Quote :

"Apparently the original WRAL article posted the tutor's full home address but I saw it after that was removed. She might have some angry UNC people on her doorstep."

yet some of the players who cheated are being cheered for on saturdays....

11/12/2010 12:52:31 PM

dont know if this is old: http://www.news-record.com/content/2010/11/11/article/tar_heel_football_lacks_accountability

the IC discussion on it is just idiotic...

[Edited on November 12, 2010 at 6:19 PM. Reason : x]

11/12/2010 6:16:44 PM

damn, this almost fell off of the first page of ST

things seem to be quieting down a lot over there, what are the chances UNC actually gets out of this with nothing more than a slap on the wrist??

ESPN, as well as the rest of the sports world, is freaking out about this Cam Newton/Auburn/Miss.St situation which is small potatoes compared to the multiple investigations and violations going on in Chapel Hill. It pisses me off that those fuckers arent being destroyed by the media, its actually the complete opposite where commentators and reporters keep acting like UNC is "rising above" all the suspensions and lack of talent on the field. Its not like they arent playing because they are injured, they arent playing because they committed serious violations.

So, with things getting more and more quiet, which option do you think is most likely?

1) Hammer comes down and UNC has to vacate wins, multiple players get kicked off the team and out of school, gets put on probation, loses scholarships and are banned from postseason play for years. Butch Davis and Dick Badour are both fired and UNC's football program is set back 5-10 years

2) NCAA goes easy on them and they lose a few scholarships and are out of bowl games for 1-2 years. Butch and Dick still get fired due to lack of institutional control

3) NCAA decides that self-inflicted suspensions of players is good enough, and they are set off with nothing more than a slap on the wrist. No probation or other sanctions. Butch and Dick keep their jobs and UNC continues to pull in great recruiting classes all while building the program

11/15/2010 1:53:55 PM

3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, starting to think they may publicly commend UNC for their compliance work when this is all said and done.

11/15/2010 1:57:11 PM

Don't know if it was posted here, but the banner they paid for to be towed behind a plane fore the VT game was printed in Red letters. They are pissed over at IC.

11/15/2010 2:05:50 PM

#3

11/15/2010 2:07:43 PM

yea, i doubt they understand the dynamics of flying a bashful blue banner with white letters against the backdrop of a bashful blue sky with white clouds. It would have just looked like a plane flying over kenan.

11/15/2010 2:09:36 PM

If we win on Saturday I hope the State fans chant "Four more years!"

It would go nicely with that banner.

11/15/2010 2:32:48 PM

The Cam Newton thing is the flavor of the month, so of course the media is all over it.

I don't see UNC losing scholarships or being banned from post season play over this. Now that UNC will in all likelihood go 8 - 4 I don't see any firings either. They've already started the can't blame Butch campaign.

They could vacate a few wins, but that would be years down the road and by then it wouldn't have any effect.

I feel like #3 has already happened. Can we hire Blake next?

11/15/2010 2:38:40 PM

We just need to hope the tutor start talking because she is pissed off that she can't go to games for "at least 5 years."

11/15/2010 3:00:49 PM

Quote :

"UNC continues to pull in great recruiting classes all while building the program"

[no]

Their recent great recruiting classes were a result of paying players...are you saying, after this is all said and done, they're still going to be paying blue chip athletes to play football at UNC? I don't buy that shit for a second

You have to figure the rumors going around among blue chip high school football players who expect to get paid are that UNC is in a mess, and will have to clean up their program, and if they want the big money, they need to go to a school thats not in the middle of a huge investigation

11/15/2010 3:03:58 PM

I'm referring to the killer recruiting class they have coming in NEXT YEAR. I cant imagine that they are still paying recruits, so it seems like they are having recruiting success through legal methods. If these investigations dont scare away recruits from this incoming class, the recruits being recruiting while the investigation is actually taking place, then I have a hard time believing subsequent classes/recruits are affected by it as well.

I cannot believe they are on the verge of getting out of blatant academic and benefit-centric investigations and violations, especially with all of the evidence that has come out. I guess all you have to do is claim that you didnt know what was going on, and you can get away with anything

11/15/2010 3:25:58 PM

I just expect a number of their verbal commits from next year's class to sign a LOI with another school before its all said and done...its not like they've gotten a lot of commitments in the last couple months since the investigation began...next year's class still has John Blake's fingerprints all over it, but since he's gone, so is whatever he promised the recruits

11/15/2010 3:29:37 PM

I am absolutely baffled at how nasty their recruiting class is.

