North Carolina Scandal Etc

[jarms24]

This article will leave a mark!

 

[jarms24]

Same article also says the fake classes are the impermissible benefits. Same thing i tried to tell Bob.

The NCAA is investigating the fake classes, but in a notice of allegations it sent to UNC in May it did not cite them as evidence of academic fraud. The NCAA instead is calling them impermissible benefits.

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

Same article also says the fake classes are the impermissible benefits. Same thing i tried to tell Bob.

The NCAA is investigating the fake classes, but in a notice of allegations it sent to UNC in May it did not cite them as evidence of academic fraud. The NCAA instead is calling them impermissible benefits.

Well then, this is quite embarrassing for Kane. Irregular classes != impermissible benefits. Maybe you should shoot him a quick email telling him to re-read his article.

 

[Xception]

In the article you'll find this gem

“While you’ll find references to past events or actions ... Carolina has acknowledged and accepted responsibility for the past and has committed to meaningful, long-term reforms that strike the right balance between academics and athletics,” he said.

Because reforms is how you accept responsibility , not sanctions which teaches you nothing .

 

[uky8unc5]

If Dan Kane's car blows up one day, would anyone be surprised? He's my hero....

 

[kybassfan]

In the article you'll find this gem

“While you’ll find references to past events or actions ... Carolina has acknowledged and accepted responsibility for the past and has committed to meaningful, long-term reforms that strike the right balance between academics and athletics,” he said.

Because reforms is how you accept responsibility , not sanctions which teaches you nothing .

I'm guessing that NC would have told us they had the right balance before their academic treachery was exposed.

Fox guarding hen house.

 

[Bkocats]

well, I'm with those who believe unc** will skate.

I also still think Bobby is Petjurino's alter ego

 

[jarms24]

Well then, this is quite embarrassing for Kane. Irregular classes != impermissible benefits. Maybe you should shoot him a quick email telling him to re-read his article.

Fake classes, and I WAS RIGHT!

 

[MNantz]

Bobby

Why don't you give it , you really starting to look even dumber than ever , if that's possible !! Can you really make the deans list and make all A's and never go to a single class, or turn in an assignment ? Wow UNCheat has a express lane , either that or they are a bunch of cheating SOB's and I think we all know the answer to that !! How does it feel to be the school known for the biggest cheating scandal of all time ? I know I Know that's "the Carolina Way "

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

Fake classes, and I WAS RIGHT!

I disagree. If you're talking about allegation #1 maybe we should actually look at it:

It is alleged that beginning in the 2002 fall semester and continuing through the 2011 summer semester, the institution provided impermissible benefits to student-athletes that were not generally available to the student body.

Are you saying that the NCAA is saying those classes were not available to the entire student body?

Let's look at the reasoning the NCAA provided for this allegation:

Athletics academic counselors in the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes (ASPSA) leveraged their relationships with faculty and staff members in the African and Afro-American Studies (AFRI/AFAM) department to obtain and/or provide special arrangements to student-athletes that were not generally available to the student body. The special arrangements athletics academic counselors provided to student-athletes constituted impermissible extra benefits and included, but were not limited to, requesting certain course offerings within the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, contacting individuals within the AFRI/AFAM department to register student-athletes in courses, obtaining assignments for classes taught in the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, suggesting assignments to the AFRI/AFAM department for student-athletes to complete, turning in papers on behalf of student-athletes and recommending grades.

Where does it say the courses were impermissible benefits? We can clearly see what the NCAA is calling an impermissible benefit but what we don't see is them say that the classes themselves were impermissible benefits.

But, as I've said all along, the great thing is that we'll see who's actually been correct about this.

 

[wromanp7]

I disagree. If you're talking about allegation #1 maybe we should actually look at it:

It is alleged that beginning in the 2002 fall semester and continuing through the 2011 summer semester, the institution provided impermissible benefits to student-athletes that were not generally available to the student body.

Are you saying that the NCAA is saying those classes were not available to the entire student body?

Let's look at the reasoning the NCAA provided for this allegation:

Athletics academic counselors in the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes (ASPSA) leveraged their relationships with faculty and staff members in the African and Afro-American Studies (AFRI/AFAM) department to obtain and/or provide special arrangements to student-athletes that were not generally available to the student body. The special arrangements athletics academic counselors provided to student-athletes constituted impermissible extra benefits and included, but were not limited to, requesting certain course offerings within the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, contacting individuals within the AFRI/AFAM department to register student-athletes in courses, obtaining assignments for classes taught in the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, suggesting assignments to the AFRI/AFAM department for student-athletes to complete, turning in papers on behalf of student-athletes and recommending grades.

Where does it say the courses were impermissible benefits? We can clearly see what the NCAA is calling an impermissible benefit but what we don't see is them say that the classes themselves were impermissible benefits.

But, as I've said all along, the great thing is that we'll see who's actually been correct about this.

Cheater

 

[Spanish Radio]

I disagree. If you're talking about allegation #1 maybe we should actually look at it:

It is alleged that beginning in the 2002 fall semester and continuing through the 2011 summer semester, the institution provided impermissible benefits to student-athletes that were not generally available to the student body.

