clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

UNC Releases Parking Tickets; ABCers Excuse Themselves For Some Private Time

New, 8 comments

Here are the parking tickets via WRAL in a nice form fitted list for easy persusal.

UNC did not include the names of the student athletes on the list which could be an issue since the ruling stated UNC had to turn over everything. At this point it is not known if that will create a whole other legal confrontation on whether  UNC violated the judge's order.

As for the tickets themselves, there is nothing particularly earth shattering here, mainly because we have no idea which players are tied to which vehicles and who specifically owns or bought said vehicles. There are a total of 395 citations for 11 student-athletes which comes out to around $13,000 in fines over three and a half years. That is roughly $400 per student per year or as someone pointed out cheaper than paying for a parking permit in Chapel Hill. The media will raise questions as to whether the fines were paid and who paid them, but that information(i.e. the disposition of the citations) was also held back by UNC. Others will make a huge deal over the total sum of the fines which is stupid given the length of time, the parking situation at UNC and the fact college kids rack up parking fines on a regular basis everywhere.

With the release of the records, UNC included some background information which stated, among other things that, a review of the tickets by UNC showed all the vehicles cited were registered to a "student, parent, grandparent or fellow student." So that should be the end of it right? UNC said it was all good so we can move on to watching the Heels play baseball. Yeah, not likely. First of all, ABCers are going to scream bloody murder at the lack of evidence shown to back up the claim. The media will react much the same way but instead use correct English and some form of acceptable logic.

One question I am sure they will ask is how did UNC link the student-athlete with the car? If tickets are issued to the registered owner then how does UNC know Player A was driving the car owned by Player A's Mother if he is not present with it? I imagine the answer to that is the car was probably registered with UNC and that is the link. Of course the real goal for the media here(save one outlet who was only interested in parking abuses at UNC) will be digging down to find out where the car came from and who paid for it. Confirming that Player A was driving a car belonging to someone on the NCAA's list of permissible benefactors(mother, father, etc.) is only one level of clearance. The next question is whether said car was bought and paid for by someone outside the NCAA's list. In other words did Agent X buy a car for Player A's mother and had it registered to her thus hiding his involvement.

That will be the direction the media goes with their investigation and it is safe to assume there will not be an answer to that query any time soon. At this point I am not going to say UNC is in the clear because that is yet to be determined independently of UNC's statement. It is not a shock that UNC reviewed all of these and confirmed the registration information which explains why it was all ready to go for the media less than 24 hours after the stay was vacated. If what UNC has said holds up then this is much ado about nothing aside from the faux outrage that will arise over sum total of the fines. If the media digs down and finds some sort of Terrell Pryor-type situation where the cars came to the players via illicit(by NCAA rules) means, then this is obviously a bigger issue. At this point here is hoping UNC's statement is the last one we need to hear about these parking tickets.