NCAA: Committee on Infractions could not conclude UNC violated NCAA rules

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

On message boards or otherwise, defenders of UNC Chapel Hill's prior morally vacuous no show, no requirements, no nothing courses and the undermined university's academic, athletic, and administrative (mis)leaders surely couldn't be UNC Chapel Hill employees, students, alumni, or legal representatives. All was and is fine!

 

[CL82]

Do you feel that that 1) giving grades based upon the score needed for an athlete to remain eligibility, rather than the quality of the work for a 2) no show, one paper course 3) in which the only submission is not graded by the academic staff and 4) not even read by a secretary prior to grading is a pretty fair indicator of institutional staff not acting "with honesty and integrity in all academic matters?"

Your beef is not with me, it's with the NCAA since they revised their policy a couple years ago that the University decides when academic fraud occurs on it's campus. That's how the majority of D1 schools want it. Now the NCAA is way beyond inconsistent in what it chooses to enforce & to answer your question these courses lacked integrity but that not what schools want to enforce

Avoidance of the question duly noted.

 

[David 76]

All the lines of logic are wrong. The NCAA chose to do nothing because UNC is a blue blood program in a P-5 conferences. It is not in the interest of the NCAA to piss them off and risk their wrath. So they didn't.
The rationale came later to justify the financial decision.