The Carolina Way VIII
- Thread starter DevilDJ
- Start date
- Status
K would be roasted for this...
Andrew Carter@_andrewcarter
Asked Roy what he's been telling prospects amid the NCAA uncertainty. Says he acknowledges the uncertainty with them.
"Uncertainty?" Howso? No allegations vs MBB & Roy tells recruits no sanctions are coming...
“They mentioned it to me,” Robinson told ESPN.com. “Coach ensured me that the basketball program would not be touched and it had nothing to do with them.”
http://www.greensboro.com/sports/ac...cle_70bd8ffb-e708-5714-b970-1ff2a6b53659.html
Someone's lying. Smart money's on the guy with the track record....
Andrew Carter@_andrewcarter
Asked Roy what he's been telling prospects amid the NCAA uncertainty. Says he acknowledges the uncertainty with them.
"Uncertainty?" Howso? No allegations vs MBB & Roy tells recruits no sanctions are coming...
“They mentioned it to me,” Robinson told ESPN.com. “Coach ensured me that the basketball program would not be touched and it had nothing to do with them.”
http://www.greensboro.com/sports/ac...cle_70bd8ffb-e708-5714-b970-1ff2a6b53659.html
Someone's lying. Smart money's on the guy with the track record....
unx alum Bob Lee...
I’ve always said Roy’s Big Exit Scene will be Incredible Theater…. Steve Kirschner and Clint Gwaltney frog-marching him out of the room with him kicking and screaming about “junk” and blaming everyone but himself.
http://bobleesays.com/2015/10/09/when-truth-is-your-enemy-avoid-it/
I’ve always said Roy’s Big Exit Scene will be Incredible Theater…. Steve Kirschner and Clint Gwaltney frog-marching him out of the room with him kicking and screaming about “junk” and blaming everyone but himself.
http://bobleesays.com/2015/10/09/when-truth-is-your-enemy-avoid-it/
Manalishi has spoken again on the PackPride forum. So much that I had to split it up into more than one post. Here's what he had to say.....
First off:
I feel that every so often certain reminders need repeating, simply for posterity’s sake.
The days of PP breaking major scandal news have been over for awhile, but don’t misunderstand the reasons behind that. It has not been due to a lack of intel that has been gathered, uncovered, and/or shared with those of influence.
Those late-night bombshells essentially ended with the multi-week PJH situation. After that point in time a lot of the dynamics of unc’s obfuscation (of its athletic-slash-academic scandal) kicked into a different gear, and it was determined that posting information on the boards in such a fashion was not the best way to bring eventual enlightenment. (You may be asking, “determined by whom”? In part by people who have a vested and shared interest in several different educational platforms.)
I know the results of this tactical alteration are not as fun as the days of Marvin, McAdoo, Blake, Peppers, and PJ, et al, but the reasons for the shift in approach have, in my view, been justified.
Having said all of that, I am going to still try to make the effort to pass along small bits of information when time allows and (even more importantly) when prudent. There could be another update in a week, or this might be the last post until Spring or Summer; impossible to say. Even five years ago a certain percentage of facts were withheld (in posts) for reasons of future leverage; those percentages have understandably gone way up in the past 24 months. Again, not fun for most, but necessary.
The following are a few of the items that have been gathered primarily over the past 4-6 weeks, with a couple of the more interesting points coming to surface even more recently – which ultimately prompted this update.
As alluded to above, much of the information posted here is often very edited in form and content. Some of the details were passed on by sources that I’d like to shield, and others were gathered through more first-hand methods. I know some will scoff at such notions, and that’s okay. Understandable, and doesn’t bother me a bit.
Take the following with as much of a grain of salt as you’d like. These days I’m indifferent when it comes to trying to convince anyone of anything; the wheels are in motion, regardless.
I gather, dissect, and assess, and then if warranted, deliver. Charlie Mike; drive on.
-- Numerous members of the national athletic-leadership community have been (very unofficially) issuing their displeasure of the new “Dean Smith” award, particularly since UNC’s very own paid-for reporting shows the scandal clearly spans several years into Smith’s regime (including the point of original). Not every national school and athletic leader is fully aware of all of those facts, of course – but many more are aware than the casual observer realizes. Word gets around, despite PR efforts aimed at the casual sports fan.
Those leaders who are displeased have sent very concise signals to the NCAA. Paraphrased: If you want to save the legacy of a man out of respect for his recent departure, then fine. (That is, unfortunately, the way the political and corporate worlds often work.) But… you better hold the university and its programs accountable for the years that followed, since this blight has negatively affected MANY schools and athletic programs across the country. (again, my paraphrase of the general tone of some of the comments)
A close variation of that sentiment was repeated by several different collegiate leaders at various times over the past month, at two separate (and unconnected) conferences/gatherings.
That is a fact. There are less than a half-dozen people whom I fully trust in regards to this topic, and all are well-placed in their areas of specialty. One of them was privy to a nearly 30-minute conversation on this topic at one of the above-mentioned gatherings.
And no, you are extremely unlikely to see any of those leaders go on record; such dealings are behind closed doors for a reason. Again, the parallels with the worlds of the political and corporate need to be kept in mind.
-- Other coalitions that are keeping close tabs on the situation are certain Higher Education watchdog groups. It is verified that some of them have been in contact with their political allies, as well as representatives of the NCAA. Their message: we are following the situation and will use our contacts and future political influence as deemed appropriate.
-- Piggybacking on the above: politics used to be a safe haven for UNC and the perception of this scandal. There have been some small cracks in that foundation, to say the least.
I have a strong disdain for politics (no matter the party); my reasons are unimportant to this conversation. However, a wise man still recognizes the power that is wielded through politics. Those who rely on politicians need to always remember the phrase “looking out for number one”, because that is what will always take place in the mind of (99% of) politicians. (my opinion)
Due to the ever-growing duration and breadth of the scandal, there are some undeniable signs that UNC’s political allies are becoming fewer and fewer. Some have left the fight due to frustrations from being kept in the dark or outright deceived by UNC’s leaders (both named and unnamed). Not smart on the university’s part; they have miscalculated their power-play moves numerous times over the past few years.
Some allies, however, have begun to distance themselves so that when the proverbial stuff hits the fan, they are well out of the splatter zone. There is a LOT that still hasn’t come out that spans more than just athletics (and it most likely never will come out) – but some of these politicians apparently don’t want to take any chances.
The end result is a loss of allies, and thus leverage, on UNC’s part.
First off:
I feel that every so often certain reminders need repeating, simply for posterity’s sake.
The days of PP breaking major scandal news have been over for awhile, but don’t misunderstand the reasons behind that. It has not been due to a lack of intel that has been gathered, uncovered, and/or shared with those of influence.
Those late-night bombshells essentially ended with the multi-week PJH situation. After that point in time a lot of the dynamics of unc’s obfuscation (of its athletic-slash-academic scandal) kicked into a different gear, and it was determined that posting information on the boards in such a fashion was not the best way to bring eventual enlightenment. (You may be asking, “determined by whom”? In part by people who have a vested and shared interest in several different educational platforms.)
I know the results of this tactical alteration are not as fun as the days of Marvin, McAdoo, Blake, Peppers, and PJ, et al, but the reasons for the shift in approach have, in my view, been justified.
Having said all of that, I am going to still try to make the effort to pass along small bits of information when time allows and (even more importantly) when prudent. There could be another update in a week, or this might be the last post until Spring or Summer; impossible to say. Even five years ago a certain percentage of facts were withheld (in posts) for reasons of future leverage; those percentages have understandably gone way up in the past 24 months. Again, not fun for most, but necessary.
The following are a few of the items that have been gathered primarily over the past 4-6 weeks, with a couple of the more interesting points coming to surface even more recently – which ultimately prompted this update.
As alluded to above, much of the information posted here is often very edited in form and content. Some of the details were passed on by sources that I’d like to shield, and others were gathered through more first-hand methods. I know some will scoff at such notions, and that’s okay. Understandable, and doesn’t bother me a bit.
Take the following with as much of a grain of salt as you’d like. These days I’m indifferent when it comes to trying to convince anyone of anything; the wheels are in motion, regardless.
I gather, dissect, and assess, and then if warranted, deliver. Charlie Mike; drive on.
-- Numerous members of the national athletic-leadership community have been (very unofficially) issuing their displeasure of the new “Dean Smith” award, particularly since UNC’s very own paid-for reporting shows the scandal clearly spans several years into Smith’s regime (including the point of original). Not every national school and athletic leader is fully aware of all of those facts, of course – but many more are aware than the casual observer realizes. Word gets around, despite PR efforts aimed at the casual sports fan.
Those leaders who are displeased have sent very concise signals to the NCAA. Paraphrased: If you want to save the legacy of a man out of respect for his recent departure, then fine. (That is, unfortunately, the way the political and corporate worlds often work.) But… you better hold the university and its programs accountable for the years that followed, since this blight has negatively affected MANY schools and athletic programs across the country. (again, my paraphrase of the general tone of some of the comments)
A close variation of that sentiment was repeated by several different collegiate leaders at various times over the past month, at two separate (and unconnected) conferences/gatherings.
That is a fact. There are less than a half-dozen people whom I fully trust in regards to this topic, and all are well-placed in their areas of specialty. One of them was privy to a nearly 30-minute conversation on this topic at one of the above-mentioned gatherings.
And no, you are extremely unlikely to see any of those leaders go on record; such dealings are behind closed doors for a reason. Again, the parallels with the worlds of the political and corporate need to be kept in mind.
-- Other coalitions that are keeping close tabs on the situation are certain Higher Education watchdog groups. It is verified that some of them have been in contact with their political allies, as well as representatives of the NCAA. Their message: we are following the situation and will use our contacts and future political influence as deemed appropriate.
-- Piggybacking on the above: politics used to be a safe haven for UNC and the perception of this scandal. There have been some small cracks in that foundation, to say the least.
I have a strong disdain for politics (no matter the party); my reasons are unimportant to this conversation. However, a wise man still recognizes the power that is wielded through politics. Those who rely on politicians need to always remember the phrase “looking out for number one”, because that is what will always take place in the mind of (99% of) politicians. (my opinion)
Due to the ever-growing duration and breadth of the scandal, there are some undeniable signs that UNC’s political allies are becoming fewer and fewer. Some have left the fight due to frustrations from being kept in the dark or outright deceived by UNC’s leaders (both named and unnamed). Not smart on the university’s part; they have miscalculated their power-play moves numerous times over the past few years.
