Meanwhile in Chapel Hill.......

Donate To GopherHole
dpodoll68 said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_vacated_and_forfeited_games_in_college_basketball

Minnesota is just oh-so-persecuted.
Click to expand...

you know we weren't really hit very hard by the NCAA for the 90's scandal.

We lost 5 scholarships spread out over 3 years. we had a 1 year post season ban(self imposed only, though NCAA probably would have given us 1 had we not self imposed) and the probation for 4 years. loss of all tournament results.

Compare that to Syracuse: 1 year post season ban (self imposed) loss of 8 scholarships over 4 years. loss of 108 wins. 5 years probation.

Edit: origonally it was 12 over 4 years now it is 8 over 4 years after they won a scholarship/yr back upon appeal.
 


MennoSota said:
I'm looking for that list to include a long string of UNC NCAA tournament participations. Perhaps Michael Jordan never won an NCAA basketball championship, dpodoll.
Click to expand...

I don't really understand this post. UNC will almost assuredly lose games, but there's not been any indication that this stretches back to the early 80s.

In reality, that list demonstrates that the idea that only minor programs get punished is silly. UCLA, Ohio State, Michigan, Arizona, Villanova, and Kentucky on there. Syracuse isn't on there for some reason, but as noted has been punished. And this is only vacated wins. Kansas has the longest current tournament streak and it would be even longer had the NCAA not imposed a postseason ban because they bought a plane ticket for a recruit to go to his grandma's funeral.

People get on dpodoll for sticking up for the NCAA, but I'm guessing what he's doing is sticking up for facts. NCAA investigations take a long time because they want to be thorough. Very often big schools DO end up getting punished.
 

I love these adjusted records.

Minnesota Clem Haskins 1995 19–13 20–11 Vacated 1 tournament loss (gained 1 forfeited win)
Minnesota Clem Haskins 1996 19–13 20–10 Vacated 1 NIT win and 1 NIT loss (gained 2 forfeited wins)

So we actually improved our records!
 

justthefacts said:
I don't really understand this post. UNC will almost assuredly lose games, but there's not been any indication that this stretches back to the early 80s. In reality, that list demonstrates that the idea that only minor programs get punished is silly. UCLA, Ohio State, Michigan, Arizona, Villanova, and Kentucky on there. Syracuse isn't on there for some reason, but as noted has been punished. And this is only vacated wins. Kansas has the longest current tournament streak and it would be even longer had the NCAA not imposed a postseason ban because they bought a plane ticket for a recruit to go to his grandma's funeral. People get on dpodoll for sticking up for the NCAA, but I'm guessing what he's doing is sticking up for facts. NCAA investigations take a long time because they want to be thorough. Very often big schools DO end up getting punished.
Click to expand...

A big problem is the "good" schools have their punishment ignored by the media. Michigan and the Fab Four is still one of the best teams, Roy will still be loved, heck Bruce Pearl was an ESPN analyst the second he got punished. Meanwhile Clem has been blackballed and the 97 team has ceased to exist. So while the punishment is comparable, the reaction from media is still not IMO.
 


scher215 said:
A big problem is the "good" schools have their punishment ignored by the media. Michigan and the Fab Four is still one of the best teams, Roy will still be loved, heck Bruce Pearl was an ESPN analyst the second he got punished. Meanwhile Clem has been blackballed and the 97 team has ceased to exist. So while the punishment is comparable, the reaction from media is still not IMO.
Click to expand...

To be clear - your position is that the ncaa distributes punishment and applies rules consistently, no matter the member institution?
 

BarnBurner said:
To be clear - your position is that the ncaa distributes punishment and applies rules consistently, no matter the member institution?
Click to expand...

I think you quoted the wrong post, but my position is that most fans who complain about uneven application of the rules don't know enough details about the cases to judge correctly. I think this view is strongly bolstered by the fact that most fans conveniently forget that many, many big name schools have been punished in both football and basketball.

If you'd like to point out an NCAA investigation that led to too much punishment for a small school and present your case as to why a larger school committed the same violations, I'm all ears.
 

justthefacts said:
I think you quoted the wrong post, but my position is that most fans who complain about uneven application of the rules don't know enough details about the cases to judge correctly. I think this view is strongly bolstered by the fact that most fans conveniently forget that many, many big name schools have been punished in both football and basketball.

If you'd like to point out an NCAA investigation that led to too much punishment for a small school and present your case as to why a larger school committed the same violations, I'm all ears.
Click to expand...

SMU football. Will the NCAA do the same to UNC in football and basketball? Their violations are quite bad. Will the NCAA hand out the death sentence?
 

MennoSota said:
SMU football. Will the NCAA do the same to UNC in football and basketball? Their violations are quite bad. Will the NCAA hand out the death sentence?
Click to expand...

Not trying to be snarky, but do you know what violations SMU was charged with and what UNC is being investigated for?
 



Boosters were paying players at SMU.
UNC created fake classes so that the players could focus solely on the sport.
Seems pretty simular to me.
 


