Another academic scandal; UNC is f-cked

Where was SACS? and where is SACS now?

As the article above asks, why even bother with accreditation if it is meaningless?

 

I suspect you'll be hearing from SACS re: this story sometime soon, but accreditation means a helluva lot less than is generally understood.

 

This certainly casts a new light on those longtime smug boasts from UNC (and Dick Vitale) about the "stellar graduation rates" in Chapel Hill. Appears we now know the secret to explain those rates--a fraudulent system that damn near guaranteed a diploma to any athlete that played four years, regardless of whether actual work was done or an actual education received.

Exhibits why all grad rate numbers perhaps should be met with a skeptical eye. It's easy for any school to have a high percentage if it's willing to rig the system.

 

Meh. The author of that article clearly hasn't actually read the report. There is plenty of red meat for those wishing to trash the university - and a trashing is well deserved - but is it too much to ask that they bother to inform themselves before undertaking the task?

 

Pierce also gets a few of the facts wrong.

One of the many things that kills me about Wainstein's report is that it's clear many of the enrolled students were not in on the fix. As part of the review, Wainstein had the actual papers reviewed by outside experts in the field. Some came back as excellent papers deserving of high marks. Most came back as having original content and of a decent enough quality to earn a passing grade. And many of the students - including several basketball players - insisted that they took the courses quite seriously and devoted a great deal of time to the papers. The advantage to them of the paper class was the schedule flexibility, not the ease of the course.

I feel for those students most because they put in the effort that a college asks, and their transcripts are forever tainted.

 

http://tinyurl.com/kr9w45p

And now the lawsuits from former players have begun. First shot fired by Mike McAdoo.

.

 

Golly gee willickers, it's almost like Roy Williams didn't give a shit about Carolina (academics). Four of his best players appear to have taken no classes at all during the 2005 season.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/11/08/4305374/2005-unc-basketball-champs-2-semesters.html?sp=/99/100/&ihp=1

 

t

Good. Destroy the culture.

 

If the NCAA forced Memphis to vacate its final four season because one player was suspected but never proven to have cheated on a test taken before he ever enrolled in the school, then I don't know how they can possibly avoid vacating the 2005 national title. Players on that 05 UNC roster were enrolled in THIRTY FIVE of these phony classes during that season, and nearly every scholarship player on that team was an AFAM major. Not sure there was anybodywho got playing time on that team who should've been eligible.

And, of course, if you vacate 05, the question then becomes why not also 09 and 93, since those title teams apparently also included bogus class takers? I don't believe the NCAA has ever vacated national titles, and I'm sure they don't want to begin by wiping away three in one swipe. But, damn, when you start pulling that string here.....

 

If they vacate 93, the winner AND the runner-up will have been stricken from the record.

 

Has the NCAA ever vacated a basketball championship? Always felt like they wouldn't have done anything about Memphis if they had held on to beat Kansas. I think that's the one line they have drawn, that they want their marquee event to be "untainted."

I know USC vacated football titles, but those aren't governed by the gestapo.

 

I agree, which is why the NCAA is in such an interesting little pickle here. I'm sure the NCAA doesn't want to erase national titles in its showcase event, but the Memphis precedent leaves them little way of justifiably avoiding it.