Some allies, however, have begun to distance themselves so that when the proverbial stuff hits the fan, they are well out of the splatter zone. There is a LOT that still hasn’t come out that spans more than just athletics (and it most likely never will come out) – but some of these politicians apparently don’t want to take any chances.
The end result is a loss of allies, and thus leverage, on UNC’s part.
Continued from above........
-- Research and intel is still being gathered on potential higher numbers, but it can be stated with confidence that there are currently (as of 9 OCT) four schools that have tasked their respective university legal teams with a “what if” scenario, so to speak. “If the NCAA does not take adequate action against UNC with regards to UNC’s academic infractions (when compared to our infractions, and the penalties we ultimately received), then what is our legal recourse?” And “legal recourse” doesn’t necessarily mean appeals – they are also talking about revenue compensation due to the unfair penalties, monies lost due to negative publicity, etc.
And an ironic twist that was revealed last week with regards to possible litigation: SMU is reportedly NOT one of those schools – at least not yet. Rumor is that they felt they were going to be shielded from major penalties BECAUSE they had Larry Brown. You can figure out why they felt that way… and the ramifications (to other certain schools) based on what was eventually handed down.
-- It has been mentioned earlier on the boards about a “general atmosphere that points to severe punishment”. This remains accurate, and has only grown stronger over the past month. There are numerous people who comprise the “pool” from which the eventual Committee on Infractions will be chosen (for UNC’s specific case). Fact: UNC has put out feelers to see if they can “stack the jury”, so to speak. Fact: Certain NCAA employees have (literally) laughed at this effort, going so far as to tell jokes (in private, of course) about those efforts. (once again… those previous statements are ones that I state as clear facts)
Regardless of those ill-intended efforts… some of the COI “pool” have received documentation (official, not rival-submitted) on the breadth of the scandal (including, but not limited to, numerous portions of the NOA’s supporting documentation that UNC redacted from its release), and a “rough draft” of potential penalties have been bandied about, off-the-record.
Some of those rumors have filtered back to Chapel Hill. Word from INSIDE THE SCHOOL is that reality may be finally setting in at the upper levels.
-- From Indy: certain scenarios are on the table that give a real chance that penalties could come down quite a bit earlier than many have speculated. Timelines almost ALWAYS change, for one reason or another… so I have zero confidence in guesstimating a date. But again, enough hints have come from Indy to suggest that an acceleration is a very real possibility.
-- Finally, from the entertainment side of the world: another book is apparently in the works and being pitched to Houses though publisher/editor back channels. (per reps of two separate entities)
What else could be covered that hasn’t already been detailed in Tarnished Heels or Cheated? Good question…
The beauty of posting these updates on an internet site is that it really doesn’t put too many people at risk, considering the semi-vague form that I feel I’ve edited down some of the portions. It’s on the internet – who will believe it, right??
But those gathering behind closed doors will believe it… and while a lot of unc fans will cry “BS” on virtually all of this… there are certain people in South Building who are aware of some of the above happenings, and they most definitely will not be crying foul.
I know that some people may not see this has a major update, and/or that there’s nothing particularly insightful or damning about it. Maybe so… maybe not.
But as the saying goes, the devil is often in the details – and as always, it’s sometimes best to let certain details emerge on their own accord.
All of the above is, believe it or not, a watered-down version of perhaps 25% of what’s taken place since mid-summer.
Some will notice that are certain topics (names, documents, etc.) that were not touched on much, if at all, up above. There are some obvious “elephant in the room” types of issues, granted. But there’s always a reason for saying (or not saying) something. Boja sie swiatla, nie ciemny…
As stated before, many will not believe, and that’s totally fine with me. I’m just a name on the internet.
Additionally, I’m usually three TZ’s separated from unc, and sometimes a full 12 hours away. So yeah, don’t believe.
The several people that they really need to worry about are much, much closer.
Be patient, and Happy Holidays.
Isn’t spooky Halloween soon?...
-- Research and intel is still being gathered on potential higher numbers, but it can be stated with confidence that there are currently (as of 9 OCT) four schools that have tasked their respective university legal teams with a “what if” scenario, so to speak. “If the NCAA does not take adequate action against UNC with regards to UNC’s academic infractions (when compared to our infractions, and the penalties we ultimately received), then what is our legal recourse?” And “legal recourse” doesn’t necessarily mean appeals – they are also talking about revenue compensation due to the unfair penalties, monies lost due to negative publicity, etc.
And an ironic twist that was revealed last week with regards to possible litigation: SMU is reportedly NOT one of those schools – at least not yet. Rumor is that they felt they were going to be shielded from major penalties BECAUSE they had Larry Brown. You can figure out why they felt that way… and the ramifications (to other certain schools) based on what was eventually handed down.
-- It has been mentioned earlier on the boards about a “general atmosphere that points to severe punishment”. This remains accurate, and has only grown stronger over the past month. There are numerous people who comprise the “pool” from which the eventual Committee on Infractions will be chosen (for UNC’s specific case). Fact: UNC has put out feelers to see if they can “stack the jury”, so to speak. Fact: Certain NCAA employees have (literally) laughed at this effort, going so far as to tell jokes (in private, of course) about those efforts. (once again… those previous statements are ones that I state as clear facts)
Regardless of those ill-intended efforts… some of the COI “pool” have received documentation (official, not rival-submitted) on the breadth of the scandal (including, but not limited to, numerous portions of the NOA’s supporting documentation that UNC redacted from its release), and a “rough draft” of potential penalties have been bandied about, off-the-record.
Some of those rumors have filtered back to Chapel Hill. Word from INSIDE THE SCHOOL is that reality may be finally setting in at the upper levels.
-- From Indy: certain scenarios are on the table that give a real chance that penalties could come down quite a bit earlier than many have speculated. Timelines almost ALWAYS change, for one reason or another… so I have zero confidence in guesstimating a date. But again, enough hints have come from Indy to suggest that an acceleration is a very real possibility.
-- Finally, from the entertainment side of the world: another book is apparently in the works and being pitched to Houses though publisher/editor back channels. (per reps of two separate entities)
What else could be covered that hasn’t already been detailed in Tarnished Heels or Cheated? Good question…
The beauty of posting these updates on an internet site is that it really doesn’t put too many people at risk, considering the semi-vague form that I feel I’ve edited down some of the portions. It’s on the internet – who will believe it, right??
But those gathering behind closed doors will believe it… and while a lot of unc fans will cry “BS” on virtually all of this… there are certain people in South Building who are aware of some of the above happenings, and they most definitely will not be crying foul.
I know that some people may not see this has a major update, and/or that there’s nothing particularly insightful or damning about it. Maybe so… maybe not.
But as the saying goes, the devil is often in the details – and as always, it’s sometimes best to let certain details emerge on their own accord.
All of the above is, believe it or not, a watered-down version of perhaps 25% of what’s taken place since mid-summer.
Some will notice that are certain topics (names, documents, etc.) that were not touched on much, if at all, up above. There are some obvious “elephant in the room” types of issues, granted. But there’s always a reason for saying (or not saying) something. Boja sie swiatla, nie ciemny…
As stated before, many will not believe, and that’s totally fine with me. I’m just a name on the internet.
Additionally, I’m usually three TZ’s separated from unc, and sometimes a full 12 hours away. So yeah, don’t believe.
The several people that they really need to worry about are much, much closer.
Be patient, and Happy Holidays.
Isn’t spooky Halloween soon?...
The biggie that sticks out to me is that he brings up the possibility of penalties coming down much sooner than originally expected. Just imagine the cries if UNC were to be banned from the tourney this coming season.
So unx has tried to infiltrate the COI and they don't have the support they thought they had. Gee...that's tough. Poor flagship. lol. How 'bout Deano? The only thing savin' 'im from being totally "Paterno'd" is the willingness of others to pin all this on everyone AFTER. They still don't get it...
heelman59
Redshirt
101 posts this site
X
Re: Woods decision in a day or two
3:22 PM
I think a recruit should place a lot of emphasis on the quality of education he would receive from the school he or she is considering, and how much a degree from that school would mean after playing days. I feel certain Coach Williams includes this in his presentation. In my opinion that gives unc an advantage over most any rivals.
lol
heelman59
Redshirt
101 posts this site
X
Re: Woods decision in a day or two
3:22 PM
I think a recruit should place a lot of emphasis on the quality of education he would receive from the school he or she is considering, and how much a degree from that school would mean after playing days. I feel certain Coach Williams includes this in his presentation. In my opinion that gives unc an advantage over most any rivals.
lol
st8dukegrad87
6th Man
2556 posts this site
Ignore this Member
Send Private Message
Posted: Today 5:24 PM
Re: Cheater Continuing Saga
Don't give the NCAA too much credit, they are as or more corrupt than unc-CH. The NCAA is only interested in protecting academics because that is the only defense available that has a chance of keeping the NCAA intact. If this had been discovered 10-15 years ago and the NCAA was not a defendant in so many lawsuits, I don't believe unc-CH would have been punished and if they were it would have been minimal.
Also, the NCAA is lobbying Congress heavily to get an exemption to anti-trust and those efforts have increased with their loss in the 9th Circuit. As manalishi stated academics are speaking out behind the scenes. I know of several academics that have spoken to members of Congress from California, Florida, Utah and Pennsylvania. These academics are pushing for some type of government oversight of revenue sports. They feel the system is completely broken and that the NCAA are the captains of the Titanic.
I have said many times that academics are speaking but they do so quietly and not in public. In the past, unc-CH had much greater influence in the academic world (they are now laughed at privately), in Congress and at the NCAA (Jack Evans, etc). This is all radically diminished. I can confirm that some staffers at the NCAA have laughed and joked about unc-CH strategy and that they think they can manipulate the process. Remember that Oliver Luck is running the show in enforcement and he is no friend of unc-CH or John Swofford.