[Edited on November 15, 2010 at 3:30 PM. Reason : ^ I hope so]

11/15/2010 3:30:19 PM

Quote :

"its not like they've gotten a lot of commitments in the last couple months since the investigation began"

wat?

They have 3 this month and two this weekend.

11/15/2010 3:47:47 PM

verbals, or did they officially sign with them? i havent been keeping up

11/15/2010 3:55:15 PM

oh. didn't know you were talking about LOI's. they are verbals at this point.

still don't see how you get a kid to commit at a game where the team quit and fans left before the 4th in the middle of a ncaa investigation.

11/15/2010 4:00:10 PM

Butch has done a great job lying his ass off to those kids, they're just hoping that they can get the class signed before the NCAA hands out the penalties.

11/15/2010 4:10:42 PM

They are listed as having the #10 recruiting class coming in next year

this is bullshit.

11/15/2010 4:11:33 PM

I don't see what the point of that would be, they would be able to get out of their commitments if the school goes on probation.

11/15/2010 4:18:56 PM

I thought releases were conditional on the severity of the probation, so depending on what UNC gets they might not have to let kids out of their LOI?

11/15/2010 4:31:43 PM

Nothing can tarnish their image...

11/15/2010 4:48:21 PM

I thought the AD would have to release their LOIs

11/15/2010 4:53:32 PM

What if the AD is released?

11/15/2010 4:57:42 PM

Well played

11/15/2010 5:03:31 PM

Quote :

" UNDER THE RUG "

[Edited on November 15, 2010 at 6:09 PM. Reason : .]

11/15/2010 6:08:49 PM

lol under the baby blue rug

11/15/2010 6:14:42 PM

Quote :

"UNC's Ramsay, McAdoo ruled permanently ineligible, Carolina to appeal Posted: 6 minutes ago University of North Carolina football student-athletes Devon Ramsay and Michael McAdoo have been ruled permanently ineligible by the NCAA. North Carolina will appeal the decision to the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement, an independent panel comprised of representatives from NCAA member colleges, universities and athletic conferences. This committee can reduce or remove the condition. The student-athletes remain ineligible until the conclusion of the appeals process. “While we respect the decision, the facts of the cases simply do not support permanent ineligibility,” says Dick Baddour, North Carolina Director of Athletics. “We will aggressively appeal and are hopeful the reinstatement committee will reach the same conclusion.” A junior from Red Bank, N.J., Ramsay played in the first four games of the 2010 season and had two catches for 15 yards, including a touchdown vs. LSU. He was withheld from competition beginning with the Clemson game on Oct. 9 and has not returned. The NCAA enforcement staff will not require UNC to forfeit the two games in which Ramsay played this year. A junior defensive end from Antioch, Tenn., McAdoo has not played this season. Copyright 2010 by Capitol Broadcasting Company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed."

Already signs of leniency that we are going to see from the NCAA for UNC????


[Edited on November 15, 2010 at 6:33 PM. Reason : ...]

11/15/2010 6:31:38 PM

I guess they mean "forfeit the two games wins"

11/15/2010 6:36:16 PM

interested to hear the rationale for not having to forfeit the 2 wins

some guys on PP are thinking unc will self-impose a bowl ban this year to show their 'compliance.'
could that be why?

[Edited on November 15, 2010 at 6:56 PM. Reason : black helicopters]

11/15/2010 6:53:46 PM

^I'm going to venture a guess that they go with "Did not have a relevant impact on the game" despite evidence to the contrary.

11/15/2010 7:06:20 PM

From my understanding the NCAA wouldn't take the games away unless the academic problem was systematic like it was at FSU. However I can't imagine that tutorgate was enough to rule both of those guys permanently ineligible, they must have lied to the NCAA at some point or done something we don't know about

11/15/2010 8:58:39 PM

i feel like unc is hurting themselves by saying "i think this penalty is too harsh."

11/15/2010 10:06:09 PM

^Naw, they will take them away for just one player. memphis vacated 38 for Derrick Rose.

A while back, U of Hawaii had to vacate a national championship in Men's volleyball because one player was found to have played 20 games (as an amateur) on a professional team in Greece before he went to UH. So it's not just because the NCAA wants to hammer Calipari.

11/15/2010 10:06:56 PM

Quote :

"i feel like hope unc is hurting themselves by saying "i think this penalty is too harsh.""

fixed it for you

11/15/2010 10:07:39 PM

seriously guys. if butch had known... ramsay wouldn't have played in those games. use yall's heads

11/15/2010 10:38:38 PM

ncaa said they can keep their wins eh? sounds like unc players aren't the only ones gettin black diamonds.

