One year bowl ban is bullcrap. UNC got off easy.

3/12/2012 2:41:01 PM

A little weak...figured it would be worse.

LOIC is what I was hoping for.

3/12/2012 2:41:17 PM

For as long as this shit show took, these infractions are sort of a joke.

3/12/2012 2:41:30 PM

Quote :

"The penalties in this case include: Public reprimand and censure. Three years of probation from March 12, 2012, through March 11, 2015. Three-year show-cause penalty for the former assistant football coach prohibiting any recruiting activity. The public report contains further details. Postseason ban for the 2012 football season. Reduction of football scholarships by a total of 15 during three academic years. The public report includes further details. Vacation of wins during the 2008 and 2009 seasons (self-imposed by the university). The public report includes further details. $50,000 fine (self-imposed by the university). Disassociation of both the former tutor and former student-athlete who served as an agent runner (self-imposed by the university)."

3/12/2012 2:42:14 PM

ok I guess. should have had at least a 2 year bowl ban

3/12/2012 2:42:23 PM

probably about what i was expecting, of course i was hoping for more.

3/12/2012 2:42:23 PM

these are pretty fair, ban hammer could've come down a lot harder and they could've come down a lot easier

3/12/2012 2:42:35 PM

Meh,

I guess the 15 scholarships for 3 years in a row aint bad

3/12/2012 2:42:45 PM

WEAK.


(regardless of what it was. it was going to be weak unless they blew up the school)

3/12/2012 2:42:45 PM

Quote :

" UNC receives postseason ban, scholarship reductions University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill is responsible for multiple violations, including academic fraud, impermissible agent benefits, ineligible participation and a failure to monitor its football program, according to the decision announced today by the Division I Committee on Infractions. Over the course of three seasons, six football student-athletes competed while ineligible as a result of these violations, and multiple student-athletes received impermissible benefits totaling more than $31,000. Public Infractions Report Read the Public Infractions Report here. While employed by the university, a former assistant football coach was compensated by a sports agent for the access he provided to student-athletes and failed to disclose the income to the university. The former assistant coach and a former tutor both committed unethical conduct and failed to cooperate with the investigation. “This case should serve as a cautionary tale to all institutions to vigilantly monitor the activities of those student-athletes who possess the potential to be top professional prospects,” the committee stated in its report. “It should also serve to warn student-athletes that if they choose to accept benefits from agents or their associates, they risk losing their eligibility for collegiate competition.” Penalties for the case include a one-year postseason ban, reduction of 15 football scholarships, vacation of records and three years probation. The former assistant coach received a three-year show-cause penalty restricting any recruiting activity. The academic fraud violations stemmed from the former tutor constructing significant parts of writing assignments for three football student-athletes. The tutor wrote paragraphs for papers, revised drafts, composed “works-cited” pages, researched and edited content and inserted citations, among other violations. The tutor also provided more than $4,000 in impermissible benefits, including airfare and paying for outstanding parking tickets, to 11 football student-athletes after she graduated and was no longer a university employee. The tutor also refused to cooperate with the investigation. The former assistant football coach was also cited for a failure to cooperate and unethical conduct. According to the committee, not only did he refuse to provide information relevant to the investigation, but he also furnished false and misleading information. At the hearing, in a reversal of his previous refusal to provide information, the former assistant coach expressed a willingness to provide the pertinent records. However, he did not provide the documents for more than three months following the hearing, resulting in a significant delay in bringing this case to conclusion. The former assistant coach also did not report $31,000 in athletically related outside income from a sports agency. According to the committee findings, the former assistant coach was either employed or compensated by the sports agent. It was found that even after returning to college athletics, the former assistant coach continued recruiting clients for the sports agency, including student-athletes he was coaching. The committee also found the university failed to monitor its football program, in part when it allowed a former student-athlete to have regular access to current student-athletes at its athletic facilities without any scrutiny. The former student-athlete was deemed an agent runner during the NCAA investigation. In addition, the university failed to investigate information it obtained suggesting one student-athlete, who accepted the most in impermissible cash and benefits, may have violated NCAA agent rules. This case also included the provision of thousands of dollars in impermissible benefits to multiple student-athletes. Seven football student-athletes accepted more than $27,500 in benefits from various individuals, some of whom triggered NCAA agent rules. These impermissible benefits included cash, flights, meals, lodging, athletic training, admission to clubs and jewelry, among others. While the value of the benefits the student-athletes accepted varied, one student-athlete received more than $13,500 cash and gifts. The university took decisive action after discovering the academic fraud violations and when the former assistant coach’s violations came to light. In addition, the school cooperated fully during the investigation. The penalties in this case include: Public reprimand and censure. Three years of probation from March 12, 2012, through March 11, 2015. Three-year show-cause penalty for the former assistant football coach prohibiting any recruiting activity. The public report contains further details. Postseason ban for the 2012 football season. Reduction of football scholarships by a total of 15 during three academic years. The public report includes further details. Vacation of wins during the 2008 and 2009 seasons (self-imposed by the university). The public report includes further details. $50,000 fine (self-imposed by the university). Disassociation of both the former tutor and former student-athlete who served as an agent runner (self-imposed by the university). The Division I Committee on Infractions is an independent group comprised of representatives across NCAA membership and the public. The members of the committee who reviewed this case include Britton Banowsky, commissioner of Conference USA and chair of the Committee on Infractions. Other members are John S. Black, attorney; Brian P. Halloran, attorney; Roscoe Howard, Jr., attorney; Andrea Myers, athletics director emeritus, Indiana State University; James O’Fallon, law professor and faculty athletics representative for University of Oregon; Gregory Sankey, associate commissioner of the Southeastern Conference; and Rodney Uphoff, law professor for University of Missouri, Columbia."

http://ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/resources/latest+news/2012/march/unc+receives+postseason+ban+scholarship+reductions

3/12/2012 2:42:57 PM

Quote :

"Meh, I guess the 15 scholarships for 3 years in a row aint bad"

I thought that meant 15 over 3 years, thus 5/yr?

3/12/2012 2:43:24 PM

If they don't qualify for a bowl next year does that still count as their ban, or do they have be eligible for it to take effect?

3/12/2012 2:43:45 PM

^^this

3/12/2012 2:44:14 PM

Should've been 2 year bowl ban. That's about my only complaint.

3/12/2012 2:44:29 PM

The way that scholarship reduction is worded makes it sound like its a total of 15 over 3 years.. I hope that isnt the case.

3/12/2012 2:44:32 PM

It's not 15 each year.

3/12/2012 2:45:47 PM

it is.

only 5 a year.

3/12/2012 2:46:33 PM

Quote :

"Should've been 2 year bowl ban. That's about my only complaint."

3/12/2012 2:46:47 PM

after failing to monitor recruiting for years, they skate

butch makes it look easy

3/12/2012 2:47:43 PM

Jesus what a bunch of bullshit. No wonder teams are willing to pull shit like that. Carolina probably won't even make a bowl game next year so that doesn't matter. I agree it should be a guaranteed bowl ban going forward until you make a bowl otherwise it is completely worthless. 5 scholarships a year for 3 years is fucking pussy too. They will just have the track coach or something give 5 guys one and problem solved. FUCK I hate those cheating assholes!

3/12/2012 2:49:47 PM

I just hope they think they can do it again and THEN the hammer gets dropped.

There's no way Fedora is completely clean.

now, i wonder what recruits jump ship, if any.

also wonder when we might get Butch's full phone records.

[Edited on March 12, 2012 at 2:52 PM. Reason : g]

3/12/2012 2:50:07 PM

Eh, not totally pleased, but it could have been much lighter, which is kinda what I was expecting.

Quote :

"There's no way Fedora is completely clean"

what makes you say that?

