NCAA announcing UNC penalties on Friday | Page 2 | The Boneyard

NCAA announcing UNC penalties on Friday

There is just no known universe where the NCAA gives the purgatory penalty (its not death, see SMU etc...) to a UNC. Even a vacating of wins/titles for a school like UNC would be a massive stain and I don't see it happening, ever.

A one-year ban is possible I think given the current hyper-scrutiny and I take a kind of middle position that they have to do something to show some teeth while being very careful not to do anything that sets a life jeopardizing precedent for their golden geese.

Over under is 10-game coaching ban and loss of scholarships for 1-3 years.
 
The Funster said:
They should come down hard: 2 year post season ban, reduced schollies for 5 years and loss of wins for all implicated sports. The NCAA won't do it and even if it did the sanctions will be tied up in courts for years. UNC will get a slap on the wrist, look contrite and it will be over.
Expand ...

This is along the lines of what I was thinking. Who knows what will actually happen though?

Hopefully the NCAA lets all of the current UNC players transfer out without sitting. They really screwed the SMU players (especially the seniors) a couple years back when they levied a post-season ban after the school year had already started.
 
2Infinity said:
In light of the recent scandal revelations, and with the NCAA now clearly in the enforcement spotlight, I believe we'll see them levy significant sanctions against UNC. They will need to do this in order to justify their continued existence. If not, they will only be asking congress to step into the oversight quagmire the NCAA has helped create and begin the process of restructuring it.
Expand ...
I hope you are correct that they will come down hard on UNC but I have a gut feeling it will only be a slap on the wrist...
 
Considering that the announcement will part of the Friday afternoon news dump, I'm not expecting much in the way of penalties. The NCAA wants this story to go away.

getusedtodisappointment.jpg
 
freescooter said:
The NCAA will decide it isn’t fair to punish current players for violations they didn’t commit (the upstater conundrum) so they will take no action on future penalties. However, all UNC teams between 1990 and 2014 with be banned from any future NCAA tournaments and/or bowl games.
Expand ...


All current UNC players committed to the school AFTER the scandal was made public.
 
.-.
GemParty said:
If the penalty is less damaging than UConn's APR, it's laughable. They are a joke.
Expand ...
I'm guessing it will be pretty much the same. In essence it will be saying that cheating makes sense since The punishment won't be any more severe than honestly reporting bad scores.

As long as we are talking about UConn's postseason ban let's keep in mind that the only reason Connecticut receive the band was because the NCAA made changes to the penalty structure and applied it to Connecticut retroactively.
 
Roy's laughing at all the fans, other schools, & the NCAA. He nabbed a 5* player this week with no fear of missing a beat in hoops.
 
the Q said:
If this isnt death penalty worthy then nothing is. If this wasn't unc everyone would be expecting the death penalty. This isn't a one time payment to a player to be on campus for 1-2 years.

This is 20 years of intensely coordinated cheating across multiple sports to preserve eleigibilty for s massive amount of "student athletes."
Expand ...

I agree with you.. but the FBI didnt blow that story and make the NCAA look stupid. They made themselves look stupid on that one all on their own. We'll see what happens. I hope they do get the death penalty and a whole lot of wins vacated. I doubt they treat them as harsh as say Louisville though. What do I know though? I'm just speculating. Cant wait to see what happens tomorrow.
 
UconnFanNVa said:
I agree with you.. but the FBI didnt blow that story and make the NCAA look stupid. They made themselves look stupid on that one all on their own. We'll see what happens. I hope they do get the death penalty and a whole lot of wins vacated. I doubt they treat them as harsh as say Louisville though. What do I know though? I'm just speculating. Cant wait to see what happens tomorrow.
Expand ...

yeah, I'm just saying what they did is absolutely DP worthy.

Whether the NCAA actually takes down one of their blue bloods (who also had a separate NCAA issue about 5-7 years ago, right?) is another thing.
 
.-.
StoweD210 said:
Considering that the announcement will part of the Friday afternoon news dump, I'm not expecting much in the way of penalties. The NCAA wants this story to go away.

getusedtodisappointment.jpg
Expand ...
fleudslipcon said:
Friday release makes me think they will go light and are using the weekend for cover. Hope I'm wrong.
Expand ...

Possibly...though it could be just the opposite. Think of the wall-to-wall football coverage over the weekend giving their ruling lots of airtime and discussion. Could be an ideal scenario for them to receive a lot of favorable reaction and publicity regarding their tough penalty.
 
Last edited:
2Infinity said:
Possibly...though it could be just the opposite. Think of the wall-to-wall football coverage over the weekend giving their ruling lots of airtime and discussion. Could be an ideal scenario for them to receive a lot of favorable reaction and publicity regarding their tough penalty.
Expand ...
Fishy heard that the NCAA is angry with UNC with all the delays so I'm keeping my hopes up.
 
awfuldan said:
This is along the lines of what I was thinking. Who knows what will actually happen though?

Hopefully the NCAA lets all of the current UNC players transfer out without sitting. They really screwed the SMU players (especially the seniors) a couple years back when they levied a post-season ban after the school year had already started.
Expand ...
This thing has been dragging on for such a long time those players had to know that a ruling would come down at some point. Normally I'm sympathetic to the players but in this case making it hard for those players to leave will send a message to recruits to avoid universities who are being viewed by the NCAA for infractions.

Given the sneaker situation I'm hoping they are tough on UNC players.
 
fleudslipcon said:
Friday release makes me think they will go light and are using the weekend for cover. Hope I'm wrong.
Expand ...

