UNC announced that six Tar Heels would be ineligible for the opener vs LSU and six others would be held out pending the conclusion of the investigation. Also, three other players were not traveling at this time. Here is the release:

The six ineligible student-athletes include: defensive tackle Marvin Austin, cornerback Charles Brown, cornerback Kendric Burney, wide receiver Greg Little, defensive end Michael McAdoo and defensive end Robert Quinn.

Six other student-athletes who will be withheld from Saturday’s game include: tailback Shaun Draughn, defensive end Linwan Euwell, safety Brian Gupton, tailback Ryan Houston, safety Da’Norris Searcy and safety Jonathan Smith.

The number of games that those 12 student-athletes may miss has not been determined at this time. The investigation continues to include both agent-related and academic issues.

The University also continues to work today with the NCAA to determine the eligibility status of three other student-athletes. Those three will not accompany the team to Atlanta on Friday morning. Further information will be announced when a decision on their status for the game is reached.

Robbi Pickeral at the N&O is reporting the three unnamed players with their eligibility flapping in the breeze are Quan Sturdivant, Bruce Carter and Deunta Williams. It is my understanding that these three could have their eligibility issues worked out and travel to Atlanta on Saturday.

So let’s be clear on what this means. If the list of 15 holds UNC will play LSU missing their entire starting secondary, two All-ACC caliber linebackers, two NFL prospect defensive linemen, their #1 WR and the lion’s share of the running game.I guess that means Zach Pianalto is going to have like 20 receptions or something. If UNC can get at least Carter, Sturdivant and Williams eligible that helps but I am extremely pessimistic about UNC’s chances in a game with huge chunks of key personnel missing from both sides of the football.

On a side note, Joe Schad is reporting on Twitter than there could be more which does not make line up with UNC’s position that anyone in question would not travel. By all accounts everyone is traveling sans the 15 players indicated by UNC and local media. It is possible UNC decides to hold players out on the basis of the academic probe but if there are others why not simply lump them in with the limbo trio?

–

The first shoe in the NCAA’s investigation into potential improper contact with agents by players at UNC, South Carolina, and Alabama has dropped as Alabama’s Marcell Dareus has been suspended for two games by the NCAA and ordered to repay $1700 and change to a charity of his choice.

According to NCAA guidelines, improper benefits of that amount should have resulted in a four-game suspension, but mitigating circumstances reduced the penalty by half. Alabama coach Nick Saban has indicated the Tide will appeal to try and get the suspension reduced to a single game. Pretty important for Bama, as they play Penn State next week.

It was reported earlier this week that SCAR would find out their fate before Thursday’s game against Southern Mississippi, but that did not happen. In addition to TE Weslye Saunders, who had been suspended for matters not related to the NCAA investigation, SCAR was looking at as many as ten players possibly held out for their involvement in the hotel benefits situation, but only two did not play: OL Jarriel King and DB Chris Culliver. King was one of the ten players possibly involved in the hotel benefits situation, but interestingly, Culliver was not.

In Chapel Hill, ACC Now’s Joe Giglio reports the afternoon passed with no news about who would have a seat on the bus to Atlanta. Giglio notes that Butch Davis said UNC could still be sorting out player issues through the middle of the afternoon on Saturday. Giglio also writes in a separate post that UNC did release an injury report without any surprises or any big names.

So what can be taken from the news on Marcel Dareus? Apparently the NCAA has decided there was agent contact at the party so that at least gives a road map on the minimum that can be expected for Austin and Little.

Meanwhile, no news is, well, no news. Bus loads in 12 hours; let’s see who is on it.

By way of analysis the schedule is less arduous than last season, especially on the non-conference side. UNC will play three games in Puerto Rico on Nov. 18th, 19th and 21st. The Heels open with Hofstra then get either Western Kentucky or Minnesota. After that it could be anyone from a group of Davidson, WVU, Nebraska or Vanderbilt with the good money being on WVU or Vandy should UNC advance to the title game. After Puerto Rico, the toughest stretch of the non-conference schedule comes with UNC traveling to Illinois for the ACC/Big Ten Challenge followed by a home date with Kentucky. Two weeks later UNC will also host Texas on December 18th in Greensboro with a pair of games sandwiched in between. Overall UNC will play away from Chapel Hill for half of the out of league slate though one of those is Greensboro. Four other games are neutral court affairs and two are true road games, Illinois and Evansville. The trip to Evansville is the Tyler Zeller homecoming game.

