"Hearing that the #UNC Notice of Allegations will be released Thursday morning" | Page 4 | The Boneyard

"Hearing that the #UNC Notice of Allegations will be released Thursday morning"

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can only hope that now that the evidence and allegations have been released that the UNC administration will do the right thing, clean house removing the rotten apples and accept a deservedly severe punishment. Academics should matter at a school like North Carolina that has had an excellent reputation among public universities.
 
Jerry1714 said:
My point regarding number 1 is that there are people who want UNC banned this year but are upset Cuse got it the same year as the sanctions were handed down, and those people are absurd. And everyone wanted Cuse banned next year, not this year, so anyone advocating for UNC to be banned this year falls into that category.

And I already made your second point previously in this thread.
Expand ...

Keep saying everyone is absurd and not read my reply. Makes you smart, too.
 
pnow15 said:
Make no mistake the NCAA is serious about these charges. In fact they have appointed a special prosecutor especially for this case: Rollo Tomassi.
Expand ...

Roll Over Tomato? Sounds tough to me.
 
Last edited:
pepband99 said:
Keep saying everyone is absurd and not read my reply. Makes you smart, too.
Expand ...
Glad you figured out how to use the reply function this time, good job.

I read your reply, it does nothing to change the point I made. Yes, people were upset Cuse got 1 year, I did not dispute that. Again, Cuse banned themselves on February 4th, this idea they were out of the tournament at this time is just wrong.
 
.-.
Jerry1714 said:
Glad you figured out how to use the reply function this time, good job.

I read your reply, it does nothing to change the point I made. Yes, people were upset Cuse got 1 year, I did not dispute that. Again, Cuse banned themselves on February 4th, this idea they were out of the tournament at this time is just wrong.
Expand ...

Cuse knew they were a long shot to make the tournament when they banned themselves. They had just beat VT by two points at home following two previous losses. They also had in front of them their toughest part of their schedule. They then proceeded to lose 6 of their last 9 games to end up 18-13. Choosing to banned themselves from the tournament was an easy and smart decision. They were a long shot to make it..
 
CallMeBruce said:
Stop posting stupid crap and people will stop criticizing you. It's tiresome.
Expand ...
What is this, the twelve-year-old's board? What's tiresome is the gratuitous digs for the sake of getting the last word in... news flash, it just smacks of pedantic whining. My joke wasn't funny to you, fine, you have the option to ignore it or call it stupid crap. Guess which is the more mature option.
 
Gurleyman said:
Not absurd if the UNC sanctions were handed out tomorrow. Getting a postseason penalty in June would give players a chance to transfer out - Syracuse players never had that chance and were left to play a dead-end season (particularly Christmas and any other seniors they had). And they were able to self-impose sanctions at a time when their season was sliding (post-McCullough injury) and their prospects were dimmer than in recent years. It was pretty easy to sacrifice that season in hopes for leniency, even if they were still a possible NCAA team.

But if the sanctions come down in February, which is more likely with the speed these things happen, then we have apples to apples. The opinions people are giving are based on time frame, though - if Cuse had self imposed their ban in June, it would be treated differently.
Expand ...
Yea of course, but there will be no decision on UNC until after the season starts. Cuse recieved their NOA around the same time as UNC did, so it is a very similar situation.
 
Jerry1714 said:
Glad you figured out how to use the reply function this time, good job.

I read your reply, it does nothing to change the point I made. Yes, people were upset Cuse got 1 year, I did not dispute that. Again, Cuse banned themselves on February 4th, this idea they were out of the tournament at this time is just wrong.
Expand ...

Cuse banning themselves Feb 4 is irrelevant - we're talking about the NCAA penalty here. Also, not sure why you think Cuse wasn't out at 15-7 with an RPI of 69 on Feb 4th. They were fringe at best, and that's just trying to be nice.
 
pepband99 said:
Cuse banning themselves Feb 4 is irrelevant - we're talking about the NCAA penalty here. Also, not sure why you think Cuse wasn't out at 15-7 with an RPI of 69 on Feb 4th. They were fringe at best, and that's just trying to be nice.
Expand ...
Because it is February 4th. Do you know when the season ends?

The NCAA penalty was the accepting of the ban which occurred on February 4th, that is why it is relevant.
 
.-.
Jerry1714 said:
Because it is February 4th. Do you know when the season ends?
Expand ...

So, you think a team with a 69 RPI on Feb 4 is a pretty good candidate for an at-large? Especially with their post-Feb 4 schedule of: @Pitt, @BC, dook, Ville, Pitt, @ND, @dook, UVA, @NCSt ? Anyone paying attention knew they were staring at at least 5 sure losses there.

And again, the reason people complained is that the NCAA accepted *only* the self-imposed ban timeline. Given their (at best) iffy at-large status, both those bans were essentially toothless. If the NCAA had extended it further, you would have heard absolutely no comment about the timing at all.
 
pepband99 said:
So, you think a team with a 69 RPI on Feb 4 is a pretty good candidate for an at-large? Especially with their post-Feb 4 schedule of: @Pitt, @BC, dook, Ville, Pitt, @ND, @dook, UVA, @NCSt ? Anyone paying attention knew they were staring at at least 5 sure losses there.

And again, the reason people complained is that the NCAA accepted *only* the self-imposed ban timeline. Given their (at best) iffy at-large status, both those bans were essentially toothless. If the NCAA had extended it further, you would have heard absolutely no comment about the timing at all.
Expand ...
Did I say they were a "pretty good candidate for an at-large"? No, I am simply pointing out the stupidity in saying a team with 15 wins and a winning record in the ACC on February 4th had no shot at making the tournament and banned themselves because they already out of the tournament (which has been said in this thread).
 
Jerry1714 said:
Did I say they were a "pretty good candidate for an at-large"? No, I am simply pointing out the stupidity in saying a team with 15 wins and a winning record in the ACC on February 4th had no shot at making the tournament and banned themselves because they already out of the tournament (which has been said in this thread).
Expand ...

No, you were just your usual wrong condescending self. Everyone else is stupid/absurd, blah blah blah. Forgive me if i don't hold your tournament prognostications in the highest regard, either.
 
pepband99 said:
No, you were just your usual wrong condescending self. Everyone else is stupid/absurd, blah blah blah. Forgive me if i don't hold your tournament prognostications in the highest regard, either.
Expand ...
Haha, way to go back 1.5 years to find something I was wrong about. I am sure I could do the same for you, but I have a life. (I was really on an island with SMU too, crazy me)

But you are right Pep the season ends February 4th, sorry I am such an idiot for not recognizing that.
 
.-.
So UNC is like a preseason #1 ranked team. Yet most likely if they face tournament ban(s) it wont be until next season. Same ole NCAA.
 
UNC finalizing Roy Williams multi-million dollar extension...
 
.-.
Are UNC and the NCAA really going to try and spin it that the men's basketball team didn't have much involvement with any wrongdoing? That there were sham classes and a lack of institutional control, but that mainly affected the football and women's basketball teams. Their highest profile and most celebrated team, though, they weren't part of it.

That's impossible to take seriously, but it's almost admirable, in a way, if that's what they try to sell to everyone.
 
JSM1970 said:
Would be great if it was this upcoming year, when they are preseason #1.
Expand ...
It would hurt them as much or more if it were delayed until the following two seasons...serious negative impact on recruiting.
 
StoweD210 said:
Are UNC and the NCAA really going to try and spin it that the men's basketball team didn't have much involvement with any wrongdoing? That there were sham classes and a lack of institutional control, but that mainly affected the football and women's basketball teams. Their highest profile and most celebrated team, though, they weren't part of it.

That's impossible to take seriously, but it's almost admirable, in a way, if that's what they try to sell to everyone.
Expand ...
For quite a long time, the athletic department and the UNC administration have been selling (and initially the NCAA was buying) that this is not an athletics issue since other students had the capability to take the same advantageous pseudo-coursework. From the e-mail strings, it is pretty clear that this was part of a deceptive plot from the beginning. I have no doubt that Good Ole Roy was knee deep in the initial planning process for this.
 
huskyharry said:
For quite a long time, the athletic department and the UNC administration have been selling (and initially the NCAA was buying) that this is not an athletics issue since other students had the capability to take the same advantageous pseudo-coursework. From the e-mail strings, it is pretty clear that this was part of a deceptive plot from the beginning. I have no doubt that Good Ole Roy was knee deep in the initial planning process for this.
Expand ...

Tape of Coach William's interview with the NCAA investigators looking into these issues.

 
Letsgohuskies11 said:
meanwhile, Roy gets a contract extension... cant make this stuff up

http://www.scout.com/college/north-...e&hootPostID=cc19fe89a1955c59dde5e82f8b022330
Expand ...
I've been trying to make sense of this since I read it yesterday and the best reasoning for it I can come up with is either:
A) They assume that they'll likely be facing a period of uncertainty for a number of years going forward and they don't want further upheaval by having to deal with everything that comes along with a new hire and search for one.
or
B) They are just flippantly thumbing their collective noses at the NCAA knowing not much will really be coming down on the Men's team, so it's essentially business as usual.

I'm hoping it's more the first than the second, but it's probably somewhere in between. Eh, who knows, I'm all schadenfreuded out.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,202
Messages
4,556,747
Members
10,442
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom