Academics are the business of universities, not the NCAA

Congratulations to North Carolina on avoiding punishment as a result of the  alleged academic fraud. Per ESPN, looks as if the NCAA investigation was limited in its scope because the university itself determines the existence of academic fraud, and in this case, because the courses were available to other students no fraud. I suspect Portland does not have the type of "paper courses" available at North Carolina and other institutions. This result may actually lead to further abuse, unfortunately.

"While student-athletes likely benefited from the so-called 'paper courses' offered by North Carolina, the information available in the record did not establish that the courses were solely created, offered and maintained as an orchestrated effort to benefit student-athletes," said Greg Sankey, the panel's chief hearing officer and commissioner of the Southeastern Conference, in the release. "The panel is troubled by the university's shifting positions about whether academic fraud occurred on its campus and the credibility of the Cadwalader report, which it distanced itself from after initially supporting the findings. However, NCAA policy is clear. The NCAA defers to its member schools to determine whether academic fraud occurred and, ultimately, the panel is bound to making decisions within the rules set by the membership."

The investigation centered on a system in which a significant percentage of student-athletes took classes that had academic irregularities -- and whether that resulted in those athletes receiving an impermissible benefit. The classes were taken by more than 3,100 students -- nearly half of them athletes -- from 1993 to 2011. However, the investigation was focused from 2002-11.

North Carolina has maintained that the NCAA has no jurisdiction over this academic matter, and has denied that student-athletes received impermissible benefits due to the fact that the classes in question were offered to the entire student body."

I mean... did anyone actually expect the NCAA to bring the hammer against UNC?!?

The NCAA makes examples out of small schools, not cash cows.

The NCAA may have been correct that they do not have the authority to enforce this issue. However, what they have concluded completely invalidates their amateur student-athlete argument they have used to defend the collegiate model. They built their whole system on the notion of amateurism and "student first," and yet have no power to enforce both amateurism (per the FBI) and "student first" per their recognition that they are unable to enforce academic issues.

The quality of an education for student athletes at Power 5 schools may be diminishing as this topic is discussed.

Maybe my response to this issue has been naive, but I did not think essentially nothing would be done to UNC.

I mean... it's pretty obvious the sham classes were created to primarily benefit student-athletes, correct? Sure they might have been open to all students, but nearly half of the 3K+ students who took them were student-athletes. (UNC has an enrollment of nearly 30K, of which probably less than 5% are on a D1 roster.)

There's no doubt in my mind that the athletic department at UNC steered student-athletes into these classes, knowing full well what they were.

How does that not merit at least some sort of punishment? It seems like the precedent has been set... what is preventing other schools from creating sham classes and steering athletes into them, and then claiming the NCAA has no jurisdiction? You'd hope that university presidents and provosts and deans would stand in the way of such behavior, but clearly that wasn't the case at UNC - a very good school with a strong academic reputation.

Ok. UNC is a member of the AAU. What's their take on paper classes? Wouldn't sham classes affect their accreditation?

It seems to me this decision by the committee will come back to haunt the NCAA when it tries to defend the Student-athlete position it takes, originally to avoid Workers compensation claims.

If sports and academics aren’t linked by the NCAA and left to schools, there is no position.

up7587 wrote:Ok.  UNC is a member of the AAU. What's their take on paper classes?  Wouldn't sham classes affect their accreditation?

We’ll, no. They aren’t a member of the amateur athletic union, though some think that’s where they properly belong ( except maybe for the Amateur part)

The agency  that certifies their accreditation (Southern Association of Colleges and Southerners states colleges committee) put them on probation and that is what caused the investigation to begin with. UNC was in real danger of losing its certification as a real university and two presidents had to resign over it.

http://college.usatoday.com/2015/06/11/unc-probation-accreditation-agency/

I think he meant this AAU: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Universities

But I am not really sure what AAU membership does for universities other than act as a bragging right/feather in the cap.

Stonehouse wrote:I think he meant this AAU: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Universities

But I am not really sure what AAU membership does for universities other than act as a bragging right/feather in the cap.

It’s no feather in your cap to admit to 18 years of academic fraud, with your defense being that it’s not illegal.

And those other AAU team have nothing to brag on if they are in the same association.

Stonehouse wrote:I think he meant this AAU: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Universities

But I am not really sure what AAU membership does for universities other than act as a bragging right/feather in the cap.

Exactly. I don't know much about it either, but I recall that during the conference expansion craze, schools were said to not be appropriate for Pac-12 membership because they were not AAU members. Thought maybe they'd care about fake classes.