Are you saying that the NCAA is saying those classes were not available to the entire student body?

Let's look at the reasoning the NCAA provided for this allegation:

Athletics academic counselors in the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes (ASPSA) leveraged their relationships with faculty and staff members in the African and Afro-American Studies (AFRI/AFAM) department to obtain and/or provide special arrangements to student-athletes that were not generally available to the student body. The special arrangements athletics academic counselors provided to student-athletes constituted impermissible extra benefits and included, but were not limited to, requesting certain course offerings within the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, contacting individuals within the AFRI/AFAM department to register student-athletes in courses, obtaining assignments for classes taught in the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, suggesting assignments to the AFRI/AFAM department for student-athletes to complete, turning in papers on behalf of student-athletes and recommending grades.

Where does it say the courses were impermissible benefits? We can clearly see what the NCAA is calling an impermissible benefit but what we don't see is them say that the classes themselves were impermissible benefits.

But, as I've said all along, the great thing is that we'll see who's actually been correct about this.

Self delusion.

 

[kybassfan]

Well then, this is quite embarrassing for Kane. Irregular classes != impermissible benefits. Maybe you should shoot him a quick email telling him to re-read his article.

Cat fans, take note. This is what a post from a pathetic, beaten, desperate and hopeless fan of the cheating academic cesspool, North Carolina, looks like. It's last hope is redefining the language to cover the relentless pattern of deception and cheating for nearly two decades. Trying to tell us that words don't mean what we know they mean but only where North Carolina. Yes, Bobbi Perv, those faux classes were impermissible benefits. What sort of character does it take to lie for them, Bobbi? Are you just lying to us or are lying to yourself too?

Ultimately, NCAA basketball will benefit from the unprecedented acts of this vile institution. If the NCAA crushes the cheats of North Carolina, then justice is done. If not, then the NCAA's credibility is lost and they are done. Either way, basketball will benefit. And Bobbi will cry. Only he and the other corrupt fans of that slime pit will continue to count those unearned wins and championships. Those are already gone as a result of broken rules and cover ups. Nobody with any love for the sport or with any ethics will count them.

Clearly North Carolina has fallen from blue blood status. I'm wondering whether they even measure up as a mid-major. Bobbi is like one of those old stranded soldiers on a deserted island in the Pacific. Bobbi, the war is over. You guys lost everything.

 

[UKnCincy_rivals]

In the article you'll find this gem

“While you’ll find references to past events or actions ... Carolina has acknowledged and accepted responsibility for the past and has committed to meaningful, long-term reforms that strike the right balance between academics and athletics,” he said.

Because reforms is how you accept responsibility , not sanctions which teaches you nothing .

It reminds me of my friend's kid. He got caught doing something he wasn't supposed to be doing. When threatened with losing his toy, his response was an impassioned plea about how he would never do it again and offering assurances of that. In his mind, those assurances absolved him of the consequences.

Speaks highly of the moral development of UNC leadership.

 

[kybassfan]

I disagree. If you're talking about allegation #1 maybe we should actually look at it:

It is alleged that beginning in the 2002 fall semester and continuing through the 2011 summer semester, the institution provided impermissible benefits to student-athletes that were not generally available to the student body.

Are you saying that the NCAA is saying those classes were not available to the entire student body?

Let's look at the reasoning the NCAA provided for this allegation:

Athletics academic counselors in the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes (ASPSA) leveraged their relationships with faculty and staff members in the African and Afro-American Studies (AFRI/AFAM) department to obtain and/or provide special arrangements to student-athletes that were not generally available to the student body. The special arrangements athletics academic counselors provided to student-athletes constituted impermissible extra benefits and included, but were not limited to, requesting certain course offerings within the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, contacting individuals within the AFRI/AFAM department to register student-athletes in courses, obtaining assignments for classes taught in the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, suggesting assignments to the AFRI/AFAM department for student-athletes to complete, turning in papers on behalf of student-athletes and recommending grades.

Where does it say the courses were impermissible benefits? We can clearly see what the NCAA is calling an impermissible benefit but what we don't see is them say that the classes themselves were impermissible benefits.

But, as I've said all along, the great thing is that we'll see who's actually been correct about this.

Time for you to go home Bobbi. Nobody with any credibility debates the scum North Carolina's guilt. They cheated. They are now academic sleeze. They have used ineligible players. They are guilty of lack of institutional control. Essentially, you're just a wart on the NCAA's *** now.

The only question is whether the NCAA will have the rotten growth removed or make us all continue to sit on you each time we have to take the court with teams from that pit you support.

The only purpose you now serve is providing repeated opportunities to stress what a cheating slime pit that North Carolina is. 18 years that pathetic institution cheated us, fielded ineligible teams and deceived the media and the public. Nearly every day we get to use your deceptive and out of context posts to make these points yet again for 1000's to read.

 

[Lumpy 2]

Bobby has made the argument that nobody at UNC has admitted they committed academic fraud. The email from Thorp said "We exposed this academic fraud and we are fixing it." Another one of Bobby's claims up in smoke.