11/15/2010 11:41:30 PM

at what point can you delcare them a rival in the sense that they compete with legit players?

at this point, I feel like they are on ecu's or lower level - losing to them feels like playing poker against a guy who has a pair of aces up his sleeve or marked cards.

[Edited on November 16, 2010 at 12:33 AM. Reason : ]

11/16/2010 12:31:55 AM

They are letting them keep the wins because when his eligibility was questioned, they did the right thing and sat him immediately. Unlike Auburn, who will probably have the hammer dropped on them for continuing to play Cam.

11/16/2010 9:05:58 AM

sounds like the NCAA is going to let them off ... had they intended to take away bowl eligibility, then they would not have hesitated to go ahead and forfeit those wins ...

The fact that they did not erase them means they are planning to let UNC play bowl games and have them count.

11/16/2010 9:13:19 AM

The Ramsay decision doesn't have anything to do with what punishment the NCAA will eventually hand down to UNC. The investigation won't end before the season is over so of course UNC is going to be permitted to participate in whatever shitty bowl they end up in, I just hope they opt to play in it and don't get away with declining and using it as serving the first year of their post-season punishment. The question isn't if UNC will get banned from bowls, but for how many years.

11/16/2010 9:33:01 AM

Quote :

"I just hope they opt to play in it and don't get away with declining and using it as serving the first year of their post-season punishment."

This. Letting them even partially slide with some bullshit self-imposed bowl sit-out would go a long way to sending no message whatsoever.

11/16/2010 9:36:46 AM

kind of like letting someone redshirt because they were suspended for a whole season???

11/16/2010 9:50:37 AM

I don't see UNC opting to sit out the post season. What gives anyone this indication? They've protested everything that's handed down from the NCAA so far and they look for every possible loophole to get ineligible players back on the field.

They're going to cash as many checks as they can while they still can.

11/16/2010 9:52:20 AM

^^
that's my other big issue, I can't remember if we know what (if anything) Gupton, Houston, Brown, and I think one more did but if they were guilty of anything it is completely wrong to let them redshirt away their punishment. The only thing I could see being even close to acceptable would be if it was determined that they needed to serve a 1 or 2 game suspension but had already sat out 6, so they get to redshirt this year and serve the 1-2 games at the start of the next season.

[Edited on November 16, 2010 at 9:54 AM. Reason : ]

11/16/2010 9:53:01 AM

Simple solution. Hand down a two season suspension... but we all know they wouldn't do that.

11/16/2010 10:01:04 AM

Quote :

"I don't see UNC opting to sit out the post season. What gives anyone this indication? They've protested everything that's handed down from the NCAA so far and they look for every possible loophole to get ineligible players back on the field."

I think they'll do whatever they calculate will be the shortest and least-damaging to their appearance. Taking a post-season ban this season (if there was any chance that the NCAA would accept that as their punishment) would be a win-win for them. 1) They do the "noble" thing, the NCAA takes no further action, and the public forgets about all this shit by next season; 2) Sitting out a shit bowl game for a single season is a pittance to pay in order to have a shot at much bigger things going forward, given their incoming recruiting class.

11/16/2010 10:15:56 AM

Summary from IC:

16 students affected
* 4 players with agent issues
* 11 players with illegal academic assistance issues
* 1 player with both

1 coach affected
* long-running friendship/business connection with an agent
* 3rd party reports from players at other schools that he lobbied on behalf of the agent

Of the 5 agent issues:
* 1 dismissed from team and declared ineligible
* 2 declared permanently ineligible
* 2 penalized

Of the 12 academic assistance issues
* 2 declared permanently ineligible (pending appeal)
* 3 disallowed from competition for 1 season by honor court
* 3 allowed to compete following honor court dates (could be innocent or considered minor infraction)
* 4 innocent (no honor court dates)

Agent issues
* Dishonesty to NCAA investigators was a mitigating factor in all three permanently ineligible cases. It is likely that had the players admitted the violations up front, they would not have been declared permanently ineligible.

* One of the three players declared ineligible accepted a jewelry gift that was traced to Miami jeweler AJ Machado. Machado specializes in bling for athletes. It is unclear whether Machado is considered by the NCAA to be an agent or a runner to an agent or financial advisor.

* Two players received admission wrist bands to a pool party from Michael Katz, an employee of agent Drew Rosenhaus.

