PonyFans.com

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/coll ... 52282.html

"North Carolina is on the verge of beating the NCAA at its own game. The response argues that the NCAA has no jurisdiction and has violated its own rules long before the university ever gets around to actually responding to any of the allegations – which it does with almost casual dismissiveness.

Above it all hangs the existential question of the NCAA’s very mission, one it has never been able to adequately answer: Can it really claim any jurisdiction over academics?

North Carolina’s response is essentially an ultimatum to the NCAA to answer that question, because it knows the answer has to be “no.”"


It’s a blatant a challenge to the NCAA’s authority as you’ll ever find, its impact diluted by the anodyne language college athletics loves to use in matters of compliance and governance, but aggressive nonetheless.

Interesting. Anyone remember if it was academic or some other kind of fraud we got smacked for with Keith?

That's how it's done right there

Does this at least solve any APR problems we may have?

Are we the only school left that seems to care what the NCAA says? I predict that the big powers will completely break from the NCAA at some point.

We will probably get a b12 invite then the ncaa will tell us no and we will acquiesce.

This is a better argument for the Penn St case which dealt with criminal behavior-I think Penn St. wins that argument eventually after doing a lot more damage to the university's reputation

The NCAA does have jurisdiction over the academic performance of student athletes because the NCAA has jurisdiction over the academic eligibility of student athletes

The NCAA has had academic standards for many decades-but discipline for criminal behavior has always been governed by Individual schools-how can the NCAA deal with criminal issues when there are no standards governing that behavior in its own Bylaws

Stallion wrote:This is a better argument for the Penn St case which dealt with criminal behavior-I think Penn St. wins that argument eventually after doing a lot more damage to the university's reputation

The NCAA does have jurisdiction over the academic performance of student athletes because the NCAA has jurisdiction over the eligibility of student athletes

The NCAA has had academic standards for many decades-but discipline for criminal behavior has always been governed by Individual schools-how can the NCAA deal with criminal issues when there are no standards governing that behavior in its own Bylaws

Same with Baylor? I have trouble believing that the NCAA can sanction them for the allegations we have read in the press given that there are no bylaws dealing with the problem. I am guessing that Baylor is going to pay off some civil claims but what can the NCAA really do to them?

Pretty much same with Baylor-except they stepped into the mess by establishing that failure to monitor criminal behavior can be considered lack of institutional control. They need to either flesh that out in their Bylaws or let the criminal courts handle criminal matters. The problem is that they will never be able to properly investigate criminal matters until the criminal case is concluded. About all they can do is rubber stamp self imposed punishment.

What about lack of institutional control???

Stallion wrote:Pretty much same with Baylor-except they stepped into the mess by establishing that failure to monitor criminal behavior can be considered lack of institutional control. They need to either flesh that out in their Bylaws or let the criminal courts handle criminal matters. The problem is that they will never be able to properly investigate criminal matters until the criminal case is concluded. About all they can do is rubber stamp self imposed punishment.

So the "institutional control" issue can encompass matters that go beyond matters governed by the NCAA bylaws like eligibility?

Title IX

JasonB wrote:Title IX

Ahh. But not criminal matters per se like Penn State.

NCAA easily has jurisdiction in UNC case because the facilitation of players being eligible created an unfair playing field. They just don't have the balls to do it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Could this be extended further? Could a state university set up an employment agreement with an athlete and say the NCAA has no jurisdiction based on sovereign immunity? It just seems odd that state university can say it is a member of an organization but refuses to adhere to that organizations rules based on jurisdiction.