UNC-CHeatsª
Achieve ÒRedemptionÓ
If
there were anything even approaching equal justice under the National
Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), the organization that enforces the
rules by which member basketball teams supposedly play, the Tar Heels of the
University of North Carolina would not even have been permitted to participate
in the tournament that determines the national champion, either this year or
last year. They have been caught in
a massive cheating scandal that dwarfs anything ever discovered at any other
college or university. In a scheme
that began with the menÕs basketball program but then expanded to include
football players, womenÕs basketball players, and then other athletes and a
disproportionately small number of just plain students, essentially sham
classes were created in which Òstudent-athletesÓ could remain eligible to play
under the NCAAÕs rules while doing basically no academic work and learning
nothing, except maybe how to cheat.
The university has responded by hiring lawyers and public relations
firms and hiring an outside consultant who they probably thought would
perpetuate their ongoing cover-up but ended up spilling more beans,
instead. The expense of all that
resistance so far, by latest count, has been a cool $17.6 million.
At
least, through their shameless stalling tactics they were able to postpone
punishment that, at the very least, should make them ineligible to compete for
post-season honors for a number of years.
By doing so, they were able to make it to the championship game last
year, only to lose on a last-second shot to Villanova and to win the top trophy
this year against Gonzaga.
It
was against this backdrop that I opened my Washington
Post on the day of the final game and read the following headline on the
continuation page of an article by Chuck Culpepper: ÒTar Heels are seeking redemption in title game
return.Ó
I suppose I should not have been surprised. It has been clear to me for many years
now that The Post is not exactly a
Christian newspaper; in fact, it is probably better described as a fiercely anti-Christian
newspaper. Still, I thought that
they should have a better feel for the meaning of English-language words and
the overall context in which they were using the word Òredemption,Ó
particularly as we approached Holy Week.
One of the definitions of ÒredeemÓ in my dictionary is Òto deliver from
sin and its penalties, as by a sacrifice made for the sinner.Ó Even in purely sports terms, the use of
ÒredemptionÓ here is a stretch because the Tar Heels played well and mounted a
valiant comeback last year in the game against Villanova, only to fall short
against what was probably a superior team.
I
promptly registered my objection to the use of the word with a comment online,
and to make sure he didnÕt miss it, I called Mr. CulpepperÕs attention to the
comment with the following email:
Hi
Chuck,
I
know you donÕt write the headlines, but you might have worked the subject of my
comment into your
article somewhere:
The continuation page headline for this article
in the print edition has this very inappropriate headline: "Tar Heels are
seeking redemption in title game return." There can be no redemption
without confession and acceptance of the consequences of one's sins. The
March 31 NY Times headline was, by contrast, on the mark: "North Carolina's
Dominance Fails to Cover Cheating's Stain."
That New
York Times article has this memorable passage, speaking of long-time UNC
coach, Roy Williams:
ÒWhen
it all shakes out,Ó Gonzaga Coach Mark Few said, ÒheÕll be one of the Mount
Rushmore types in college coaching.Ó
IÕd
genuflect myself, if only I could administer a mind wipe.
I definitely caught CulpepperÕs attention,
because he responded promptly with this email:
Hi Dave,
Many
thanks for writing.
The
story to which you refer, by an author I admire
greatly, did not mention the central facet to which the investigation might
wind up distilling: that thousands of non-athletes took the courses. On this,
the outcome may well hinge, via the NCAA rule book.
As
for a daily matter of writing about these teams, though, you just compared an
opinion piece to a non-opinion feature. They aren't comparable, and that fact
goes into the routine decision of what to include on a given day.
I was talking to a bunch of close followers of
the case the other day. I don't think you're going to get a desired outcome,
even though your concerns and points are unquestionably valid.
The response was at the same time gratifying and
exasperating. It was gratifying
because Culpepper explicitly acknowledged the worth of my objection to their
headline and by praise of Michael Powell of The
New York Times he acknowledged that what we see taking place is a profound
injustice. The exasperation comes
from the fact that he and his newspaper seem to be okay with that. And even though he invoked the authority
of Òa bunch of close followers of the case,Ó in speaking of the would-be
extenuating fact that lots of non-athletes took the bogus courses he betrayed
his own lack of knowledge of the latest developments in the case.
Culpepper Reflects Post
Attitude
Most troubling of all was his apparent blithe
attitude toward the continuing miscarriage of justice. That attitude had been on display in a
puff piece by The PostÕs Adam Kilgore
a few days before entitled, ÒNorth Carolina never
loses transfers, in an age when every team does.Ó
That article had produced a raft of outraged
readersÕ comments:
Read
the Wainstein Report or any of Dan Kane's (Raleigh
News & Observer) multiple articles on the subject and you'll get a better
picture of why players rarely leave that place.
