Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="crewbear742, post: 2360822, member: 7435"] The problem is that these courses are technically not fake courses. They were in the catalog. Any student could register. They had a syllabus. They had course work assigned. They were graded according to the required course work. They are on the transcript. There is no technical occurrence of fraud. The classes were real. The work was performed by the student himself. Now people look at this ethically and they say "[Expletive Deleted!]" And they are correct. But it doesn't matter in terms of the NCAA rules. The NCAA will not examine the course content and say "That is a fraudulent course." University presidents did not want the NCAA to have the authority to criticize their academic courses. That is the purview of the University itself. So the NCAA does not have jurisdiction to punish what actually happened at UNC. That's why this case has gone on for six years. The NCAA has been trying to find grounds for jurisdiction. What it settled upon is weak. I don't think it survives a Court challenge because a Court will make sure that the NCAA followed its rules. This is not going to end easily or quickly. And frankly UNC - despite its fraudulent activity - is in the right and should prevail. Note that I have no connection to UNC. [/QUOTE]