 

[jarms24]

I disagree. If you're talking about allegation #1 maybe we should actually look at it:

It is alleged that beginning in the 2002 fall semester and continuing through the 2011 summer semester, the institution provided impermissible benefits to student-athletes that were not generally available to the student body.

Are you saying that the NCAA is saying those classes were not available to the entire student body?

Let's look at the reasoning the NCAA provided for this allegation:

Athletics academic counselors in the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes (ASPSA) leveraged their relationships with faculty and staff members in the African and Afro-American Studies (AFRI/AFAM) department to obtain and/or provide special arrangements to student-athletes that were not generally available to the student body. The special arrangements athletics academic counselors provided to student-athletes constituted impermissible extra benefits and included, but were not limited to, requesting certain course offerings within the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, contacting individuals within the AFRI/AFAM department to register student-athletes in courses, obtaining assignments for classes taught in the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, suggesting assignments to the AFRI/AFAM department for student-athletes to complete, turning in papers on behalf of student-athletes and recommending grades.

Where does it say the courses were impermissible benefits? We can clearly see what the NCAA is calling an impermissible benefit but what we don't see is them say that the classes themselves were impermissible benefits.

But, as I've said all along, the great thing is that we'll see who's actually been correct about this.

Well, you quoted the NOA where it specifically said they weren't "generally available to the student body" so, yeah, they obviously weren't. Sounds like your argument is with the NCAA and how they structured the NOA.

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

Well, you quoted the NOA where it specifically said they weren't "generally available to the student body" so, yeah, they obviously weren't. Sounds like your argument is with the NCAA and how they structured the NOA.

No, I have no problem with how the NCAA structured the NOA. I think you're reading something that isn't there. They never call the irregular classes impermissible benefits. I used that statement as part of the reasoning why they were not considered impermissible benefits...before I pasted the actual NOA. Those classes were available to all students, we all know this. However, the NOA specifically mentions benefits not available to all students. Hence, a contradiction...if you assume the courses are considered IB. But, even if you ignore that, you can't ignore the actual NOA, which is posted up above. Either way, irregular classes != impermissible benefits.

Once again, we can argue about this until we're both sick. But, luckily for one of us, we'll know the answers soon. We'll see if those players were ineligible and whether the irregular classes were IB. I can try to explain it to you, you'll say I'm being dumb or stupid, and so on...but no arguing once the COI rules...unless you or I want to whine about how unfair their ruling was (however, even then, you/I will have to acknowledge the facts and who was wrong and who's been right this whole time). Until then...carry on with the spread of irrelevant facts and incorrect statements, I'll try to respond when I have time.

 

[preacherfan]

Bobby has made the argument that nobody at UNC has admitted they committed academic fraud. The email from Thorp said "We exposed this academic fraud and we are fixing it." Another one of Bobby's claims up in smoke.

Man, o man, does this keep getting better and better! Where is Bobby to tell us that NOBODY had referred to the scandal as academic fraud except for rival fans and some biased media members?

I love the fact that Bethel is trying to defend the academic support counselors by saying that they were too stupid to know that Crowder wasn't a TA! [laughing] I guess complete incompetence for Bethel is preferable to cheating!

And, this latest revelation is beyond belief:

Six years ago, the head of the tutoring program for athletes at UNC-Chapel Hill paved the way for a valued employee to have her retirement party at a spacious, climate-controlled luxury box in Kenan Stadium. He persuaded the athletic department to waive a $1,000 rental fee and offered to pay the $575 tab for wait service and cleanup.

But that employee did not work for the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes, then run by Robert Mercer.

She was Deborah Crowder, the longtime clerical employee at the Department of African and Afro-American Studies who had been providing athletes fake classes for high grades for the previous 16 years.

 

[OldRed]

If you want a good laugh read Boxill's paper on the importance of "sport" where she talks about sport reflecting society as a whole and its display of morally heroic virtues. I guess cheating on the education part was UNC******'s contribution that allowed that display of morality. She talks about "rules decency and fair play", What a hypocrite.

Read the last paragraph on this page. It pretty much describes why so many are outraged at UNC***. Interesting that it was written by Boxill. "Sport may be the moral opium of the people", Indeed, Jan, indeed.

 

[preacherfan]

Man, o man, does this keep getting better and better! Where is Bobby to tell us that NOBODY had referred to the scandal as academic fraud except for rival fans and some biased media members?

I love the fact that Bethel is trying to defend the academic support counselors by saying that they were too stupid to know that Crowder wasn't a TA! [laughing] I guess complete incompetence for Bethel is preferable to cheating!

And, this latest revelation is beyond belief:

Six years ago, the head of the tutoring program for athletes at UNC-Chapel Hill paved the way for a valued employee to have her retirement party at a spacious, climate-controlled luxury box in Kenan Stadium. He persuaded the athletic department to waive a $1,000 rental fee and offered to pay the $575 tab for wait service and cleanup.

But that employee did not work for the Academic Support Program for Student-Athletes, then run by Robert Mercer.

She was Deborah Crowder, the longtime clerical employee at the Department of African and Afro-American Studies who had been providing athletes fake classes for high grades for the previous 16 years.