6th Man
2556 posts this site
Ignore this Member
Send Private Message
Posted: Today 5:24 PM
Re: Cheater Continuing Saga
Don't give the NCAA too much credit, they are as or more corrupt than unc-CH. The NCAA is only interested in protecting academics because that is the only defense available that has a chance of keeping the NCAA intact. If this had been discovered 10-15 years ago and the NCAA was not a defendant in so many lawsuits, I don't believe unc-CH would have been punished and if they were it would have been minimal.
Also, the NCAA is lobbying Congress heavily to get an exemption to anti-trust and those efforts have increased with their loss in the 9th Circuit. As manalishi stated academics are speaking out behind the scenes. I know of several academics that have spoken to members of Congress from California, Florida, Utah and Pennsylvania. These academics are pushing for some type of government oversight of revenue sports. They feel the system is completely broken and that the NCAA are the captains of the Titanic.
I have said many times that academics are speaking but they do so quietly and not in public. In the past, unc-CH had much greater influence in the academic world (they are now laughed at privately), in Congress and at the NCAA (Jack Evans, etc). This is all radically diminished. I can confirm that some staffers at the NCAA have laughed and joked about unc-CH strategy and that they think they can manipulate the process. Remember that Oliver Luck is running the show in enforcement and he is no friend of unc-CH or John Swofford.
Sylvia. About the 1:40 mark. "If there's no allegations how can there be penalties?" Wow. Just wow. And to think I once felt bad for her because her employer was tryin' to pin it all on her. Gravely , of course , doesn't challenge it...
http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/video/14969752/
http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc/video/14969752/
Hatchell said she doesn’t let little problems bother her or allow larger issues to weigh her down, like the loss over the past two years of four star players from the unc women’s basketball program.
"I have a philosophy—anytime someone wants to leave my program or carolina, it's their loss,” she said. “I think we have proven that many times over and over again."
Hatchell said she doesn’t worry that the ongoing NCAA investigation into the university’s academic counseling for athletes will cost her team.
“Myself and none of the coaches have been mentioned and women's basketball hasn't been mentioned,” Hatchell said. “It's academic councilors with women's basketball. If there is no allegation how can there be penalties?
http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc-s-...h-new-lens-after-bout-with-leukemia/14969302/
"I have a philosophy—anytime someone wants to leave my program or carolina, it's their loss,” she said. “I think we have proven that many times over and over again."
Hatchell said she doesn’t worry that the ongoing NCAA investigation into the university’s academic counseling for athletes will cost her team.
“Myself and none of the coaches have been mentioned and women's basketball hasn't been mentioned,” Hatchell said. “It's academic councilors with women's basketball. If there is no allegation how can there be penalties?
http://www.wralsportsfan.com/unc-s-...h-new-lens-after-bout-with-leukemia/14969302/
unc Outlines New Rules for Student-Athlete Academic Support
unc is laying down new guidelines for how its faculty, counselors and coaches should communicate when it comes to the academic work of the students involved in intercollegiate athletics.
They appear in a Web-based report issued Wednesday by a working group convened and led by Provost Jim Dean and Athletics Director Bubba Cunningham.
They say coaches "and their staff" may not "initiate contact" with professors or teaching assistants to discuss an athlete's grades or academic performance.
Instead, they're to work through the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes, which reports to the provost, not the athletic department.
Professors aren't supposed to ask the ASPSA what grade a student needs to remain eligible to compete, and the ASPSA in turn "does not offer this information," the guidelines say.
The program office isn't supposed to "attempt to influence student-athletes' grades," and professors aren't to "impose standards or requirements on student-athletes that are greater than those required of other students in the same classroom."
The guidelines are among the changes in "academic processes" for student-athletes the high-level working group said it implemented in the course of its work over the last two years.
The broader report, available at apsa.unc.edu, in large part documents the policies that should govern an athlete's academic life at unc from recruitment to graduation.
But "if there were things we found that we thought weren't good enough, we just fixed them," Dean said, added that the communication guidelines previously "didn't exist in any form like this."
The report is part of unc's ongoing response to the athletics-related scandals that've engulfed it for most of this decade, highlighted by the long-running "paper classes" academic fraud in the former Department of African and Afro-American Studies.
The university is facing the possibility of athletics-program sanctions from the NCAA, on the grounds the phony classes amounted to an impermissible benefit for athletes that helped some remain eligible to play when they otherwise shouldn't have.
More seriously, the scandal earlier this year prompted an accrediting agency, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, to put unc on a year's probation.
The move gave Dean, Chancellor Carol Folt and other administrators time to prove that unc has instituted reforms sufficient to prevent any similar sort of scandal.
If they can't, unc could lose its accreditation and, with it, its eligibility to receive federal funding. That would affect everything from student aid to research grants, meaning the issue has the potential to harm both the local and state economies.
Dean said Wednesday's report will "probably be helpful in responding" to the Southern Association, though it wasn't one of the original motives for forming the working group in the fall of 2013.
Back then, the point was to inventory and "shore up" everything on the policy front that relates to an athlete's academic life at unc, he said.
In many cases, the 10-person group found that "the processes were pretty sound," he said, citing as an example the standards the admissions office uses in weighing whether to give a recruited athlete a slot in an incoming freshman class.
There, changes made "in the last two or three years were sufficient to get us where we wanted to go in terms of the quality of students coming to this institution," Dean said.
The communication guidelines likely will be of interest to the NCAA, given that it's obtained emails showing that people involved in the paper-classes scheme were trading notes on what grades athletes needed to receive to keep their eligibility.
But there's little in the report that speaks to the key aspect of the scandal, namely that a department secretary in African and Afro-American Studies was actually running the phony classes and grading papers.
Dean acknowledged that the report assumes other policy changes have already addressed that.
Those include syllabus reviews, tighter controls on independent-study classes and even "people checking that faculty are actually in classes teaching classes," he said.
http://www.athleticbusiness.com/col...nes-for-student-athlete-academic-support.html
Dean practically bragging about "changes" that shoulda never been required. "Changes" that include , among other things , "people checking that faculty are actually in classes teaching classes." lol
unc is laying down new guidelines for how its faculty, counselors and coaches should communicate when it comes to the academic work of the students involved in intercollegiate athletics.
They appear in a Web-based report issued Wednesday by a working group convened and led by Provost Jim Dean and Athletics Director Bubba Cunningham.
They say coaches "and their staff" may not "initiate contact" with professors or teaching assistants to discuss an athlete's grades or academic performance.
Instead, they're to work through the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes, which reports to the provost, not the athletic department.
Professors aren't supposed to ask the ASPSA what grade a student needs to remain eligible to compete, and the ASPSA in turn "does not offer this information," the guidelines say.
The program office isn't supposed to "attempt to influence student-athletes' grades," and professors aren't to "impose standards or requirements on student-athletes that are greater than those required of other students in the same classroom."
The guidelines are among the changes in "academic processes" for student-athletes the high-level working group said it implemented in the course of its work over the last two years.
The broader report, available at apsa.unc.edu, in large part documents the policies that should govern an athlete's academic life at unc from recruitment to graduation.
But "if there were things we found that we thought weren't good enough, we just fixed them," Dean said, added that the communication guidelines previously "didn't exist in any form like this."
The report is part of unc's ongoing response to the athletics-related scandals that've engulfed it for most of this decade, highlighted by the long-running "paper classes" academic fraud in the former Department of African and Afro-American Studies.
The university is facing the possibility of athletics-program sanctions from the NCAA, on the grounds the phony classes amounted to an impermissible benefit for athletes that helped some remain eligible to play when they otherwise shouldn't have.
More seriously, the scandal earlier this year prompted an accrediting agency, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, to put unc on a year's probation.
The move gave Dean, Chancellor Carol Folt and other administrators time to prove that unc has instituted reforms sufficient to prevent any similar sort of scandal.
If they can't, unc could lose its accreditation and, with it, its eligibility to receive federal funding. That would affect everything from student aid to research grants, meaning the issue has the potential to harm both the local and state economies.
Dean said Wednesday's report will "probably be helpful in responding" to the Southern Association, though it wasn't one of the original motives for forming the working group in the fall of 2013.
Back then, the point was to inventory and "shore up" everything on the policy front that relates to an athlete's academic life at unc, he said.
In many cases, the 10-person group found that "the processes were pretty sound," he said, citing as an example the standards the admissions office uses in weighing whether to give a recruited athlete a slot in an incoming freshman class.
There, changes made "in the last two or three years were sufficient to get us where we wanted to go in terms of the quality of students coming to this institution," Dean said.
The communication guidelines likely will be of interest to the NCAA, given that it's obtained emails showing that people involved in the paper-classes scheme were trading notes on what grades athletes needed to receive to keep their eligibility.
But there's little in the report that speaks to the key aspect of the scandal, namely that a department secretary in African and Afro-American Studies was actually running the phony classes and grading papers.
Dean acknowledged that the report assumes other policy changes have already addressed that.
Those include syllabus reviews, tighter controls on independent-study classes and even "people checking that faculty are actually in classes teaching classes," he said.
http://www.athleticbusiness.com/col...nes-for-student-athlete-academic-support.html
Dean practically bragging about "changes" that shoulda never been required. "Changes" that include , among other things , "people checking that faculty are actually in classes teaching classes." lol
Assault happened 11 days ago. We're just now hearin' about it. The Stewart kid was part of gang-concussing the walk-on ( Jackson Boyer ) at the Aloft Hotel last year. Dollars to doughnuts , Fed makes 'im run laps or somethin...'
unc suspends CBs M.J. Stewart, Mike Hughes for violating team rules
North carolina has suspended two players indefinitely for a violation of team rules stemming from an Oct. 4 incident.
Starting sophomore cornerback M.J. Stewart and backup freshman cornerback Mike Hughes are suspended from all football activities, the school announced in a prepared statement. Campus and Chapel Hill police are both involved.
"We have been aware of this situation since the night of the altercation and have been working closely with the University and Chapel Hill Police to gather relevant information," coach Larry Fedora said. "We hold our players to a high standard, and M.J. and Mike will face the consequences for their involvement."
Stewart's three interceptions and four pass breakups lead the Tar Heels, and he is fifth on the team with 20 tackles. Hughes played in all five games and has three tackles.
At 4-1, the Tar Heels are off to their best start since 2011, when they started 5-1. They host Wake Forest on Saturday following a bye week.
Earlier this month, North carolina lost defensive tackle Aaron Crawford to season-ending surgery and junior linebacker Joe Jackson to a career-ending neck injury. Redshirt freshman tight end Caleb Samuel's career also ended because of a heart condition.
http://espn.go.com/college-football...d-mj-stewart-mike-hughes-violation-team-rules
unc suspends CBs M.J. Stewart, Mike Hughes for violating team rules
North carolina has suspended two players indefinitely for a violation of team rules stemming from an Oct. 4 incident.
Starting sophomore cornerback M.J. Stewart and backup freshman cornerback Mike Hughes are suspended from all football activities, the school announced in a prepared statement. Campus and Chapel Hill police are both involved.
"We have been aware of this situation since the night of the altercation and have been working closely with the University and Chapel Hill Police to gather relevant information," coach Larry Fedora said. "We hold our players to a high standard, and M.J. and Mike will face the consequences for their involvement."
Stewart's three interceptions and four pass breakups lead the Tar Heels, and he is fifth on the team with 20 tackles. Hughes played in all five games and has three tackles.
At 4-1, the Tar Heels are off to their best start since 2011, when they started 5-1. They host Wake Forest on Saturday following a bye week.
Earlier this month, North carolina lost defensive tackle Aaron Crawford to season-ending surgery and junior linebacker Joe Jackson to a career-ending neck injury. Redshirt freshman tight end Caleb Samuel's career also ended because of a heart condition.
http://espn.go.com/college-football...d-mj-stewart-mike-hughes-violation-team-rules
wufpakman21
6th Man
4506 posts this site
Ignore this Member
Send Private Message
Posted: Today 10:31 PM
Re: Two Tarholes In Trouble (Assault & Battery...again)
Details coming out.
Assault & Battery charges against unc's best defensive player MJ Stewart. One would expect him to immediately be removed from the team and probably the school when you couple this latest charge with the Boyer assault & hazing incident of last year. His career should be over. No word on Hughes yet.
M.J. Stewart's arrest details have become public. Was charged with assault and battery. Turned himself in tonight. Was released on $2K bond.
10:24pm - 15 Oct 15
6th Man
4506 posts this site
Ignore this Member
Send Private Message
Posted: Today 10:31 PM
Re: Two Tarholes In Trouble (Assault & Battery...again)
Details coming out.
Assault & Battery charges against unc's best defensive player MJ Stewart. One would expect him to immediately be removed from the team and probably the school when you couple this latest charge with the Boyer assault & hazing incident of last year. His career should be over. No word on Hughes yet.
M.J. Stewart's arrest details have become public. Was charged with assault and battery. Turned himself in tonight. Was released on $2K bond.
10:24pm - 15 Oct 15
unx alum Bob Lee...
A New Thug-alete Incident “amid the pines” !!!
With their team off to a very fine start, and with prospects for even more success looming … KERPLUNK / THUD… unc Head Coaches Larry/Gene now have a NEW Thug-alete Incident to deal with.
Neither one is “a walk-on” – one is a starter – so this could be difficult to “finesse”.
Can the ABC community absorb EVEN MORE SELF-INFLICTED JUICY FODDER from “amid the pines” ???
Does this news provide a safety net in the event The Wolfpack do not prevail next week in Winston-Salem ???
http://bobleesays.com/2015/10/16/a-new-thug-alete-incident-amid-the-pines/
A New Thug-alete Incident “amid the pines” !!!
With their team off to a very fine start, and with prospects for even more success looming … KERPLUNK / THUD… unc Head Coaches Larry/Gene now have a NEW Thug-alete Incident to deal with.
Neither one is “a walk-on” – one is a starter – so this could be difficult to “finesse”.
Can the ABC community absorb EVEN MORE SELF-INFLICTED JUICY FODDER from “amid the pines” ???
Does this news provide a safety net in the event The Wolfpack do not prevail next week in Winston-Salem ???
http://bobleesays.com/2015/10/16/a-new-thug-alete-incident-amid-the-pines/
Mary an' Jay...
The “working group” worked hard not to see the truth
...unwilling to confront evidence that contradicted their most cherished beliefs, they preferred not to know the truth.
...the website consist of bland descriptions of existing policies, with remarkably little critical assessment anywhere in evidence. The page that lists the working group “responses” to recommendations made by other committees in the past is filled with non-committal observations, uninformative boilerplate, and a general insistence that we at carolina are already doing things right. The overall effect of the working group’s report, if it can be called that, is to assure the community (and, perhaps, the university’s accrediting body) that all is well.
...perhaps the oddest thing about the website that culminates the working group’s work is that it fails to identify the problems the working group presumably found. The few changes in policy or procedure that have occurred since 2013 are not always even represented as changes, and all appear without explanation, with little insight into the rationale behind the making of the change. Why? The Provost and AD claimed in their email that the working group’s goal was to communicate “transparently and comprehensively.” How, then, are we to interpret this basic failure to be transparent? Is it that the Provost and the AD wanted no one on the outside–whether from the NCAA, from SACS, or anywhere else–to see problems actually identified as problems? By neglecting to locate the point A from which their various points B supposedly moved, did the leaders of the working group hope to silently encourage everyone to “move on” and stop asking questions?
Whatever the reasons behind the working group’s refusal to declare “these are the problems we found and these are the changes we propose as solutions,” the larger issue is that the working group itself seems to have been uninterested in digging for the truth, unwilling to suspend its faith in first principles, unable to confront the possibility that the problems at unc were deep and structural, requiring deep and structural solutions. They were unwilling to look through the telescope.
The working group would seem to have been unaware–or simply chose to be unaware–of the contradictions that jump out of its own anodyne description of Summer Bridge.
Yet after touting the merits of the Summer Bridge program, and noting its universal accessibility, the working group stunningly goes on to add that “few student-athletes attend Summer Bridge” because the program “does not allow absences.” The program conflicts with team activities (i. e., practice, meetings, fitness exams and planning) and so athletes are prevented from participating.
What does the working group think about the priority given to “team activities” in athletes’ first summer on the unc campus? What do the members of the committee think about the subordination of academic concerns to athletic concerns in the lives of these students? What message do they think this sends to the students? What message do they think this sends to the world about the values of unc-Chapel Hill?
Unfortunately, there is little evidence that the working group spent much time thinking at all about this issue. They blithely stated the established reality, offered no objections to it, acknowledged no conflict, and moved on to their next bullet point. This is one of a great many blind spots in the website they have created. We challenge the members of the working group to come peer through the telescope in the weeks to come, as we continue to blog about their website. We challenge them to sit down for a public dialogue with those who might wish to question them. We challenge them to use their website as an initiation to further conversation and not–as they appear to have planned–as a tool that forecloses conversation. We challenge them, in short, to be bigger, bolder, and more confident than the university philosophers who rebuffed Galileo. If their ideas are sound, they should be able to withstand open questioning and critique. If they are not, perhaps we will find that it really is time to “move on”–toward real problem solving and courageous leadership.
http://paperclassinc.com/the-working-group-worked-hard-not-to-see-the-truth/
The “working group” worked hard not to see the truth
...unwilling to confront evidence that contradicted their most cherished beliefs, they preferred not to know the truth.
...the website consist of bland descriptions of existing policies, with remarkably little critical assessment anywhere in evidence. The page that lists the working group “responses” to recommendations made by other committees in the past is filled with non-committal observations, uninformative boilerplate, and a general insistence that we at carolina are already doing things right. The overall effect of the working group’s report, if it can be called that, is to assure the community (and, perhaps, the university’s accrediting body) that all is well.
...perhaps the oddest thing about the website that culminates the working group’s work is that it fails to identify the problems the working group presumably found. The few changes in policy or procedure that have occurred since 2013 are not always even represented as changes, and all appear without explanation, with little insight into the rationale behind the making of the change. Why? The Provost and AD claimed in their email that the working group’s goal was to communicate “transparently and comprehensively.” How, then, are we to interpret this basic failure to be transparent? Is it that the Provost and the AD wanted no one on the outside–whether from the NCAA, from SACS, or anywhere else–to see problems actually identified as problems? By neglecting to locate the point A from which their various points B supposedly moved, did the leaders of the working group hope to silently encourage everyone to “move on” and stop asking questions?
Whatever the reasons behind the working group’s refusal to declare “these are the problems we found and these are the changes we propose as solutions,” the larger issue is that the working group itself seems to have been uninterested in digging for the truth, unwilling to suspend its faith in first principles, unable to confront the possibility that the problems at unc were deep and structural, requiring deep and structural solutions. They were unwilling to look through the telescope.
The working group would seem to have been unaware–or simply chose to be unaware–of the contradictions that jump out of its own anodyne description of Summer Bridge.
Yet after touting the merits of the Summer Bridge program, and noting its universal accessibility, the working group stunningly goes on to add that “few student-athletes attend Summer Bridge” because the program “does not allow absences.” The program conflicts with team activities (i. e., practice, meetings, fitness exams and planning) and so athletes are prevented from participating.
What does the working group think about the priority given to “team activities” in athletes’ first summer on the unc campus? What do the members of the committee think about the subordination of academic concerns to athletic concerns in the lives of these students? What message do they think this sends to the students? What message do they think this sends to the world about the values of unc-Chapel Hill?
Unfortunately, there is little evidence that the working group spent much time thinking at all about this issue. They blithely stated the established reality, offered no objections to it, acknowledged no conflict, and moved on to their next bullet point. This is one of a great many blind spots in the website they have created. We challenge the members of the working group to come peer through the telescope in the weeks to come, as we continue to blog about their website. We challenge them to sit down for a public dialogue with those who might wish to question them. We challenge them to use their website as an initiation to further conversation and not–as they appear to have planned–as a tool that forecloses conversation. We challenge them, in short, to be bigger, bolder, and more confident than the university philosophers who rebuffed Galileo. If their ideas are sound, they should be able to withstand open questioning and critique. If they are not, perhaps we will find that it really is time to “move on”–toward real problem solving and courageous leadership.
http://paperclassinc.com/the-working-group-worked-hard-not-to-see-the-truth/
#hangabanner....
About
In Fall 2013, Provost James W. Dean, Jr. and Director of Athletics Bubba Cunningham brought together a 10-person team of campus leaders to do something that we believe no other University had done before: comprehensively document and assess all academic processes that affect student-athletes from the time that they are recruited until after they graduate.
http://apsa.unc.edu/about/
THIS is exactly why they're hated. Busted as liars , cheaters and hypocrites after decades of "holier-than-thou" sermonizing and tptb STILL have the audacity to view themselves as leaders in academic/athletic collegiate reform. I'm sorry but career criminals aren't allowed to have a say-so in creating/altering legal codes. Exposed as the worst offenders in NCAA history and still zero shame. #carolinaway
About
In Fall 2013, Provost James W. Dean, Jr. and Director of Athletics Bubba Cunningham brought together a 10-person team of campus leaders to do something that we believe no other University had done before: comprehensively document and assess all academic processes that affect student-athletes from the time that they are recruited until after they graduate.
http://apsa.unc.edu/about/
THIS is exactly why they're hated. Busted as liars , cheaters and hypocrites after decades of "holier-than-thou" sermonizing and tptb STILL have the audacity to view themselves as leaders in academic/athletic collegiate reform. I'm sorry but career criminals aren't allowed to have a say-so in creating/altering legal codes. Exposed as the worst offenders in NCAA history and still zero shame. #carolinaway
B. Martin @yibyabby
What's never been done before? A college's academic processes tainted an athletic program, needing reform: http://apsa.unc.edu/
Cheating Blue Ram @CheatingBlueRam
@yibyabby Reporting new initiatives is a start, but as SACS said in their July 1 letter, they must document measures of the success. To show improvement, will they first have to confess their deficiencies? A suggested opening phrase: We changed and here is why?
What's never been done before? A college's academic processes tainted an athletic program, needing reform: http://apsa.unc.edu/
Cheating Blue Ram @CheatingBlueRam
@yibyabby Reporting new initiatives is a start, but as SACS said in their July 1 letter, they must document measures of the success. To show improvement, will they first have to confess their deficiencies? A suggested opening phrase: We changed and here is why?
B-Rad. Lulz...
A Successful Kickstarter Campaign and the Beginning of Production
Verified Films, LLC 0 Comment
Only 39% of Kickstarter campaigns are successful, but, thanks to more than 1,000 backers, our campaign was funded at 284% of our goal! We raised over $142,000, and more than half of that came from pledges of $250 or less. Clearly, there is widespread interest in Unverified and in the issues it will raise about the role and power of the press in today’s society. We are eager to produce a compelling film that will address those issues.
Because of the tremendous and immediate support we received, we were able to begin production on February 27. That day, Bradley (writer & executive producer) gave a talk to the East Chapel Hill Rotary Club, and we filmed both the talk and the discussion afterward. The members of the Rotary Club were very gracious and asked thoughtful questions, and the interactions between them and Bradley made for some engaging footage.
Over the same weekend, we also filmed Bradley’s conversations with two former unc academic counselors who worked with the football team. We were moved by the counselors’ stories and found their perspectives quite different from the limited perspectives cited by the press.
Two days after we heard the counselors share stories the press has overlooked, the Daily Tar Heel (DTH) attacked Bradley and the film in an defamatory editorial demonstrating the very sensationalism that has motivated Bradley to make Unverified. However, many people responded with sharp criticism, and one reader, a former member of the DTH editorial board, wrote a pointed repudiation in a letter to the editor. Another reader, a unc alum who went on to earn his PhD in History at the University of Kansas, even published a response on his blog. Bradley also wrote a letter, pointing out how the editorial flagrantly mischaracterized him and the film.
Despite the DTH’s lack of fairness, other campus journalists have engaged Bradley with courtesy and professional curiosity. We filmed behind the scenes of Bradley’s appearance on carolina Week and of an interview he gave to the radio program carolina Connection. carolina Week has made the full, half-hour interview available online and is worth watching:
On Saturday evening, before the men’s basketball game against Duke, Bradley and the film crew went to Franklin Street to interview fans about the controversies related to the paper classes and unc athletics. The people with whom Bradley spoke, including one former unc quarterback, gave a variety of responses, but a theme that emerged was the skepticism people feel toward the media.
Bradley shares that skepticism and plans to explore the reasons for it during our upcoming filming. We are currently scheduling interviews with media and journalism experts to try to understand how journalists work and where potential breakdowns in the process of verification can occur. Thanks for reading, and we look forward to sharing another update soon.
We are still accepting contributions, which will help us produce the film at the highest quality and market and distribute it to a wide audience. You can learn how to contribute here.
http://unverifiedthefilm.com/a-successful-kickstarter-campaign-and-the-beginning-of-production/
To summarize...
1. For the film they filmed B-Rad's speech to the Chapel Hill Rotary Club.
2. They filmed interviews with 2 academic counselors who claim no wrongdoing.
3. They filmed "behind the scenes" action at B-Rad's "carolina Connection" radio interview.
4. B-Rad whines about his mistreatment from the Daily Tarheel.
5. They filmed interviews with people on Franklin Street.
6. They interviewed a former unc QB who they ran into on Franklin St.
7. B-Rad begs for more money so he can "produce the film at the highest quality"
The guy cries about "bias" and "lazy journalism" but gets the raw material for his opus from Wal-Marters , academicians involved with the fraud and unx jocks. Then has the audacity to keep beggin' for more money. What a joke. #carolinaway
A Successful Kickstarter Campaign and the Beginning of Production
Verified Films, LLC 0 Comment
Only 39% of Kickstarter campaigns are successful, but, thanks to more than 1,000 backers, our campaign was funded at 284% of our goal! We raised over $142,000, and more than half of that came from pledges of $250 or less. Clearly, there is widespread interest in Unverified and in the issues it will raise about the role and power of the press in today’s society. We are eager to produce a compelling film that will address those issues.
Because of the tremendous and immediate support we received, we were able to begin production on February 27. That day, Bradley (writer & executive producer) gave a talk to the East Chapel Hill Rotary Club, and we filmed both the talk and the discussion afterward. The members of the Rotary Club were very gracious and asked thoughtful questions, and the interactions between them and Bradley made for some engaging footage.
Over the same weekend, we also filmed Bradley’s conversations with two former unc academic counselors who worked with the football team. We were moved by the counselors’ stories and found their perspectives quite different from the limited perspectives cited by the press.
Two days after we heard the counselors share stories the press has overlooked, the Daily Tar Heel (DTH) attacked Bradley and the film in an defamatory editorial demonstrating the very sensationalism that has motivated Bradley to make Unverified. However, many people responded with sharp criticism, and one reader, a former member of the DTH editorial board, wrote a pointed repudiation in a letter to the editor. Another reader, a unc alum who went on to earn his PhD in History at the University of Kansas, even published a response on his blog. Bradley also wrote a letter, pointing out how the editorial flagrantly mischaracterized him and the film.
Despite the DTH’s lack of fairness, other campus journalists have engaged Bradley with courtesy and professional curiosity. We filmed behind the scenes of Bradley’s appearance on carolina Week and of an interview he gave to the radio program carolina Connection. carolina Week has made the full, half-hour interview available online and is worth watching:
On Saturday evening, before the men’s basketball game against Duke, Bradley and the film crew went to Franklin Street to interview fans about the controversies related to the paper classes and unc athletics. The people with whom Bradley spoke, including one former unc quarterback, gave a variety of responses, but a theme that emerged was the skepticism people feel toward the media.
Bradley shares that skepticism and plans to explore the reasons for it during our upcoming filming. We are currently scheduling interviews with media and journalism experts to try to understand how journalists work and where potential breakdowns in the process of verification can occur. Thanks for reading, and we look forward to sharing another update soon.
We are still accepting contributions, which will help us produce the film at the highest quality and market and distribute it to a wide audience. You can learn how to contribute here.
http://unverifiedthefilm.com/a-successful-kickstarter-campaign-and-the-beginning-of-production/
To summarize...
1. For the film they filmed B-Rad's speech to the Chapel Hill Rotary Club.
2. They filmed interviews with 2 academic counselors who claim no wrongdoing.
3. They filmed "behind the scenes" action at B-Rad's "carolina Connection" radio interview.
4. B-Rad whines about his mistreatment from the Daily Tarheel.
5. They filmed interviews with people on Franklin Street.
6. They interviewed a former unc QB who they ran into on Franklin St.
7. B-Rad begs for more money so he can "produce the film at the highest quality"
The guy cries about "bias" and "lazy journalism" but gets the raw material for his opus from Wal-Marters , academicians involved with the fraud and unx jocks. Then has the audacity to keep beggin' for more money. What a joke. #carolinaway
Sure , the unx guys were pizzed about it but come on! The holes brought all this upon themselves. Williams and Switzer are azzwipes....
UNC doesn’t forget Twitter jab amid rout against Wake Forest
Tweet that appeared on Wake Forest assistant’s account took aim at UNC scandals
Tar Heels were motivated by it on Saturday night
After rout, UNC’s Ryan Switzer posed with sign referencing the tweet and UNC’s 50-14 victory
Not long after North Carolina’s 50-14 victory against Wake Forest on Saturday night, Ryan Switzer, the Tar Heels’ junior receiver, posted on Twitter a picture of himself sitting on a bench with a wide smile, holding a white board with a message written on it.
Written on the board was this: “Nothing UNClear about 50-14,” and the letters “UNC” were underlined. To the casual observer the sign might have looked like some playful trash talk after a decisive victory in a game between two old ACC rivals.
And that’s all it was, in some ways. Yet that’s not the only reason why it had been re-tweeted more than 1,000 times, and counting, as of Sunday afternoon at around 1. No, the sign, and Switzer’s big smile above it, served as a response to an eight-month old digital jab that Switzer and his teammates had been waiting – and waiting – to respond to in their own way.
The story starts last February, on college football’s National Signing Day. That’s when Adam Scheier, a Wake Forest assistant coach, appeared to tweet the following (Internet-styled communicative jargon included):
The implication there is easy enough to understand: Scheier, it appeared, was taking a shot at UNC amid its long-running academic and athletic scandal – the one that is still making its way through the NCAA investigative process with no end in sight. The tweet quickly went viral.