Moonlight said:
The quote that never grows old:
“The NCAA is so mad at Kentucky, it’s going to give Cleveland State two more years of probation,” Tarkanian said. It’s a great line, a funny line, but it underscored how the NCAA bullied smaller schools with sanctions while it let marquee (read: money-making) programs slide for the same transgressions. (Washington Post)
Click to expand...

I get the meaning of the quote but the NCAA nailed Kentucky in the late 80s.Rick Pitino went to Kentucky and re-ebuilt the program from the ground up.
 

MennoSota said:
Boosters were paying players at SMU.
UNC created fake classes so that the players could focus solely on the sport.
Seems pretty simular to me.
Click to expand...

First of all, even if SMU had just given a manila envelope to a player to use in class, the point still wouldn't be made because at that time SMU was a pretty big name in football. They posted a 49–9–1 record from 1980–1984, which was the highest win percentage (.839) in Division 1-A over that span.

Secondly, the scope and scale of the SMU scandal was staggering. They paid players every year for 10 years and did so with the involvement and knowledge of many people at the University. It's hard to put a quantitative score on what happened, but at least people could compare two scandals that involved the same type of violation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Methodist_University_football_scandal
 



justthefacts said:
First of all, even if SMU had just given a manila envelope to a player to use in class, the point still wouldn't be made because at that time SMU was a pretty big name in football. They posted a 49–9–1 record from 1980–1984, which was the highest win percentage (.839) in Division 1-A over that span.

Secondly, the scope and scale of the SMU scandal was staggering. They paid players every year for 10 years and did so with the involvement and knowledge of many people at the University. It's hard to put a quantitative score on what happened, but at least people could compare two scandals that involved the same type of violation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Methodist_University_football_scandal
Click to expand...
Do you think 30 years of fake classes for athletes is a minor infraction?
 

MennoSota said:
Do you think 30 years of fake classes for athletes is a minor infraction?
Click to expand...

Exactly.

THE WORST academic cheating. EVER.

Paying players is worse than creating classes and fixing grades????????
 


Tim1406 said:
you know we weren't really hit very hard by the NCAA for the 90's scandal.

We lost 5 scholarships spread out over 3 years. we had a 1 year post season ban(self imposed only, though NCAA probably would have given us 1 had we not self imposed) and the probation for 4 years. loss of all tournament results.

Compare that to Syracuse: 1 year post season ban (self imposed) loss of 8 scholarships over 4 years. loss of 108 wins. 5 years probation.

Edit: origonally it was 12 over 4 years now it is 8 over 4 years after they won a scholarship/yr back upon appeal.
Click to expand...

As I recall it was not the loss of scholarships that was so painful, but the severe restriction of on-campus visits that hampered recruiting in the Monson era. My hazy recollection is that official (i.e. paid) visits were cut in half for three years, making it ever more important to hit on the right prospects with visits, which didn't happen very often in Dan's tenure. I think saying we "weren't really hit very hard" understates the reality they lived. Like others say, media attention is a big deal with these things as well.

If UNC doesn't get comparable treatment the U got, I am calling conspiracy. The problem with academic fraud versus paying off players is that paying is simply getting an athletic advantage. Academic fraud damages the integrity of a university and in the larger scheme of things is much more serious. Both should be punished severely, but the fraud soils an entire university, not just an athletic department.
 

The Lorax said:
Uhhh yes? From an NCAA perspective it absolutely is
Click to expand...

Degree's granted to kids that didnt do the work, phony classes?

If that is the ncaa perspective, that is a joke.

Paying kids is certainly bad enough - fake classes and degrees to keep em eligible is far worse.
 

Holy Man said:
As I recall it was not the loss of scholarships that was so painful, but the severe restriction of on-campus visits that hampered recruiting in the Monson era. My hazy recollection is that official (i.e. paid) visits were cut in half for three years, making it ever more important to hit on the right prospects with visits, which didn't happen very often in Dan's tenure. I think saying we "weren't really hit very hard" understates the reality they lived. Like others say, media attention is a big deal with these things as well.

If UNC doesn't get comparable treatment the U got, I am calling conspiracy. The problem with academic fraud versus paying off players is that paying is simply getting an athletic advantage. Academic fraud damages the integrity of a university and in the larger scheme of things is much more serious. Both should be punished severely, but the fraud soils an entire university, not just an athletic department.
Click to expand...

Yes.

It just proves that academics doesnt matter to the ncaa if The Lorax is correct.
 

It's worth noting that the scandal at UNC was not specific to the athletic department. Those classes and the advantages granted by taking them extended far beyond athletes. That's why the NCAA was initially thinking that it wasn't under their purview. The allegations specific to student athletes was much more limited temporally than the aforementioned "30 years."

Again, SMU was basically running a professional football team. The other key distinction is that SMU continued to violate the rules even after being sanctioned by the NCAA. SMU was placed on probation five times between 1974 and 1985, and had been slapped with probation seven times overall—more than any other school up to that point. The death penalty is only in play when a school has been found guilty twice within 5 years. So that doesn't really apply in the UNC case, and punishment short of that doesn't mean the NCAA is taking it easy on UNC.