What is funny is that there is a meltdown over at Inside Carolina because of the phrase, "climate-controlled luxury box!! They are screaming and crying that the N&O is using that kind of language to pick on them! [roll] I just keep on laughing!

 

[Lumpy 2]

No, I have no problem with how the NCAA structured the NOA. I think you're reading something that isn't there. They never call the irregular classes impermissible benefits. I used that statement as part of the reasoning why they were not considered impermissible benefits...before I pasted the actual NOA. Those classes were available to all students, we all know this. However, the NOA specifically mentions benefits not available to all students. Hence, a contradiction...if you assume the courses are considered IB. But, even if you ignore that, you can't ignore the actual NOA, which is posted up above. Either way, irregular classes != impermissible benefits.

Once again, we can argue about this until we're both sick. But, luckily for one of us, we'll know the answers soon. We'll see if those players were ineligible and whether the irregular classes were IB. I can try to explain it to you, you'll say I'm being dumb or stupid, and so on...but no arguing once the COI rules...unless you or I want to whine about how unfair their ruling was (however, even then, you/I will have to acknowledge the facts and who was wrong and who's been right this whole time). Until then...carry on with the spread of irrelevant facts and incorrect statements, I'll try to respond when I have time.

You keep talking about irregular classes. The NOA says they were anomalous classes designated as lecture courses taught as independent study courses with little, if any attendance requirements, minimal to no faculty interaction, lax paper writing standards and artificially high grades. In some instances, athletics academics counselors within ASPSA made special arrangements and used these courses to help ensure the eligibility of academically at-risk student-athletes.

So what the NOA is accusing UNC of is setting up fake lecture classes for athletes who had already reached their limits for independent study credits, giving them grades they didn't earn and making special arrangements to help athletes maintain eligibility. This, along with Thorp's email makes it pretty clear that UNC cheated to keep players eligible and any games won while using ineligible players should be forfeited.

 

[Xception]

Is robbing a bank an irregular withdrawal?

 

[preacherfan]

If you want a good laugh read Boxill's paper on the importance of "sport" where she talks about sport reflecting society as a whole and its display of morally heroic virtues. I guess cheating on the education part was UNC******'s contribution that allowed that display of morality. She talks about "rules decency and fair play", What a hypocrite.

We need to do our OWN movie about the UNC scandal. Let's see....key figures for the movie:

Deb Crowder - Maybe we can use a revival of the "Lucy" character from "I Love Lucy."

Academic Support Staff - Could be played by the preppies in "Revenge of the Nerds."

Jan Boxill - Best played by Jack Nicholson as in "A Few Good Men."

Roy Willaims - Probably should be played by Dustin Hoffman in a similar role as "Rainman" so that he can capture how clueless he is to not know that his players weren't going to class and getting A's.

Bradley Bethel - we need a lapdog to play the part. The lapdog runs around peeing on the "evidence" in an attempt to cover it up.

 

[kybassfan]

We need to do our OWN movie about the UNC scandal. Let's see....key figures for the movie:

Deb Crowder - Maybe we can use a revival of the "Lucy" character from "I Love Lucy."

Academic Support Staff - Could be played by the preppies in "Revenge of the Nerds."

Jan Boxill - Best played by Jack Nicholson as in "A Few Good Men."

Roy Willaims - Probably should be played by Dustin Hoffman in a similar role as "Rainman" so that he can capture how clueless he is to not know that his players weren't going to class and getting A's.

Bradley Bethel - we need a lapdog to play the part. The lapdog runs around peeing on the "evidence" in an attempt to cover it up.

For Roy, I think your gonna need Larry the Cable Guy. He's the only one I know that could eat all those moon pies.

For Bethel, maybe Pee Wee Herman. I'm thinking he could handle the Bobbi role too. If you want to want to cast Bobbi differently, then perhaps Iris Behr. She's the gal that played Amy Butlin on Larry's Health Inspector movie. She was good at quoting stupid regulations that had nothing to do with anything.

Maybe could cut tape and dub in the Keystone Cops as the NCAA Infractions committee. If something more contemporary was needed, then those guys that played Dumb and Dumber would be a decent fit.

 

[preacherfan]

For Roy, I think your gonna need Larry the Cable Guy. He's the only one I know that could eat all those moon pies.

For Bethel, maybe Pee Wee Herman. I'm thinking he could handle the Bobbi role too. If you want to want to cast Bobbi differently, then perhaps Iris Behr. She's the gal that played Amy Butlin on Larry's Health Inspector movie. She was good at quoting stupid regulations that had nothing to do with anything.

Maybe could cut tape and dub in the Keystone Cops as the NCAA Infractions committee. If something more contemporary was needed, then those guys that played Dumb and Dumber would be a decent fit.

Pee Wee Herman would make an EXCELLENT Bethel!!!!! Behr would be good for bobby and I love Dumb and Dumber guys for Emmert and company.

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

You keep talking about irregular classes. The NOA says they were anomalous classes designated as lecture courses taught as independent study courses with little, if any attendance requirements, minimal to no faculty interaction, lax paper writing standards and artificially high grades. In some instances, athletics academics counselors within ASPSA made special arrangements and used these courses to help ensure the eligibility of academically at-risk student-athletes.

