NCAA is a joke

[freescooter]

Wasn't one of the issues involved that course work was being graded by an administrative employee named Crowder instead of professors, or even grad assistants? A similar issue has been made in other cases, most notably at TN, MN and Ohio St., I think, where athletics dept. personnel or contractors were doing the coursework for student-athletes. Either way, the grades are being determined by athletics dept. personnel or by their agents or administrators. If so, then how do you evaluate the APR? Forgetting about the relative academic merits of the courses, if Joe Athlete can skate through all the academic requirements then the whole thing is nothing but a giant scam, which it is in practice. I'd bet that not one UNC athlete ever flunked in one of those classes, but some non-athlete students probably did.

I'll admit the whole APR thing is a useless scam, but if you're going to go through the motions of treating it like it's a real thing, then the athletic dept. or non-professor departmental administrators shouldn't be grading the athletes' term papers. That goes way beyond arguing the merits of whether or not they're academically fake courses. That's complete fraud. If the NCAA has no authority to do anything about that, then they might as well close up shop and quit pretending they administer anything.

BTW, just because the NCAA may lose a court case is no reason for them to withdraw from an investigation. If that's all it takes to get them off any particular school's back, then the organization has no basis for its own existence.

Crewbear is sort of correct in this. The NCAA is not authorized to make determinations of whether a course is rigorous enough to be considered legitimate. That responsibility rests ultimately with the governing body of the school. And let’s be honest. A class that is acceptable at Louisville might not past muster at Yale. The NCAA can’t decide a class is “fake” or “real”. And once the UNC Board of Trustees agreed that certain classes were to receive credit regardless of their, let’s say academic rigor, the NCAA had no recourse. If the guy down the street puts an addition on his house without getting permits you can complain to the building department or maybe zoning. If they say it’s ok not much you can do. They have jurisdiction. Doesn’t matter what the Park & rec board says though. In the UNC case the NCAA is the park and rec board. UNC is the building dept.

It was sleazy and wrong but the NCAA had zero authority to say a class is or is not legitimate. And really they can’t hsve that authority.

 

[AllAbout5]

Very true, although those two times each year Roy cries after a loss for the love of his players gets me every time. Reminds me of when OJ vowed to help catch the killer. Very touching.

Guessing the Boneyard has a problem with Roy

 

[crewbear742]

It would never had gone court. In order to prevail with NCAA UNC said these are the courses we offered we are standing by them. In order to prevail with it's accrediting agency UNC said these course are not up to our standards; they were offered by rogue staff we've corrected the situation. Those two positions can't exist in the same the universe. UNC wouldn't have taken the NCAA to court because they would have to make admissions on the record that would have cost them their accreditation.
Because KO's case will be decided by what this board thinks? Riiiight. Again, you may want to read the governing documents if you want to discuss this seriously.

UNC is already standing behind those courses. Is it altering transcripts? Is it revoking degrees? That case would have went to court just as fast as UNCs lawyers could get it there.

And the issue for this thread is the rank hypocrisy displayed on this board towards the NCAA depending upon whose ox is being gored. If the NCAA is not credible in its dealings with UNC, then the NCAA is not credible in its dealings with KO. You can't have it both ways.

 

[billybud]

The NCAA is not about academics as someone posted...it is about college athletics.

And thus the focus and authority are limited.

The accreditation agencies do not review athlete eligibility...and the NCAA does not review a college's academic course content.

 

[jibsey]

The NCAA is not about academics as someone posted...it is about college athletics.

And thus the focus and authority are limited.

The accreditation agencies do not review athlete eligibility...and the NCAA does not review a college's academic course content.

Yet a player can post a 3.0 on a crap curriculum and the NCAA don’t care whether they attended the course or not. What a country.

 

[Dooley]

You really do have to marvel at how the NCAA no longer gives a hoot about its corrupt image. Transparent corruption is a refreshing change.

 

[billybud]

Yet a player can post a 3.0 on a crap curriculum and the NCAA don’t care whether they attended the course or not. What a country.

As long as non athlete students could do the same...no foul.

I do remember the Creighton ex player who read on the second grade level entering the college and sued the college for failing to educate him while using him for basketball.

 

[crewbear742]

Yeah, you can't engage in this fiction that the NCAA is all about academics, while you turn around and allow all schools to offer fake classes. That's supposed to be what the NCAA is all about. If they have no authority to regulate that, then the entire mission of the organization, albeit a phony and contrived one in practice, is compromised.

The University presidents would never give an athletic organization like the NCAA the authority to disapprove a curriculum developed by a tenured academic.

NCAA: Hey, Mr University President. We the NCAA don't think your classes are up to snuff.

Mr President: Hey Mr Owl. How many different ways can I say "Intercourse you" to the NCAA?

