re: UNC Admits Academic Fraud: Lack Of Institutional Controls, *NCAA Issues 3rd NOA

quote:

---

Have not been paying attention but guessing UNCheats is not getting hammered.

---

quote:

---

On Monday, UNC-Chapel Hill will produce a written response to the five major allegations the NCAA’s enforcement division filed in its investigation of the long-running academic-athletic scandal. It’s not expected to be made public for several more days.

Like all NCAA investigations, it is a case that is being conducted behind closed doors. But UNC’s response to charges surrounding the system of classes advertised as lectures that never met and provided good grades should shed more light on how the NCAA views the case and how UNC is defending itself.

Here are six things to look for in UNC’s response:

---

quote:

---

1. How is UNC describing the fake classes to the NCAA?

UNC has described the classes in various reports as “anomalous,” “aberrant” or “irregular,” but not “fraudulent.” This is important because the NCAA has a bylaw that bars anyone at a university from arranging “fraudulent” academic credit.

---

quote:

---

2. Will UNC again contend that all students had equal access to the classes?

NCAA officials initially balked at investigating the scandal, saying it was unclear if the classes were largely created to help athletes stay eligible. The NCAA jumped in as Kenneth Wainstein’s investigation began showing close connections between Crowder and the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes. The NCAA told UNC in the notice that athletes had “increased exposure” to the classes, which helped trigger the charge of lack of institutional control.

---

quote:

---

3. Who will UNC identify as guilty parties, and how were those people handled?

The NCAA has asked UNC to report any punitive actions, and any disciplinary actions against former or current athletics staff.

---

quote:

---

4. How does UNC respond to exhibits in the notice that cast men’s basketball and football in a bad light?

One is an email exchange between Crowder and the former counselor for men’s basketball, Wayne Walden, in which he’s seeking a safe class for an athlete with learning disabilities. The other is a PowerPoint presentation for football coaches that warns them of the loss of Crowder’s classes. Both were unearthed in Wainstein’s investigation, and are now being used to support the allegations of failure to monitor and lack of institutional control.

---

quote:

---

5. Will UNC offer any help to Jan Boxill?
(nope, she's the sacrificial ram)

---

quote:

---

6) Will there be signs of a settlement?

This is the second notice of allegations the NCAA sent to UNC in the case, and it appears more lenient than the first. The second notice dropped a specific mention of football and men’s basketball – the two sports that had the highest use of the fake classes – and limited its reach regarding the classes to a six-year-period that begins in the fall of 2005.

UNC could accept the findings and negotiate penalties that the NCAA’s Committee on Infractions might agree to without conducting a hearing, a process known as a summary disposition. Boxill would also have to consent to the process.

In 2011, UNC accepted the NCAA’s findings with the football program and offered to self impose penalties, but the case did not go to a summary disposition. The committee came down harder than what UNC had hoped, adding a one-year bowl ban to the fine, loss of scholarships, probation and vacated victories that UNC had proposed.

---