So what the NOA is accusing UNC of is setting up fake lecture classes for athletes who had already reached their limits for independent study credits, giving them grades they didn't earn and making special arrangements to help athletes maintain eligibility. This, along with Thorp's email makes it pretty clear that UNC cheated to keep players eligible and any games won while using ineligible players should be forfeited.

Actually no, that is NOT what they're saying in the NOA. They're saying the academic support staff used "special arrangements" to ensure athletes made it into some of the irregular courses and that these "special arrangements" were not available to regular students. No where do they say they created the courses for athletes (in fact Wainstein concluded this was NOT the case) and no where do they say they consider the courses as IB. Now, I'm sure UNC will argue that giving athletes the first pick of courses is not an IB and that it goes on at all universities, but we'll see how the NCAA feels about that.

This is just the facts people. I'm not doing anything crazy here, I'm just quoting the NOA. Gotta run, thanks for the chat. I'll be back later to respond if needed.

 

[OldRed]

Actually no, that is NOT what they're saying in the NOA. They're saying the academic support staff used "special arrangements" to ensure athletes made it into some of the irregular courses and that these "special arrangements" were not available to regular students. No where do they say they created the courses for athletes (in fact Wainstein concluded this was NOT the case) and no where do they say they consider the courses as IB. Now, I'm sure UNC will argue that giving athletes the first pick of courses is not an IB and that it goes on at all universities, but we'll see how the NCAA feels about that.

This is just the facts people. I'm not doing anything crazy here, I'm just quoting the NOA. Gotta run, thanks for the chat. I'll be back later to respond if needed.

Actually, Cheating BobbyG, that is exactly what the NCAA was talking about in B.1.a of the NOA. I understand that a paragraph break is a difficult thing for you to comprehend being of such limited mental capacity. Work with me now. Read that first paragraph again in B.1.a (talks about the "special arrangements") and then keep reading all the way into the second paragraph of B.1.a. Even you will be able to see "anomalous classes" if you try hard enough.

I am certain you will misread this and misquote or misdirect since that is all you have left. I've never met a less honest poster. You represent UNC**** perfectly. Deceit, arrogance, tunnel vision. You got it all.

Anyone else that wants a good laugh at BobbyG's expense can read the NOA here and then laugh at how BobbyB strains a gnat and swallows the camel.

 

[UKnCincy_rivals]

No, I have no problem with how the NCAA structured the NOA. I think you're reading something that isn't there. They never call the irregular classes impermissible benefits. I used that statement as part of the reasoning why they were not considered impermissible benefits...before I pasted the actual NOA. Those classes were available to all students, we all know this. However, the NOA specifically mentions benefits not available to all students. Hence, a contradiction...if you assume the courses are considered IB. But, even if you ignore that, you can't ignore the actual NOA, which is posted up above. Either way, irregular classes != impermissible benefits.

Once again, we can argue about this until we're both sick. But, luckily for one of us, we'll know the answers soon. We'll see if those players were ineligible and whether the irregular classes were IB. I can try to explain it to you, you'll say I'm being dumb or stupid, and so on...but no arguing once the COI rules...unless you or I want to whine about how unfair their ruling was (however, even then, you/I will have to acknowledge the facts and who was wrong and who's been right this whole time). Until then...carry on with the spread of irrelevant facts and incorrect statements, I'll try to respond when I have time.

When the NCAA accused the athletics academic counselors of "...requesting certain course offerings within the AFRI/AFAM department...", what do you think they meant by this?

 

[Lumpy 2]

Actually no, that is NOT what they're saying in the NOA. They're saying the academic support staff used "special arrangements" to ensure athletes made it into some of the irregular courses and that these "special arrangements" were not available to regular students. No where do they say they created the courses for athletes (in fact Wainstein concluded this was NOT the case) and no where do they say they consider the courses as IB. Now, I'm sure UNC will argue that giving athletes the first pick of courses is not an IB and that it goes on at all universities, but we'll see how the NCAA feels about that.

This is just the facts people. I'm not doing anything crazy here, I'm just quoting the NOA. Gotta run, thanks for the chat. I'll be back later to respond if needed.

"In some instances, athletics academics counselors within ASPSA made special arrangements and used these courses to help ensure the eligibility of academically at-risk student-athletes." This quote came directly from the NOA. So yes, the NOA is accusing UNC of using fake classes to keep athletes eligible. Even someone with an Eastern European education should be able to understand that.

 

[BobbyG_tickle_swerv]

Not sure why this is so hard, but, the courses are not part of the IB. THE "SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS" ARE THE IBs. Requesting courses for athletes are the IBs. The courses were not part of the IBs. Many of you have quoted the NOA enough, so it's not like you all are ignoring it, so I don't know how else to explain it. No where in the NOA do they mention the courses as being IB. However, they do mention IBs. What are the IBs that are mentioned? Please, stop saying...well even though they don't say this that is really what they mean. What does the NOA say? It says:

The special arrangements athletics academic counselors provided to student-athletes constituted impermissible extra benefits and included, but were not limited to, requesting certain course offerings within the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, contacting individuals within the AFRI/AFAM department to register student-athletes in courses, obtaining assignments for classes taught in the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, suggesting assignments to the AFRI/AFAM department for student-athletes to complete, turning in papers on behalf of student-athletes and recommending grades.

I know you all love to mention the next paragraph, so I'll do it here:

Certain AFRI/AFAM courses were anomalous because they were designated as lecture courses but were taught as independent study courses with little, if any, attendance requirements, minimal to no faculty interaction, lax paper writing standards and artificially high final grades. In some instances, athletics academic counselors within ASPSA made special arrangements and used these courses to help ensure the eligibility of academically at-risk student-athletes. The high level of involvement by athletics academic counselors in the administration of these anomalous AFRI/AFAM courses relieved student-athletes of the academic responsibilities of a general student.

Now, do me a favor, read the first paragraph and then the second. In the first they mention the IBs, in the second they don't. They simply add a paragraph about the courses being irregular. Do they ever once claim those courses are IBs? I'm not even sure why I keep trying to explain this, as no one here will listen. I guess the best thing to do is to wait until the COI rules, then we can see without any doubt who was right and who was wrong. Until then...

 

[kyjeff1]

Actually, Cheating BobbyG, that is exactly what the NCAA was talking about in B.1.a of the NOA. I understand that a paragraph break is a difficult thing for you to comprehend being of such limited mental capacity. Work with me now. Read that first paragraph again in B.1.a (talks about the "special arrangements") and then keep reading all the way into the second paragraph of B.1.a. Even you will be able to see "anomalous classes" if you try hard enough.

I am certain you will misread this and misquote or misdirect since that is all you have left. I've never met a less honest poster. You represent UNC**** perfectly. Deceit, arrogance, tunnel vision. You got it all.

Anyone else that wants a good laugh at BobbyG's expense can read the NOA here and then laugh at how BobbyB strains a gnat and swallows the camel.

Yup, it specifically says "impermissible benefits" and lack of institutional control right there on page 6. I haven't had the chance to read but a few pages but so far everything I've read would have me really worried if I was a UNC fan.

 

[OldRed]

Not sure why this is so hard, but, the courses are not part of the IB. THE "SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS" ARE THE IBs. Requesting courses for athletes are the IBs. The courses were not part of the IBs. Many of you have quoted the NOA enough, so it's not like you all are ignoring it, so I don't know how else to explain it. No where in the NOA do they mention the courses as being IB. However, they do mention IBs. What are the IBs that are mentioned? Please, stop saying...well even though they don't say this that is really what they mean. What does the NOA say? It says:

The special arrangements athletics academic counselors provided to student-athletes constituted impermissible extra benefits and included, but were not limited to, requesting certain course offerings within the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, contacting individuals within the AFRI/AFAM department to register student-athletes in courses, obtaining assignments for classes taught in the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, suggesting assignments to the AFRI/AFAM department for student-athletes to complete, turning in papers on behalf of student-athletes and recommending grades.

I know you all love to mention the next paragraph, so I'll do it here:

Certain AFRI/AFAM courses were anomalous because they were designated as lecture courses but were taught as independent study courses with little, if any, attendance requirements, minimal to no faculty interaction, lax paper writing standards and artificially high final grades. In some instances, athletics academic counselors within ASPSA made special arrangements and used these courses to help ensure the eligibility of academically at-risk student-athletes. The high level of involvement by athletics academic counselors in the administration of these anomalous AFRI/AFAM courses relieved student-athletes of the academic responsibilities of a general student.

Now, do me a favor, read the first paragraph and then the second. In the first they mention the IBs, in the second they don't. They simply add a paragraph about the courses being irregular. Do they ever once claim those courses are IBs? I'm not even sure why I keep trying to explain this, as no one here will listen. I guess the best thing to do is to wait until the COI rules, then we can see without any doubt who was right and who was wrong. Until then...

You are intentionally being dense. You can't be that stupid and be able to get on the internet. UNC***** and you deserve maximum punishment. You are intentionally misreading "In some instances". How can an honest person claim that those aren't the impermissible benefits in the first paragraph? The answer is an honest person can't but you can. This is because you are not honest and you love your cheating university too much to see the truth. UNC****** is a cheating school to its core and you are a jerk to your core.

 

[bigbluelou]

Bobby, you've got more spin than a laundromat after a Southern Baptist chili supper. Wow.

 

[mapcatfan_rivals31344]

The special arrangements athletics academic counselors provided to student-athletes constituted impermissible extra benefits and included, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, requesting certain course offerings within the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, contacting individuals within the AFRI/AFAM department to register student-athletes in courses, obtaining assignments for classes taught in the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, suggesting assignments to the AFRI/AFAM department for student-athletes to complete, turning in papers on behalf of student-athletes and recommending grades.

So you want to point out every technicality in every phrase? Then you have to do so in every instance. Even if your take is correct, the bold type phrase in all caps "technically" suggests there are more irregular benefits, does it not?