Almost just as quickly, Scheier attempted to distance himself from it. Hours after the tweet with the original “UNClear” reference, Scheier came back and wrote: “Some1 hacked my twitter! Lol. Let’s keep this light people; a little fun between rivals. I’m better, we’re better & Wake’s better than that.”
That tweet, the one in which Scheier said his account had been hacked, has since been deleted. So, too, is the one that started this whole thing, the one in which Scheier – or his purported Twitter hacker, as he claimed at the time – wrote, in so many words, that Wake Forest isn’t “UNClear” about the definition of a student-athlete.
No matter. As goes the saying goes: Nothing really ever disappears off the Internet. The original “UNClear” tweet didn’t just go away when Scheier deleted it. By then plenty of people had taken screenshots of it. It had been archived in the literal and figurative sense, and more than eight months later it was on the Tar Heels’ minds on Saturday night.
Early on, UNC quarterback Marquise Williams said, “We wanted to jump on them.”
It didn’t happen exactly the way the Tar Heels envisioned – their first two drives ended in interceptions – but eventually it happened. UNC scored on the first play of the second quarter and from there the rout was on, often the result of big plays and quick-strike scoring drives.
Williams afterward referenced the “badmouthing on our university” that the Tar Heels hadn’t forgotten. He didn’t mention Scheier by name but Williams didn’t have to.
“With the (guy) tweeting about us, we knew that when you come in the Tar Pit, you need to back that up,” Williams said. “And we set the bar when you play in the Tar Pit. We’re going to set it to a higher standard, and we’re going to come out and we’re going to execute.
“We’re going to hit you in the mouth and we’re going to send you on your way.”
Scheier didn’t provide any motivational material in the days leading into the game. What appeared on his Twitter account eight months ago served as plenty enough, anyway, though. Wake Forest declined to comment about the tweet on Sunday afternoon.
Meanwhile Switzer, who had a 70-yard punt return wiped away by a strange officiating decision, didn’t make himself available afterward to reporters. He said all he wanted to say, apparently, when he posted that picture with the message on the white board that wasn’t the least bit UNClear.
http://www.heraldonline.com/sports/college/acc/article39696612.html
Boo-hoo. Ryan wouldn't talk to reporters. And what the heck is Williams even talking about? "Back up" what? unx athletes cheated. The FACTS "back that up." Beating an under-manned Wake team doesn't change that.
UNC doesn’t forget Twitter jab amid rout against Wake Forest
Tweet that appeared on Wake Forest assistant’s account took aim at UNC scandals
Tar Heels were motivated by it on Saturday night
After rout, UNC’s Ryan Switzer posed with sign referencing the tweet and UNC’s 50-14 victory
Not long after North Carolina’s 50-14 victory against Wake Forest on Saturday night, Ryan Switzer, the Tar Heels’ junior receiver, posted on Twitter a picture of himself sitting on a bench with a wide smile, holding a white board with a message written on it.
Written on the board was this: “Nothing UNClear about 50-14,” and the letters “UNC” were underlined. To the casual observer the sign might have looked like some playful trash talk after a decisive victory in a game between two old ACC rivals.
And that’s all it was, in some ways. Yet that’s not the only reason why it had been re-tweeted more than 1,000 times, and counting, as of Sunday afternoon at around 1. No, the sign, and Switzer’s big smile above it, served as a response to an eight-month old digital jab that Switzer and his teammates had been waiting – and waiting – to respond to in their own way.
The story starts last February, on college football’s National Signing Day. That’s when Adam Scheier, a Wake Forest assistant coach, appeared to tweet the following (Internet-styled communicative jargon included):
The implication there is easy enough to understand: Scheier, it appeared, was taking a shot at UNC amid its long-running academic and athletic scandal – the one that is still making its way through the NCAA investigative process with no end in sight. The tweet quickly went viral.
Almost just as quickly, Scheier attempted to distance himself from it. Hours after the tweet with the original “UNClear” reference, Scheier came back and wrote: “Some1 hacked my twitter! Lol. Let’s keep this light people; a little fun between rivals. I’m better, we’re better & Wake’s better than that.”
That tweet, the one in which Scheier said his account had been hacked, has since been deleted. So, too, is the one that started this whole thing, the one in which Scheier – or his purported Twitter hacker, as he claimed at the time – wrote, in so many words, that Wake Forest isn’t “UNClear” about the definition of a student-athlete.
No matter. As goes the saying goes: Nothing really ever disappears off the Internet. The original “UNClear” tweet didn’t just go away when Scheier deleted it. By then plenty of people had taken screenshots of it. It had been archived in the literal and figurative sense, and more than eight months later it was on the Tar Heels’ minds on Saturday night.
Early on, UNC quarterback Marquise Williams said, “We wanted to jump on them.”
It didn’t happen exactly the way the Tar Heels envisioned – their first two drives ended in interceptions – but eventually it happened. UNC scored on the first play of the second quarter and from there the rout was on, often the result of big plays and quick-strike scoring drives.
Williams afterward referenced the “badmouthing on our university” that the Tar Heels hadn’t forgotten. He didn’t mention Scheier by name but Williams didn’t have to.
“With the (guy) tweeting about us, we knew that when you come in the Tar Pit, you need to back that up,” Williams said. “And we set the bar when you play in the Tar Pit. We’re going to set it to a higher standard, and we’re going to come out and we’re going to execute.
“We’re going to hit you in the mouth and we’re going to send you on your way.”
Scheier didn’t provide any motivational material in the days leading into the game. What appeared on his Twitter account eight months ago served as plenty enough, anyway, though. Wake Forest declined to comment about the tweet on Sunday afternoon.
Meanwhile Switzer, who had a 70-yard punt return wiped away by a strange officiating decision, didn’t make himself available afterward to reporters. He said all he wanted to say, apparently, when he posted that picture with the message on the white board that wasn’t the least bit UNClear.
http://www.heraldonline.com/sports/college/acc/article39696612.html
Boo-hoo. Ryan wouldn't talk to reporters. And what the heck is Williams even talking about? "Back up" what? unx athletes cheated. The FACTS "back that up." Beating an under-manned Wake team doesn't change that.
BTW , Ryan's sign has undergone some alterations. Lulz...
New guidelines for athletics, academics have unc covering bases
unc rules on athletics and academics welcome
But much trouble and time were exhausted
Integrity shouldn’t have to be explained
If officials of unc-Chapel Hill are expecting ovations and breathless cheers for their announced guidelines for athletics and academics, posted in an online report, they are likely to be sorely disappointed.
Had academic and administrative leaders been doing their due diligence of oversight, this kind of report never would have been necessary.
But that’s not what happened. The African studies program offered high grades in exchange for little or no work, and athletes were guided there by an adviser system that seemed geared more to maintaining eligibility than to helping “student athletes” get their degrees. This embarrassment, once exposed by The News & Observer’s Dan Kane, led the university to spend millions on public relations agencies to “manage” the story and millions more on a high-powered report by a Washington lawyer that basically concurred with Kane’s reports.
And in the course of all this, a courageous whistle-blower was criticized by administrators, then given a six-figure settlement and her walking papers. That remains an embarrassment.
Now the university has guidelines: Coaches aren’t to go directly to faculty members about an athlete’s grades, advisers can’t offer any information to faculty members and those faculty members aren’t allowed to ask. While this website is welcome, it comes as the university remains under investigation for one of the biggest and longest-running scandals ever in college sports. The university itself has had several internal investigations over the last five years.
And while the athletics department and the academic departments may boast of these “rules,” the truth is that athletics programs can stay above difficulty with simple honesty. Good coaches shouldn’t recruit athletes who are borderline students and might not have been admitted in part of the regular competitive admissions scramble. Once admitted, coaches should monitor the progress of athletes toward a degree, not just in maintaining their eligibility. And coaches, no matter how successful, have to be held to standards or face consequences.
Academic leaders should make it emphatically clear to boosters that the university is not for sale, not to those who’ll fund elaborate facilities catering to the wealthiest alums or anyone else. In time, coaches’ salaries should be brought back into line. Chancellors and presidents have been predicting this for years, but it hasn’t happened. It should not take a scandal to bring sober, straightforward rules into place and to expect those in charge to see that they’re enforced.
http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/editorials/article40265877.html
unc rules on athletics and academics welcome
But much trouble and time were exhausted
Integrity shouldn’t have to be explained
If officials of unc-Chapel Hill are expecting ovations and breathless cheers for their announced guidelines for athletics and academics, posted in an online report, they are likely to be sorely disappointed.
Had academic and administrative leaders been doing their due diligence of oversight, this kind of report never would have been necessary.
But that’s not what happened. The African studies program offered high grades in exchange for little or no work, and athletes were guided there by an adviser system that seemed geared more to maintaining eligibility than to helping “student athletes” get their degrees. This embarrassment, once exposed by The News & Observer’s Dan Kane, led the university to spend millions on public relations agencies to “manage” the story and millions more on a high-powered report by a Washington lawyer that basically concurred with Kane’s reports.
And in the course of all this, a courageous whistle-blower was criticized by administrators, then given a six-figure settlement and her walking papers. That remains an embarrassment.
Now the university has guidelines: Coaches aren’t to go directly to faculty members about an athlete’s grades, advisers can’t offer any information to faculty members and those faculty members aren’t allowed to ask. While this website is welcome, it comes as the university remains under investigation for one of the biggest and longest-running scandals ever in college sports. The university itself has had several internal investigations over the last five years.
And while the athletics department and the academic departments may boast of these “rules,” the truth is that athletics programs can stay above difficulty with simple honesty. Good coaches shouldn’t recruit athletes who are borderline students and might not have been admitted in part of the regular competitive admissions scramble. Once admitted, coaches should monitor the progress of athletes toward a degree, not just in maintaining their eligibility. And coaches, no matter how successful, have to be held to standards or face consequences.
Academic leaders should make it emphatically clear to boosters that the university is not for sale, not to those who’ll fund elaborate facilities catering to the wealthiest alums or anyone else. In time, coaches’ salaries should be brought back into line. Chancellors and presidents have been predicting this for years, but it hasn’t happened. It should not take a scandal to bring sober, straightforward rules into place and to expect those in charge to see that they’re enforced.
http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/editorials/article40265877.html
Insightful post from PackPride and some solid reasons I think unx gets hit harder than before. DISCLAIMER: As always , I remain pessimistic that unx receives full-on , wrath of God-type sanctions. I do , however , think they get (among other smaller penalties ) at least a one-year post-season ban for mbb....and some other programs too. The NCAA has tons of leeway here. So many teams involved. Obviously , the focus is Roy but if other programs aren't held responsible too , the NCAA should close up shop. Honestly , I don't see how fball AVOIDS debilitating sanctions. Repeat offender. It WILL , of course , but there's no logic behind it. Cesspool. Wipe it off the face of the earth for awhile. Ain't like anyone would miss it anyway. That said...
st8dukegrad87
6th Man
2574 posts this site
Ignore this Member
Send Private Message
Posted: Today 9:29 PM
Re: Cheater Continuing Saga (strongly recommend page 2)
unc-CH has been trying to use every contact and person of influence they have to minimize punishment. 10 years ago this would have worked. The NCAA can no longer help unc-CH, there is too much damage. Apology for the length.
The following items are nails in the unc-CH coffin:
1. The NCAA lost O'Bannon at the trial level and then lost in a unanimous vote on appeal. In the opinion, Judge Bybee referenced that academics were the reason for the existence of the NCAA and this is in the NCAA charter. The following is all the NCAA has left as a defense in the Jenkins v NCAA case since the 9th circuit struck down the liberal use of "amateurism" as defined in the Bd of Regents U of Oklahoma v NCAA in 1984.
Since its founding in 1906 under another name, the NCAA has professed to protect and police the education of college athletes. According to its own historical account, “For the NCAA, the principal themes—fundamental at the beginning and fundamental today—are the commitment to amateurism and the connection between education and athletics in which education is the principal partner.”
This founding mission is evident in the NCAA Division I Manual, which includes the NCAA’s Constitution and Bylaws (colloquially referred to as its “rules”) and emphasizes that the “basic purpose of this Association is to maintain intercollegiate athletics as an integral part of the educational program and the athlete as an integral part of the student body.”
NCAA Constitution Article 2.5 sets forth the “Principle of Sound Academic Standards”:
Intercollegiate athletics programs shall be maintained as a vital component of the educational program, and student-athletes shall be an integral part of the student body. The admission, academic standing and academic progress of student-athletes shall be consistent with the policies and standards adopted by the institution for the student body in general.
NCAA Operating Bylaw 20.9.1.7 underscores the NCAA’s written commitment to policing “Sound Academic Standards” for student-athletes:
Standards of the Association governing participation in intercollegiate athletics, including postseason competition, shall be designed to ensure proper emphasis on educational objectives and the opportunity for academic success, including graduation, of student-athletes who choose to participate at a member institution. Intercollegiate athletics programs shall be maintained as an important component of the educational program, and student-athletes shall be an integral part of the student body. Each member institution’s admission and academic standards for student-athletes shall be designed to promote academic progress and graduation and shall be consistent with the standards adopted by the institution for the student body in general.
2. Jenkins v NCAA which has Jeff Kessler as lead counsel and Alston v NCAA which has Steve Berman as lead counsel. These cases will most likely be merged and tried in the 9th circuit with Judge WIlkin presiding. The 9th circuit now has precedent with O'Bannon, so the NCAA is very limited in a defense of amateurism (see above ) for violating anti-trust law. Judge Bybee essentially told the NCAA that your best defense against direct non-education related payments to athletes is that the athlete is in fact a student first.
3. McCants V NCAA. This case is working its way through the system but a class decision will happen at some point. At unc-CH the class could include 1,000 or more former athletes. The NCAA is exposed at unc-CH, but they are also exposed where academic fraud has occurred and the NCAA did nothing about it (Michigan, Auburn and others).
So, unc-CH is fighting a symmetric war against an asymmetric enemy. The PTB are starting to realize this which is why the PR campaign has been so intensive and focused at recruits. The NCAA must protect itself against this litigation and one step to do this is to punish unc-CH severely.
st8dukegrad87
6th Man
2574 posts this site
Ignore this Member
Send Private Message
Posted: Today 9:29 PM
Re: Cheater Continuing Saga (strongly recommend page 2)
unc-CH has been trying to use every contact and person of influence they have to minimize punishment. 10 years ago this would have worked. The NCAA can no longer help unc-CH, there is too much damage. Apology for the length.
The following items are nails in the unc-CH coffin:
1. The NCAA lost O'Bannon at the trial level and then lost in a unanimous vote on appeal. In the opinion, Judge Bybee referenced that academics were the reason for the existence of the NCAA and this is in the NCAA charter. The following is all the NCAA has left as a defense in the Jenkins v NCAA case since the 9th circuit struck down the liberal use of "amateurism" as defined in the Bd of Regents U of Oklahoma v NCAA in 1984.
Since its founding in 1906 under another name, the NCAA has professed to protect and police the education of college athletes. According to its own historical account, “For the NCAA, the principal themes—fundamental at the beginning and fundamental today—are the commitment to amateurism and the connection between education and athletics in which education is the principal partner.”
This founding mission is evident in the NCAA Division I Manual, which includes the NCAA’s Constitution and Bylaws (colloquially referred to as its “rules”) and emphasizes that the “basic purpose of this Association is to maintain intercollegiate athletics as an integral part of the educational program and the athlete as an integral part of the student body.”
NCAA Constitution Article 2.5 sets forth the “Principle of Sound Academic Standards”:
Intercollegiate athletics programs shall be maintained as a vital component of the educational program, and student-athletes shall be an integral part of the student body. The admission, academic standing and academic progress of student-athletes shall be consistent with the policies and standards adopted by the institution for the student body in general.
NCAA Operating Bylaw 20.9.1.7 underscores the NCAA’s written commitment to policing “Sound Academic Standards” for student-athletes:
Standards of the Association governing participation in intercollegiate athletics, including postseason competition, shall be designed to ensure proper emphasis on educational objectives and the opportunity for academic success, including graduation, of student-athletes who choose to participate at a member institution. Intercollegiate athletics programs shall be maintained as an important component of the educational program, and student-athletes shall be an integral part of the student body. Each member institution’s admission and academic standards for student-athletes shall be designed to promote academic progress and graduation and shall be consistent with the standards adopted by the institution for the student body in general.
2. Jenkins v NCAA which has Jeff Kessler as lead counsel and Alston v NCAA which has Steve Berman as lead counsel. These cases will most likely be merged and tried in the 9th circuit with Judge WIlkin presiding. The 9th circuit now has precedent with O'Bannon, so the NCAA is very limited in a defense of amateurism (see above ) for violating anti-trust law. Judge Bybee essentially told the NCAA that your best defense against direct non-education related payments to athletes is that the athlete is in fact a student first.
3. McCants V NCAA. This case is working its way through the system but a class decision will happen at some point. At unc-CH the class could include 1,000 or more former athletes. The NCAA is exposed at unc-CH, but they are also exposed where academic fraud has occurred and the NCAA did nothing about it (Michigan, Auburn and others).
So, unc-CH is fighting a symmetric war against an asymmetric enemy. The PTB are starting to realize this which is why the PR campaign has been so intensive and focused at recruits. The NCAA must protect itself against this litigation and one step to do this is to punish unc-CH severely.
BTW , Ryan's sign has undergone some alterations. Lulz...
Hahahahahaha, that's some funny stuff, DevilDJ! I need a rollin' smiley for this!
OFC
Oh, and I'm with you DevilDJ, I think the Heels are going to get hit harder than people think. Again, not as bad as they deserve, but still pretty hard.
OFC
OFC
They'll get a year and instead of being elated , they'll be aghast. For everyone convinced unx will get a wristslap... a year IS a wristslap. They're unx. They'll recover quickly. Their fball program is a cesspool of mediocrity , failure and national irrelevance. That got a year and they seem to be doing as well as they ever have...and that's FOOTBALL. Basketball will barely miss a beat. They've missed the NCAA's entirely within recent memory and recovered from those sub-par seasons. This , unfortunately , will be similar. Of course , they WILL have the stigma but as we've seen that school/fanbase could give 2 sheets about such things. The only way unx suffers any massive on-court damage is if they get the draconian sanctions they deserve and I think most agree that is unlikely. Sucks but it is what it is.
Bilas carryin' some water today. He has to KNOW he's playin' the semantics game yet he does it anyway. Can't decide if he just hates the NCAA that much or loves Roy...or both....
J @WinOrGoHome@JayBilas
Regarding unc, the Men's BB program wasn't mentioned?!?! You're a damn liar!! Wow. You just lied on national television. #unc
Jay Bilas @JayBilas
@WinOrGoHome No, there were no allegations of wrongdoing against unc men's basketball or Roy Williams.
David Blevins @DKBlev
@JayBilas ok...there were allegations of wrongdoing at unc that directly benefitted men's bball & went unchecked for 2 decades. Semantics
Jay Bilas @JayBilas
@DKBlev No, it's not semantics. It's called evidence. There was not evidence nor charges of Williams involved in any wrongdoing.
David Blevins @DKBlev
@JayBilas I didn't say Williams.
Jay Bilas @JayBilas
@DKBlev I did, in response to what was posited on SportsCenter. Williams and men's basketball were not named or charged with wrongdoing.
David Blevins @DKBlev
@JayBilas and we're back to where we started. Does it matter 2 NCAA if they werent mentioned as responsible if they benefitted for 20 years?
Michael Woodward @woodardhsd
@JayBilas @DKBlev Was Wayne Walden not part of the men's basketball program? He is mentioned 21 times in the NOA.
Michael Woodward @woodardhsd
@DKBlev @JayBilas I mentioned WW because Roy once said he would rather lose all his asst coaches at once than to lose Wayne Walden
David Blevins @DKBlev
@JayBilas open NOA. ctrl + f "Wayne Walden"
DevilDJ @DevilDJ32
@woodardhsd @JayBilas @DKBlev Janet Huffstetler is another name to look for...Roy's too.
Michael Woodward @woodardhsd
@DevilDJ32 @JayBilas @DKBlev Janet Huffstetler mentioned in 29 times. That's 50 (at least) for MBB staff.
