Roy Exonerated in Internal Investigation, Hurt, Angry
jaybate 1.0 last edited by DoubleDD
I’m still not sure what to think.
I worry someone is out to get control of UNCAD revenues and Roy is in the cross fire.
At the same time I just don’t quite understand how he could not have known his players were taking these problematic classes for so many years.
Oh, well, the process grinds on.
Let’s be honest here. The more information comes out, the more it is clear that the truth is closer to what Rashad McCants said several years ago and much further away from what Roy Williams and the UNC administration has said over the last several years.
I’m not saying that Roy should bear the brunt of the penalty here, or that it should ruin his reputation, but I also can’t say that he had no idea what was going on. There is no way someone with his intelligence didn’t know something was afoot.
Here is the rub:
“Williams also defended the decision to bring Wayne Walden, his academic adviser at Kansas, with him to North Carolina in 2003. The report claimed Walden “steered players into these paper classes.””
So… do they follow the “paper classes trail” all the way back to Kansas? Did this junk happen in Lawrence? Does this junk happen in Lawrence?
There has always been the history of advisers leading students to easier classes… and there is nothing wrong with that. But these weren’t real classes and professors grading.
I can’t believe Roy didn’t know. If he didn’t know, then he wasn’t being a responsible coach. These are student-athletes and every aspect of their lives is monitored to try to keep them going down the right path and not damaging the reputation of the universities. Roy just turned away from watching. Kind of reminds me of Penn State.
nuleafjhawk last edited by
I’ll be interested to see how it all finally pans out.
This is the kind of stuff that humbles me though. As much as I whine about losing to mid-majors at the end of the season, or any loss for that matter - I’d rather have a 10 WIN season honestly than be 40-0 by cheating. I’m not just saying that - I frickin hate liars and cheaters.
I hope Bill Self feels the same way.
I couldn’t rewrite your post any better than you said it. I hate liars and cheats, too. That’s why I have disdain for Calipari… going back to his start and what got him to where he is today, by being able to over-recruit when he had nothing to sell. He washed his hands from any guilt when he was always claiming to be his players’ best friends. Best friend who just didn’t seem to know anything.
If Roy didn’t know then he should be let go… and if he did know… we’ll see what the feds do.
Bill better know where all his players sit academically. If they are bad students they better have tutors and work hard to improve, not get a free ride with paper classes.
I hope the feds come down hard on UNC. I have nothing against UNC, but this damages the reputation of all college education, because it brings up a question of legitimacy everywhere, not just UNC.
And if KU is guilty of the same thing, they should get hammered, too.
Some people need prison time.
wissoxfan83 last edited by wissoxfan83
@nuleafjhawk I cheated in my algebra class freshman year of high school. Miss Bean literally stared a hole through my head with that mean look on her face, but I guess you frickin hate me, I’m ok with that.
nuleafjhawk last edited by
@wissoxfan83 aw shucks, you know I heart you dawg.
I’m pretty sure none of us are perfect, but I’m talking about the lying and cheating that is habitual. A way of life. As someone mentioned earlier - Calipari kind of lying and cheating. That’s probably not fair, but as Jayhawks, it’s kind of fun!
wissoxfan83 last edited by
@nuleafjhawk LOL. The reality of it is I felt so guilty I never cheated again on anything in school! A little bit of old fashioned discipline goes a long ways!
RockChalkinTexas last edited by
See ARod and Lance Armstrong for habitual lying and cheating!
Crimsonorblue22 last edited by Crimsonorblue22
@RockChalkinTexas guess who?? I did not have ( fill in the 3 letter blank)
RockChalkinTexas last edited by
JayHawkFanToo last edited by
Kip_McSmithers last edited by Kip_McSmithers
This can’t be good for UNC. What are the chances their 2005 title is toast???
LJW did an article two years ago on “clustering majors” by athletes. It has numbers on majors from 2004-2012 for the whole Big12. Here’s the link: Athletes’ tendencies to ‘cluster’
That clustering article points out what many people fear - that athletes aren’t getting the education they want, but are steered into a particular major or specific classes for the sake of eligibility. Looks like that is what UNC did with their paper classes to a huge degree, and may be what many more schools do to a lesser degree.
