Opinion: The NCAA’s look at UNC is a sideshow to real issues

At first glance, the NCAA’s notice of allegations doesn’t contain any substantial new information. Their main charge — that UNC lacked institutional control, should shock no one.

But it’s important to remember that both the NCAA and UNC have a vested interest in discussion about the scandal ending as soon as possible.

UNC needs to be able to recruit athletes and generate revenue. The NCAA benefits from a lack of close examinations of their flagship programs. When conversations about the structure of college sports continue, it becomes difficult to ignore the exploitation that is occurring.

The NCAA’s investigation process and the official positions of UNC’s administration reveal a lack of institutional will from both to seriously examine the evidence that’s been uncovered so far and, by extension, address the problems at the core of college sports.

Going forward, UNC should attempt to reclaim its progressive legacy on this issue exemplified by figures like William Friday and Dean Smith, not continue to hitch itself to the NCAA’s sinking ship.

While it is difficult to know what the NCAA will do at this point, this editorial board suspects that the NCAA’s Committee on Infractions will come down hardest on women’s basketball, as Jan Boxill, the program’s former academic advisor, is the star of the notice of allegations.

Her emails litter the report, filled with exclamations about what classes her “girls” need and suggestions about what grades they should receive on assignments. The notice doesn’t seem to emphasize revenue sports — men’s basketball and football.

Another marker of resistance to addressing problems is the decision to try UNC under the old enforcement policy. The new policy introduced in 2013 holds coaches responsible for misconduct even if they weren’t directly aware it was occurring at the time. The old policy allows head coaches to emerge relatively unscathed.

UNC athletic director Bubba Cunningham said the NCAA decided to use the old penalty structure. This seems to be an arbitrary decision that lessens pressure on UNC’s renowned head coaches.

This is not to say that the NCAA coming down hard on all the involved teams would be a useful course of action. The NCAA, as a fundamentally exploitative institution, lacks any kind of moral authority when it comes to UNC’s wrongdoing. UNC cannot look to the NCAA to wipe its own slate clean.

To do so, UNC should own up to its misdeeds and lead conversations about institutional change on a national level. So far, that has not happened.