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

messi wrote:

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

Yes

Which schools are those? I confess I probably only know about the big blockbuster cases.

It is an interesting question, should NCAA athletics be able to control/judge academics? If so what is the standard? Are athletes from colleges with high academic standards held to the same standard as those with lower academic standards? The same question could be asked of different majors too.

Interesting question wrote:

It is an interesting question, should NCAA athletics be able to control/judge academics? If so what is the standard? Are athletes from colleges with high academic standards held to the same standard as those with lower academic standards? The same question could be asked of different majors too.

They do for high school athletes who want to play college sports. That's where part of their case falls apart. They can keep a kid from playing college ball who has taken high school classes or graduate from a certain high schools that they deem do not meet certain standards. But once the kid gets to college, they are hands off academics??????

I don't see the problem here. The degrees athletes get are useless anyways. Even "good" bachelors degrees don't get jobs anymore. What are the chances a nonsense major will get an athlete a job? Just give them the degree even if they flunk out.

Brock wrote:

Interesting question wrote:

It is an interesting question, should NCAA athletics be able to control/judge academics? If so what is the standard? Are athletes from colleges with high academic standards held to the same standard as those with lower academic standards? The same question could be asked of different majors too.

They do for high school athletes who want to play college sports. That's where part of their case falls apart. They can keep a kid from playing college ball who has taken high school classes or graduate from a certain high schools that they deem do not meet certain standards. But once the kid gets to college, they are hands off academics??????

Well, I think it is a bit more nuanced than that.

They do require substantial progress towards a degree for college student athletes who are enrolled.

I'm not 100% familiar with the standards for evaluating high schools. I know there have been some pretty high profile athletes who have had issues, due to attending schools that were diploma mills.

So, I think the argument is something like "we have standards for academic progress and grades, but we depend on accrediting agencies to evaluating the basic academic integrity of the institutions."

I think...

sbeefyk1 wrote:

I don't see the problem here. The degrees athletes get are useless anyways. Even "good" bachelors degrees don't get jobs anymore. What are the chances a nonsense major will get an athlete a job? Just give them the degree even if they flunk out.

The problem lies with the basic premise of NCAA athletics, the "student athlete," meaning that all of their athletes are students who also participate in collegiate sports. That requires them to maintain the image and idea that athletes are getting the same degrees as everyone else on campus. If schools are caught giving athletes passing grades for classes they didn't attend or did no work for and degrees simply for playing a sport for four years they cannot promote the idea that the athletes are primarily students. And if you toss that idea inevitably you get to the idea that athletic departments are really for profit businesses which costs you your tax exempt status.

If you are correct, then UNC is in serious trouble. They were put on probation by SACS for the same academic issues they are fighting the NCAA on. One of the recommendations by SACS was that they needed to reach out to students who had taken these fraudulent courses (I think there were 3,100 student-athletes included) are offer them courses to "make their degree whole,"

I also remember there was an instance of one of the basketball players who came back to take classes to earn his "degree" after he turned pro. A reporter asked him at graduation what his major was. He said that he didn't know and they were still working that out.

Sounds like he got a real good education, but I guess he was making progress toward a degree.

HRE wrote:

The problem lies with the basic premise of NCAA athletics, the "student athlete," meaning that all of their athletes are students who also participate in collegiate sports. That requires them to maintain the image and idea that athletes are getting the same degrees as everyone else on campus. If schools are caught giving athletes passing grades for classes they didn't attend or did no work for and degrees simply for playing a sport for four years they cannot promote the idea that the athletes are primarily students. And if you toss that idea inevitably you get to the idea that athletic departments are really for profit businesses which costs you your tax exempt status.

I 100% agree with that.

One issue w/ the UNC case in particular is that it was not just athletes who took these courses. Over 3100 students took the "paper courses." In that sense, it is not terribly different from any other University where there are easy courses.

At my school one of the easiest courses on campus was Geology 101. We all called it Rocks for Jocks. You did have to show up for class but I believe the grading was based on a midterm and a final and they were multiple choice (with previous year's test questions available.) Lots of football players in that one.

Is that really so different from what happened at UNC? More importantly, is the NCAA the right body and does the NCAA have the right resources, to make the determination if these are similar or different?

Playing a major sport at a powerhouse school holds significant weight in regards to getting a job, basically just hold above a 2.5, don't be totally incompetent/socially awkward and your foot is in the door. You'd be amazed how many managers jerk themselves off at the thought of hiring some former big 10 football player.

sbeefyk1 wrote:

I don't see the problem here. The degrees athletes get are useless anyways. Even "good" bachelors degrees don't get jobs anymore. What are the chances a nonsense major will get an athlete a job? Just give them the degree even if they flunk out.