But good grief, even at that, "turning in papers on behalf of student-athletes and recommending grades" isn't enough for you to think these student-athletes just might not have been eligible? Let alone the fact that the classes were bogus.

 

[UKnCincy_rivals]

Not sure why this is so hard, but, the courses are not part of the IB. THE "SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS" ARE THE IBs. Requesting courses for athletes are the IBs. The courses were not part of the IBs. Many of you have quoted the NOA enough, so it's not like you all are ignoring it, so I don't know how else to explain it. No where in the NOA do they mention the courses as being IB. However, they do mention IBs. What are the IBs that are mentioned? Please, stop saying...well even though they don't say this that is really what they mean. What does the NOA say? It says:

The special arrangements athletics academic counselors provided to student-athletes constituted impermissible extra benefits and included, but were not limited to, requesting certain course offerings within the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, contacting individuals within the AFRI/AFAM department to register student-athletes in courses, obtaining assignments for classes taught in the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, suggesting assignments to the AFRI/AFAM department for student-athletes to complete, turning in papers on behalf of student-athletes and recommending grades.

I know you all love to mention the next paragraph, so I'll do it here:

Certain AFRI/AFAM courses were anomalous because they were designated as lecture courses but were taught as independent study courses with little, if any, attendance requirements, minimal to no faculty interaction, lax paper writing standards and artificially high final grades. In some instances, athletics academic counselors within ASPSA made special arrangements and used these courses to help ensure the eligibility of academically at-risk student-athletes. The high level of involvement by athletics academic counselors in the administration of these anomalous AFRI/AFAM courses relieved student-athletes of the academic responsibilities of a general student.

Now, do me a favor, read the first paragraph and then the second. In the first they mention the IBs, in the second they don't. They simply add a paragraph about the courses being irregular. Do they ever once claim those courses are IBs? I'm not even sure why I keep trying to explain this, as no one here will listen. I guess the best thing to do is to wait until the COI rules, then we can see without any doubt who was right and who was wrong. Until then...

No, you seem to be missing the point on this. What do you think it means to "request a course?"

EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm not asking this as a rhetorical question. I'm asking for a response on what you think that phrase means.

 

[Lumpy 2]

Not sure why this is so hard, but, the courses are not part of the IB. THE "SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS" ARE THE IBs. Requesting courses for athletes are the IBs. The courses were not part of the IBs. Many of you have quoted the NOA enough, so it's not like you all are ignoring it, so I don't know how else to explain it. No where in the NOA do they mention the courses as being IB. However, they do mention IBs. What are the IBs that are mentioned? Please, stop saying...well even though they don't say this that is really what they mean. What does the NOA say? It says:

The special arrangements athletics academic counselors provided to student-athletes constituted impermissible extra benefits and included, but were not limited to, requesting certain course offerings within the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, contacting individuals within the AFRI/AFAM department to register student-athletes in courses, obtaining assignments for classes taught in the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, suggesting assignments to the AFRI/AFAM department for student-athletes to complete, turning in papers on behalf of student-athletes and recommending grades.

I know you all love to mention the next paragraph, so I'll do it here:

Certain AFRI/AFAM courses were anomalous because they were designated as lecture courses but were taught as independent study courses with little, if any, attendance requirements, minimal to no faculty interaction, lax paper writing standards and artificially high final grades. In some instances, athletics academic counselors within ASPSA made special arrangements and used these courses to help ensure the eligibility of academically at-risk student-athletes. The high level of involvement by athletics academic counselors in the administration of these anomalous AFRI/AFAM courses relieved student-athletes of the academic responsibilities of a general student.

Now, do me a favor, read the first paragraph and then the second. In the first they mention the IBs, in the second they don't. They simply add a paragraph about the courses being irregular. Do they ever once claim those courses are IBs? I'm not even sure why I keep trying to explain this, as no one here will listen. I guess the best thing to do is to wait until the COI rules, then we can see without any doubt who was right and who was wrong. Until then...

Not sure why this is so hard, but, the courses are not part of the IB. THE "SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS" ARE THE IBs. Requesting courses for athletes are the IBs. The courses were not part of the IBs. Many of you have quoted the NOA enough, so it's not like you all are ignoring it, so I don't know how else to explain it. No where in the NOA do they mention the courses as being IB. However, they do mention IBs. What are the IBs that are mentioned? Please, stop saying...well even though they don't say this that is really what they mean. What does the NOA say? It says:

The special arrangements athletics academic counselors provided to student-athletes constituted impermissible extra benefits and included, but were not limited to, requesting certain course offerings within the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, contacting individuals within the AFRI/AFAM department to register student-athletes in courses, obtaining assignments for classes taught in the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, suggesting assignments to the AFRI/AFAM department for student-athletes to complete, turning in papers on behalf of student-athletes and recommending grades.

I know you all love to mention the next paragraph, so I'll do it here:

Certain AFRI/AFAM courses were anomalous because they were designated as lecture courses but were taught as independent study courses with little, if any, attendance requirements, minimal to no faculty interaction, lax paper writing standards and artificially high final grades. In some instances, athletics academic counselors within ASPSA made special arrangements and used these courses to help ensure the eligibility of academically at-risk student-athletes. The high level of involvement by athletics academic counselors in the administration of these anomalous AFRI/AFAM courses relieved student-athletes of the academic responsibilities of a general student.