JayHawkFanToo last edited by
Things are about to get a lot worse for UNC. A former football player is suing the university and his attorneys are trying to get a class action suit against the school going.
It gets worse, the school’s accreditation is also under review…
I f these two processes find UNC guilty, UNC is in deep doo doo.
“paper classes” appears so far to be a difficult term to pin down.
What exactly does it mean?
Is it a term with legal meaning? Does it refer to a court case precedent, or to a law or regulation, or to term of art in an accreditation standard.
Where exactly does it say a “paper class” actually is a violation of a law, a regulation, or a university, or accreditation standard?
I am not taking a side on this.
I am in fact finding mode.
Usually, to be found guilty of something, you have to have violated a specific law, or regulation, right?
For a “paper class” to be found in violation of an accreditation standard, I would reckon there must be a standard of work load that the alleged “paper class” were a violation of, right? What exactly is it? How far did those classes fall short, if at all?
I don’t recall seeing this specific accreditation standard posted that says “no paper classes,” nor do I recall seeing a specific allegation of how the alleged paper class failed to meet minimum standards.
I am not saying there is no problem here. I am saying I have yet to read anything that specifies exactly what laws, regulations, and standards the alleged paper classes violated and exactly how they violated them.
I am trying to find out if there is such a thing as a “paper class” that is an illegality, or a violation of a standard, or if it is something that certain persons wish were a violation of a law, or a standard?
I could see where this might eventually lead to a court case by a student, or student-athlete, alleging he/she had paid for an accredited education and did not get one. But until we see the criteria for violation, I am in the dark as to assessing what kind of trouble UNC might be in.
@jaybate-1.0 : it’s my understanding that they viewed several of the ‘papers’ that were turned in for a grade and several of them were exact copies of other published works. Just pretty much photocopied. Didn’t even try to change some of the wording… And on said papers students were giving passing grades. Usually As and Bs to boost GPAs for athletes.
Thanks for the heads up. That is VERY interesting.
If someone insisted on a day in court, I wonder if a university lawyer would argue that in fact the student committed the violation and not the teacher; that the teacher was fooled by the student.
And if a paper were turned in, I wonder if that paper might not be argued to have been sufficient to meet relevant standards?
This is why I am trying to zero in on the criteria for deciding if a violation were committed.
ParisHawk last edited by ParisHawk
@jaybate-1.0 From what I read, there were two allegations that might be troubling from a legal point of view:
There were courses that did not have classes, called “independent study”, but there were limits on how many you could take. The fake courses pretended to have classes but there was no attendance. So UNC had a rule that it did not uphold.
The teachers didn’t grade the papers, a secretary did.
Put the two together and there were courses with zero interaction between teacher and student and zero real work on the part of the student: no teaching and no learning, but credit was given.
Sounds like the old Bartles and Jaymes commercial; “…so Ed wrote off to Harvard for an MBA…”
…and thank you for your support!
jaybate 1.0 last edited by jaybate 1.0
Is there any proof presented so far that anyone took too many independent studies courses? Have you seen the actual rule that says exactly how many independent studies courses are allowed and cases where too many were taken?
Is there a UNC requirement that “classes” have to be attended to be passed? I recall attendance almost never being recorded in my undergraduate classes at KU back in the dark ages of the 20th Century. In fact, I don’t recall a single teacher taking attendance in my years at KU. Is that something new in universities now? Is taking attendance mandatory at universities now? Now that would be an easy thing to document. Just go look at the class room attendance taken? But what if attendance is not recorded and what if it is not even mandatory to take it? What does it mean exactly to say that there was no attendance, when none was required?
Is there any rule preventing a secretary from grading papers? When I was in school I had computers grade some of my papers. I had grad students grade my papers. I believe I had a teach one time that had us grade each other’s presentations?
I am not quite sure it is time to roll Bartles and James yet.
Understand, I am not taking sides here.
What went on at UNC doesn’t look like a high point of university education to me. Or even a mid point.
But I keep sifting through this and keep coming up without specific violations of specific rules.
Hell, I would kind of like it if UNC got a fork put in it, because it might free up some recruits for us.
But, c’mon, surely you still have to violate a written rule to be convicted, or sanctioned, or whatever, don’t you?
I mean, I know you don’t in national security matters. If I understand that correctly, the President can just have you abducted, tortured and whacked, if the President says you are a national security threat.
But UNC curricula in African Studies and African American studies–that isn’t defined as national security is it?
I am just asking for someone to give me the specific law, regulation, rule, or standard that is written down and the evidence of its violation; that’s all.
Is that too much to ask?
Regarding A and Bs being given usually, slightly over half the students getting the As and Bs you describe were not athletes, if I understand this correctly.
Dusting off the cob webs, what I recall in most grad schools is that everyone got As, or Bs. It was kind of an unwritten rule. If you got less, which almost no one did, you were dismissed.
Now, I know we are not talking about grad level work, but I wonder if the university has a rule at any level specifying that everyone in a class is not allowed to get As and Bs?
I admit that I’ve been away from university coursework and grading a long time, but do you really think they have a rule now about how many can get As and Bs?
One more thought on this stuff about students and student-athletes copying papers and turning them in.
My recollection is that when students cheat the way you describe, i.e., turning in copies of papers they did not write, that the student would be considered to be violating some kind of school ethic and would be, if found out, disciplined by the school. But I don’t recall a situation where the school, or the instructor, would be found to have violated a student’s rights by not catching them doing it.
And this is where I see some real problems with folks that are suggesting UNC violated laws, regulations, rules, or standards.
I don’t see anything wrong with folks saying UNC did not offer good education in these classes to some 3100 students. I could even see where accreditation programs might come in and say UNC has some courses where they are not meeting “our” standards for accreditation.
But UNC violating a law here?
Or UNC losing its accreditation across the board?
I don’t know.
Maybe the proper legal angle is that some athletes were either coerced, or mislead into taking substandard classes, when their scholarships entitled them to a standard education that they were mislead from getting.
I don’t know.
Whatever happens, I hope this propels the NCAA and all member institutions towards giving all student athletes a certain number of years of education after their playing days end to pursue their legitimate degrees with whatever tutoring assistance they need.
ParisHawk last edited by ParisHawk
I am just asking for someone to give me the specific law, regulation, rule, or standard that is written down and the evidence of its violation; that’s all.
Is that too much to ask?
I am tempted to say maybe yes, it is too much to ask.
Should rules be programmed so that a computer can calculate compliance? This isn’t math or multiple choice. There should be room for human discernment and judgement.
The computer that graded you did not decide what answer was right: it noted whether you got the answer the teacher said was right. I would also hope that the “grades” students gave each other were reviewed to some extent by the teacher; in any case that surely wasn’t the entire basis for the semester grade.
At UNC, it appears there was intent to inflate GPAs in order to maintain eligibility, without any interaction between teacher and student, and without anything resembling “learning” taking place. There appear to be principles at stake here, if not “rules”.
You say you have sifted through this. Exactly what sources have you consulted?
P.S. I see you added “I could even see where accreditation programs might come in and say UNC has some courses where they are not meeting “our” standards for accreditation.” That’s all I’m saying, so I guess we agree.
@jaybate-1.0 : You can find these articles in the other post of yours. These are just two of the articles that shed light on this whole situation. The first paragraph I’m going to post is from the TIME article:
In November 2009, two counselors led a meeting with the football coaching staff, including then-head coach Butch Davis. They showed the coaches a slide, warning them that these paper classes NO LONGER EXIST. “What was part of the solution in the past?” read the slide. “We put them in classes that met degree requirement in which they didn’t go to class, they didn’t take notes, have to stay awake, they didn’t have to meet with professors, they didn’t have to pay attention or necessarily engage with the material.” The counselors then showed two more slides comparing the GPA of eight football players in the paper classes with their GPA in other classes. The average paper-class GPA was 3.61, their GPA in other classes was 1.917.
And this paragraph is from the USA TODAY article:
For years, people working closely with athletics took advantage, and academic counselors for the football program even pushed Nyang’oro, the department chair, to get the so-called “paper classes” up and running again after Crowder retired in 2009. The semester following her retirement, the football team’s average GPA dipped to 2.121, Wainstein found, the lowest in 10 years.
What’s in question here are undergraduate classes where obviously A LOT of these athletes are getting Cs (2.0) and Ds (1.0) because their cumulative GPA wouldn’t be in the toilet otherwise. So there is no “unwritten UNIVERSITY law” that these students get As and Bs. There was however an AFAM unwritten law by those individuals that ran this scandal for students to get a GPA boost.
“My recollection is that when students cheat the way you describe, i.e., turning in copies of papers they did not write, that the student would be considered to be violating some kind of school ethic and would be, if found out, disciplined by the school. But I don’t recall a situation where the school, or the instructor, would be found to have violated a student’s rights by not catching them doing it.”
I believe the way to fix this is to investigate the entire university. Dig deep into every aspect of education. In the end, hopefully to the benefit of UNC, they discover no other misconduct at the university. This is the only way to restore the academic reputation of the school.
The entire process (in itself) would be a form of discipline on the university and enough to send a message all through the nation that this type of behavior is unacceptable.
You can look at two ways:
Glass half empty - this is a stain on the reputation of academics at UNC and may extend further into other schools. It should be dealt with promptly, and for the most part shoved under the rug.
Glass half full - this is an opportunity to investigate further into UNC (and maybe other schools) to make sure academics are taught at a high standard, and moving forward, there will be some kind of structure in place to monitor these standards. This will be a plus because it will help the reputation of college programs throughout America.
We are all looking at this only through sports glasses. There are definitely questions in other areas of studies, for example, grant studies.
This is an opportunity to bring academics up a notch in reputation. And while we are at it, maybe we can use the same “academic police” to monitor private science-based firms, which are largely unregulated and producing bogus science. What most people don’t realize is the shift in focus to private conducted science over university-based science. The entire field of science is suffering from reputation issues, and rightly so.
@jaybate-1.0 I don’t think the issue is that the class is a paper class, or that attendance must be taken.
The issue in this UNC case is that not only were many of the athletes in these paper classes, but that many of these classes were graded without even reading the papers. That’s where the fraud is occurring. I took two independent study classes while I was an undergraduate. Both classes required me to write several papers and, as far as I could tell, those papers were read and graded. That’s a legitimate class. To just assign a grade without either requiring attendance and class participation, or to evaluate the written work is not a legitimate class.
The only question now is who knew what, and when they knew it.
This CNN article has more details than most. This section is what @justanotherfan is talking about.
Underpreparedness is reflected in emails from advisers, particularly those from Boxill, who suggested grades and at least once acknowledged that a paper was plagiarized.
“Yes, a D will be fine; that’s all she needs,” one email from Boxill to Crowder says. “I didn’t look at the paper but figured it was a recycled one as well, but I couldn’t figure from where!”
In another email, Boxill wrote that one athlete was only taking “two real courses.”
Alas, I am not sure we have reached the nirvana of agreement though I am always fond of getting to that state.
You appear to be retreating into some vagaries rather than just answering my humble little question of what specific law, regulation, rule, or standard has been violated , or saying you cannot; then you appear to try to make a virtue of doing so and resort to the old "its too complicated for your itty bitty witttttttle questions.
Why exactly are you doing that and then essentially saying this may reduce to an accreditation issue? I do not follow your logic, so agreement, alas, cannot yet be said to be achieved and enjoyed. How can I agree with what is not clear enough to see the logic connect validly on? How can I make a reasonable analysis in order to agree with you? There is yet some burden on you.
I have googled a bit so far, but not near as much as I would like and hope to. I am just getting into this–just asking the most obvious questions now. And it appears increasingly conspicuous that my rather basic questions so far appear not to be being answered with what one might describe as credible specificity; that sometimes foreshadows a need for more learning. Perhaps we will all learn something as this alleged scandal of “paper classes” continues. I hope I do. I am not taking a side in this so far. I am just trying to educate myself.
Be patient. We are just getting into it. I have a feeling the alleged UNC scandal is going to get still more interesting, but I cannot at this time say if it will necessarily do so in the way folks might expect.
Crimsonorblue22 last edited by
@jaybate-1.0 Google away!
It all makes me wonder about Kentucky and Calipari.
Here are my reasons why:
Calipari has been at a program with academic issues before (Memphis). He either knew about it, or he didn’t but should have.
The level of recruiting success at Kentucky comes to question. When I say “success” it goes beyond just recruiting top tier players, but also that they all make it through the system without a problem.
Many in here wonder why we haven’t been getting the number of high level recruits that Kentucky gets. This may be the reason why. Maybe Self (and Kansas) have a higher bar set for recruits (academically). Maybe Kansas doesn’t have a “system” for getting non-academic players through without a hitch. Further… maybe Kentucky does!
Look at their roster every year since Calipari has arrived. It is hard to believe they wouldn’t have run into academic issues with at least a few of these guys. I’m not saying top recruits have more academic issues… I’m just saying x amount of recruits have academic issues, some of them top tier. I have a hard time believing Kentucky is weeding through top recruits. With their high success rate it appears they “process” all the top recruits they want to become Wildcats.
ParisHawk last edited by
@jaybate-1.0 I wasn’t trying to treat your question as “humble” or “itty bitty”. Until you made the distinction between “breaking the law” and accreditation, I thought you were applying a legal burden of proof to an accreditation issue.
I answered your question as best I could: courses without classes to get around limits on independent study courses (UNC rule), and papers graded without faculty oversight (“standard”, in my mind).
That’s all I have: neither virtue nor vagary, just itty bitty witttttle answers.
Crimsonorblue22 last edited by
I respectfully disagree at this point.
You are pointing out acts of poor quality education, not the law, regulation, rule, or standard that has been violated.
And the only time it is appropriate to pose the
I am disappointed at how UNC did things, even though it is more or less what I recall reputedly going on at KU back in the 1970s when I went to KU.
But the point remains: you cannot have a violation without a law, regulation, rule, or standard being violated. It is still not clear to me that any actionable violation occurred, either from what you have pointed out, or what others have, or what I have read so far elsewhere.
But I understand that there is some pretty hot water roiling in Chapel Hill and someone will likely eventually articulate the law, etc. that has been broken.
I stand corrected. Thanks.
justanotherfan last edited by justanotherfan
What UNC did amounts to academic fraud if the allegation about not reading the work is true. That is the violation. Simply having students enrolled in paper classes is not a violation. It may be questionable, but not a violation. On that I think we both agree.
However, giving grades without reviewing the work is academic fraud. Giving grades for work that is known to be plagiarized is academic fraud. Committing academic fraud by a student is grounds for expulsion at every university. Academic fraud by a professor is grounds for dismissal. This is where the problem is and that is the monster lurking around the corner for UNC.
I don’t think your statement is a fair assessment.
At Memphis, the university knowingly accepted partial qualifiers as a part of their admissions process. Some schools accept those students. Some do not. To my knowledge UK does not as a part of an agreement with the rest of the SEC.
As for the success at UK, let’s remember that KU was in the running for many of the same players. KU recruited John Wall, Daniel Orton, Brandon Knight, Terrance Jones, Doron Lamb, Marquis Teague, Julius Randle, and James Young. To assume that just because these players chose UK means that some of them may have been academically questionable is an unreasonable inference. KU never backed out of the recruiting due to academic or eligibility concerns, so I would have to think KU believed they would be eligible.
Let’s also remember that KU pursued Derrick Rose through the entire recruiting process until he chose Memphis. Surely that means that Self thought (as did the coaches at Arizona, Illinois and Kentucky) that Rose would be eligible.
Let’s also remember that even for the guys KU wasn’t in on (players like DeMarcus Cousins, Anthony Davis, Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Nerlens Noel, etc) many of them were being recruited by other high level programs and academic schools like Duke, Syracuse, Vanderbilt, Ohio State, Villanova, etc., or considered their in-state school (Alabama, NC State, Tennessee, etc.)
UK is in on most of the top guys, as is KU, UNC, Duke, Ohio State, Michigan, Syracuse, etc. UK is currently winning a lot of those recruiting battles, and it doesn’t seem to be because lots of schools are avoiding these players due to eligibility concerns. Duke was in on Wall to the very end. UNC and Ohio State were on Davis until the decision. It came down to KU or UK for Randle, Jones and Lamb.
Oh, and it will be more of the same next year, because KU and UK are both in on Jalen Brown, Malik Newman, Ivan Rabb, Cheick Diallo, Caleb Swanigan, and Stephen Zimmerman (all undeclared top 10 prospects) as well as Brandon Ingram.
Memphis had to vacate their season because there was enough substantial evidence showing Rose had someone else sit in on his SAT.
The NCAA (to public knowledge) didn’t have enough evidence to connect the dots to Calipari. However…
"Meanwhile, Calipari should have learned more about Rose’s eligibility and confirmed if he was acceptable academically. As investigators unmasked facts of Rose’s alleged sneaky habits to cheat on exams, his brother received $1,713.85 in forbidden benefits from the University of Memphis.
Though the school said Reggie Rose had been billed, they have not yet received a dime.
It’s tough to pull one over on the NCAA, particularly when suddenly Rose was granted college eligibility to take the SAT in Detroit.
That’s strange, and hard to affirm after he repeatedly (three times) failed the easier ACT. It’s obvious he wasn’t a genius at test-taking, but a floor general who qualified to play might have shamed himself simply to fulfill a lifelong dream.
Calipari could’ve and should’ve known, avoiding the ramifications that were involved.
Instead of standing up to wrongdoings, he rather ignored the potential infractions and refused to worry about past.
Then again, maybe he had no indications that fraud was smudging the program, though this is highly unlikely."
So just because Self recruited Rose… are you implying that Self would have followed the same path as Calipari? Are you sure you want to go that way?
This isn’t about taking the path of recruiting OADs… it is about what a coach/school does when they potentially have the services of a top tier recruit with academic issues and looks for ways to “qualify” him and keep him “qualified.”
I didn’t slander Calipari and Kentucky. I just stated my curiosity for their ability to land and successfully play every AA they can get their hands on. Kansas, on the other hand, has definitely turned away talent based on academic issues.
Every top recruit gets recruited by just about everyone. Some have academic issues and shouldn’t qualify to play anywhere. I’m not even leveling an accusation on any recent UK AA. Just looking at the high numbers of top recruits they land and the fact that most or all make it over the academic bar at UK.
And many recruiting issues we never hear the details about. It is possible that many of those UK recruits we might have signed, but pulled the offers because of potential academic issues.
IMO, part of Calipari’s ability to recruit so well is his ability to keep athletes qualified throughout their college experience. That is just my opinion. I’m not one of these people that just believe he has a great ability to talk them all into playing at Kentucky. Just look at their roster today and tell me why half of those guys would go to a school where they will sit on the bench most games? That makes absolutely no sense, whatsoever. Cal is more than a salesman, IMO.
Here is just a bit more to this story…
I’m sorry. But there is no way I can ever put Self and Calipari in a comparison where they are anywhere equal. Imagine Self doing this? This settlement is their obvious desire to sweep it all under the rug, perhaps for many reasons, including the possibility that they could later be nailed for perjury.
Through Calipari’s cries of innocence, here was one more avenue he could have gone to help clear his reputation. Yes, it would have been a tough path to go, but upstanding people realize there is nothing more valuable on this earth than their reputation.
UK lost Enes Kanter due to eligibility issues. The recruits that I named were guys that we were actively recruiting until the very end. We did not pull those offers. Lamb, Jones and Randle specifically were guys that were choosing between KU and UK.
As for whether Self would have followed the same path as Calipari, I don’t know. Many of the allegations surrounding Rose are similar to allegations made about Brandon Rush and Darrell Arthur. It was determined in KU’s case that both Rush and Arthur were eligible. As I have said before, Rose was ruled ineligible after he left Memphis - not during the season.
How many top recruits have been determined ineligible over Cal’s time at UK? I’d consider a “top recruit” to be someone ranked in the top 25. I used ESPN rankings.
2009 - Renardo Sidney (Mississippi State)
2010 - Fab Melo (Syracuse, second semester), Enes Kanter (Kentucky, played pro in Turkey)
2011 - none
2012 - Ricardo Ledo (Providence)
2013 - Chris Walker (Florida, eligible late second semester)
I may have missed someone, but I think that’s the full list. Truth is, most top players get are eligible because most of them are identified very early in high school as potential D1 recruits and are placed on an academic path to make sure they qualify under NCAA rules.
As for the link, Calipari gave back his bonus that he received for going to the NCAA title game. Since the game was vacated, Memphis could have asked for that money back anyway. As for whether I could imagine Self doing this - honestly, I don’t know Bill Self personally, so I don’t know what he 1) has done or 2) would do. I do know that most players are determined to be eligible and that very few are declared ineligible (especially among elite recruits).
None of us know what the NCAA knew and why they leveled Memphis’ season, but you know they didn’t do it for the heck of it. They had a connection between Rose’s fraudulent SAT, whether it is connected to the benefits Reggie Rose received is not known publicly.
The NCAA punishment reflected their knowledge of some guilt by the university… especially leveling probation on Memphis. If the university was a mere victim of the SAT fraud you can bet they would have challenged the NCAA. It is clear the university had some level of involvement, most likely connected to Calipari.
This is comparing apples to oranges when looking at Rush and Arthur… neither of these cases had connections to Kansas.
Kanter was paid as a professional, voiding his eligibility. We are talking about academics, in particular, cases where athletes may or may not be legally qualified.
Showing me how few cases of top recruits are found academically ineligible seems to prove my point more than yours. I’m saying… if top recruits are sitting on the academic fence, they go to Kentucky! (IMHO)
I don’t believe players that are at the top in basketball are almost all truly qualified. Chances are, many put their studies on hold while they perfected their game. To think of all of these guys as being heavily disciplined in the classroom isn’t realistic.
I believe history is a long path… it will always exist in the future… and at some point we will discover something going on at Kentucky. That is just my opinion.
And I’m not putting Kansas on a pedestal. I am HOPEFUL we are playing by the rules and we are focused on recruiting true student/athletes!
As far as Kansas “pulling offers” that can happen in a phone conversation and can be private information. In most cases, I venture to say that Self doesn’t like to publicly pull offers off the table because it reflects negatively on the athletes, something Self doesn’t want to do, regardless if there is question to their academics.
I’m willing to bet big bucks that we could have landed several top players over the past few years if we had no conscious towards academics. Examine our academics profile and we are always near the top. Many of our players even finish their degrees while playing pro ball. Those aren’t paper classes.
I’m also willing to bet several other schools have the same policy… like Duke!
Most academic eligibility issues are coming from the transition from HS to college. How that is handled by the university is what connects the university to it. For example, had the Arthur thing turned out differently, and he been declared ineligible due to his grades being changed in high school, KU would have used an ineligible player and may have had to forfeit all games in which he participated.
No one has ever alleged that Memphis fudged Rose’s records. He was ineligible because his test score was invalidated. That would have made him ineligible regardless of where he went to school. The travel for Reggie Rose was what really got them. They claimed he had been billed, but that he had not paid. It’s more likely that an invoice had been created “just in case” but that Memphis never intended to make him pay that money back.
Ultimately, the eligibility that we are talking about here (i.e. whether a student qualifies to compete in college) is different than the eligibility dealt with at UNC (whether there is fraud going on at the university level).
Also, KU has accepted players on the academic fence. Remember Ben McLemore? Current rotation member Jamari Traylor? Nothing against either of those guys, but they both redshirted due to academic eligibility issues as freshmen.
“For example, had the Arthur thing turned out differently, and he been declared ineligible due to his grades being changed in high school, KU would have used an ineligible player and may have had to forfeit all games in which he participated.”
I agree with that. But would Kansas have also received 3 years probation? Unlikely. That penalty was a reflection of the university’s involvement, most likely for more than loaning Reggie a few bucks. That involvement could be flavored many ways… including just a lack of responsibility for some area of this situation.
“Also, KU has accepted players on the academic fence.”
True. And I hope their classwork at Kansas is legit! Perhaps with BMac there could be a risk/reward where something could have been questionable. I can’t believe we would take any risk with Jamari. Like I said, I don’t put Kansas on a pedestal. I am HOPEFUL we are not involved in anything questionable for any level of reward!
“Ultimately, the eligibility that we are talking about here (i.e. whether a student qualifies to compete in college) is different than the eligibility dealt with at UNC (whether there is fraud going on at the university level).”
Exactly. I implied Calipari and Kentucky have something going on within the university to keep athletes qualified. It is just my opinion. And I believe it will eventually be revealed. Just my opinion… it isn’t anything about being a fair statement… it is just my opinion that I’m sharing here.
I have a hard time accepting Calipari’s settlement. If there was nothing to hide why not make it another opportunity to clear his name? Preventing court is also a way to prevent possible perjury charges later if you are hiding something. I took the settlement as a silent acknowledgement. That is also just my opinion.
jaybate 1.0 last edited by jaybate 1.0
Is “academic fraud” a term of law, regulation, organizational rules, or industry/accreditation standards?
I have some vague sense of it referring to students plagiarizing and having other students take tests for them, or cheating on tests on examinations. Is that what you mean by academic fraud?
If so, can you get sent to the slammer for academic fraud? or just expelled from the university?
What is the definition of it that can trigger something actionable is what I am asking?
And in what realm of justice?
Is there a statute of limitations on it? This issue reputedly involves activities 4 and more years back.
Who can commit academic fraud: students, or professors, or university administrators, or private 501.c3 athletic department employees like ADs, coaches, assistant coaches, assistant coaches in charge of academic compliance, etc.?
Is a private 501.c3 athletic department even in the business of academics, or is that the responsibility of the public university that spun off the athletic department?
“Academic fraud” sounds more like another ill defined term, like “paper classes,” “sham classes,” but I just don’t know.
But I respect you and figure you probably do.
Since the game was vacated, Memphis could have asked for that money back anyway.
I believe I follow what you are trying to say here.
They could have asked, but would he have had to give it back?
For example, you or I could have asked him to give it back, but under the circumstances he would have had no reason to do so.
So: if Memphis had asked, would there have been significant probability that Calipari would have had to have given the money back, since he was reputedly found by the NCAA not to have known about what happened, nor to have been responsible for committing the action that resulted in his unwitting playing of ineligible players?
I haven’t a clue on this.
I suppose I can hypothesize why Cal might have given the money back. Hypothetically speaking, perhaps he was already into a much better situation after his move to UK, and he probably did not need the money, given his hefty new contract. And giving the money back perhaps helped him put distance between himself and Memphis and so focus on his new job.
But I just can’t say if he would have had to give it back had Memphis tried to force him to.
Do you understand the situation well enough to say?
@jaybate-1.0 : I’ll answer one of your questions… Academic fraud is illegal if you’re paid to teach a class and never actually teach a class. NY Times: A’s for athletes, but charges of Tar Heel fraud Of course charges were dropped once he signed on to spill the beans.
And I guess if you want answers to all of your questions it would be best for you to contact a local university’s compliance office. I’m sure they’d be happy to help you out with your questions.
Academic fraud (or misconduct, or dishonesty) is defined in basically every school’s academic honor code or student conduct policy. Simply put, it’s cheating in class.
Academic fraud is just like changing a grade on a paper, or cheating on a test.
My issue is not with UNC enrolling players in “paper” classes. There are some classes that require only a written assignment that are among the most challenging at any school. The issue here is whether that work was evaluated for the grade and, further, whether students were turning in plagiarized work. If, as Tydreke Powell says “everybody knew” then this is ugly for all involved. UNC may as well have just been running a pro team.
Again, I can’t say who knew what, and when it was known, but if knowledge is linked to any of the coaches, I could definitely see them being issued show cause orders as a result.
As for the statute of limitations, I don’t think the NCAA has one for enforcement. I doubt UNC can take away any degrees at this point, especially if their professors were the ones in on the scheme, because it would go beyond just athletes - you would have to take away the degree of anyone that enrolled in any of those classes, or require them to make up those credits.
I don’t think you get sent to jail for any of this, but it can definitely get you kicked out of school. I sat on the student conduct panel when I was in school. We heard a couple of cases where plagiarism was alleged. The ultimate penalty for that was expulsion, although none of the cases my panel heard wound up resulting in expulsion.
However, it gets complicated if there is scholarship or grant money involved, because now the fraud has a financial element and there is a loss or deprivation involved. But that’s an issue for another day.
drgnslayr last edited by
“Academic fraud” amongst students is one thing… when it is allegedly conducted through the university it is something totally different.
This is a case for the justice department because the level of crime creates victims widespread. Potentially every graduate of UNC will have their diploma potentially discredited to some degree, and the damage could extend beyond that because it raises general academic integrity issues on a broader scale.
In the example above I listed a lawsuit brought from Memphis ticket holders who were suing Calipari and Rose for a loss in value… imagine the student body of UNC over 18 years bringing a class action suit because of a loss in value of their diplomas? I know if I was a UNC grad I would almost feel an obligation to be a part of that suit.
I think someone needs to go to prison!