On the ACC side of things, UNC only gets Virginia Tech once and that is in Chapel Hill. VT could be picked as high as 2nd in the ACC. The Heels last ten games has two dates each with FSU, Duke and BC. Considering how depleted BC is, those two games should not be an issue, the four vs Duke/FSU are a different story. UNC also travels to Clemson and NC State in February. The road games with Clemson comes immediately following the trip to Durham and marks the only time UNC plays on the road in back-to-back games.

Other tidbits: UNC will attempt to extend The Streak vs Clemson on January 18th in Chapel Hill. John Henson will be looking to ruin someone’s college career on November 28th when UNC hosts College of Charleston. Oh and UNC plays Georgia Tech once…in Atlanta.

I hate it when they play in Atlanta.

UNC trots Roy Williams out in an effort to assuage the fears of  UNC fans concerned the current academic scandal will somehow engulf the basketball team. Roy says, as far as they can tell, that will not be the case:

In an interview with The News & Observer, Williams said no one can ever be 100 percent sure that the school’s academic investigation won’t carry over to other programs.

“But I have, since the news has been out there, checked with our people to see if we had anybody involved with that specific tutor; is this something that I’m going to get a call about in the middle of the night?” he said. “And I’ve been assured that it’s not going to be a call I’m going get in the middle of the night, and I’ve been assured that there has not been any contact with that particular tutor. That’s as far as I can go; that’s as far as they want me to ask. They want me to keep my nose out of it, and I’m trying to do that – and gladly doing that, to be honest with you.”

You can also read into this quote that UNC’s scope basically involves the tutor in question and probably asking the current academic support staff two questions: Have you ever helped an athlete cheat? Do you know anyone working for UNC who has helped an athlete cheat? In short UNC is going to account for business in their own house while figuring out what kind of damage might extend from the unnamed tutor and that’s it.

On a side note, ABCers are breathlessly hyping the fact that Roy’s statement does not jive with the fact Greg Little was on the basketball team during the 2007-08 season. Well, let me spell it out and I will use small words so  everyone can understand. It is a very simple question. Did Greg Little have contact with the tutor in question or did Little have any papers written by the tutor in question during the brief stint he played basketball at UNC. If the answer is “no” then what Roy said is absolutely correct. If the answer is “yes” then ABCers can feel free to take their pants off if they have not already(pretty sure they have been pantless for about six weeks now.) Simply because Little was on the team at one point does not mean squat unless you have evidence connecting Little to the tutor before or during that time. While it is possible Roy talked to Robbi Pickeral without having accounted for Little’s time on the basketball team and any alleged contact with the tutor I cannot imagine that is the case. Then again, there is a truck load of crap going on that never entered my imagination before so let’s leave it at that for now.

He said the school has been able to clear some football players of wrong-doing, although he would not say how many, again because the investigation is ongoing. He also said that when the school announces who won’t make the Friday trip to Atlanta, it won’t mention the names of the players who have been exonerated.

“We would only mention names of people who were not on the roster,” Baddour said. “We would not mention names of people who had been in review on one side or the other, or cleared. We would only be talking about people who were not going to participate.”

Translation: We know you’re going to have the Kenan Football Center, team hotel, and Georgia Dome staked out on Friday to see who didn’t make the trip, so we’re going to go ahead and tell you who won’t be coming.

[UPDATE] ESPN’s Joe Schad is reporting as many as 16 players could be suspended for the LSU game. Schad writes:

A source said North Carolina may have to play without seven defensive starters, including numerous high draft choice projections.

Among the players in danger of not traveling with North Carolina Friday are: Austin, Quinn, linebackers Bruce Carter and Quan Sturdivant and cornerbacks Kendric Burney and Charles Brown.

A source said North Carolina may also be depleted at running back on Saturday. The top two running backs for the Tar Heels following spring practice were Shaun Draughn and Ryan Houston. Wide receiver Greg Little has also been questioned about his trips, agents and papers.