Mr Owl: I don't know. Let's find out! One ... Tw-hoo ... Three ... Four ... Five ... Six ...

...

137 ... 138 ...139 ...

 

[billybud]

Darren Davis went Iowa State for four years....leading rusher..

Was illiterate when he left with a Wonderlic score of 4.

 

[UConnNick]

Crewbear is sort of correct in this. The NCAA is not authorized to make determinations of whether a course is rigorous enough to be considered legitimate. That responsibility rests ultimately with the governing body of the school. And let’s be honest. A class that is acceptable at Louisville might not past muster at Yale. The NCAA can’t decide a class is “fake” or “real”. And once the UNC Board of Trustees agreed that certain classes were to receive credit regardless of their, let’s say academic rigor, the NCAA had no recourse. If the guy down the street puts an addition on his house without getting permits you can complain to the building department or maybe zoning. If they say it’s ok not much you can do. They have jurisdiction. Doesn’t matter what the Park & rec board says though. In the UNC case the NCAA is the park and rec board. UNC is the building dept.

It was sleazy and wrong but the NCAA had zero authority to say a class is or is not legitimate. And really they can’t hsve that authority.

That wasn't the point I'm making. Forget about whether these are the worst gut courses in academic history. It's about letting non-professors grade the only term paper submitted, which counts for the entire grade, so administrators are essentially giving out the grades. I don't care whether the course material constitutes a valid academic exercise or not. There are many that don't, but allowing administrators to grade entire courses is blatant fraud, which directly affects the eligibility of student-athletes. At a bare minimum, the NCAA should at least require their 1,100+ member schools to have professors giving out the grades, even if that's a total sham at some schools.

 

[UConnNick]

It would never had gone court. In order to prevail with NCAA UNC said these are the courses we offered we are standing by them. In order to prevail with it's accrediting agency UNC said these course are not up to our standards; they were offered by rogue staff we've corrected the situation. Those two positions can't exist in the same the universe. UNC wouldn't have taken the NCAA to court because they would have to make admissions on the record that would have cost them their accreditation.
Because KO's case will be decided by what this board thinks? Riiiight. Again, you may want to read the governing documents if you want to discuss this seriously.

The mere fact that UNC was willing to risk losing its academic accredidation to further its athletic interests speaks volumes about the institution as a whole.

 

[BlueDogs]

It would never had gone court. In order to prevail with NCAA UNC said these are the courses we offered we are standing by them. In order to prevail with it's accrediting agency UNC said these course are not up to our standards; they were offered by rogue staff we've corrected the situation. Those two positions can't exist in the same the universe. UNC wouldn't have taken the NCAA to court because they would have to make admissions on the record that would have cost them their accreditation.
Because KO's case will be decided by what this board thinks? Riiiight. Again, you may want to read the governing documents if you want to discuss this seriously.

UNC holds itself out as an elite academic institution when it’s courses couldn’t meet a high school accreditation standard due to unqualified staff. A fraud always has a detectable stink even when its rot is covered by layers of sweet smelling contrivances.

 

[CL82]

UNC is already standing behind those courses. Is it altering transcripts? Is it revoking degrees? That case would have went to court just as fast as UNCs lawyers could get it there.

Well then I hope they had their malpractice insurance paid up because they would have put their client between a rock and a hard place where they would have had to either stand behind the courses, as they did with the NCAA, or reject them, as they did with accrediting agency.

And the issue for this thread is the rank hypocrisy displayed on this board towards the NCAA depending upon whose ox is being gored. If the NCAA is not credible in its dealings with UNC, then the NCAA is not credible in its dealings with KO. You can't have it both ways.

No this thread is about the NCAA's rank hypocrisy in the way it deals with powerful institutions versus the way deals with less powerful ones. And all your posturing to the contrary doesn't change that.

 

[Scrutiner]

Wait. Wasn't the NCAA considered an authoritative source when UCONN was trying to avoid paying KO the money it agreed to pay him? Should I now consider the NCAA charges against him to be a joke as well? Oh, I see. That's different.

You guys really need to let this UNC thing go. The NCAA didn't do anything about the fake classes at UNC because the NCAA has no authority to judge academic standards. That authority was deliberately withheld from the NCAA because university presidents didn't want the NCAA playing in that sandbox. You may not like it, but there it is.

Maybe the NCAA doesn't need authority to judge academic standards if they wanted to fairly and equitably handle violations. uNC admitted the fake classes were fraudulent. Since they were fraudulent, why would the NCAA not be able to rule that the players taking them were ineligible due to not taking the required minimum credits and thus require the sports in which they participated to forfeit all games in which they played?

 

[billybud]

Where do you draw the line?

We all know that there are some athletes that would not be in college except for their athletic contribution...