Now, do me a favor, read the first paragraph and then the second.the IB In the first they mention IBs, in the second they don't. They simply add a paragraph about the courses being irregular. Do they ever once claim those courses are IBs? I'm not even sure why I keep trying to explain this, as no one here will listen. I guess the best thing to do is to wait until the COI rules, then we can see without any doubt who was right and who was wrong. Until then...

Read it again Bobby. The first paragraph says the impermissible benefits included, but were not limited to requesting course offerings for athletes, giving athletes preferential treatment when registering for AFAM classes, obtaining AFAM assignments for athletes to complete, turning in papers for athletes and recommending grades.

The second paragraph lists a specific example of the impermissible benefits, fake lecture courses designed to help athletes avoid the limit placed on the amount of independent studies athletes could use for credit help them maintain their eligibility.

 

[brianpoe]

No, you seem to be missing the point on this. What do you think it means to "request a course?"

Read it again Bobby. The first paragraph says the impermissible benefits included, but were not limited to requesting course offerings for athletes, giving athletes preferential treatment when registering for AFAM classes, obtaining AFAM assignments for athletes to complete, turning in papers for athletes and recommending grades.

The second paragraph lists a specific example of the impermissible benefits, fake lecture courses designed to help athletes avoid the limit placed on the amount of independent studies athletes could use for credit help them maintain their eligibility.

Why cant this guy READ his own post? Do they have to add (Impermissible Benefit) after each sentence for him to get it???

 

[saxonburgcat]

Why cant this guy READ his own post? Do they have to add (Impermissible Benefit) after sentence for him to get it???

I suspect a major type of learning disability. As a former state cop, I can tell you that there are all kinds of people out there who can't seem to understand right from wrong and/or can't comprehend something we would all consider obvious and basic.

 

[kybassfan]

Not sure why this is so hard, but, the courses are not part of the IB. THE "SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS" ARE THE IBs. Requesting courses for athletes are the IBs. The courses were not part of the IBs. Many of you have quoted the NOA enough, so it's not like you all are ignoring it, so I don't know how else to explain it. No where in the NOA do they mention the courses as being IB. However, they do mention IBs. What are the IBs that are mentioned? Please, stop saying...well even though they don't say this that is really what they mean. What does the NOA say? It says:

The special arrangements athletics academic counselors provided to student-athletes constituted impermissible extra benefits and included, but were not limited to, requesting certain course offerings within the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, contacting individuals within the AFRI/AFAM department to register student-athletes in courses, obtaining assignments for classes taught in the AFRI/AFAM department on behalf of student-athletes, suggesting assignments to the AFRI/AFAM department for student-athletes to complete, turning in papers on behalf of student-athletes and recommending grades.

I know you all love to mention the next paragraph, so I'll do it here:

Certain AFRI/AFAM courses were anomalous because they were designated as lecture courses but were taught as independent study courses with little, if any, attendance requirements, minimal to no faculty interaction, lax paper writing standards and artificially high final grades. In some instances, athletics academic counselors within ASPSA made special arrangements and used these courses to help ensure the eligibility of academically at-risk student-athletes. The high level of involvement by athletics academic counselors in the administration of these anomalous AFRI/AFAM courses relieved student-athletes of the academic responsibilities of a general student.

Now, do me a favor, read the first paragraph and then the second. In the first they mention the IBs, in the second they don't. They simply add a paragraph about the courses being irregular. Do they ever once claim those courses are IBs? I'm not even sure why I keep trying to explain this, as no one here will listen. I guess the best thing to do is to wait until the COI rules, then we can see without any doubt who was right and who was wrong. Until then...

Bobbi, remember the NCAA won't be trying to bend the rules to your benefit. They won't but the Bobbi Perv swerve on them. Only a complete and utter dumb *** could read that NOA the way you are trying to foist on this board. Only a complete and utter dumb *** would think that the NOA is even relevant at this point to the NCAA. As I've told you before, the North Carolina pit of academic filth is a member institution of the NCAA. The NOA is only a starting point. The pit of filth has no legal recourse against the NCAA.

Your only hope is that the NCAA throws itself under the bus to sweep the filth under the carpet. Its the slime you support or the survival of the incompetent NCAA.

Your boys are going down Bobbi. The sporting media will slaughter them no matter what the NCAA does. Nobody will consider games won or championships won while North Carolina was relieving themselves on the NCAA to be legitimate. They've been exposed for the scum they are and soon the committee on infractions will come for them.

Look on the bright side. You are supporting an underdog now. Fallen from grace by playing ineligible players, providing fake classes to falsify eligibility and running totally outside institution control. They are less than a mid major now. 100's of wins falsely claimed. At least 2 bogus championships. Doesn't that make you feel better.

I'm frankly surprised though that you haven't disputed the charges of LOIC. I frankly think the best case is to be made there. I don't think any of this was outside the control of the slime pit. Appears to me that the scam was carefully and masterfully orchestrated. That argument should be right up your alley.