Ok, it is not an NCAA matter per-se, but why does accreditation never come up in these discussions? Especially with the Penn State situation in which one of the big allegations was the improper "governance" of the institution. That is one of the main standards to be evaluated by accreditation reviews. If there never was a notation about improper governance at Penn State, then what good is accreditation? Everyone in the country knew that Joe Paterno had too much power within the institution. Did no one ever make note of this in the formal review process for accreditation?
This is one I don't get either. What about institutional integrity? Isn't that suppose to be part of the by-laws of the schools, conferences, and the NCAA? I just feel like there is something very wrong with the system if they don't address situations like this or rape U in TX.
I'm still pissed about UNC fake classes for decades not being an NCAA violation. How can that be? Remember when ISU was put on probation for taking a guy to a plane in DM and getting him a Big Mac? NCAA just does enough to non-blue bloods to make it look like they are actually trying to enforce rules. Just a freaking money machine at this point in time.