DevilDJ @DevilDJ32
@woodardhsd @JayBilas @DKBlev Another consideration: unc redacts everything. No tellin' who has been mentioned.
Matthew @Xexyz2
@JayBilas @DKBlev I agree that no one person is named, but the program itself is named in the NOA.
Austin @AEmory1116
@JayBilas Men's Basketball was absolutely named in the NOA. It's a lie to say otherwise.
Frank @AChillCustomer
@JayBilas @DKBlev Men's basketball was expressly named as the beneficiary of wrongdoing by athletic advisers. Why are you hiding that fact?
https://twitter.com/JayBilas/with_replies
J @WinOrGoHome@JayBilas
Regarding unc, the Men's BB program wasn't mentioned?!?! You're a damn liar!! Wow. You just lied on national television. #unc
Jay Bilas @JayBilas
@WinOrGoHome No, there were no allegations of wrongdoing against unc men's basketball or Roy Williams.
David Blevins @DKBlev
@JayBilas ok...there were allegations of wrongdoing at unc that directly benefitted men's bball & went unchecked for 2 decades. Semantics
Jay Bilas @JayBilas
@DKBlev No, it's not semantics. It's called evidence. There was not evidence nor charges of Williams involved in any wrongdoing.
David Blevins @DKBlev
@JayBilas I didn't say Williams.
Jay Bilas @JayBilas
@DKBlev I did, in response to what was posited on SportsCenter. Williams and men's basketball were not named or charged with wrongdoing.
David Blevins @DKBlev
@JayBilas and we're back to where we started. Does it matter 2 NCAA if they werent mentioned as responsible if they benefitted for 20 years?
Michael Woodward @woodardhsd
@JayBilas @DKBlev Was Wayne Walden not part of the men's basketball program? He is mentioned 21 times in the NOA.
Michael Woodward @woodardhsd
@DKBlev @JayBilas I mentioned WW because Roy once said he would rather lose all his asst coaches at once than to lose Wayne Walden
David Blevins @DKBlev
@JayBilas open NOA. ctrl + f "Wayne Walden"
DevilDJ @DevilDJ32
@woodardhsd @JayBilas @DKBlev Janet Huffstetler is another name to look for...Roy's too.
Michael Woodward @woodardhsd
@DevilDJ32 @JayBilas @DKBlev Janet Huffstetler mentioned in 29 times. That's 50 (at least) for MBB staff.
DevilDJ @DevilDJ32
@woodardhsd @JayBilas @DKBlev Another consideration: unc redacts everything. No tellin' who has been mentioned.
Matthew @Xexyz2
@JayBilas @DKBlev I agree that no one person is named, but the program itself is named in the NOA.
Austin @AEmory1116
@JayBilas Men's Basketball was absolutely named in the NOA. It's a lie to say otherwise.
Frank @AChillCustomer
@JayBilas @DKBlev Men's basketball was expressly named as the beneficiary of wrongdoing by athletic advisers. Why are you hiding that fact?
https://twitter.com/JayBilas/with_replies
wufpakman21
6th Man
4534 posts this site
Ignore this Member
Send Private Message
Posted: Today 7:33 PM
Re: Two Tarholes Arrested (Assault... victim Blinded)
Update from tarheel town on Saturday: per parent or friends of one parents etc one assault victim is blind apparently in one eye or has not regained vision due to injuries since it happened two weeks ago.
The kids did not want to initially press charges because like most fan boys they didn't want to get the athletes in trouble, but apparently with the chances of permanent damage and high medical bills they were forced to turn them in. I wonder if the school will eventually be held responsible for the bills? Especially since MJ Stewart has a history of this stuff.
6th Man
4534 posts this site
Ignore this Member
Send Private Message
Posted: Today 7:33 PM
Re: Two Tarholes Arrested (Assault... victim Blinded)
Update from tarheel town on Saturday: per parent or friends of one parents etc one assault victim is blind apparently in one eye or has not regained vision due to injuries since it happened two weeks ago.
The kids did not want to initially press charges because like most fan boys they didn't want to get the athletes in trouble, but apparently with the chances of permanent damage and high medical bills they were forced to turn them in. I wonder if the school will eventually be held responsible for the bills? Especially since MJ Stewart has a history of this stuff.
Bilas sounded like a fool today on TV during the live exchange. He made no sense with what he said.
He really sounded like someone who has zero knowledge of evidence in the Wannstein report and the NOA, which begs the question, if you are a so-called college basketball expert, why would you take the stance he did?
Does he really believe what he said, or is someone paying him to say it?
He really sounded like an 8 year old reacting to someone saying something negative about their Dad.
"How dare you say something negative about my Dad. He's the best Dad ever!"
Only problem is Dad in this case was Roy Williams.
A truly bizarre exchange if you saw it live.
He really sounded like someone who has zero knowledge of evidence in the Wannstein report and the NOA, which begs the question, if you are a so-called college basketball expert, why would you take the stance he did?
Does he really believe what he said, or is someone paying him to say it?
He really sounded like an 8 year old reacting to someone saying something negative about their Dad.
"How dare you say something negative about my Dad. He's the best Dad ever!"
Only problem is Dad in this case was Roy Williams.
A truly bizarre exchange if you saw it live.
Yes it was bizarre I agree. I can't figure out why Bilas goes to bat for UNC like he does. It's like he is trying to protect them for some reason. Could it be for any of the following reasons?
- He wants to protect the glitz and glamor of the Duke/UNC rivalry because it is a big feather in Duke's hat? (likely)
- He works for ESPN whose skipper is a UNC homer and he wants to protect his job? (likely)
- UNC has dirt on Bilas/Duke that he wants to stay under wraps? (very unlikely)
He won't even acknowledge the NOA snippet that folks have been showing him on Twitter.
- He wants to protect the glitz and glamor of the Duke/UNC rivalry because it is a big feather in Duke's hat? (likely)
- He works for ESPN whose skipper is a UNC homer and he wants to protect his job? (likely)
- UNC has dirt on Bilas/Duke that he wants to stay under wraps? (very unlikely)
He won't even acknowledge the NOA snippet that folks have been showing him on Twitter.
He's doing the same thing unx apologists do. It's called "semantics" or "parsing of words" or whatever. He says "Roy nor mbb were accused of wrongdoing." This is a true statement. What he DOESN'T say is that the academic support staff for idiot jocks ( ASPSA ) WAS charged and that their fraud directly benefitted over 20 athletic programs at unx...including , of course , mbb. This is where unx'ers get their "It was an academics scandal not an athletics one" rationale from. They attempt that lame-azz argument without ever acknowledging one simple fact: THE SCANDAL WOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED WERE IT NOT FOR ATHLETICS...PARTICULARLY MBB! unx'ers will do this all the way to the electric chair. People say "phony classes." unx'ers say , "They weren't phony. They were real and a single paper was required." Again , technically , they're correct. But they fail to mention that the evidence proves many of those papers were poorly written for a passing grade , plagiarized or written by someone other than the athlete. Again , it's semantics. Rivals say , "Players never went to class." unx'ers say , "They didn't have to. The classes were independent study and as such did not require attendance. Plus , every school has those type of classes." Factually true. What they leave out is that IS courses are reserved for those students who EXCEL in their studies and NOT for morons who read on a 3rd-grade level and are being kept as far away as possible from the classroom as to maintain eligibility in their sport. See? It's word games and the holes live by it. What ya do when ya got nuthin' else. Couple of final thoughts: unx'ers fail to mention that mbb (Roy) gets over 40 exhibits in the NOA. Wayne Walden? Janet Huffstetler? They were Roy's. Each has over 20 mentions apiece in the NOA. And btw...unx redacts every-damn-thing so how do we know who or what was mentioned beyond what we already do? Place is a sheethole.
Oh yeah. And Bilas can KMA...
Coaching the Mind@BethelLearning
Coaching the Mind Retweeted Jay Bilas
Jay Bilas's perspective on the unc scandal is the most reasonable among media personalities.
Jason Walker @jasonwalker419
@BethelLearning Bilas is one of the few who actually looks at facts instead of sensationalism. I wish more media members were as reasonable
Coaching the Mind @BethelLearning
@jasonwalker419 That's exactly why I interviewed Bilas for my documentary.
Coaching the Mind@BethelLearning
Coaching the Mind Retweeted Jay Bilas
Jay Bilas's perspective on the unc scandal is the most reasonable among media personalities.
Jason Walker @jasonwalker419
@BethelLearning Bilas is one of the few who actually looks at facts instead of sensationalism. I wish more media members were as reasonable
Coaching the Mind @BethelLearning
@jasonwalker419 That's exactly why I interviewed Bilas for my documentary.
Still I ask "why?".. Why does he want to protect/defend UNC? I'm a Dukie and I want to see them hammered back to the stone age.
I just don't understand Jay on this. He's his own man, and is welcome to his opinion, but I can't see how he comes to his conclusions. I've read an incredible amount about this scandal (as many others have), and there is just too much to dismiss...20 years worth. As DevilDJ said, much of what Jay is arguing is just semantics.
His hatred for the NCAA is legendary, so this has to be a driving force. And he has always had this inner Duke/UNC tug of war going on that won't allow him to say much negative towards UNC, lest he be thought of as a Duke homer.
So, Jay can believe what he wants, but he's going to have to spend a lot of his time defending his statements...'cause a lot more people than I think that this 20 year scandal wasn't perpetuated to protect women's basketball.
OFC
I don't know, LetsGoDukies, but I think he despises the NCAA so much that he's willing to defend anyone against them. Jay is a great Dukie, and he can believe what he wants, but we don't have to agree with him just because he played for Duke. He's got his opinion, we've got ours.
OFC
Not new just a reminder....
unc-Chapel Hill releases NCAA notice of allegations
(Staff and student-athlete names are redacted from the public report.)
http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/updates/unc-chapel-hill-releases-ncaa-notice-of-allegations/
unc-Chapel Hill releases NCAA notice of allegations
(Staff and student-athlete names are redacted from the public report.)
http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/updates/unc-chapel-hill-releases-ncaa-notice-of-allegations/
Huge data dump. Pack Pride on it as we speak. Not sure if there's anything incriminating. This IS unx , after all...
http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/records/
http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/records/
Last edited:
- Status