They
pay well in Chapel Hill. Cash, Cars, houses for parents, fake jobs for parents,
free drugs from a notorious Durham drug dealer fan boy, few or no classes and
still basically guaranteed a diploma. Even when the draft value of UNC player
goes down by staying a few extra years to play for them, those players are taken
care of. Many still make NBA rosters, even though they are dime-a-dozen end of
the bench players, due to the connections established via Michael Jordan. I
have to credit Dean, the media, the UNC journalism school, the big money Alum,
and the UNC administration for creating (and even sustaining after getting
caught red handed) the largest scam in the history of college sports. Great
work guys. Yeah, we won!
Roy
is just as dirty as Dean. Roy ran the same scam at Kansas. He used Wayne Walden
at both Kansas and UNC to run the no class scams, including AFAM at UNC. Among other major violations. All the while, the media kept
publicly glorifying UNC as doing it "The Right Way" or "The
Carolina Way". Let's just say they took cheating to an astronomical level
and will most likely skate since they are THE most influential University in
the NCAA.
Those
are three separate comments by one ÒMike Pack.Ó From his screen name we may
surmise that he is likely to be a fan of the North Carolina State Wolfpack. The
forums of the web site for fans of NC State, Pack Pride, have consistently led
the way in reporting on the various transgressions in the UNC athletic program,
even ahead of the News and ObserverÕs
Dan Kane. Then we have from
runnerguy45:
Well
UNC handed out degrees where kids didn't have to even show up and received
degrees in African American studies. Beautiful campus, pretty girls and you
don't have to go to class and get a degree!!! It's a good deal if you can get
it!!
That
comment produced this reasonable follow-up from one DaytonMDJohn:
Why
doesn't the WP run an article on this? In my opinion it's possibly the biggest
scandal ever in college athletics. The NCAA has not issued any sanctions what
so ever against North Carolina for this even though it ran for many years and
allowed hundreds of North Carolina athletes to maintain acceptable GPAs and
then to graduate. The NCAA argument is that since half of the more than 3000
students who took the phony courses were not athletes the athletic program
should not be punished. Total bull, and the NC argument that coaches and team
academic advisors knew nothing about the phony classes is
not credible. Look into it WP, the NCAA needs to step up and NC needs to be
held accountable.
One
nutstobolts opined:
Every
win in the last 10 years should be taken away, as well as the current coach
fired. They should be suspended from any type of sports for the same amount of
time.
As
of now, there have been only 22 comments, of which mine was third from the
last:
You make it all sound so nice and
"family." Don't you think the fancy cars,
the payment of their parking tickets, and the various other under-the-table
perquisites might have something to do with the players' willingness to hang
around? See http://www.wralsportsfan.com/list-of-current-forme... and http://dcdave.com/article5/160107.htm
On the day of the championship game, which was
the same day as the Culpepper piece ran this comment came in from ÒMark
MichaelsÓ:
The
NCAA allows UNC to cheat without punishment, that's a big advantage. UNC
engaged in widespread academic cheating by over a thousand athletes over many
years, if you don't go to class and still get passing grades, why transfer?
Their final four appearance shows the NCAA plays
favorites and is a stain on college athletics.
It was
with that background in mind and other manifest
failings by The Post that
I responded to Culpepper:
Hi
Chuck,
You
know as well as I do that I was not faulting your article in particular but
your newspaper for the way it has virtually ignored this enormous story, never
having written anything even remotely comparable to that New York Times
commentary or this one from CBS Sports. Who at The
Post is protecting the UNC miscreants? And how about this latest foot-dragging from the perpetrators,
on its face, of the biggest athletic/academic scandal in U.S. history? TheyÕre
able to get by with it because opinion molders like your paper, ESPN, and, yes,
even CBS Sports commentators covering the games continue to look the other way.
As
for the fact that some fraternity boys found out about the fake classes and got
in on the gravy train, thatÕs one that left the station well before the
Weinstein Report was made public and the case was re-opened. You do know
that, donÕt you?
Get
with it, Posties, and give this huge
news the reporting it deserves. If the Òdesired outcomeÓ that you talk
about is not forthcoming, surely you know that you and your colleagues would
deserve a large part of the blame for not properly holding the NCAAÕs feet to
the fire. Why have you left the job to concerned citizens like me and Professor Jay Smith?
Dave
The ÒJay SmithÓ reference was to the book, Cheated: The UNC Scandal, the Education of
Athletes, and the Future of Big-Time College Sports that Smith co-authored
with Mary Willingham and I reviewed here.
That produced this prompt response from Culpepper:
Dear
David,
You're
serially inaccurate there, right from the top with, "You know as well
as I do . . ."
We've
had a bushel of stories about it, including one today, written from here in
Arizona (which was part of the reason I steered clear today), and a loud one
last tournament, which caused a stir especially in the head of Roy
Williams.
I
would say, though, that I can't remember one of our columnists sharing the
adamancy of Michael Powell (even with the glaring omission in that
column), so that could be a viable point, unless I missed an adamant Post
column somewhere. Our columnists: Amherst, Duke, Duke, Stanford, Western
Kentucky, Delaware.
What's
not a point, though, is your irresponsible venture into the evidence-free
conspiracy zone. Nobody among our writers or decision-makers went to UNC, which
is about 95-percent irrelevant anyway, because once you've done this work
for a while, those old rooting styles drain away for 95 percent of us. (Check
out UNC graduate S.L. Price of Sports Illustrated after Dean Smith's death, for
one sterling example.)
Let's
see, our department, off the top of my head and from the top of the department:
NYU, Michigan, Kansas, Randolph-Macon, Georgetown, Nebraska,
Amherst, Vanderbilt, Duke, Duke, Yale, Yale, Stanford, Western
Kentucky, Barnard, Missouri, Georgetown, Syracuse, New Mexico, Almeda, Montana, Northwestern, South Carolina,
South Carolina, Maryland, Virginia. Three schools in there loathe UNC, and I
spent my childhood loathing Dean Smith, but that's all gone.
Chuck
Culpepper
Washington Post
ThereÕs a lot of bluster in that response, but
here is the key passage: ÒI can't
remember one of our columnists sharing the adamancy of Michael Powell.Ó While denouncing me he is agreeing with
me that The Post has not weighed in
with proper censure of the outrageous actions of the University of North
Carolina and the almost equally outrageous failure of the NCAA up to now to
levy any punishment. I emailed him
again to agree with him that I had seen nothing like the Powell article and to
take issue with his Òbushels of storiesÓ claim:
Hi
Chuck,
I
assume that this is the article
today that
youÕre talking about with this really hard-hitting relevant passage:
With
the looming potential of NCAA sanctions stemming from allegations of widespread
academic fraud, CarolinaÕs recruiting has suffered at the highest level —
the Tar Heels, despite wooing several candidates, have not landed a
one-and-done player since 2007. Missing out on the best players, though, has
meant assembling very good players who stick around. Those very good players
have come to know and cherish each otherÕs idiosyncrasies.
I
am still, amazingly enough, a regular subscriber and an avid ACC basketball
fan, and I can assure you that that passage is as tough and revealing as
anything that has appeared in The Post on the subject, unless it
appeared when I was traveling overseas and I had my delivery stopped though The
Post charged me anyway because I would have Òaccess online,Ó which I did
not. You certainly could have fooled me about those Òbushels of stories.Ó
Dan Kane of the Raleigh News and Observer has written bushels of
stories and The New York Times and CBS Sports have written relatively
hard-hitting pieces, but The Post has done neither.
Rather,
your coverage has been as I describe it in the article to which I linked in my email.
It bears this title, "NCAA Caves on UNC CorruptionÓ and it has this
subtitle, ÒWashington Post Blacks Out the News.Ó Just like this
week, The New York Times did a relatively honest job of reporting; The
Post did not.
If
someone higher up hasnÕt stuffed a sock in your mouth, then you explain it if
IÕm the Òconspiracist.Ó Could it be that the
truth might hurt the sale of John
FeinsteinÕs book beatifying
Dean Smith? I know that sounds like a reach, but there must be some
explanation.
Dave
p.s. ESPNÕs Jay Bilas, like Feinstein, went to Duke, but he has been a
complete shill for the Tar Heels all during this scandal. Call me a conspiracist if you will, but I think the fact that he is a
lawyer for a firm in the epicenter of Tar Heel fanaticism, Charlotte, goes a
long way toward explaining his behavior.
ThatÕs where matters stood in the
Martin-Culpepper email war until a blatant act of news suppression on the UNC
scandal front prompted me to email him again.
Post Cover-Up Participation Confirmed
Once again, it was the Raleigh News and Observer that broke the story,
but other news organs like the Baltimore
Sun and ESPN quickly picked up on it.
The Washington Post remained
silent. My email to Culpepper tells
the story:
Hi Chuck,
Your very influential newspaper and your sports page, including all
those non-UNC-connected (unlike me) colleagues, seems to be blacking out the
huge news that the president of our local university in College Park has said
that the NCAA would inflict the athletic Òdeath penaltyÓ on UNC for its
ÒabysmalÓ scandal. As you can see, the Baltimore Sun has recognized that his
remarks are highly newsworthy.