No huge surprises here, except for the possibility running backs being involved. The defensive names have been kicked around since all this broke last week and with no NCAA resolution in sight for Little, it is not a stretch to imagine he would not play. Also, Houston was suspended from spring practice for academics and Draughn had an inopportune tweet recently about not knowing his professors and the names of his classes.

On the other hand, how does this information contrast with Baddour’s assertion that some players have been cleared? So many questions… In any case, carry on.

From the standpoint of progress of the investigation, this is good news. This means things have been moving forward to the point that UNC feels like it can exonerate some players (assuming also the NCAA has signed off on this). Robert Quinn, for one, said publicly yesterday that he had nothing to do with the academic investigation.

“‘If we have guys in question, they won’t travel,’ Baddour said in a telephone interview. ‘And if that question is eliminated, then we would try to get them down there Saturday,’” notes the piece. Pickeral also writes:

He (Baddour) cautioned that when the school does announce who is – and is not – traveling to this weekend’s game, people should understand that the list “may be fluid. There may be some alterations after we say that, but we’ve got to work towards that. We’re just hoping that we can hold on and be in a position. We want to be able to give the most up-to-date and accurate information, and it’s worth waiting a little longer to do that.”

Translation: We’re still working on it and we may hold some guys out this weekend who are cleared later.

Given the fact that UNC has said they will not allow anybody who is under question to make the trip, is it safe to assume that if a player is on the travel squad, he is all good? On the other hand, just because a player is not on the travel squad does not mean a player is done for. Baddour has said players could be cleared up until game time; I can’t help but have this “Waterboy” vision of Dick Baddour in the Kathy Bates role, driving a fanboat through downtown Atlanta to get a player to the stadium.

[UPDATE]: ESPN’s Schad writes, “The school is exploring the possibility of ‘rolling suspensions’ with the NCAA, which would allow them to spread losses over multiple games.” This is interesting in light of Baddour’s “the list is fluid” comment, so maybe those traveling to LSU could face a sanction later. We’ll just have to see how it all shakes out in the next 24 hours.

[ADDITIONAL NOTE]: I would just like to reiterate a point THF has made previously about the difference in the two prongs of the football issue. On the agent issue, of which the NCAA was in charge, UNC engaged in a cone of silence. On the academic issue, of which UNC is in charge, there has been frequent comment and updates, if only to say “we can’t really tell you much.” UNC maintained the cone of silence regarding the agent prong was driven by the NCAA, but the media and rival fan bases scoffed at the notion, going so far as to obtain quotes from the NCAA about the generalities of rules during an investigation while ignoring that SCAR and Alabama have also said absolutely nothing  despite the posturing of their high-profile coaches.

And yet on the academic issue, where UNC is directing the scope of the investigation, there is much greater communication. Wow, could it be that the situation was exactly what Dick Baddour said it was, that the NCAA asked UNC not to be out front on the agent issue? Hard not to draw that conclusion when you see side-by-side how the two issues have been handled for public consumption.

University of North Carolina head coach Butch Davis has suspended senior defensive tackle Marvin Austin indefinitely.

“This decision is not a result of the ongoing NCAA review,” says Davis. “Marvin has violated team rules and has neglected his responsibilities to the team.”

Austin will not play Saturday vs. LSU.

You want my honest take? I have no freaking idea what this means. Seriously. We hear the “violated team rules” reason all the time but I have no clue what constitutes “neglecting his responsibilities to the team.” If anyone has a guess, feel free to toss it out there because I am having trouble coming up with even something wildly speculative.

UPDATE: Mark Armstrong at WTVD has tweeted the following about the Austin suspension:

Source tells me suspension is partially related to facebook post, but Austin has also been skipping classes, dogging it in practice cont’d

If that is true and it is likely the NCAA is going to suspend him anyway, I am not sure why he is still on the team other than it makes UNC appear to be passing judgment prematurely.

–

It should be noted this is the second sudden move UNC has made today. This morning UNC went all Soup Nazi on the media by shutting down access to players and coaches which included canceling already scheduled interviews. I am going to go out on a limb here and say the isolation from the media is related to the Austin suspension announcement. I know, really daring risk I am taking there. For players and coaches to talk to the media then have this news breaks means said interviews are worthless and it looks like UNC was holding out.  The media access decision is also likely related to Robert Quinn and Kendric Burney tap dancing their way through a couple of interviews yesterday. The Quinn interview was described as painful/awkward. Burney fared much better according the message boards. Still, it is probably not a good idea to keep trotting these guys out there if they do not even know whether they will play vs LSU much less answer any investigation questions.

If you’re looking beneath the surface for the problem in Chapel Hill, you might find it in the amazing coincidence that so many top-notch athletes are so interested in how humans relay messages. Or maybe it’s just that “communications” fits the bill for what a former UNC football player told me about the majors of choice there: Athletes are interested in a major that works around their busy schedules, requires little math, primarily assigns short papers and uses subjective grading in most of its courses.

That common thread among so many of UNC’s best players reflects a problem particular to athletics. It isn’t limited to Chapel Hill; nor is it merely an indication of how education has been devalued across the board. Only in athletics are students asked to manage their schoolwork around their real jobs. It’s the only department on campus where limiting the scope of one’s educational possibilities is passed off as a favor. It essentially designates a teenager to be academically irredeemable.

As long as education is used as currency for athletes’ bodies and ungodly amounts of their time, they must at least learn something. Otherwise, they’re being “paid” with rubber checks.

They receive clothes, lodging and the chance to work, a bushel of goods that makes comparisons between college sports and human trafficking unavoidable. Without an enriching educational environment, the current system of college athletics is worse than unfair. It’s inhumane.

That is why the resolution of these allegations of academic impropriety is so much more important than the sprawling probe of agents that began after NCAA officials noticed UNC’s Marvin Austin tweeting about enjoying some benefits that college football players might not be allowed. That investigation centers around external forces that are oppositional to the NCAA, enemies the NCAA will always face as long as schools are so concerned with growing revenues. It’s the NCAA protecting its virtue from those that wish it harm.

The academic allegations don’t come with a bogeyman like agents. They are about a school against itself — its lucrative and visible side business versus its primary objective, two things that each day seem to have less to do with one another. More importantly, it’s a public battle between reality and the rhetoric that makes the current system at all defensible: that education is a priceless, uplifting asset that student-athletes will have forever.

Asking head coach Butch Davis and athletics director Dick Baddour to answer for one tutor isn’t enough. What UNC needs to ask itself is whether the millions it invests in academic support is about teaching student-athletes or keeping them eligible and making them viable contributors to the school’s Academic Progress Rate.

(Emphasis mine)

Be sure to read the whole thing. I think Jones is mostly right here in that academic support is centered more on keeping players eligible than it is giving them a good education. Earlier this week I alluded to my days as an athlete at UNC Greensboro and how athletes were asked to attend study hall if their GPA fell to close to the eligibility line. The implication was no one cares if your GPA was hovering just above the NCAA prescribed Mendoza line of 1-8-2.0 but if you strayed into an area where your eligibility was threatened then action was taken. For all anyone knew or cared you could be taking the easiest classes on campus and working towards some worthless degree. As long as you pulled a 2.01 the athletic department really did concern itself with you.

Jones’ basic point is no one cares about the quality of education received by athletes only that they hit whatever milestones the NCAA sets forth for continuing eligibility. The question is how do you raise that quality and balance their time with the commitment to being a Division I student athlete? As a cross country runner it was easier. We generally had one daily  practice that consumed 2-3 hours from around 3-6 PM. There were 6-8 meets during the season, all on Saturday which meant only missing afternoon classes on Friday. For football and basketball players in particular the sport is much more time consuming. There is practice, working out in the weight room, film sessions, treatment for injuries, etc, etc, etc. While the NCAA limits practice time there is no limit on what the athlete might opt to do on his own. Given the time spent on athletic endeavors it is easy to see how athletes might gravitate towards school work that fits around the object of their primary focus.

In that regard, I do wonder if you can make a comparison to regular students who spend as much time honing a talent such as playing the violin as football players do on the practice field. However in those cases, students are expected to maintain their skill and attend other classes all without the academic support structure athletes have behind them. I have heard the argument made that athletes should be able to avail themselves of a major course of study which  is connected to their sport.  However that is really no different than what is happening now since you are implying that athletes cannot do “real” academic work so they are going to shunt them into a “special” major just for jocks.

In other words, there are no easy answers, especially with an entrenched culture that has revenue as the ultimate end. Keeping players on the north side of eligibility is simply a means to that end. Not to mention, you can lead a horse to water but your cannot make it drink. In some cases, players simply do not care to do the work. Jones cites a lack of time as the reason a player might lean on a tutor to get a paper done. I think you cannot discount apathy as a contributing factor or the notion that going to class is unnecessary beyond it being a means to staying eligible so they can showcase their talents and get drafted professionally. In other cases,  some athletes are just like students in the general population. They would rather watch TV,  go to a movie, hang out with friends or any number of activities college students do in their free time. If I had a dollar for every minute I put off doing a paper or studying for a test, I’d probably be rich. Yet, I was 18-22 years old, on my own for the first time and enjoying the college life. There was a level of academic survival I was willing to accept and my academic focus reflected that.

Some people go to college and invest time in academics because that is their passion. Maybe they like school. Maybe they have a tremendous work ethic. Maybe it comes easy to them.  There are those of us who are perfectly fine with a GPA at or slightly below 3.0 so we spent less time on our school work than we would if we wanted to be summa cum laude. There are still others who have not an ounce of concern for their academics. Student athletes as a whole have people from each of these categories. When you add the trappings on being a star athlete on a ranked athletic team, I imagine it can have a deleterious effect on their focus. When you add the prospect of making millions of dollars professionally, the appetite for academic work might drop even more. In the end I agree with Jones that an effort should be made the raise the quality of education being received by athletes. I also realize that all you can do is put the opportunity before them and encourage them to take it. Some of them will, some of them will resist. All any administration can do is try. The question is UNC or anyone else actually trying?

We can only assume the folks at UNC are plugging away with the academic review and the NCAA does…well…whatever it is that they do.

Late yesterday, UNC decided to announce some changes to their social media policy for student athletes.

UNC has updated its 2010-11 Student Athlete Handbook to stipulate that “each team must identify at least one coach or administrator who is responsible for having access to and regularly monitor the content of team members’ social networking sites and postings.” The athletics department also reserves the right to have other staff members monitor athletes’ posts; and if any of an athlete’s online content violates the law or NCAA, University or athletic department policies, sanctions could range from removal of the posting to dismissal from the team.

Now social media has moved from being something UNC sort of glanced at when necessary to UNC actually tasking employees with actively monitoring when Dexter Strickland feeds his snake. Here is hoping the coaches know how to look up the latest slang being used by these young kids today.

As far as the academic scandal goes, DE and Breaker of QBs Robert Quinn told The Daily Tar Heel he was not involved in the academic scandal. Quinn stated he did work with the tutor in question but did not receive illicit assistance from her. Do we read anything into this? Could Quinn have been told he is in the clear and felt free to tell the campus newspaper? It is interesting that UNC being in charge of the academics probe means more information coming from all sorts of places vs the mode of operation on the NCAA issue. It should be noted that many players were named and held off the first team probably because they had contact with the tutor. That contact may have been perfectly innocent or a part of her duties when she was employed in the academic support center. However, since no one knew for certain what this was when it broke, UNC erred on the side of caution and put a question mark by anyone who was known to have worked with the tutor. At this point we are probably at the stage where UNC is beginning to figure out who is in hot water and who isn’t on the academics issue while still waiting for the NCAA to get their collective rear end off the proverbial pot. Hopefully we are only talking about a few players and the list can be narrowed down to those by the time Saturday rolls around.

At the other targets of the NCAA’s curiosity, The Charleston Post is reporting SCAR expects a ruling later this week on the hotel issue. In Tuscaloosa, Alabama has DE Marcell Dareus listed on the depth chart but has not commented on his status for what is sure to be a dramatic game on Saturday vs San Jose St.

Just a blogging note. We would love to actually cover the football side of things with a nice preview of the season, predictions. Doc started last week with a preview of the schedule before the train went right off the tracks following the revelations of possible academic violations. It is pretty much impossible for us to discuss what kind of season UNC is going to have since we have no idea who is going to take the field for the Heels at any point this season. The worst case is most of the defense ends up being deep sixed along with Greg Little. Best case is 2-3 guys at most, maybe for only a few games. With that kind of uncertainty we really cannot make an accurate prediction at this point. We could speak hypothetically which was easier if you were speaking of only Marvin Austin or Greg Little. With so many other players out there who could miss games writing a preview would be too much like trying to nail jello to a wall.

