Welcome Guest

True.

Posted on: August 13, 2019 at 10:08:00 CT
GapDaddy MU
Posts:
16432
Member For:
20.46 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
UNC did not self report and then subsequently argued that their paper classes were accredited and available to all students and, therefore, were not impermissible benefits or fraud.

In response, the NCAA proposal was that the NCAA should have some role in adjudicating what is accredited and what isn't. By withdrawing this proposal in the face of an example as blatant as that of UNC, the NCAA will be criticized as not taking academic fraud seriously.

The difference for MU, however, is that MU self-reported and then agreed with the NCAA that the infractions were Level 1.

In order to refute the criticism predicted above, it will be easy for the NCAA to simply deny MU's appeal as evidence and an example of the NCAA indeed taking academic fraud seriously.
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

     I can't decide if this helps or hurts our case..nm - tigertix MU - 8/13 08:15:26
          I think it hurts us. Here's why.... - GapDaddy MU - 8/13 09:56:11
               RE: I think it hurts us. Here's why.... - Ace MU - 8/13 10:00:51
                    to align with the UNC ruling, Mizzou just has to say that - alwaysright MU - 8/13 11:08:40
                    True. - GapDaddy MU - 8/13 10:08:00
                         The members of he committee from the Ivy League will - tigertix MU - 8/13 18:14:38
          Will be interesting - jumbo73 MU - 8/13 09:00:21
          I think it will depend on how the appeal has been framed - Ace MU - 8/13 08:18:08




©2019 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard