    2 years ago 06/05/2017 9:37am CDT
    re: Big baller
    Forum Index
    Big baller wrote:

    Has UNC ever had an athlete flunk out or be suspended for academics?

    Of course!!! That not one D1 ball sports players who are productive players ever flunked out is just a funny coincidence.

    The NCAA can't have common knowledge of this well-known D1 diploma mill scam spread. It might hurt broadcast revenues.
  • ShaneO
    2 years ago 06/05/2017 9:46am CDT
    re: Mr. Obvious
    Forum Index
    Mr. Obvious wrote:

    The Great Escape wrote:

    Mr. Obvious wrote:

    Former D9 wrote:

    Monkeys typing wrote:

    Will UNC get SMU's death penalty? Supposedly the first NCAA punishment (that UNC fought) was a real slap on the wrist. That really pissed off NCAA, who dug further.

    Is this a fair interpretation of the facts?

    It's a lot deeper than that.

    The five LOICs the NCAA charged them with pales in comparison to what one investigative reporter for the local newspaper has dug up and a whistleblower has revealed has been going on.

    Basically, their defense is that the NCAA has no authority to tell them that they can not set up fake classes to keep athletes eligible, have tutors write papers for athletes, have the director of their ethics school and the rep for the faculty athletic council write papers for athletes, plus a lot more.

    They were put on probation by their academic accrediting agency for the same transgressions.

    In short, they admit cheating, but say the NCAA has no jurisdiction over how they run their academics, no matter how apparent it is that they just want a system to keep athletes eligible.


    Here is what the NCAA themselves argued in court: The NCAA wrote that it “did not assume a duty to ensure the quality of education student-athletes received at member institutions or to protect student-athletes from the independent, voluntary acts of those institutions or their employees.†Added the NCAA: “… it was not secret that the NCAA did not review the substance of college courses.â€

    So they are arguing they are no the right body to monitor course quality over there and then over here they are arguing that they can punish a member institution over course quality.

    For better or worse, I think UNC is going to largely escape this unscathed.

    They did get a warning or probationary period from their accreditation body, which is the right body to enforce academic standards.



    You may want to review Jenkins v. NCAA and the implications if the COI rules lightly or not at all in UNC's case.


    Only somewhat familiar with the case but am failing to see the link that you are proposing.

    Except possibly if this is your point: They (NCAA) are arguing in a variety of cases on amateurism that the key to their scheme is that athletics are tied to academic and here their argument would be undermined.

    I agree, but my cynicism is that the tie between academics and athletics is a sham anyway, and the NCAA is a hypocritical organization.

    I think just as the sanctions on Penn State had to be largely abandoned for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (not what they said but this is what it basically amounts to) that academic fraud sanctions at UNC is likely to die under the same idea.



    Your lack of jurisdiction premise would hold water if no other schools had been sanctioned recently for lesser academic related improprieties. However, that is not the case.

    I agree. Jenkins really puts the NCAA in a pockle.
  • messi
    2 years ago 06/05/2017 9:52am CDT
    re: ShaneO
    Forum Index
    ShaneO wrote:

    Mr. Obvious wrote:

    The Great Escape wrote:

    Mr. Obvious wrote:

    Former D9 wrote:

    Monkeys typing wrote:

    Will UNC get SMU's death penalty? Supposedly the first NCAA punishment (that UNC fought) was a real slap on the wrist. That really pissed off NCAA, who dug further.

    Is this a fair interpretation of the facts?

    It's a lot deeper than that.

    The five LOICs the NCAA charged them with pales in comparison to what one investigative reporter for the local newspaper has dug up and a whistleblower has revealed has been going on.

    Basically, their defense is that the NCAA has no authority to tell them that they can not set up fake classes to keep athletes eligible, have tutors write papers for athletes, have the director of their ethics school and the rep for the faculty athletic council write papers for athletes, plus a lot more.

    They were put on probation by their academic accrediting agency for the same transgressions.

    In short, they admit cheating, but say the NCAA has no jurisdiction over how they run their academics, no matter how apparent it is that they just want a system to keep athletes eligible.


    Here is what the NCAA themselves argued in court: The NCAA wrote that it “did not assume a duty to ensure the quality of education student-athletes received at member institutions or to protect student-athletes from the independent, voluntary acts of those institutions or their employees.†Added the NCAA: “… it was not secret that the NCAA did not review the substance of college courses.â€

    So they are arguing they are no the right body to monitor course quality over there and then over here they are arguing that they can punish a member institution over course quality.

    For better or worse, I think UNC is going to largely escape this unscathed.

    They did get a warning or probationary period from their accreditation body, which is the right body to enforce academic standards.



    You may want to review Jenkins v. NCAA and the implications if the COI rules lightly or not at all in UNC's case.


    Only somewhat familiar with the case but am failing to see the link that you are proposing.

    Except possibly if this is your point: They (NCAA) are arguing in a variety of cases on amateurism that the key to their scheme is that athletics are tied to academic and here their argument would be undermined.

    I agree, but my cynicism is that the tie between academics and athletics is a sham anyway, and the NCAA is a hypocritical organization.

    I think just as the sanctions on Penn State had to be largely abandoned for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (not what they said but this is what it basically amounts to) that academic fraud sanctions at UNC is likely to die under the same idea.



    Your lack of jurisdiction premise would hold water if no other schools had been sanctioned recently for lesser academic related improprieties. However, that is not the case.

    I agree. Jenkins really puts the NCAA in a pockle.


    Then schools should also be free to pay players......yes??????