As far as latest news goes there really isn’t any. According to ACC Now, Marvin Austin broke his silence via Facebook last night or at least by all accounts it appears to be Austin.

“I came back to school to have my character questioned..[expletive]..i thought education was key.. I dont really understand…i though it was the right thing to do..maybe i was mistaken,” the message said. “…i like to say thanx to all those who stand by me i really appriecate [sic] it. oh yea and to those who wanna see me fall i wont cause i dont great athletes stay on their feet!!!!!

Read into that what you will. It sounds a bit like a farewell 0f sorts, especially with the “thank you” to those who supported Austin. It is unclear if Austin knows his fate at this point but most of the signs still point to either a length suspension(four games) or something worse.

As for the rest of the team, Robbi Pickeral at the N&O indicated player travel to Atlanta would be contingent on which rules were broken: UNC or NCAA.

Depending on how deep the inquiries have gone, players could be tagged for breaking NCAA rules, school rules or both.

If a player is ineligible for competition per NCAA guidelines, the school cannot pay for any travel expenses, UNC senior associate athletic director Larry Gallo explained via e-mail Sunday. If the player travels on his own dime, the NCAA allows him to be on the sideline at the school’s discretion, but not in uniform.

However, if a player is suspended for breaking a school rule, but remains eligible for competition per NCAA guidelines, he can travel with the team and can be in uniform, if the school permits.

The institution makes those sideline/uniform decisions on an individual, case-by-case basis, Gallo wrote.

Butch Davis said in his press conference players will travel if they can play. That being said, Dick Baddour said last week they could end up clearing players right up to game day which stands to reason players will travel unless they know they are not going to be cleared by Saturday.

Now this UNC rules vs NCAA rules gets into an area that I have been tossing around in my head all weekend. When UNC discovered the tutor’s name via a player interview, they informed the NCAA there could be academic issues and the NCAA blessed UNC’s efforts to track down the infractions. The question I had was why the NCAA is allowing UNC to take the lead on this? The answer is no one knows for sure whose rules were broken. The NCAA has rules pertaining to athlete academic eligibility[Note: This info comes from a document dated 2-3 years ago, standards may have changed.] There is the initial determination when the athlete enters school. Once an athlete has matriculated there are also minimal GPA, number of hours attempted/credits earned per semester and progress towards graduation requirements. In your freshman year you need to have a GPA of 1.8 or higher to be eligible.  The NCAA rules slide the GPA up so by your senior season you need a 2.0 to be eligible for competition. What the NCAA does not get into is how those grades are attained. As long as you are earning sufficient grades according to the school grading standards , take the correct number of hours, earn the minimal number of credits and show degree progress, you are eligible in the eyes of the NCAA. On top of the NCAA rules, the school generally has rules for athletes to help them stay ahead of the NCAA rules. For example, when I was at UNC Greensboro all freshman athletes were required to attend study hall a few nights a week during their first semester. If an athlete posted a GPA of 2.0 or higher then you were excused from study hall unless your GPA dropped back below 2.0. Then you have the general academic rules that apply to all students commonly known as the honor code. If a player were to violate the school honor code and get caught that would obviously have an impact on their grades, credits earned, etc.

Take this current case(and note I am speculating here.) If UNC Player A submitted a paper written by a former tutor during the 2010 spring semester and has now been caught then UNC would follow its own policies to deal with the student in question. The result might be voiding his grades which could kill his GPA, cost him needed credits, etc thus making him ineligible by NCAA rules. Since the player has yet to play in a game since the infraction occurred the compliance office would deem them ineligible and the NCAA would not take action. However, if UNC Player A committed honor code violations in the 2009 spring semester and UNC executes discipline which renders them ineligible according to NCAA standards then you have a larger issue. Since said player would have played for UNC during the 2009 football season the NCAA would have to step in and make a ruling for use of an ineligible player. In short, UNC is presently conducting an internal review of possible academic violations of university policy with an eye towards NCAA rules. If UNC uncovers violations that create eligibility issues in past games then it becomes an NCAA issue. If UNC finds widespread corruption in their academic support program affecting multiple sports that will require NCAA intervention as well. Of course it is probably easier for UNC to use its staff to deal with professors and what not than the NCAA which is another reason why this is being handled in house first before turning it over to the NCAA.

Bearing that in mind, the other question I have is whether the tutor in question was employed by UNC at the time she allegedly assisted players or was she acting as an independent person who knew the players from her previous position with the academic support program? It is an important distinction. If she was outside the academic support role then it is likely that part of the athletic department is clean. At that point you are talking about a situation where players are using 3rd party individuals to get their academic work done. Is that shocking that players would use fellow or former students to help them with papers? Probably not since the same thing happens across the student population as a whole. Raise your hand if you have ever done school work for a friend or had a friend do something for you? How many of you have copied off another test paper in the room, use a cheat sheet and generally cut corners because you did not study the night before? My point is it happens. It happens at UNC. It happens everywhere. Now, UNC should not get a pass on this because someone decided to flip the log over to discover any number of nasty creatures underneath. These are the breaks more or less. This is like sitting in a group of ten cars on the interstate running 15 mph over the speed limit and because you have an expired tag the police single you out for the ticket. UNC had one issue crop up and it lead other issues being discovered. This is what happens when the NCAA starts digging around. The seedy underbelly gets exposed and since it is out there for the world to see, it must be dealt with. In an ideal world you hope your team is maintaining a high standard where these kinds of issues are concerned. For the most part I think UNC does it right in the areas they can control. Again, this is why it is important to know whether the individual accused of aiding players was on her own or still employed. The latter is under UNC’s control but what she does or did on her own is not. When you are talking about players going off on their own to get work done by individuals outside the official system how does anyone police that? In some respects it is the same issue as agent contact. You can educate the players, you can encourage them to do the right thing. You can offer them all the assistance the rules allow in hopes they do not feel the need to act in an illicit manner. However at the end of the day we all find out any given athletic season is hinged on 18-22 year old athletes making good choices.

With those odds it is a wonder more schools aren’t in trouble than we see now.

Author’s Note: Just a further, explicit disclaimer. It is the position of THF that UNC should follow all NCAA rules and the athletes wearing the uniform should do the same. We also believe that if anyone breaks NCAA or university rules they should be punished accordingly. Just because everyone is doing it does not mean UNC should nor should they be excused. However, we also acknowledge that in a world where moral compromises are easily brokered rules will be bent or crushed in the name of expediency, laziness and the almighty dollar. We wish it were different and we hope this leads to real reform. And yes, we’d be lying if we were not a tad frustrated UNC got caught but as stated above, those are the breaks. The only thing UNC can do now is the right thing which actually has more to do with PR than anything else but that is sad discussion for another time.

Just in case you were wondering, vacation was good. Many thanks and much appreciation to Doc for covering this story so thoroughly. The story caught me completely off guard and I spent most of dinner casting furtive glances at my Blackberry hoping Tar Heel Wife would not notice and confiscate the device from me. I stated on Twitter it is very strange to get the story in short blurbs from multiple sources all at once. Doc has done an excellent job of recapping everything that has happened over the past three days. Unlike the agent investigation, UNC decided to turn the lights on and flood the PR zone. With the agent issue, UNC was perfectly willing to cede the PR ground in hopes the situation would be resolve quickly while only affecting a couple of players. The story with Agent-gate is one or two players making a poor decision in regards to the regulations on gifts from former teammates. The hope was that it would be neatly wrapped in time for the start of the season with minimal to no damage for the football program.

This situation is entirely different. The academic reputation of the school is on the line. With that being the case, the “base” as Joe Ovies points out, needs to be placated. UNC has every reason to control the conversation in the PR realm by talking to the local media as much as possible. It would not surprise me to see Dick Baddour and Steve Kirschner talking to media almost daily to either give updates or issue clarifications for stories that might be floating out there. Letting speculation run wild is not going to work with this story thought there is no way UNC can control all the speculation that floats across the internet.

Still, as much as UNC has talked there are many questions left unanswered. The foremost in the eyes of most UNC fans is what to make of Dick Baddour’s statement that they are not ruling anything out, including possible spillover into other sports? And by “what to make” I mean “will basketball be affected?!?!?” That has to be the primary concern in Chapel Hill right now and to be honest it sent a chill down my spine when Baddour said everything was in play.  Not to play the “it’s only football” card but I imagine this investigation into academic issues is being conducted with basketball on the left front burner and football on the right. And if they burn the rice on the right to make sure the chicken is properly cooked on the left, that’s what is going to happen.