* One player received hotel rooms paid for by Todd Stewart, who is considered by the NCAA to be a prospective agent.

* One player received "minimal benefits" from Chris Hawkins, a former player previously endorsed by UNC. Subsequent to the investigation, Hawkins was declared to be a runner by the NCAA. While he was a central figure in the investigation, his actual wrong doing at UNC seems small, although he was linked to the suspension of Georgia player AJ Green over the sale of a game jersey.

* The two penalized players accepted benefits from a friends/former players Omar Brown, Hakeem Nicks, and Mahlon Carey. From reports, the benefits received were a) car rides to/from the airport b) overnight stays in their houses c) misc entertainment expenses (disneyland tickets). No evidence links these incidents with agents or runners.

* Vernon Davis, a former Maryland player, provided $20 in benefits.

* An unknown man from Miami provided $323 in benefits.

* The grand total impact of the agent-related ineligibility/suspensions in 2010: 46 player-games lost

* The issues involving Coach Blake are difficult to assess, but don't look promising:
- He had a long standing friendship/personal relationship with the agent Gary Wichard.
- He admits to have taken a number of personal loans from Wichard over the years
- He was issued a credit card in Wichard's business name
- A non-UNC player, when questioned by the NCAA, admitted that Blake recommended Wichard to him. This contradicts Blake's own testimony to the NCAA.
- Only one former UNC player has ever signed with Wichard as an agent
- Credit card belonging to Wichard's agency were used on trips the media has linked to one UNC's players.
- Davis, on learning of Blake's relationship with Wichard, expressed surprise and thoroughly threw Blake under the bus

* All of the incriminating evidence against Blake was privileged information that was leaked to press. The only plausible source for the leak was the NCAA itself. This does not excuse any wrong doing on Blake's behalf, but clearly the NCAA is willing to bend the rules to execute whatever agenda they have cooked up.

* When examined as a whole, there is no systematic large scale problem. Rather, there are a number of small incidents which add up to give the impression of a larger problem. However, it should be noted that the number of small incidents could open UNC up to the dreaded "Lack of institutional control" charges.


Academic issues
* The academic issues were unrelated to the agent issues, but were uncovered while the NCAA was questioning the players regarding the agent issues. Clearly, neither the media nor UNC itself has done a good job of keeping the two issues separate. Again, this resulted in the appearance of a larger problem that it was in reality.

* The 2 players declared permanently ineligible received illegal assistance from a tutor while that tutor was on the payroll. It is speculated that dishonesty to NCAA investigators may be a mitigating factor for these two.

* The 3 that were disallowed from competition in 2010 were guilty of an academic infraction.

* The 4 that never went to the honor court were innocent.

* The 3 that were sent to the honor court could either be innocent or guilty only of minor infractions.

* All academic issues were attributable to a single tutor who was an undergraduate student while on the university payroll.

* The tutor's contract was not renewed by the university because it was evident that she was developing personal friendships with the players (a violation of policy).

* The tutor was one of the 3 tutors hired by the Davis family to tutor their son, who was a high school student. While this added fuel to the fire the media ginned up, the connection between Davis and the tutor in question is probably coincidental.

* That tutor's reluctance to assist in the investigation was a factor that caused delays for some of the accused athletes.

11/16/2010 10:20:41 AM

^If that's not LIC, I'd like a detailed and sufficiently-boring powerpoint presentation from the NCAA on what is.

11/16/2010 10:23:19 AM

Quote :

" Summary from IC: 16 students affected * 4 players with agent issues * 11 players with illegal academic assistance issues * 1 player with both "

Quote :

" * The issues involving Coach Blake are difficult to assess, but don't look promising: - He had a long standing friendship/personal relationship with the agent Gary Wichard. - He admits to have taken a number of personal loans from Wichard over the years - He was issued a credit card in Wichard's business name - A non-UNC player, when questioned by the NCAA, admitted that Blake recommended Wichard to him. This contradicts Blake's own testimony to the NCAA. - Only one former UNC player has ever signed with Wichard as an agent - Credit card belonging to Wichard's agency were used on trips the media has linked to one UNC's players. - Davis, on learning of Blake's relationship with Wichard, expressed surprise and thoroughly threw Blake under the bus "

Quote :

"* When examined as a whole, there is no systematic large scale problem. Rather, there are a number of small incidents which add up to give the impression of a larger problem. However, it should be noted that the number of small incidents could open UNC up to the dreaded "Lack of institutional control" charges."

*scratches head*

11/16/2010 10:39:27 AM