Cunningham Discusses UNC's Response To The NCAA

The following is a transcript from a teleconference with North Carolina Director of Athletics Bubba Cunningham and some members of the media that was held Thursday afternoon to discuss UNC’s release of its response to the most recent Amended Notice of Allegations by the NCAA.

The transcript follows a glance at Cunningham’s opening statement.

Cunningham noted he was not able to speculate on the substance of the case or any of the details but could discuss NCAA policies and its procedures. Cunningham then noted a few points he wanted to emphasize:

“The fundamental issue in our case is that the NCAA bylaws cover athletics matters, not how academics are managed. We thoroughly addressed academic oversight with our accrediting agency, which is the proper governing body for academic issues.

“Our reply to each allegation is based on the NCAA’s constitution and member-adopted bylaws. We expect the Committee on Infractions to consistently apply these bylaws as the case moves forward.”

Here is the Q&A with Cunningham:

Q: With the NCAA including, excluding and then including various items most recently deemed relevant to the case, has one of the issues for UNC been that it’s dealing with a moving target and doesn’t always know exactly what to zero in on?

Cunningham: Each time we have received a Notice of Allegations we have responded to it, which is what our responsibility is, to respond to the allegations and to provide the defense that we think is appropriate based on the allegations that have been made against the institution. It has gone on for a long time. They have changed a couple of times, and each time we responded how we think is appropriate to those allegations.

Q: If the NCAA doesn’t see this the way UNC wants it to, what’s the ultimate recourse for UNC to fight for what it considers to be an unfair situation?

Cunningham: I don’t want to speculate on any of the outcomes that may occur, but as I’ve indicated before, we are prepared to work through all of the processes. We have been through a number of reviews and investigations and we stick to the process that the agency that we’re working with requires. Whether it was the SBI or SACS or the NCAA, we’ll exhaust the process to its fullest extent that we can, and then we’ll see what our options are at that point.

Q: In regard to recalculating the percentage of athletes to 29.4 percent, why did it take this long to come forward with this number?

Cunningham: It has been a long time that we’ve been working on the case, as has everyone else. I don’t know that I have a specific answer for you. As we continue to do research and evaluate the allegations and prepare a response based on the information that we have. We came across those facts, and the definition of a student-athlete is defined by the NCAA for our purpose, and other reviews and investigations how you define that is a little bit different. And that’s probably as much as I should weigh in on that specific relative to one of our responses.

Q: Is this response fundamentally different from the first two, and if so how?

Cunningham: Certainly, the allegations have changed a couple of times, so this response is specific to the last set of allegations, but I would say in a global sense it’s consistent with what our position has been from the very beginning.

Q: Back to the 29.4 percent figure, are you saying what UNC determines to be a student-athlete is different from what the NCAA determines to be a student-athlete?

Cunningham: No, I’m not saying that and I do encourage you to read the report specifically. The distinction is between some of the statistics used in a previous report by an outside agency and one that the institution determined as we looked at the date ourselves.

Q: More on the 29.4 percent number, UNC is saying athletes that have completed their eligibility should not be counted in this case, doesn’t that still impact APR rankings?

Cunningham: When a student-athlete leaves the university that has an impact on an academic rate. Whether you’re talking about academic progress rate or the Federal graduation rate, I’m not sure which of those you’re talking about. Certainly, they all count in one of those metrics. The distinction that we’ve made in the statistics are written about in the report, and they are active student-athletes on rosters when they took the class.

Q: have you considered self-imposing any kind of penalties to get out in front of this, and if so why not?

Cunningham: Certainly we have considered it, but self-imposition of penalties were not a part of the response that we submitted.

Q: That Deborah Crowder interviewed with the NCAA six days before UNC’s response was originally due, did that interview affect UNC’s response at all?

Cunningham: As you read the response, you’ll see that we have included some of her testimony into the response. It was a short turnaround, and as we’ve been trying during this entire extended period of time to get people to cooperate and be a part, we put in what we could based on the limited time that we had.

Q: There are a couple of references to Auburn and Michigan and their cases, how important do you think a precedent is in this case with other institutions that have gone through a very similar circumstance?

Cunningham: In my experience, each case if different. So, what we’re hoping is the facts in this case are measured consistently against the bylaws and definitions that have been adopted by the membership.

Q: It appears that a concern from UNC is the length of time this has taken and a number of media reports that may impact the fairness of the hearing and/or ruling, and also the chairman of the Committee On Infractions hearing, what’s the level of concern in those areas?

Cunningham: We take all of the allegations very, very seriously. We take our commitment to abiding by the NCAA bylaws very seriously, the membership in general takes them seriously and we hold each other accountable, and we expect that we’ll have consistency as it relates to the hearing (and) as it relates to the investigation. And again, we’re continuing to abide by member-adopted bylaws.

Q: Can you share any of the details regarding the date of the hearing, who will be there to represent UNC and who is expected to participate in the hearing?

Cunningham: Unfortunately, I cannot. There’s been some speculation about those dates – there’s been some in the media – but I’m not at liberty to talk about that now.