Last week the ACC and the NCAA announced new locations for all the championship events they moved out of North Carolina to protest House Bill 2. The ACC is moving games to South Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Kentucky; the NCAA is moving games to California, Virginia, Georgia, Texas, Massachusetts and Tennessee.
So just so we’re all on the same page: thanks to HB2, North Carolina is now officially even more anti-LGBT than South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, Texas, Virginia, and Tennessee. (And also California, Florida and Massachusetts, but we knew that already.)
But I have a little bone to pick with the NCAA – because one of those states is Tennessee.
Listen to Aaron’s commentary.
What’s wrong with Tennessee, you ask?
Let’s go back to HB2. It’s been called the worst piece of anti-LGBT legislation in America, but let’s talk about why.
Part 1 of the bill denies transgender people the right to use the restroom in accordance with their gender identity – but not many states protect that right. Part 3 of the bill effectively legalizes anti-LGBT discrimination – but as Pat McCrory has (correctly!) said, North Carolina is one of 28 states that do not ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. There are 27 other states where you can still fire me for being gay and I can refuse to serve you for being transgender – including seven of the nine states that just got ACC and NCAA championship games. What gives?
What gives is a particular provision of HB2, something that sets our law apart from all those others. It’s in part 3 of the bill, which lists all the reasons you’re not allowed to discriminate. HB2 bans discrimination on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, age, biological sex, and handicap – but not sexual orientation and not gender identity, so you can legally discriminate on those grounds. That much is true in 27 other states too.
But House Bill 2 goes one step further. Not only does the state refuse to protect LGBT people, they also ban local governments from passing ordinances to add categories that aren’t covered by the state. Even if Chapel Hill or Orange County wanted to protect LGBT people from discrimination, HB2 forbids them from doing so.
And that is what sets House Bill 2 apart. Factor that in and suddenly there aren’t 27 other states just like us – there are two. There are only two other states in America with laws as anti-LGBT as ours.
But here’s the thing:
One of those two states is Tennessee! (Arkansas is the other.)
So why is it okay for the NCAA to host the Division III men’s and women’s tennis championships in Chattanooga?
I call shenanigans!
Now there is an actual explanation for this, which the NCAA spelled out in a statement last month. It’s Part 1 of the bill, the “bathroom” stuff, that really put the ACC and the NCAA over the top. It’s true that not many states explicitly protect the right of transgender people to use the restroom in accordance with their gender identity – but North Carolina is unique in making it clear that transgender people who do so are breaking the law. That’s what spurred the NCAA to move games to Tennessee. At least in Chattanooga, the venue can allow people to use the bathroom as their gender identity dictates, without having to worry about a trespassing citation. (Venues can do that here in North Carolina too if they’re privately owned, which is why Duke still gets to host the ACC men’s lacrosse championship.)
But if the NCAA is serious about taking a stand – and I am 100 percent in favor of them if they are – then I think we ought to take a stand against those other two states as well. No more championship games in North Carolina, or Arkansas, or Tennessee.
And if Chattanooga has a problem with that – let ‘em call me.
Sports can make a difference. Let’s make it happen.http://chapelboro.com/columns/aaron-keck/second-thoughts-rocky-tops-hb2
Officials from UNC are scheduled to go before the NCAA Committee on Infractions regarding the university’s response to the amended Notice of Allegations on October 28.
The hearing will solely focus on “procedural issues raised in the institution’s response” to the amended NOA.
UNC alleged in its response that certain allegations from the NCAA were outside of the committee’s purview and that the statute of limitations had expired on some allegations.
The panel will review “a limited record to resolve the procedural claims,” according to a letter from the NCAA placed on a UNC webpage.
Representatives from UNC, Dr. Jan Boxill, Deborah Crowder and Julius Nyang’oro are allowed at the hearing.
The hearing is slated for eight o’clock the morning of October 28 in Indianapolis.http://chapelboro.com/featured/unc-set-for-oct-28-hearing-on-amended-notice-of-allegations
Last weekend, the Triangle hosted the 32nd annual North Carolina Pride Festival – a celebration of North Carolina’s LGBT community, in a year when HB2 has made “North Carolina” synonymous in many eyes with “anti-gay.”
When NC Pride first began, back in 1985, being anti-gay wasn’t so much of a black eye – economically speaking, it was more dangerous to be perceived as pro-gay. But some things have changed: the passage of House Bill 2 in March sparked a backlash and a boycott that has already cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars. (And tourism officials, like Laurie Paolicelli of the Orange County Visitors Bureau, say the worst of it is likely yet to come.)
Ironically, though, most of those lost dollars have come in the form of canceled concerts, canceled conventions, canceled sporting events, canceled business expansions, and canceled related travel plans. And all of that primarily affects North Carolina’s urban centers, Charlotte, the Triad, the Triangle, Wilmington and Asheville – the most LGBT-friendly, anti-HB2 places in the state.
As a result, the leaders of those communities have been in a quandary all year. How do you support those who have spoken out so strongly against a law you find abhorrent – while also lamenting the lost events, the lost opportunities, the lost jobs and the lost revenue? How do you promote business, travel, tourism and the arts in Chapel Hill, to people who are denouncing and boycotting North Carolina?
That’s the challenge facing Laurie Paolicelli at the Orange County Visitors Bureau. Prior to HB2’s passage, the OCVB launched a national campaign to attract LGBT tourists to the Chapel Hill area – and Paolicelli says it’s still generating interest, in spite of the state’s reputation.
Still, Paolicelli says, HB2 has cost our community a great deal – starting with more than $1.2 million in lost revenue from canceled conferences and travel plans, including the cancellation of a Public Management Research Association conference at UNC that alone would have generated close to half a million dollars. Paolicelli says Orange County also suffers when other communities in the area are hit: hotels fill up in Chapel Hill when Pinehurst holds golf tournaments, so Chapel Hill will almost certainly be affected by the loss of championship events in Durham (ACC baseball) and Cary (NCAA championships).
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Paolicelli says there’s one significant bit of good news: the North American Travel Journalists Association is going ahead with their planned conference in Chapel Hill next May (though not without some internal debate), and having all those travel journalists in town will give Orange County a chance to showcase its LGBT-friendly vibe and its commitment to social justice. But she says that’s not likely to offset all the losses from HB2 – not just from previously-scheduled travel plans being canceled, but from all the people and all the organizations who won’t even consider Orange County as a destination in the first place.
How many people is that? How many organizations? It’s impossible to say.
Laurie Paolicelli discussed the effects of HB2 on WCHL with Aaron Keck.
The dilemma also hits those who oppose HB2 and support the fight against it, even though they’d personally benefit from the events that are being lost. Of course that includes the owners and managers of hotels and other tourist-friendly businesses – but it also includes Tar Heel student-athletes, who are losing nearby championship games.
UNC senior Ezra Baeli-Wang is a member of the Tar Heel fencing team, the president of the ACC’s Student-Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC), and the co-chair of the SAAC at UNC-Chapel Hill. Like all UNC student-athletes, Baeli-Wang was directly affected, in a negative way, by the NCAA’s decision to pull championship events from North Carolina – but he’s also been vocally opposed to House Bill 2, and supportive of the ongoing efforts to fight back against it. This is what he wrote, in an open letter to the campus community following the NCAA’s decision:
As a Tar Heel, this decision is bittersweet. It is heartening to see the governing body in collegiate athletics take a stand against state-sanctioned discrimination and recognize its primary commitment to the safety and inclusion of all the people who make college sports possible. On the other hand, as an athlete, it is devastating to see my teammates and peers lose the opportunity to compete for their friends and family in their home state. This is only the latest in a string of injustices that HB2 has inflicted on UNC’s and North Carolina’s community, and by no means the most egregious. This bill is damaging for everyone—for businesses, for families, for teachers, coaches, students and student-athletes, and especially for all those whom it oppresses. It opposes everything that Carolina stands for, and, in the words of ACC Commissioner John Swofford, it is “counter to basic human rights.”
On behalf of Carolina Athletics, and from one Tar Heel to another, HB2 must be seen for what it is: an act of violence against our community, an attack on the core values of the University of North Carolina. To enforce this law, or even to continue to remain silent, would be to turn our backs on each other. For us, that is not an option. So in closing, I want to reaffirm that Carolina will not waver from its commitment to fairness, inclusion, and ensuring that all who visit this campus for athletic events or otherwise are, and always will be, welcome.
Ezra Baeli-Wang spoke with Aaron Keck on WCHL.
Baeli-Wang says he’s received support for his stance from other Tar Heel student-athletes – as well as high-ranking administrators at UNC-Chapel Hill, including Chancellor Carol Folt and AD Bubba Cunningham. (UNC’s official position, via system president Margaret Spellings, is merely that the NCAA and ACC’s decisions are “disappointing,” because the move penalizes UNC even though it’s not enforcing HB2. Baeli-Wang’s statement echoes that sentiment, but takes a clearer stance against the bill itself.)
In the end, though, one thing is clear: LGBT people across the nation may be steering clear of North Carolina, but HB2 hasn’t silenced the LGBT community that’s living in North Carolina right now. Thousands of people lined the streets in Durham last weekend and cheered for the largest NC Pride parade in the event’s history – a parade made all the more relevant by the ongoing fight over HB2.http://chapelboro.com/news/business/with-hb2-the-hits-keep-on-coming
The NCAA has announced it is moving all previously awarded championship events from North Carolina during the 2016-2017 academic year over the state’s controversial House Bill 2.
The law, which advocates maintain is the worst piece of anti-LGBT legislation in the nation, requires transgender individuals to use the bathroom and changing facility in government-owned buildings that matches their birth certificate rather than their gender identity. The law also blocks localities from extending nondiscrimination guidelines beyond the state policy and keeps local governing bodies from increasing the minimum wage.
The body’s Board of Governors announced the NCAA decision on Monday.
The decision pulls seven championship events from the Tar Heel state – including the first and second rounds of the men’s basketball tournament that was slated for Greensboro next March.
The NCAA will also be pulling the Division I Women’s Soccer Championship from Cary, Division I Women’s Golf Championships, Division III Men’s and Women’s Tennis Championship, Division I Women’s Lacrosse Championship and Division II Baseball Championship.
The National Basketball Association also moved the 2017 All-Star Game from Charlotte over the law.
The NCAA said the HB2 provisions invalidating local nondiscrimination policies and the fact that the law provides legal protections for government officials to refuse services to the LGBT community were two reasons the decision was made.
“Fairness is about more than the opportunity to participate in college sports, or even compete for championships,” said Mark Emmert, NCAA president. “We believe in providing a safe and respectful environment at our events and are committed to providing the best experience possible for college athletes, fans and everyone taking part in our championships.”
“As representatives of all three divisions, the Board of Governors must advance college sports through policies that resolve core issues affecting student-athletes and administrators,” said G.P. “Bud” Peterson, Board of Governors chair and Georgia Institute of Technology president. “This decision is consistent with the NCAA’s long-standing core values of inclusion, student-athlete well-being and creating a culture of fairness.”
The NCAA required all cities in North Carolina to submit proposals as to why they would be able to successfully host the championship events.
The NCAA said it would determine the replacement championship sites “soon.”
Republican Governor Pat McCrory issued the following statement on the NCAA decision.
“The issue of redefining gender and basic norms of privacy will be resolved in the near future in the United States court system for not only North Carolina, but the entire nation. I strongly encourage all public and private institutions to both respect and allow our nation’s judicial system to proceed without economic threats or political retaliation toward the 22 states that are currently challenging government overreach. Sadly, the NCAA, a multi-billion dollar, tax-exempt monopoly, failed to show this respect at the expense of our student athletes and hard-working men and women.”
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Roy Cooper’s campaign spokesman Ford Porter issued the following statement on the decision to move NCAA Championships from North Carolina.
“It seems that almost every day, we learn of a new consequence of HB 2. Hosting NCAA championship events has long been a point of pride for North Carolina. These tournaments pump money into our economy and give our communities and fans a chance to showcase our incredible tradition of college sports. Now, our ability to host these events at the highest level has been eliminated because of Governor McCrory and HB 2. Enough – We need to repeal this law and get our state back on track.”
UNC athletics director Bubba Cunningham issued the following statement on the NCAA decision.
“Carolina Athletics is steadfast in its commitment to fairness, inclusion and ensuring that all who come to our campus for athletics events are welcome. We are disappointed for the people of this great state, the communities that are scheduled to play host to these championship events and to the students who may be denied the opportunity to compete for championships in their home state.”
North Carolina GOP spokesperson Kami Mueller issued the following statement criticizing the NCAA move.
“This is so absurd it’s almost comical. I genuinely look forward to the NCAA merging all men’s and women’s teams together as singular, unified, unisex teams. Under the NCAA’s logic, colleges should make cheerleaders and football players share bathrooms, showers and hotel rooms. This decision is an assault to female athletes across the nation. If you are unwilling to have women’s bathrooms and locker rooms, how do you have a women’s team? I wish the NCAA was this concerned about the women who were raped at Baylor. Perhaps the NCAA should stop with their political peacocking— and instead focus their energies on making sure our nation’s collegiate athletes are safe, both on and off the field.”
ACC Commissioner John Swofford issued the following statement:
“The decision by the NCAA Board of Governors to relocate all current, and not award any future, NCAA Championship sites in the state of North Carolina continues to build upon the negative impact this bill has already had on the state. HB2 was previously schedule to be thoroughly discussed at this week’s ACC Council of Presidents meeting, so it would be premature to make any decisions or announcements regarding ACC Championships until our membership is able to discuss. The league’s longstanding commitment to equality, diversity and inclusion will continue to be a central theme to our discussions.
“On a personal note, it’s time for this bill to be repealed as it’s counter to basic human rights.”
Other statements will be added to this story as they come in.http://chapelboro.com/featured/ncaa-moving-championships-north-carolina-hb2
Was the NCAA enforcement staff hiding critical information?
On page 18 of UNC’s 73-page response to the amended Notice of Allegations is an interesting anecdote and accompanying footnote.
On March 5, 2013, the managing director of the Academic and Members Affairs (AMA) within the NCAA responded to its own enforcement staff after reading the Martin Report submitted by the university, “There are always concerns with aberrant classes comprised of a significant number of student-athletes in comparison with non-athletes; however, there is nothing definitive in the report [provided by the University] that would validate that there was a systematic effort within the African and African American Studies department motivated by the desire to assist student-athletes with maintaining their eligibility, either in how the courses were created, taught and/or how the grades awarded.”
The AMA’s conclusion confirmed that the NCAA itself had concluded that the anomalous courses and the other academic irregularities in the AFAM department did not violate NCAA rules.
Yet in the 8th footnote submitted by UNC, it was revealed that the above determination was discovered purely by happenstance on July 15, 2015, more than two years later. Despite the fact that the enforcement staff had previously agreed UNC’s outside counsel could access all materials relevant to the investigation via a secure website, this information was not included, contrary to the requirements of NCAA Bylaw 19.5.9. They were discovered by the university only because its representatives traveled to the national office to review the physical files personally.
After Miami got off with light penalties in alleged violations far more egregious than the charges against UNC, it was discovered that the overzealous NCAA enforcement staff had obtained evidence against its own procedures and perhaps illegally in the view of a court of law. A similar violation of the NCAA’s own bylaws may have occurred here when the AMA conclusion was NOT turned over to the UNC lawyers.
That is what Carolina has spent millions of dollars investigating and fighting, not necessarily the violations it may or may not have committed, but what the NCAA actually concluded and then buried.http://chapelboro.com/sports/chanskys-notebook-did-the-ncaa-bury-evidence
UNC took dead aim right between the NC-double A’s.
Carolina has said from the beginning of this academic-athletic mess that, on the other side of it, will be a model athletic program and university in how it deals with its intercollegiate teams. Carol Folt, Bubba Cunningham and their staffs have held true to that pledge, and when it came down to answering the amended Notice of Allegations, the university hit back and hit back hard with clarity in responding to a process the NCAA let linger far longer than necessary.
Yes, UNC accepted three of the email extra-benefit allegations against former woman’s basketball tutor Jan Boxill but refuted 15 of them and said the infractions that did occur were Level II or Level III at best. And Cunningham closed his news conference with public praise and thanks to women’s basketball coach Sylvia Hatchell, which makes you believe she could survive this investigation as well.
Most of UNC’s response can be summed up in three words: Stick to Sports. The NCAA’s own bylaws do not allow it to pass judgment on courses offered and how they are taught. That’s an academic accreditation issue for which the university served a one-year probation and has since been cleared. Sure, let’s accept the hollow charge that Nyang’oro and Crowder wouldn’t speak to the NCAA, but they also stonewalled us with no subpoena power either.
And Carolina totally refutes the notion of lack of institutional control, based on such a small subset of mistakes over a long period of time that, again, is not in the jurisdiction of the NCAA. Certainly, negotiations will continue between the two parties, but I think the bull’s eye is squarely on the NCAA, which will be criticized harshly if it doles out a series of wrist slaps. However, UNC concluded clearly: Impose penalties outside your own bylaws on people and programs not mentioned or even referenced in the final NOA, and we are all going to court with the roles of plaintiff and defendant reversed.
The NCAA has never been hit back like this in such a thorough and thoughtful manner, and for that UNC has set a new precedent.http://chapelboro.com/sports/chanskys-notebook-unprecedented-response
The University of North Carolina has submitted its response to the NCAA in connection to the amended notice of allegations the university received earlier this year.
After submitting the response to the NCAA on Monday, the university released the public copy on Tuesday.
The amended notice of allegations is the latest step in the years-long fallout of the long-running academic scandal at UNC involving “paper classes” – classes that rarely or never met and had a grade assigned based on one paper at the end of the semester. The classes were open to all UNC students but were disproportionately populated with student-athletes.
UNC is still facing five Level I infractions in the amended notice of allegations, which are the most severe the NCAA can levy.
UNC is challenging the validity of three of those five allegations.
Listen to UNC AD Bubba Cunningham’s teleconference with reporters from Tuesday:
In the first allegation, the NCAA alleges that Jon Boxill knowingly provided extra benefits to student-athletes on the women’s basketball team in her capacity as an academic counselor and acted in an unethical manner. The university acknowledged that Boxill provided extra benefits, but UNC “disagrees that Boxill engaged in unethical conduct” as defined by the NCAA’s bylaws, “even though her actions fell short of the University’s own standards.” UNC is arguing that the circumstances, as the university sees them, would drop that from a Level I to a Level III infraction.
Boxill continued to deny any wrongdoing in her response to the NCAA.
The university is accepting allegations two and three – that two faculty members heavily implicated in the scandal, Julius Nyang’oro and Deborah Crowder, would not cooperate with the NCAA investigation.
The NCAA alleges that UNC failed to monitor Boxill and the department overseeing academic support for student-athletes. The university is accepting that it failed to monitor Boxill, but is arguing that there are “jurisdictional and procedural issues” barring the allegation beyond that scope. That would drop the allegation from Level I to Level II.
The fifth allegation from the NCAA is a charge of lack on institutional control, which UNC is rebutting entirely. The university “disagrees with this allegation” in its response. UNC says the issues being alleged to bring about lack of institutional control charges relate to topics that are under the purview of the university’s accrediting body – SACSCOC – rather than the NCAA. That accrediting body restored UNC to full standing earlier this year after placing the university on probation for one year.
Blake Hodge broke down UNC’s response with Aaron Keck Tuesday on WCHL.
Ultimately, the university is accepting that it failed to monitor certain aspects of the institution, which resulted in a long-running scandal. But UNC says that is under the jurisdiction of SACSCOC and not the NCAA.
In the executive summary of the response to the NCAA, UNC admits to wrongdoing saying the university has “accepted responsibility for what happened in our past and made numerous apologies to our campus community, to the citizens of North Carolina, and to all those who care about the institution.”
But in the conclusion of the response, UNC makes it clear the university will challenge the NCAA if certain sanctions are sought as a result of the hearing by the Committee on Infractions that the university feels are outside of the NCAA bylaws.
“If the hearing panel determines that penalties are to be imposed, the University believes that they must be tied directly to a particular violation of NCAA bylaws and, in all instances, must be applied in a fair and consistent manner. It would be an unprecedented application of NCAA rules to impose a penalty on institutional employees, student-athletes, or sport programs that are not the subject of, or even referenced in, an allegation in the ANOA.”
The NCAA Committee on Infractions will likely hear the case in October before issuing a ruling, possibly in early 2017.
WCHL’s Art Chansky discussed UNC’s response with Aaron Keck on Tuesday.
UNC athletics director Bubba Cunningham released the following statement after the university’s response was made public:
“As a member of the NCAA, we carefully considered the appropriate University response based upon a thorough analysis of the NCAA’s Constitution and bylaws and all involved parties’ mutual desire to adhere to these important standards. We identified key issues and provided factual responses for each allegation with the goal of bringing this case to a fair and just conclusion.’’
UNC Chancellor Carol Folt also issued a statement on Tuesday:
“Our work to reach this point has been extensive, including implementing wide-ranging reforms and taking substantial actions to ensure transparency and integrity across the University. The necessary scrutiny and self-examination has made us a stronger University, and the resolution of this case will be vital to our moving forward.”
The SEC needs a rap sheet more than a scorecard.
As the college football season approaches, key athletes all over the Southeastern Conference are driving their coaches, their fans and, yes, their opponents crazy by being in so much trouble no one knows if they will play or not. And in the SEC, guilt or innocence really doesn’t matter much. It’s part of the game plan.
At Alabama, star tackle Cam Robinson and reserve defensive back Hootie Jones faced drugs and weapon charges over the summer that mysteriously were not prosecuted. What a surprise, sort of like police investigated O.J. Simpson for assaulting his wife and never filed reports because of the Juice’s celebrity status. But the news is out, and Nick Saban still faces whether to discipline his two players.