3/12/2012 2:55:30 PM

One year bowl ban isnt gonna sway anyone to leave I wouldnt imagine. Hell they can just redshirt the year and still have 4 years to play in a bowl. 5 scholarships a year doesnt really hurt that much either. Basically they got away with a slap on the wrist and that is just shameful.

3/12/2012 2:55:36 PM

Recruiting classes contain between 15-25 players each year.

if they lost 15 scholarships per year for 3 years, they would be fucked because it would be impossible to continue competing in the ACC and they might as well drop football to Division 3.

3/12/2012 2:55:37 PM

Quote :

" I thought that meant 15 over 3 years, thus 5/yr? "

Well shit...

3/12/2012 2:55:41 PM

Quote :

"also wonder when we might get Butch's full phone records."

I'd love to know what's in them as well. One of my good friends (and by good friend I mean, he was one of my groomsmen, not some friend of a friend of a friend) works for the same law firm that "consulted" UNC on the matter, and despite my pestering all he would tell me is that it's good for UNC that none of that got released.

my theory is that the odd timing of the firing was to insulate UNC from possibly having to release it.

3/12/2012 2:56:52 PM

Quote :

"Recruiting classes contain between 15-25 players each year. if they lost 15 scholarships per year for 3 years, they would be fucked because it would be impossible to continue competing in the ACC and they might as well drop football to Division 3. "

Which is what they deserve!

3/12/2012 2:56:58 PM

Better than what I thought they would get, which is nothing.

3/12/2012 2:57:56 PM

should have been 20 and 2

20 ships and 2 yr ban

3/12/2012 2:58:13 PM

5 scholarships per year for the next 3 years will hurt, and the fine thing is bullshit, but at least they still had to pay Butch and Blake so it'll at least add to that total.

Only thing I had an issue with was bowl ban. They went to 2 bowls with those players on the team, should've been 2 years they couldn't have been able to qualify for bowls.

3/12/2012 2:58:43 PM

Quote :

"if they lost 15 scholarships per year for 3 years, they would be fucked because it would be impossible to continue competing in the ACC and they might as well drop football to Division 3. "

lol, extreme much?

3/12/2012 2:58:50 PM

sucks that they waited this long and gave them a 1 year bowl ban. Recruits are already signed for next year and it wont matter to this years recruiting class.

3/12/2012 2:59:55 PM

should have been SMU 2 Electric Boogaloo

3/12/2012 3:02:07 PM

A little weak, but I'll take it. Those 15 scholarships will add up...you know, to 15

meh

3/12/2012 3:02:40 PM

yeah, the 2 year bowl ban would have been ideal.

3/12/2012 3:03:34 PM

ugh I can't listen to this conference call

Sounds like NOAA radio

3/12/2012 3:06:21 PM

Quote :

"Jesus what a bunch of bullshit. No wonder teams are willing to pull shit like that. Carolina probably won't even make a bowl game next year so that doesn't matter. I agree it should be a guaranteed bowl ban going forward until you make a bowl otherwise it is completely worthless. 5 scholarships a year for 3 years is fucking pussy too. They will just have the track coach or something give 5 guys one and problem solved. FUCK I hate those cheating assholes!"

how I feel. This is bullshit. I am really mainly disappointed about the bowl ban. Should have been two years. 5 schollys a year isn't that huge of a deal...mainly will help other teams in the area like us, Wake / ECU pick up players that would have gone to UNC.

Over all - this whole thing is gay. Maybe we should cheat our ass off if this is all the penalty we're going to get.

FUCK you UNC

[Edited on March 12, 2012 at 3:07 PM. Reason : g]

3/12/2012 3:07:01 PM

lol they commended UNC for cooperating.

this is a joke.

3/12/2012 3:07:27 PM

Quote :

"How is this fair to the players who did nothing and the incoming freshmen? Players who violated the rules should be the ones facing the consequences, not the entire team. There needs to be an overhaul of the rules anyway."

On the WRAL page.