Ohio State's Terrell Pryor had a Wonderlic of 7...which indicates a room temperature IQ (in a cool room). Same with Tavon Austin of WVU....Other NFL draftees have scores which indicate a below average IQ.

Jeff George, out of the University of Illinois, had a Wonderlic that converted to the IQ at the lower end of the scale of that needed for janitors.

 

[crewbear742]

Maybe the NCAA doesn't need authority to judge academic standards if they wanted to fairly and equitably handle violations. uNC admitted the fake classes were fraudulent. Since they were fraudulent, why would the NCAA not be able to rule that the players taking them were ineligible due to not taking the required minimum credits and thus require the sports in which they participated to forfeit all games in which they played?

UNC granted credits towards graduation for those courses and therefore conferred degrees based upon their completion. They were in no legal sense "fake". That's why the NCAA couldn't do anything. If you want to see lawsuits, then wait for UNC to start mucking with the credentials they conferred for coursework completed in good faith.

 

[HuskyFich]

The biggest irony of all of this is that Cal Poly is getting in trouble for giving money(excess) to students to allow them to spend on books(okay not all the students did)

UNC can’t be bothered because said classes never existed, so it isn't an academic issue and the NCAA can’t extend an opinion....where’d the NCAA determine that was the right judgement, in some cheap college textbook?

 

[freescooter]

Yet a player can post a 3.0 on a crap curriculum and the NCAA don’t care whether they attended the course or not. What a country.

It isn’t their job to determine quality of the curriculum. Truly I don’t get how some people can’t grasp this. No university, no professor would tolerate the NCAA saying English 204 taught by Dr Smith is ok but English 204 taught by Dr Jones is not. And that is what you want them to do because UNC beat the rap. Once the school decided to recognize the credits as legitimate it was game over for the NCAA. And it will always be game over

 

[Husker Husky]

Remember back when Boise State was embarrassing the bigs and the NCAA decided to due an exhausted investigation? They uncovered and posted a list of violations. The one that had me howling was that someone bought a bottle of soda for a recruit. The line item said something like "16oz Pepsi - $1.20". Their investigators somehow unearthed this egregious flaunting of rules, but couldn't find the admitted bag of cash for Scam Newton.

 

[The Funster]

I think its way cool that the NCAA finally cracked down on Cal Poly. Everyone knows there was book stipend hijinks going on there. I think its about time that these flagrant rule breakers get their comeuppance. They're a black eye to the standard bearing institutions like LSU, Arizona and UNC. Good on you NCAA!

 

[CL82]

UNC granted credits towards graduation for those courses and therefore conferred degrees based upon their completion. They were in no legal sense "fake". That's why the NCAA couldn't do anything. If you want to see lawsuits, then wait for UNC to start mucking with the credentials they conferred for coursework completed in good faith.

And yet they specifically disavowed the courses during their accrediting agency review. Weird, right?

 

[freescooter]

And yet they specifically disavowed the courses during their accrediting agency review. Weird, right?

And were put on probation for 2 years I think by the accrediting agency for that. That is the appropriate agency to deal with academic violations. And they did. You can argue whether they were severe enough but not that they ignored it or nobody acted.

 

[CL82]

And were put on probation for 2 years I think by the accrediting agency for that. That is the appropriate agency to deal with academic violations. And they did. You can argue whether they were severe enough but not that they ignored it or nobody acted.

Largely agree. I'm just noting that took inconsistent positions with the NCAA (yeah, the classes were fine and you lack the authority to tell us otherwise) and the accrediting agency (yeah the classes were crap, we're really sorry and correcting the problem.) UNC did ignore it until whistle blowers made that impossible.

 

[boba]

This isn’t the first time Cal Tech has been dinged. Someone at the NCAA has it in for them

Caltech is on NCAA probation. No, really

Cal Tech is in Pasadena. Cal Poly is in San Luis Obispo. And they go after Cal Tech because if they go after Harvey Mudd, they are likely to find a VW bug in the Emmert's office.

 

[crewbear742]

And yet they specifically disavowed the courses during their accrediting agency review. Weird, right?

They would say there is no retroactive remedy. They have a legal obligation to stand behind those courses. They can only prevent future harm.

Btw. There was never any risk to UNCs accreditation. There might have been risk to the AFAM Dept. UNC however is too big and too established and too prestigious to be punished like that. Too many innocent people would have been hurt. No one seriously believes this affected the serious academics at the school in any case.

This was a fraud perpetrated by specific individuals in a specific dept. A small group of people in a single department managed to concoct (probably without knowing they did so) a scheme that could not be adjudicated by the NCAA. In so doing they did damage to UNCs reputation and made the NCAA look like idiots.

That's really all there is to it.