Saint Nick is under no pressure to bench his guys, but he is not saying because it gives Southern Cal, his opening day opponent, one or two more things to think about in preparing for the game. Florida State doesn’t know what to expect for its opener against Ole Miss. The Rebels’ defensive tackle Breeland Speaks was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence in March, and Coach Hugh Freeze has not said if he’ll play against the ‘Noles. The same goes for Rod Taylor, a key offensive lineman who was arrested on suspicion of shoplifting in April. Does it really take so long to decide?
Auburn plays defending Orange Bowl champion Clemson at home in its season-opener, yet the Tigers could very well be without two of their best young players in cornerback Carlton Davis and pass-rusher Byron Cowart. They, along with wide out Ryan Davis and defensive back, Jeremiah Dinson, were arrested in May on misdemeanor marijuana charges. Coach Gus Malzahn hasn’t said much because his indecision is confusing Clemson.
As with Alabama, some of these kids won’t ever go to court, but that’s not the point. SEC coaches are using their transgressions as smokescreens for opponents trying to prepare to play their teams. Seemingly, nothing has been learned from what has happened in the past when it comes to football in the SEC.
Local police are hesitant to make arrests and DA’s are hesitant to press charges because of the pressures THEY face from the schools, their coaches and their fans. Whether or not they play, they are part of the summer game plan in the SEC. Nice strategy.http://chapelboro.com/sports/chanskys-notebook-part-of-the-gameplan
And so we wait.
What action will the NCAA take against UNC for its athletic/academic wrongdoings?
Personally, I do not understand why the NCAA has any moral authority in these matters in any case. It is, after all, the enabler of the Big Time Sports schemes. I am much more concerned about the deliberations of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools from which a stern sentence could literally cost the university billions of dollars.
What troubles me now about the scandal is the narrow, legalistic framing. Does this email confirm corrupt behavior or exonerate the sender? What is the definition of “behavior?” What is the definition of “sender?” Will an NCAA verdict and sentence bring a close to the scandal and its horrific costs to the moral core and the reputation of the University?
In my view, this narrow framing will not bring an end. The University, does, however, have it within its own power to do the right thing, regardless of the legal contortions. This we know. Hundreds of presumed students participated in games as athletes, while getting credit for fraudulent courses. It matters not whether Roy Williams or Sylvia Hatchell or the entire Faculty Council were active collaborators or ignorant souls about these indisputable misdeeds, each individual has to live with their own conscience. We know that University procedures and officials made it possible for UNC teams to win by encouraging and enabling dishonesty at the vital core of any university–integrity in the classroom.
The University can own this responsibility by forfeiting the games, returning the tainted championship banners, acknowledging simply and clearly, “we violated the basic trust placed in us as a university and we take responsibility for making amends.” In Dostoyevsky’s monumental psychological drama, Crime and Punishment, the very first we hear from Raskolnikov, the tormented protagonist, is “all is in a man’s hands and he lets it all slip from cowardice, that’s an axiom.
It would be interesting to know what it is men are most afraid of. Taking a new step, uttering a new word is what they fear most…”
If victories are what define athletics, let’s not be afraid to give them back.
— Lew Margolishttp://chapelboro.com/columns/the-commentators/lets-give-back-the-victories
UNC Chancellor Carol Folt said the university is “pleased to have” the amended Notice of Allegations from the NCAA.
The amended allegations came in to the university on Monday morning and were released to the public later that afternoon.
Folt, speaking at the WCHL Community Forum on Tuesday, said that the university is ready to move forward.
“We feel like we’ve been doing everything that we can to work with the NCAA,” Folt said, “and I think that’s been very important for us.”
Folt added that she was pleased with the steps the university has taken and that the UNC student-athletes set a record-high APR over the past year.
“I try to remember that the students who are here have nothing to do with those allegations, so they need to feel that they’re moving forward and proud of their institution,” Folt said. “And we need to feel very proud of how we’re handling it.”
Folt also credited UNC Athletic Director Bubba Cunningham for his guidance through this process, calling him a “very thoughtful leader” adding she had “a lot of confidence in him.”
The new Notice of Allegations still contains accusations of five Level 1 infractions, the most serious the NCAA can levy. But what has drawn the most attention is the wording of the amended NOA, specifically the lack of a mention of either the men’s basketball or football programs.
The university has 90 days to respond to the amended NOA.http://chapelboro.com/featured/unc-chancellor-addresses-amended-notice-of-allegations