That is exactly what my argument, who is the right governing body to judge academic standards for NCAA athletic participation? Obviously the NCAA has minimum standards (SAT score and passing GPA) but who controls the level of education? I think it actually does have to be with the academic institution (Stanford controls their standards and Florida State has theirs). What may be beneficial to UNC in this case is that many other students could take these courses (not exclusive to athletes) but what may get them in trouble is any cover-up.

Yeah, I am still thinking my way through the case, but I think I agree with you.

I don't think the NCAA has the means or the expertise to ensure academic integrity at all of their member schools. I almost think that has to be a job left up to the schools and their accrediting agencies.

Have you guys read the NOA? It goes much deeper than easy classes. One of the issues is bifurcated classes and classes that required no attendance and no work. In other cases, a secretary (girlfriend of former bball player) set up fake courses, forged professors signatures, changed grades without professors's knowledge , etc.

Brett wrote:

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Yeah, I am still thinking my way through the case, but I think I agree with you.

I don't think the NCAA has the means or the expertise to ensure academic integrity at all of their member schools. I almost think that has to be a job left up to the schools and their accrediting agencies.

Have you guys read the NOA? It goes much deeper than easy classes. One of the issues is bifurcated classes and classes that required no attendance and no work. In other cases, a secretary (girlfriend of former bball player) set up fake courses, forged professors signatures, changed grades without professors's knowledge , etc.

I've read a summary, plus a lot of articles about he scandal. I know it is mor ethan easy classes.

The main issue I keep coming back to is that this was an issue of ACADEMIC fraud, in courses that were available and taken by students beyond just student athletes.

I do not think they will get off entirely free. I'm sure there will be some sanctions on some of the issues.

The NCAA doe not have the personnel or expertise (nor the mandate from its members) to police academic fraud.

It is just like the Penn State case in that way. The proper place to adjudicate issues of sexual impropriety is a court of law, not an athletics association, even if that conduct involved members and athletics personnel of the athletic association.

This is a case of Academic fraud. The proper authority is the school, the state legislature, and the accreditation agencies.

This does not mean that sexual abuse or academic fraud are not serious issues. They are. In many ways they are much too serious to be presided over by an athletics association.

The problem is that UNC did not follow its own academic policies regarding these courses. Nor did their accrediting agency agree that these courses met requirements for their standards and thus UNC became the first research university to be put on academic probation by SACS.

They'll probably hang a banner for it.

Yes but is it up to the NCAA to ensure classes teach (or how much they teach)? In the case of the girlfriend, cheating/academic fraud is different and should not result in punishment of the school unless they knew about it or aided in some way. That is a violation of academic honor code and the University deals with it. Same rules should apply to athletes as non-athletes when caught.

The discussion about whether or how the NCAA should or can implement academics standards for participating members can go around in circles, and there are valid points to be made on both sides.

The reality is, and all this should really boil down to, is 1) Did the UNC athletic department knowingly solicit, encourage, cover-up or sanction academic fraud via its employees or athletes (all signs point to yes!) and 2) Does the NCAA want to allow such behavior to slide unchecked (hopefully not)?

Whether they have "jurisdiction" is irrelevant; they're a private organization and can do whatever they want, really. Whether they take action will essentially come down to whether they feel the benefits of setting a precedent of fighting academic fraud outweigh the negatives of coming after one of the biggest/highest generating basketball (and thus highest sports) programs under their domain.

not a pedo u fan wrote:

Modern Drunkard wrote:

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.

Oh he's rotting, alright.

Interesting question wrote:

Yes but is it up to the NCAA to ensure classes teach (or how much they teach)? In the case of the girlfriend, cheating/academic fraud is different and should not result in punishment of the school unless they knew about it or aided in some way. That is a violation of academic honor code and the University deals with it. Same rules should apply to athletes as non-athletes when caught.

How about if there were emails from the academic counselors for the athletic department to the secretary what classes they needed to create for athletes, what the syllabus should be, and grades the athletes needed?

What if the academic counselors for the football team presented a PowerPoint to football coaches saying that there were classes where players didn't have to attend, there was no class work, didn't have to interact with professors and were guaranteed high grades. In the next slide told them that this was about to end because this secretary was retiring and a new plan was needed to keep players eligible.

What if aincoming freshman football player was enrolled in a 400 level (senior) course the summer before his freshman year if the athletic department did not know anything about it.

What if...