Can anyone look at this list honestly and come to the conclusion that the NCAA only punishes small schools?

http://www.foxsports.com/other/story/schools-with-most-major-ncaa-infractions-092915
 

justthefacts said:
It's worth noting that the scandal at UNC was not specific to the athletic department. Those classes and the advantages granted by taking them extended far beyond athletes. That's why the NCAA was initially thinking that it wasn't under their purview. The allegations specific to student athletes was much more limited temporally than the aforementioned "30 years."

Again, SMU was basically running a professional football team. The other key distinction is that SMU continued to violate the rules even after being sanctioned by the NCAA. SMU was placed on probation five times between 1974 and 1985, and had been slapped with probation seven times overall—more than any other school up to that point. The death penalty is only in play when a school has been found guilty twice within 5 years. So that doesn't really apply in the UNC case, and punishment short of that doesn't mean the NCAA is taking it easy on UNC.

Can anyone look at this list honestly and come to the conclusion that the NCAA only punishes small schools?

http://www.foxsports.com/other/story/schools-with-most-major-ncaa-infractions-092915
Click to expand...

I bet the ncaa didnt want it under their purview.

Can you honestly say the ncaa is consistent with their decisions?
 

BarnBurner said:
I bet the ncaa didnt want it under their purview.

Can you honestly say the ncaa is consistent with their decisions?
Click to expand...

Of course not, but clearly the ncaa cares more about paying players than academic fraud. The former dispels the illusion of "amateurism" that is the foundation for the ncaa's profits.
 

BarnBurner said:
I bet the ncaa didnt want it under their purview.

Can you honestly say the ncaa is consistent with their decisions?
Click to expand...

I think it's difficult to compare different cases because the circumstances vary greatly. But I certainly don't agree with the original premise, which is that big name schools get off easy. Just think of the past 5 or 6 years. Syracuse, Ohio State, Penn State, USC. All big name schools.

I'll ask again. Do you have an example in which two schools had similar infractions and were handed wildly different punishments?
 

justthefacts said:
I think it's difficult to compare different cases because the circumstances vary greatly. But I certainly don't agree with the original premise, which is that big name schools get off easy. Just think of the past 5 or 6 years. Syracuse, Ohio State, Penn State, USC. All big name schools.

I'll ask again. Do you have an example in which two schools had similar infractions and were handed wildly different punishments?
Click to expand...

We should find out shortly, if the dolly is correct that, based on past instances, April is the month for the announcement.

Big name schools do get off easy. One word - Duke.

Academic cheating is academic cheating. The degree is the only distinction. UNC, by all accounts, is the WORST EVER.

I really admire how you advocate for the ncaa. I think you are wrong.
 

The Lorax said:
Of course not, but clearly the ncaa cares more about paying players than academic fraud. The former dispels the illusion of "amateurism" that is the foundation for the ncaa's profits.
Click to expand...

If they care more about paying players than academic fraud, that says a lot, dont you think?

Why are the kids called student athletes? Why should they go to class? You make no sense.
 

BarnBurner said:
If they care more about paying players than academic fraud, that says a lot, dont you think?

Why are the kids called student athletes? Why should they go to class? You make no sense.
Click to expand...

Duh. I'm not defending the NCAA here dude. They're a corrupt exploitative organization. It isn't exactly rocket science where their priorities are though and why they make the decisions they do.
 

BarnBurner said:
We should find out shortly, if the dolly is correct that, based on past instances, April is the month for the announcement.

Big name schools do get off easy. One word - Duke.

Academic cheating is academic cheating. The degree is the only distinction. UNC, by all accounts, is the WORST EVER.

I really admire how you advocate for the ncaa. I think you are wrong.
Click to expand...

Which Duke investigation are you referring to?

Academic cheating isn't just academic cheating. If it's broader than athletes then it can't simply be argued that the school gained an athletic advantage. Now, apparently in the UNC case it extends beyond that, but the NCAA doesn't care about cheating that isn't specific to sports.

I don't advocate for the NCAA. I'm driven crazy by people who buy into conspiracy theories and are intransigent when presented with mountains of evidence disproving those theories. I argue this same way when people argue that the recruiting services only base their rankings on offers.
 

justthefacts said:
Which Duke investigation are you referring to?

Academic cheating isn't just academic cheating. If it's broader than athletes then it can't simply be argued that the school gained an athletic advantage. Now, apparently in the UNC case it extends beyond that, but the NCAA doesn't care about cheating that isn't specific to sports.

I don't advocate for the NCAA. I'm driven crazy by people who buy into conspiracy theories and are intransigent when presented with mountains of evidence disproving those theories. I argue this same way when people argue that the recruiting services only base their rankings on offers.
Click to expand...

Take your pick. There are plenty of examples of the perfect program being anything but....

Cheating is cheating. Period. In sports, in this instance.
 

BarnBurner said:
Take your pick. There are plenty of examples of the perfect program being anything but....

Cheating is cheating. Period. In sports, in this instance.
Click to expand...

You pick one and tell me which other case it compares to in which the other school got more punishment.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom