Football, men’s basketball named in UNC’s newest NOA


Charges of “extra benefits” reappeared in North Carolina’s second amended notice of allegations, which takes a harsher tone than the ANOA issued to the school in April. The university pubicly released its newest ANOA on Thursday.

In June 2014, the NCAA reopened its investigation into academic improprieties at UNC. The school received its original notice of allegations in May 2015, but the process was put on hold when the university self-reported new findings before submitting its response. That led to an amended notice of allegations sent to UNC this past April. In its response, the school argued that the NCAA stepped outside its jurisdiction with the charges in the ANOA, which included lack of institutional control.

Following an Oct. 28 jurisdictional hearing, the NCAA Committee on Infractions rejected UNC’s arguments in the school’s response. In November, the COI wrote a letter to the NCAA enforcement staff to revisit the second notice of allegations from April.

That led to the newest NOA, issued to UNC on Dec. 13. Here are the allegations:

  1. Extra benefits provided by AFAM department manager Julius Nyang’oro and his assistant Deborah Crowder in the form of special arrangements for student-athletes, “particularly in the sports of football and men’s basketball,” from the fall of 2002 through the summer of 2011. The NCAA deems this an ethical conduct violation.
  2. Extra benefits provided by women’s basketball athletic academic counselor Jan Boxill in the form of impermissible academic assistance to women’s basketball student-athletes from February 2003 to July 2010.
  3. Crowder failing to furnish information to the NCAA.
  4. Nyang’oro failing to furnish information to the NCAA.
  5. Lack of institutional control from fall of 2002 through the summer of 2011.

“We’ve worked collaboratively with the NCAA enforcement staff for more than two years,” UNC athletic director Bubba Cunningham said. “We have serious concerns about the process that led to the third notice of allegations based on the principle that all member institutions should expect fair and consistent treatment. We will continue to work cooperatively with the NCAA and remain fully committed to seeking a fair outcome.”

The university will have 90 days from its receipt of the NOA to send its response to the NCAA. UNC is evaluating whether or not it will need more time “due to the shifting nature of the allegations.”

Once the NCAA receives the response, it will have 60 days to reply to the school. A hearing will then be scheduled for UNC to go before the Committee on Infractions. A ruling on potential penalties typically comes in the months that follow.