Hadn’t thought about that. Makes sense.
The two wild cards here are the FBI investigation and the ncaa faculty and presidents. With the investigation the NCAA is at serious risk of losing its control over the lucrative NCAA pie.
I don’t think you can under estimate the outrage among presidents and faculty over the academic scandal. The UNC awarding of credits without doing the work has created outrage whereas the Louisville prostitute scandal was met with a yawn .
 
.-.
Padutch5 said:
Hadn’t thought about that. Makes sense.
The two wild cards here are the FBI investigation and the ncaa faculty and presidents. With the investigation the NCAA is at serious risk of losing its control over the lucrative NCAA pie.
I don’t think you can under estimate the outrage among presidents and faculty over the academic scandal. The UNC awarding of credits without doing the work has created outrage whereas the Louisville prostitute scandal was met with a yawn .
Expand ...
Many ways of looking at this. Usually Friday announcements are made to reduce public scrutiny, but as 2infinity points out, in the sports world, the audience is more prevalent on weekends. So an NCAA announcement could get more attention with regards to people interested in these events.

In addition to the FBI investigation you would think they would come down harder on UNC than the universities who received penalties with the APR failures just out of fear those universities would sue the NCAA.

As they say we'll soon find out. No matter how it plays out the punishment should give us a distraction until the season starts.
 
I am betting that whatever they do it will not affect current players. They will say something like "the current student athletes had nothing to do with the previous decades long fake classes so we felt it would not be prudent to punish these players....". Completely ignoring what they did to our Hungry Huskies
 
.-.
fleudslipcon said:
Won't click it because there are some grads from rival programs with an anti UConn agenda providing reports and don't want to support them. Give us names and partial quotes.

Not worried about their agenda. The FBI is another story.
Expand ...
Yea, don't click. Regret I did. But they quote Susan and bring up Nate Miles in an obtuse guilt by association tack Of course it is a joke that UConn will be punished, but damn, the basis of most jokes is reality.

Herbst was appointed UConn president in December of 2010, and watched the fallout of an NCAA case where Josh Nochimson, a former UConn team manager turned registered sports agent, was sued by one of the program’s best players, then-NBA star Richard Hamilton, for stealing $1 million from him. Nochimson then helped UConn coaches broker the recruitment of prized talent Nate Miles. Nochimson provided Miles with housing, meals, strength and conditioning classes, training and even surgery on his foot.

Miles enrolled but never played for UConn. He was expelled for violating a restraining order in a domestic violence case. In 2011 the NCAA stripped the school of scholarships, placed it on three years probation and suspended then-coach Jim Calhoun for three games. Calhoun retired in 2012, but the idea that “nothing like that” could occur anywhere, let alone a place where it occurred in the past decade, is beyond naïve.
 
I think Slick Rick's recent troubles have us focusing on the BB program and Roy Williams, but the UNC scandal is more far-reaching. It not only involves multiple sports, but wouldn't have worked without the complicity of academic institution itself for 10+ years.
 
housekeys said:
Yea, don't click. Regret I did. But they quote Susan and bring up Nate Miles in an obtuse guilt by association tack Of course it is a joke that UConn will be punished, but damn, the basis of most jokes is reality.

Herbst was appointed UConn president in December of 2010, and watched the fallout of an NCAA case where Josh Nochimson, a former UConn team manager turned registered sports agent, was sued by one of the program’s best players, then-NBA star Richard Hamilton, for stealing $1 million from him. Nochimson then helped UConn coaches broker the recruitment of prized talent Nate Miles. Nochimson provided Miles with housing, meals, strength and conditioning classes, training and even surgery on his foot.

Miles enrolled but never played for UConn. He was expelled for violating a restraining order in a domestic violence case. In 2011 the NCAA stripped the school of scholarships, placed it on three years probation and suspended then-coach Jim Calhoun for three games. Calhoun retired in 2012, but the idea that “nothing like that” could occur anywhere, let alone a place where it occurred in the past decade, is beyond naïve.
Expand ...
If the reporters were unbiased they'd have criticized the APR penalties especially with the news surrounding UNC.

Regarding Nate I wrote this in the Vitale thread:

JC went to the compliance department to report the Nate Miles situation. Of course the compliance department was Jeff Hathaway. He got rid of the staff. It is obvious to many of us now, as opposed to when that incident occurred, Jeff, like Emmert, had a grudge against JC and threw him under the bus. Any reasonable AD would have understood JC was not in league with Nochimson because he cheated Rip just prior to this incident.

The NCAA got JC on a technicality (an issue since changed) over the numbers of contacts made with Miles. They dismissed the argument the staff made that they kept contacting Nate to stay away from Nochimson. If Emmert wasn't already biased against UConn and JC they might have given JC some slack but Hathaway made the statement he never saw JC recruit a player harder than Miles. Of course Hathaway stayed away from JC because they hated one another so he would have no clue to support his statement.

IMO Vitale's defense was at best minimal. Jay Bilas was more aware of the issues and presented salient points to refute the APR ruling.
 
fleudslipcon said:
This thing has been dragging on for such a long time those players had to know that a ruling would come down at some point. Normally I'm sympathetic to the players but in this case making it hard for those players to leave will send a message to recruits to avoid universities who are being viewed by the NCAA for infractions.

Given the sneaker situation I'm hoping they are tough on UNC players.
Expand ...
Agreed that this IS different. Anyone enrolling there already knew there were sanctions coming...so it was a huge risk. This is very different than most situations where infractions are uncovered and generally affect only one sport, while the circumstances had not been widely known. UNC's violations are so broad, they affected many sports programs, so any student-athlete enrolling there was taking a risk. It would be somewhat similar to a basketball recruit enrolling at Louisville today. :confused:
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,285
Messages
4,561,387
Members
10,455
Latest member
UConnGabby


Top Bottom