A month ago NCAA responded to UNC's response and it just now became public thanks to local paper. They are rejecting UNC's claims that NCAA has no ability to get involved in the case of all those years of content-free classes.
"
▪ Does the NCAA have jurisdiction?
UNC: The NCAA has no jurisdiction over academic matters such as the content and oversight of courses.
NCAA: The case isn’t about content or management of courses. It’s about “how the unmonitored athletics department used anomalous courses in a manner different than the general student body in violation of NCAA rules.”
▪ Were the bogus classes broadly available?
UNC: The classes had non-athletes enrolled, along with athletes.
NCAA: Athletes made up nearly half of the enrollments, when they account for 3 percent of the student body. “The preferential and near unfettered access the AFRI/AFAM department gave athletics to the anomalous courses provided student-athletes with advantages that others simply did not have.”
▪ What NCAA standards did UNC violate?
UNC: The NCAA accusations of UNC’s failure to monitor and lack of institutional control failed to cite any underlying bylaw for misconduct – such as unethical conduct or impermissible benefits – involving the classes.
NCAA: The failure of academic and athletic officials to put a stop to the fake classes and to the access athletes had to them justifies those violations.
▪ Does the NCAA get a second chance at the scandal?
UNC: The NCAA’s enforcement staff had the opportunity to fully investigate the classes in August 2011, when UNC first notified it during the course of an investigation into improper financial benefits from agents and improper academic help from a tutor.
NCAA: The previous case involving the football team was unrelated to the fake classes, and the full scope of the academic scandal wasn’t known until three years later with the Wainstein investigation. The NCAA also noted that seven investigations prior to Wainstein’s report failed to get to the bottom of the scandal.
▪ Is it too late?
UNC: By the time the NCAA either re-opened or began a new investigation into the classes, the four-year statute of limitations had expired.
NCAA: The four-year limit can be waived when there is a “blatant disregard” of NCAA bylaws.
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article110315307.html#storylink=cpy
"
It may be UNC pi**ed off the NCAA and it may be that was a bad idea. I hope so. Time will tell.
"
▪ Does the NCAA have jurisdiction?
UNC: The NCAA has no jurisdiction over academic matters such as the content and oversight of courses.
NCAA: The case isn’t about content or management of courses. It’s about “how the unmonitored athletics department used anomalous courses in a manner different than the general student body in violation of NCAA rules.”
▪ Were the bogus classes broadly available?
UNC: The classes had non-athletes enrolled, along with athletes.
NCAA: Athletes made up nearly half of the enrollments, when they account for 3 percent of the student body. “The preferential and near unfettered access the AFRI/AFAM department gave athletics to the anomalous courses provided student-athletes with advantages that others simply did not have.”
▪ What NCAA standards did UNC violate?
UNC: The NCAA accusations of UNC’s failure to monitor and lack of institutional control failed to cite any underlying bylaw for misconduct – such as unethical conduct or impermissible benefits – involving the classes.
NCAA: The failure of academic and athletic officials to put a stop to the fake classes and to the access athletes had to them justifies those violations.
▪ Does the NCAA get a second chance at the scandal?
UNC: The NCAA’s enforcement staff had the opportunity to fully investigate the classes in August 2011, when UNC first notified it during the course of an investigation into improper financial benefits from agents and improper academic help from a tutor.
NCAA: The previous case involving the football team was unrelated to the fake classes, and the full scope of the academic scandal wasn’t known until three years later with the Wainstein investigation. The NCAA also noted that seven investigations prior to Wainstein’s report failed to get to the bottom of the scandal.
▪ Is it too late?
UNC: By the time the NCAA either re-opened or began a new investigation into the classes, the four-year statute of limitations had expired.
NCAA: The four-year limit can be waived when there is a “blatant disregard” of NCAA bylaws.
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/unc/article110315307.html#storylink=cpy
"
It may be UNC pi**ed off the NCAA and it may be that was a bad idea. I hope so. Time will tell.
