UNC vs. the NCAA: Academic fraud or athletic advantage?

On Tuesday, the University of North Carolina made public its official response to the NCAA regarding the organization's amended notice of allegations stemming from the academic scandal at the school. The school has been accused of running "paper classes" in the African and Afro-American studies department from 1993 to 2011 — classes that athletes in various sports attended where they did minimal work for high grades.

UNC's response to the allegations was essentially that they mostly fall outside of the NCAA's jurisdiction. The school feels that this is an academics scandal, not an athletics one, and that the NCAA has no right to be punishing the university. Since the classes were made available and attended by the student body at large, there were no extra benefits for student-athletes, the NCAA has no right to come in and discipline the school nor its athletic programs, according to UNC. That has been the heart of this entire scandal as far as the NCAA and athletics department are concerned.

This has been one of the biggest, yet trickiest, investigations by the NCAA. To be brief, it started with a tweet by football player Marvin Austin in 2010 that got the football team punished for receiving extra benefits from agents. From there, an investigation formed about academic fraud, mainly in the African and Afro-American studies department, that was widespread over nearly two decades. It has been acknowledged by the university that those classes had students doing minimal work for exceptional grades. Faculty has been fired, there have been changes in school leadership and a new set of checks were put in places to make sure something like this doesn't happen again.

At issue here is how widespread this was, what extra benefits were given and if this is even the NCAA's business. On the outside, it looks like the NCAA is having difficulty punishing one of the blue bloods of college basketball (there were a lot of men's players who took these classes), and there are voices that scream that the NCAA is taking it easy on UNC. North Carolina believes that, while there was wrongdoing, it isn't an athletics matter, and this longstanding cloud of the investigation has punished the school enough. In the middle of this is the very reach of the NCAA. UNC's response clearly conveys the belief that this isn't an NCAA matter.

There were five major violations that the NCAA attributes to the school. Two involve department administrative assistant Debby Crowder's and department chairman Julius Nyang'oro's refusal to interview with the NCAA. Both were retired from the university when they refused to be interviewed for the investigation. The school's response is that they shouldn't be punished because these two no longer work for the university and it couldn't force them to consent to interviews. How can we be punished because they won't talk? We can't make them cooperate because they no longer work here!

Another violation is the failure of the university to monitor the African and Afro-American studies department. UNC believes that, while true, that really isn't the NCAA's business. The university has already had to deal with its accreditation agency (the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools), which it feels has jurisdiction over the matter. The SACS put the school on a one-year probation that ended this June. The school feels that the SACS monitors its academics just as the NCAA monitors the athletics side of things and that it was the appropriate body to deal with this matter. 

One violation that the university does think the NCAA got kind of right was women's basketball academic advisor Jan Boxill giving improper benefits by steering players into these classes. In its response, North Carolina says that while Boxill did provide academic assistance to women's basketball players, she didn't know it was against the rules.

The most serious is the "lack of institutional control" accusation. The university contends that while this did become out of control, it was an academic issue involving two rogue members of the faculty and one counselor in one department, and that any student could get into these classes and all students turned in the same kind of work to get grades. Many athletes took these classes, but so did a lot of non-athletes (nearly a 50-50 mix). The question is, how is this an extra benefit given to athletes case if it was open to anyone and student-athletes weren't given special passes to get into these classes? Non-athletes turned in the same kind of work to get the same kind of grades.  

What this comes down to is this: The school knows that athletes were taking advantage of a class where you didn't have to attend nor pay attention if you did attend, and you could turn in minimal work for good grades. Athletes in a wide range of sports took advantage of this setup to keep their grades good enough to stay eligible. However, since work had to be submitted to "earn" a grade and since this class was made available and attended by the student body at large, the university doesn't think there was any preferential treatment given to any student-athlete or that the grades they earned while taking theses classes were invalid. Yes, it looks like UNC is trying to go unpunished because of technicalities and wants the NCAA to stay in its lane, but the school knows that sanctions are binding and potentially devastating and will defend itself as any defendant would.

With all of that, the NCAA is stuck in a spot it doesn't want to be — diving in to academics. That's what has made this long-running case so unique. What, really, is the NCAA's role, and is most of this even the organization's business? It seems as if the NCAA knows this is thin ice it's walking on here. With the NCAA taking blows all over the place regarding the compensation of student-athletes, cost of attendance, mega-conferences taking shape and challenging the need for a governing body, and its already slow processes of investigations and doling out punishments, this is something the organization just didn't need.

So what happens? Who knows? In a few months, UNC will go in front of the infractions board to get its punishment. The feeling has been that the school could be fined and maybe lose some scholarships (with the women's basketball program getting hit the worst) plus have a probation placed on the entire athletics program. But with North Carolina's response to the allegations essentially going after the NCAA's umbrella and the fact that the athletic department put forth no self-sanctions, everything is up in the air. Could the NCAA find this as defiance by the school, or will it take into consideration the response and give this monumental scandal the punishment of a relative slap on the wrist?

We shall see.  

One thing is for certain: The university's basketball and football programs are acting as if there will be minimal, if any, punishments coming their way. Head coaches Larry Fedora and Roy Williams are telling everyone that things are good, and it is showing in their recruiting efforts. The men's hoops team has already seen an uptick in recruiting after tough showings the past few years (most notably Brandon Ingram deciding to attend Duke instead of UNC) with prospects. On the field, the football team won the ACC's Coastal Division title last season and played in the ACC Championship Game (the Tar Heels are picked to repeat that feat) while the men's hoops team played for the National Championship in April and should be a top 10 team for the upcoming season.

So while the NCAA and the university sort out what is and is not unfair advantage for student-athletes, the student-athletes themselves can only wait and see as their seasons approach.