[ncsu1987]

^Posted just before the INT. Nice foreshadowing, ‘foose.

[ncsu1987]

^Like the way you’re thinking.

[ncsu1987]

Coverage sack, nice work by secondary.

JEEBUS: Everything coming up cowbell so far…great punt coverage.

[ncsu1987]

D line looks strong…gonna be a long night for the OL and Jacoby.

[ncsu1987]

Again, I must ask, WTF WAS THAT? The OPI was obvious, but my point is the senior QB STILL can’t make the throw even when we cheat? Good God, how can you be so unprepared?

[ncsu1987]

^Unfortunately, true. God I hate those f@ckers.

[ncsu1987]

F will run this score as high as he can. Wants to make a big splash, not for playoff, but for his next gig. OSU win today SHOULD have taken care of their playoff hopes.

[ncsu1987]

WTf? how did they get the ball back? it’s first quarter and they’ve matched last years score. good god.

[ncsu1987]

Dead serious here: what’s the NCAA record for yardage allowed in a game?

[ncsu1987]

Are you f@cking kidding me? What was that?

[ncsu1987]

Sr QB gotta be able to make that throw. Execution not there, team is TOO tight.

[ncsu1987]

Jesus. The penalty was a little tricky-tack, but valid. Agree, cannot give them 2nd chances.

[ncsu1987]

Going to be a long afternoon, gents. And I think it’s time for me to just admit that I have no clue what constitutes holding at the line of scrimmage anymore.

[ncsu1987]

^Ok, now that’s not fair.

#literalspitloller

Two things, CD:
1)I wish I had your confidence
2)I hope with every fiber of my being that you’re right

[ncsu1987]

How the hell did I miss this?!?!?! One of the 7 issues that SACS mentioned was the faculty’s role in “governance and handling of financial aid”.

Handling of financial aid? Is the often rumored Pell Grant fraud about to become part of the discussion? https://t.co/CzpxizGioU

— Professor Wolf (@ProfessrWolf) June 11, 2015

Feds do not play with Pell Grant fraud. If we can find an ambitious young attorney from outside the UNx family who wants to make his career, this could get very interesting, very fast.

[ncsu1987]

And the news just keeps getting better for UNx: SACS has hit them with a one-year probation. Although this doesn’t sound like much, it actually is very serious from a SACS perspective. They only thing worse would be loss of accreditation, but that would be absolutely disastrous for the entire state and was never really in the picture.

I’ve wondered many times about the faculty over on the hill, specifically “Where are they?” in all this. The faculty at NCSU in the early 90’s was crucial to the self-imposed Draconian measure that the University adopted. They were absolutely irate at the fact that sports had cast a shadow on the academic reputation of the University, and they were loud, vocal, and unrelenting in their activism.

Throughout the UNC scandal, with a few obvious exceptions, the UNx faculty has been strangely absent. Not just quiet, but absent. There are rumors that faculty members have been warned that any actions that run counter to the administration and PR message would potentially create funding issues/cuts, at a time when funding is a sore subject anyway. This, at least, is plausible, and fits my perception of the administration’s heavy hand well.

So now SACS comes along and puts the ENTIRE UNIVERSITY on probation, while publicly citing 7 serious offenses. One of the dangers of probation is that research grantors will consider it as negative input, potentially impacting funding. In addition, as the departments go out to attract the very best talent to recruit to the University, such recruits will absolutely view this as negative input.

Will SACS’ decision finally be the Black Swan event that incites the faculty? Will they see the now clear and present danger to their livelihood? Will they permit athletics to continue to drive the University toward the inevitable cliffs?

I hope they pick up their pitchforks and make a loud noise. But I won’t hold my breath.

[ncsu1987]

^Yep. The “too big to fail” theory just doesn’t pass muster.

You can see the NCAA revenue distribution here.

The NCAA sets aside a percentage of its revenue for sharing with member schools. The “Basketball Fund” is one of 6 revenue sharing funds, and rewards Div I teams for success in the annual Div I basketball tournament. Essentially, every school that wins a game earns a “unit” for their conference, so the more games your conference wins, the more money the conference gets.

The amount of money the NCAA “shares” is dependent primarily on TV contracts, which do NOT stipulate higher payments if certain teams are participating.

So, I’ve heard two “missives” that I’d like to examine.

(1) “The NCAA will not hammer UNC because they would lose too much money.” This one is patently untrue. The only place this comes into play is in gear sales, and while UNC sells a lot of gear, their overall percentage is not enough to move the total revenue needle. The NCAA will get their money.

(2) “If the NCAA hammers UNC, it will be bad for the conference and for NC State because of the money we’ll lose.” So let’s do some quick engineering math. Each “unit” described above in 2014-2015 was worth approx $250,000. Worst case: UNC win’s championship without the hammer, wins NO tourney games with the hammer. Again as worst case, this means $1.5M that the conference would not receive. If we divide by the 16 members, this means each would receive $100,000 less. And this really is worst case: it ignores (a) the statistical likelihood of another ACC team making the tourney instead of UNC; (b) the possibility of a different ACC team winning additional games b/c UNC is not in the tourney; (c) the fact that participating team expenses are removed from the pool before distribution; (d) without going into gory detail, the distrubution model includes a 6-year moving average performance model; and (e) this simple analysis assumes a fair and equitable distribution by the conference overlords. So my estimate says that the hammer on UNC would cost NC State $60,000 per year.

I’ll take it.

[ncsu1987]

CowDog is correct, above. Charges were dropped by the DA for cooperation with Wainstein, not NCAA. Remember Wainstein? The guy hired by UNx to investigate a very narrow scope of the open concerns? This pig lipstick was an absolute masterful stroke, providing just enough plausibility to keep the questions down while ensuring that the lips were buttoned up when the NCAA came back. Absolutely masterful.

Here’s what I’ve been thinking about: two of the 5 “Level 1” allegations dealt with essentially failure to cooperate. What does it mean that UNx would rather see two additional Level 1 allegations brought to the public than have these individual talk to them? How bad is it really?

[ncsu1987]

Been through the document once, and will save further comment until later after reading again. Like the Wainstein report, this appears to be a big FU from the NCAA to UNC. TheCOWDOG told us weeks ago that the mood had changed, and this is clear evidence, IMO.

Two things stand out so far:
1) As TheCOWDOG said, the NCAA is (for the first time, I think) treating purposeful academic misconduct as an impermissible benefit; this likely has a direct impact on eligibility
2) The NCAA is using UNC’s own policies against them, relative to the 12-hour maximum independent study hours. Again, impermissible benefit with direct impact on eligibility.

Need to digest more before I’ll say that I’m as ecstatic as some, but this is already WAY more than I expected.

[ncsu1987]

I use Avast on OS/X. Has been great for the family herd of Macs.

[ncsu1987]

Thanks for posting – great article. Those of you who didn’t take Va’s advice and skipped the linked article in the first paragraphs….reconsider your decision.

[ncsu1987]

Been away for a while, really missed these threads, so good to return to my peaceful sports phrontistery.

Kudos to TheCOWDOG on the eellogofusciouhipoppokunurious adjective.

Excellent thread, excellent baseball, ready to introduce Tejas to the fury of Eastern Wolves.

Especially given my attitude toward the recent pronouncements coming from UNX and their paid shills, which I can only describe as floccinaucinihilipilification.

Ok, ok, I’m tapped out.

[ncsu1987]

Don’t understand this rule change, especially in isolation. Justification is always “let’s speed up the game”. I’m all for that, but if you lower the shot clock without addressing the defensive advantage bias – hand checking, grabbing, holding, etc. – the net effect will be opposite the intent.

[ncsu1987]

^So your description is ambiguous…

Are those rants about Amato written while drunk and angry, or simply rants about a drunk and angry Amato? 😉

Although as I think about it, either would be entertaining…

[ncsu1987]

^I’d pay money for a pic of Mr. Dog, mechanical pencil in hand, do rag around his head, searching in vain for the old green engineering grid pad on the desk in front of him….”A graph, a graph, my tomatoes for a graph…”

Anybody else want some of that action?

BUT, I will not give him the even money on the bet he suggested earlier in the thread. I like my money too much…

[Author]

Posts