Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="CL82, post: 2371721, member: 44"] Not so much, actually. Organizations are allowed to have rules. One of the NCAA's rules is APR. Another is the minimum CGPA needed for a player to be eligible. UNC provided fraudulent information regarding APR. Had they provided honest information they wouldn't have been eligible for the post season and some of their players would be ineligible. The punishment for playing an ineligible player is forfeiture of the game. The NCAA could have, under their existing rules, declared every game that UNC played with ineligible players forfeit and vacated the wins. Playing ineligible for 20 years would seem to be a pretty good indicator of institutional failure to monitor. You are looking at scholarship reductions and lost of post season play potentially. The NCAA, deliberately in my view, cast this as a "impermissible benefits issue" because then UNC's well if at at least one non-athlete got the benefit as well, it's not a sports argument is more effective. It isn't the logical or most efficient way to attack the behavior though. You have take a pretty tortured stance to suggest that that was the issue. (As an aside the a very large percentage of the money sports athletes were in these classes but only an infinitesimal portion of the general student body were in them. It would be easy for the NCAA to have concluded that they were not available to the general student body in practice. They chose not to.) If you really want to get to the bottom of this FOIA the original penalty report that UNC shut down. I feel pretty confident that it did't exonerate the school. Otherwise, why would they suppress it until after their fundraising event? [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach