The GRB Official 2018 College Football Thread

A forum for non-baseball sports
User avatar
go birds
-go birds
Posts: 30454
Joined: February 5 10, 9:54 am

Re: The GRB Official 2018 College Football Thread

Post by go birds »

mizzou get post-season bans for academic fraud but north carolina GETS NOTHING FOR THEIR FAKE SCHOOL AND FAKE PEOPLE IN THEIR FAKE CLASSES???????????

the ncaa is a goddamn joke.

tlombard
tl;dr
Posts: 4891
Joined: May 21 09, 12:41 pm

Re: The GRB Official 2018 College Football Thread

Post by tlombard »

go birds wrote:mizzou get post-season bans for academic fraud but north carolina GETS NOTHING FOR THEIR FAKE SCHOOL AND FAKE PEOPLE IN THEIR FAKE CLASSES???????????

the ncaa is a goddamn joke.
We already knew that, duh.

But I have a hard time feeling sorry for Mizzou with regards to anything. Go Cyclones!!! (even though they aren't in the same conference anymore)

User avatar
MrCrowesGarden
'Burb Boy
Posts: 19674
Joined: July 9 06, 11:33 am
Location: Out of the Loop

Re: The GRB Official 2018 College Football Thread

Post by MrCrowesGarden »

Basically because Mizzou was honest and UNC was not, they got banhammer'd.

cardsfantx
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 8045
Joined: November 6 10, 10:58 am

Re: The GRB Official 2018 College Football Thread

Post by cardsfantx »

wow...what a joke

guess schools are just going to shut up and lawyer up, and not cooperate at all...
"Once these issues were brought to our attention in November 2016, the university moved swiftly and fully cooperated with the NCAA Enforcement staff to jointly investigate the allegations that were made," Sterk said Thursday. "We are shocked and dismayed by the penalties that have been imposed today and will aggressively fight for what is right.

"The Committee on Infractions has abused its discretion in applying penalties in this case, and the University will immediately appeal this decision that has placed unfair penalties on our department and programs. It is hard to fathom that the University could be cited for exemplary cooperation throughout this case, and yet end up with these unprecedented penalties that could unfairly and adversely impact innocent current and future Mizzou student-athletes.

"It is important to note that this was the action of one individual, who acted unilaterally and outside of the expectations that we have established for our staff members. I assure our alumni, friends and our community that the deeply disappointing actions of that one individual do not reflect the values and expectations we hold for our staff. Mizzou coaches, student-athletes and staff are committed to upholding our core values of respect, integrity, gratitude, humility and togetherness. We will move forward living up to our frequently stated ideal of 'Win it Right' and vigorously defend this unjust penalty.”

User avatar
Tim
Consider him admonished
Posts: 8347
Joined: March 25 15, 9:59 am
Location: The South

Re: The GRB Official 2018 College Football Thread

Post by Tim »

UNC’s “ classes” were open to all students, not just athletes. IMO NCAA had no jurisdiction there, but rather unc should lose their accreditation.

Mizzou on the other hand, clearly this was an athletics issue. Unless I’ve missed something, athletes were getting academic work done for them, not the engineering student

cardsfantx
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 8045
Joined: November 6 10, 10:58 am

Re: The GRB Official 2018 College Football Thread

Post by cardsfantx »

Tim wrote:UNC’s “ classes” were open to all students, not just athletes. IMO NCAA had no jurisdiction there, but rather unc should lose their accreditation.

Mizzou on the other hand, clearly this was an athletics issue. Unless I’ve missed something, athletes were getting academic work done for them, not the engineering student
here's a QA with David Roberts, the NCAA Committee on Infractions panel committee chair who imposed the sanctions...

https://www.stltoday.com/sports/college ... 55d97.html

Q: The report distinguishes this from the case at North Carolina. If I’m reading it right, North Carolina stood by what it said and Missouri admitted violations. Had Missouri not cooperated or believed they had no culpability for this, are they being penalized because they agreed with the findings prior to your ruling?

A: I’m not going to compare cases, but you certainly have identified a significant issue in this case, and that’s when a member institution comes forward and self-reports a violation and agrees to the classification of severe, Level 1 (violations), there are consequences that happen. And in this particular case, Missouri did the right thing and self-reported. It acknowledged and accepted responsibility. It’s in the details how we go about aggregating mitigating factors, and all those are factored in. But the penalty guidelines put in place by the Association control what we can and can’t do in terms of the penalties. I would not say they were penalized. … If they had chosen a different route, I couldn’t predict what the outcome would be. But based on the facts we received, the findings were appropriate and the penalties were appropriate as dictated by the membership.

Q: If the penalties were so stiff after cooperating and self-reporting and telling the truth, does this not incentivize future cases and future schools to cooperate and tell the truth?

A: I mean one can certainly make that argument. The converse would be that hopefully more institutions would accept this responsibility as Missouri did. ... Nobody likes to receive penalties. But hopefully that would deter future behavior. I don’t want to speculate. But if a school fails to report and conceals and doesn’t tell the truth or did something to otherwise inhibit or hinder the process, then under the mitigating factors the penalties would be more severe than this case.

User avatar
Tim
Consider him admonished
Posts: 8347
Joined: March 25 15, 9:59 am
Location: The South

Re: The GRB Official 2018 College Football Thread

Post by Tim »

I’m not sure that contradicts anything I said

cardsfantx
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 8045
Joined: November 6 10, 10:58 am

Re: The GRB Official 2018 College Football Thread

Post by cardsfantx »

Tim wrote:I’m not sure that contradicts anything I said
no, no it does not

but the chairman basically admits that Mizzou screwed up by admitting to wrongdoing, and that is why the severe penalty, and really had nothing to do with the differences between the 2 cases

tlombard
tl;dr
Posts: 4891
Joined: May 21 09, 12:41 pm

Re: The GRB Official 2018 College Football Thread

Post by tlombard »

In other NCAA news (not football though), a kid at Kansas has had his basketball career ended because his guardian apparently agreed to take $2500 from somebody, ended up not actually taking the money himself but having it donated to a church and the kid had no idea. The NCAA used testimony from a trial the money guy was a part of and didn't actually bother to do any other investigation. What a crock.

I love it when Kansas gets pooped on but I still do feel bad for the kid. The NCAA claims that based on the testimony the kid's guardian also took $20k which the guardian completely denies and has even sent financial records for both him and the kid to the NCAA to try and clear his name but nope, the NCAA doesn't even care to get his side of any story and just takes the testimony from a trial as everything they need.

Abolish the NCAA!!!

User avatar
go birds
-go birds
Posts: 30454
Joined: February 5 10, 9:54 am

Re: The GRB Official 2018 College Football Thread

Post by go birds »

Just a reminder how cutthroat SEC football is...tennessee has a terrific class this year in a rebuild. #12 in the nation after going 5-7 last year.

How did they rank in the SEC though? #7

7 teams in the top 12 in the nation.

crazy

Post Reply