Also, LOL

Quote :

"Timothy Eric Pittman Unc is okay in football beat nc state twice this year "

[Edited on March 12, 2012 at 3:10 PM. Reason : ]

3/12/2012 3:08:57 PM

cooperating shouldn't be applauded...it should be expected.

3/12/2012 3:10:54 PM

Probably about as much as should be expected. Hoped it'd be about the same but when you look around at other punishments vs. infractions, about what you'd think...

Quote :

"How is this fair to the players who did nothing and the incoming freshmen? Players who violated the rules should be the ones facing the consequences, not the entire team. There needs to be an overhaul of the rules anyway"

I actually agree with this in part. Mainly because of John Calipari and how he pins all his dirtyness on the kids after he skips town.

[Edited on March 12, 2012 at 3:11 PM. Reason : x]

3/12/2012 3:11:08 PM

good question by the greensboro reporter on why they didnt go harder on the school and not the coach/agent.

3/12/2012 3:12:15 PM

so they're not gonna release the 216 records for another 3 years? no sweat

3/12/2012 3:12:21 PM

Quote :

""How is this fair to the players who did nothing and the incoming freshmen? Players who violated the rules should be the ones facing the consequences, not the entire team. There needs to be an overhaul of the rules anyway.""

The freshmen knew what kind of a program they were electing to come into...their fault for committing to UNC. Current players who do not like the repercussions...transfer. /end story.

Fuck UNC

3/12/2012 3:12:27 PM

Sweet, they couldnt play for the conference championship or a bowl. thats nice.

however, still a little weak.

3/12/2012 3:14:11 PM

Quote :

"The freshmen knew what kind of a program they were electing to come into...their fault for committing to UNC. Current players who do not like the repercussions...transfer. /end story."

Yep, no one is forcing anyone to stay at UNC. They can leave if they want to. Punish the program, and the future staff will keep it from happening again.

3/12/2012 3:15:30 PM

Tutor was paid off

3/12/2012 3:23:08 PM

tutor didnt cooperate.

WTF

BRING THE HAMMER

UNC paid off everyone involved, its obvious now. Theres WAY more to this than what the NCAA has found...they just couldn't get all the evidence.

obviously the NCAA is actually powerless to law.

[Edited on March 12, 2012 at 3:24 PM. Reason : p]

3/12/2012 3:23:24 PM

Quote :

"OK, here to take my beating like a real man. Come on you Red and Blue Ragers have at it. I know you want a peice of Smitty. Watch out, I do bite back. Well, I was expecting the 3 year probation, 3-4 schollys per year. 15 schollys, a little harsh as it hurts the 2* players, not the 3 and 4 star players. Heels will find a way around that one AKA "disadvantaged culture hardship" schollys or something like that. So we end up with a few more "walk ons". The bowl ban? I'm like Jbrd on that one. I predicted none so got that one wrong too. Did not see the value as recruits do not go to a college because they can play in a bowl game unless it's BCS, they go where they will improve and will enjoy their college experience. Since all the recruits are signed we are set so the 2012 ban does not hurt our recruiting. If this had come out before signing day then it might have. We will be back in the bowl picture for 2013 and depending on how Fedora does 1st season, that will be the key to getting great recruits 2013 and on. OK I'm done. Feeling pretty good it's over and take the smackdown and get back up more determined than ever. Great coach, great AD, NC in Basketball this year, Foxy will probably have us back at the CWS, we will win the Capital One Cup, and also the other award which name escapes me. Whoot!!! Go Tar Heels!!! #Heelblood!!! #Ramsblood!!! Eat NCAA sanctions for breakfast, pass them out the back just before bed. Oh, BTW, you Wolfpups make sure the name on that check from your bowl appearance this year is spelled TAR HEELS. Yeeeeeeeehhaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!"

3/12/2012 3:28:10 PM

^I'm not sure on his understanding of the rules there, but if a team truly gets to share in conference bowl money while being banned from bowl play I would be surprised.

3/12/2012 3:32:44 PM