Also among the questions swirling around has to be the Nixonian one. What did UNC know and when did they know it? According to Baddour, UNC caught mention of this tutor’s name in an interview. The context in the interview was non-academic in nature so UNC decided to look into the issue deeper. The question is when was this? During the interviews in early August? The subsequent later interviews? Via transcripts even after that? There is no way of knowing but it is a safe bet UNC started their probe into academic issues before it came to light via Inside Carolina.  That means there is the possibility UNC only went public on Thursday because the story was about to break on Inside Carolina. Does that make them wrong? Depends on your point of view. The longer you keep something quiet the easier it is to investigate. Then again the longer you investigate the harder it is to keep it quiet. There is one caveat: It is doubtful Butch Davis would jeopardize preparing his defense for an upcoming game by leaving the starters on the first team for the sake of appearance. That sudden change would seem to indicate UNC did indeed find out on Thursday or more likely the investigation reached a point where they had sufficient actionable information to create eligibility questions. As a side note to this, does the mention of the tutor(or former tutor) in a non-academic sense mean it is possible this individual wrote papers for these players after he employment relationship with UNC ended? Remember the timetable is the tutor worked for the academic support program before Davis arrived then worked for Davis personally after he took the UNC job. It is unclear when the alleged violations occurred or when the tutor stopped working at UNC which is the key evidence.

Finally, the biggest question of all is who is this tutor? Based on information coming from Baddour, the woman in question worked for the academic support program prior to Butch Davis’ arrival at UNC. Later she went to work for Davis assisting his son Drew with his academics. Now it turns out she may have written papers for football players making this whole business very strange in a Lifetime Movie of the Week sort of way.  Now, I have no idea who this woman is or what her motives may have been for the actions she has allegedly taken in her role as a tutor for UNC football players. She may have been well intentioned and monumentally stupid all at the same time. If the players took her help in this way that are deserve whatever penalties are coming to them. All that being said, it is very weird to have a tutor who allegedly wrote papers for football players to then end up being a tutor for Butch Davis’ son. I am not saying she is a stalker but it does have that quality to it in some respects. Added note: Someone has pointed out to me that it is also possible the players took advantage of the tutor putting the responsibility on the players alone.

At the end of the day, I am not sure anyone at UNC much cares about the motives. Baddour and Thorp want to know what happened, who is guilty so they discipline as needed. For UNC, a “win” in all of this is two-fold. First, they need to show they have properly dealt with the issue with appropriate disciplinary actions that satisfies not so much the public’s need for blood but rather the Carolina Way constituency. The other side of it is winning the PR battle. For UNC to win that they basically have to look tough on the offenders even if it means a setback in football for this season. More importantly the story has to be that Austin and Little acted without knowledge of the coaches and this was a lone rogue tutor not widespread corruption in the academic support program. If that is truly the story(i.e. the NCAA concludes as much) and UNC can effectively sell it with the NCAA handing down at most one vacated season and a handful of suspensions then Butch Davis survives. Remember, Davis apparently enjoys the support of key academic leaders at UNC which means a implosion of the football program a la NCSU destroying the basketball program in 1989 seems less likely. If that is the case football program survives though the recruiting would take a hit for a period of time. If this ends up being the corrupt actions of a few outside the control of those in authority UNC looks more like a victim. It also becomes a cautionary tale for other programs. If UNC can have a pair of players make mistakes likes this or one tutor aid players in committing academic infractions then it is very much a “this could happen to anyone” situation not intentional malfeasance on the part of Butch Davis, Dick Baddour or anyone else running the programs in Chapel Hill.

However if the NCAA proves whole John Blake-Gary Wichard connection means  Blake knew agent contact/gifts were happening and it goes beyond one tutor then heads will roll starting with Davis and possible engulfing Baddour as well. Not to sound all pessimistic but UNC athletics is staring down a potentially nasty end of a fairly big gun. If the facts of the case show one thing, it will do untold damage. If it is indeed localized to one tutor, just football players and some poor decisions by the parties involved that is probably the best we can all hope for at this point. Take the penalties, let the chips fall where they may and for the love of the Old Well move on.