- This topic has 70 replies, 30 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Fresh from our resident 4th-Estate Posse …
I’m sure everyone over on the hill has bated breath for this one!
Dang, gonna have to find some new memes. I wonder if they scheduled this knowing that Fridays were a running joke.
It will ‘all’ be ‘revealed’ to the public at a 1 PM presser. I’m taking some side action on the following lines:
Number of times the phrase “had no knowledge” is uttered: over/under 7
Number of times “the Martin Investigation did it’s job” is mentioned: over/under 5
Number of times Jennifer Wiley’s picture is shown: over/under 4
Number of questions actually answered: over/under 3
Anybody else want in?
Real question: Anyone know how this is being paid for? According to Joe Ovies, they are paying Wainstein $950/hr. That’s a crap load of money. Something seems wrong that they created that mess but taxpayers are having to pay their way out of the mess.
It will ‘all’ be ‘revealed’ to the public at a 1 PM presser. I’m taking some side action on the following lines:
Number of times the phrase “had no knowledge” is uttered: over/under 7
Number of times “the Martin Investigation did it’s job” is mentioned: over/under 5
Number of times Jennifer Wiley’s picture is shown: over/under 4
Number of questions actually answered: over/under 3
Anybody else want in?
Are we counting a Q/A period after the report?
If so, over, under, under, under.
I expect an extremely well-choreographed show. There will be minor revelations made (nothing that isn’t already known, just maybe not known nationally) and many, many pats on the back for openness, transparency, and “moving ahead”. BTW that’s the phrase you don’t want to do a drinking game with…
You can bet Mr. Wainstein has done his job, based on the information he was given. The report will only reveal what UNC wants to reveal, and the discussion will center around the “reforms” already made, the “final-ness” of this investigation, and the need to “move ahead”. I wouldn’t be entirely surprised to see a new “admission” of some minor wrong-doing. BUT, anything of the sort will be associated ONLY with football. The golden goose will remain flawless, from their perspective.
There will be questions, but they will have been cleared in advance and will be the softball variety.
I sincerely hope I’m wrong.
Are we counting a Q/A period after the report?
If so, over, under, under, under.
@Sacco .. I’m in with Paky…
May I add to fun…
Number of times we hear…
“…corrective measures have been implemented systemwide…” — over/under 5
“…this will never happen again… at the University of North Carolina…” — over/under 3
“…Coach Williams nor any of his current staff had absolutely nothing to do with any of this…” — over/under 3
“…Coach Smith had absolutely nothing to do with any of this…” — over/under 1
“…We fully expect all of our athletic teams do what it takes to be competitive at the highest levels…” — over/under 3#NCSU-North Carolina's #1 FOOTBALL school!hey Sacco….
since you’re the bookmaker on this…What’s the odds that DG-DoucheBag in Charlotte… broadcasts the entire presser…. live ?
What’s the odds that DG-DoucheBag in Charlotte… broadcasts the entire presser…. live WITHOUT commentary?
#NCSU-North Carolina's #1 FOOTBALL school!OMG guys, seven minutes to MASSIVE DISAPPOINTMENT.
LMAO.
Wainstein’s report stated that for 18 years, no-show paper classes in the African and Afro-American Studies Department were “very popular among student-athletes, and especially those from the revenue sports.”
WELL DUH!
Smarter than the average bear
The deny-ers will still deflect and deny. I can hear Dave Glenn now. IC is probably exploding, and the BOT wants to know if this will affect recruiting. Mean while my thoughts are this should cause an implosion … BUT little Carol has it under control, “this will never happen again”. Hey Carol, it shouldn’t have happened in the first place. If you really want to be proactive, take down the banners.
Smarter than the average bear
Just spent about 15 minutes perusing the report and while there appears to a lot of really good data, I walk away with the sense that everyone involved is a victim. I guess I will need to go back and read it in more detail, but one would imagine that EVERYONE can’t be victim.
The “early” exit polling indicates the “obvious”….
The Idiot Responses will begin shortly…#NCSU-North Carolina's #1 FOOTBALL school!I’ve missed the press conference – can anyone offer a rundown?
From what little I’ve read, the Executive Summary of the report props up the notion of ‘rouge elements’ in Crowder and Nyang’oro.
This is the part I found particularly interesting.
“In the case of 329 students, the grade they received in a paper class provided the “GPA boost” that either kept or pushed their GPA above the 2.0 level for a semester. For 81 of those students, that GPA boost was the margin that gave them the 2.0 GPA that allowed them to graduate. “Crowder did it, Nyang’oro allowed it (and then did it a little).
A few athletics counselors knew and steered.
Wayne Walton knew a little, but he never ever ever ever ever told Roy.
BMFD and Bunting are like Sgt Schultz.
Lotsa of other folks kinda knew, but never did anything about it.Did I forget anything?
This is the part I found particularly interesting.
“In the case of 329 students, the grade they received in a paper class provided the “GPA boost” that either kept or pushed their GPA above the 2.0 level for a semester. For 81 of those students, that GPA boost was the margin that gave them the 2.0 GPA that allowed them to graduate. “Agreed. The massive last minute steering prior to Crowder retiring as well.
Most damning to me so far:
For the purposes of their review, the Experts defined unoriginal content as content of a paper that was taken verbatim from other sources as opposed to having being written by the student. Their full report is attached at Exhibit 35 but their top-level findings are as follows:
? In over 40% of the 150 papers (61 papers), 25% or more of the text was deemed unoriginal.
? In 17% of the 150 papers (26 papers), 50% of the text was deemed unoriginal.
Of those 61 papers with 25% or more of unoriginal content, the average grade was a 3.69 (or almost an A-).As I take it, this was the “originality analysis” that Wainstein asked external experts to do on a sampling of papers provided for these classes before their grades were assigned by Crowder.
And then there’s this:
In addition to Reynolds’ grade guidance, our email review disclosed several instances where Boxill made specific grade suggestions for her women’s basketball players. In September 2008, for example, Boxill forwarded a paper on behalf of one of her players, to which Crowder responded that “[a]s long as I am here, I will try to accommodate as many favors as possible,” presumably signaling her willingness to grant grade requests up to the point of her retirement. As to that particular student’s paper, Crowder then said “Did you say a D will do for [the basketball player]? I’m only asking because 1. no sources, 2, it has absolutely nothing to do with the assignments for that class and 3. it seems to me to be a recycled paper. She took [another class] in spring of 2007 and that was likely for that class.” Boxill replied “Yes, a D will be fine; that’s all she needs. I didn’t look at the paper but figured it was a recycled one as well, but I couldn’t figure out from where.”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