At this point, as I see it, you have three options. You can
ignore this email, you can respond that I was right all along and agree that The Post is protecting the miscreants at UNC,
or you can get on the stick and start giving this colossal scandal the coverage
that it merits, starting by reporting what Dr. [Wallace] Loh
has said.
Dave
Culpepper did not take option one and ignore my
email. He responded promptly the
same day (Tuesday, April 11):
Dear David,
There has been an ongoing discussion between one editor and the
beat writer about this, about how to proceed. The beat writer did not feel
comfortable opining on the matter, so it shifted to me just moments ago. I was
off today but would like to write something as I think this case will be
important.
As for your earlier messages, they remain
completely irresponsible.
Chuck
ThatÕs quite some power and
influence the beat writer on college sports seems to have at The Post. The newspaper just ignores big news that
happens to be outside his comfort zone.
It must be Feinstein. I can
see why Culpepper might feel some ill will toward me because I apparently
ruined his day off work. At 5 pm
the same day his article entitled ÒMaryland president Ôwould thinkÕ UNC gets death penalty.
One would think he is out to lunchÓ appeared on the Post web
site. It never made the print
edition and after a day you couldnÕt even find it on their web site unless you
knew the web address.
The title really says it all.
Hidden away though it was, enough Òcompletely irresponsibleÓ readers
managed to find it to show their displeasure and disagreement with the
sentiments expressed. Here is one
of the best by Rod_Johnson:
Ask
yourselves what would happen if it had been UNLV, or Oklahoma admitting to
providing athletes with fake classes for over 20 years. They would have been
shut down in 3 months. But UNC continues to skate, and will continue to skate.
Why? Because the NCAA and ESPN make huge $$$ off of UNC
basketball. ThatÕs it. This is not about being "tribal" or any
rah rah BS. This is about a university being caught
red-handed in the most blatant case of academic fraud (in fact, the textbook
definition of it) and receiving no punishment. It sure would be nice of some
sportswriters would discover their backbone and call out the NCAA. You know it
wonÕt be CBS or ESPN, the only time they mentioned it was as a 'distraction for
Roy'.
Having weighed in with an article, with my
prompting, on the Loh observation, The Post was then able to link to it the
next day with another online-only article, this time by junior writer Scott
Allen entitled ÒRoy Williams suggests
Maryland president is a Ôdouble idiotÕ for Ôdeath penaltyÕ comments.Ó Williams was
responding to a really incredible question on a satellite radio call-in show as
to whether the NCAA menÕs basketball championship the Tar Heels won earlier this month carried any Òspecial significance
because of all the junk the university has had to deal withÓ with regards to
the fallout of the scandal. Here was his
response:
ÒItÕs
one of the reasons, thereÕs no question about that, because there has been a
lot of junk and people have questioned my integrity,Ó said Williams, who
fielded questions about the scandal throughout North CarolinaÕs NCAA tournament
run. ÒEven since we won, people have come out and said some things without
information. TheyÕve just gone by what somebody else has said, and I know
what has been done, I know what the facts are. ThatÕs been really hurtful. Some
people in the media that I never thought would go out and say some things
without having all the information. And then we have a president that says we
should get the death penalty — a president of another university. I mean,
to me, thatÕs just so silly. A guy told me one time, ÔIf you get a little
knowledge and it turns you into an idiot, but no knowledge, youÕre a double
idiot,Õ and thatÕs about the way I look at that thing. But no, it was
especially satisfying in a lot of different ways, and that was one of
them.Ó
Roy
Williams and probably a lot of UNC sports devotees believe that they have
actually achieved redemption in every sense of the word simply by dint of
having won the NCAA tournament. And
if one knows no more about UNCÕs massive cheating scandal than what he might
read in The Post, he might even agree
with Ole Roy and think the allegations amount to nothing more than Òjunk.Ó Unlike this
writer and the Wall Street
Journal and Bloomberg Businessweek,
after all, The Post didnÕt even
bother to review the Smith-Willingham book. And in spite of my protest over their
tone-deaf use of the word Òredemption,Ó when the Tar Heels won, ÒNorth
Carolina gets redemptionÉÓ was above the
masthead on their front page the next day and ÒTar
Heels find redemptionÉÓ headlined their article on the
front page of the sports section. Sigh!
David
Martin
April
13, 2017
See
also ÒSilence Broken in UNC Athletic Scandal.Ó
Home Page Column Column 5 Archive Contact