When it comes to football and academics, it's a long way from Auburn to North Carolina

New North Carolina defensive coordinator Gene Chizik meets the press Feb. 4, 2015, in Chapel Hill, N.C. (University of North Carolina photo)

Gene Chizik was the head football coach at Auburn. He is the defensive coordinator at North Carolina.
That, boys and girls, qualifies as an actual, factual link between the football programs at those two universities.
As opposed to, say, a nice, juicy insinuation by a major national publication that the Tigers and the Tar Heels maybe, possibly, could be linked by something more.
Like academic fraud.
Oh, The Wall Street Journal didn't use those exact words or make that direct charge in its story titled, "At Auburn, Athletics and Academics Collide," but the suggestion of a connection wasn't entirely subtle.


Witness this paragraph dropped into the middle of a story that's otherwise exclusively about Auburn.
For as long as universities have fielded big-time sports programs, many star athletes have gravitated to a handful of friendly majors that make it easier for them to meet the NCAA's academic eligibility requirements. At some schools, these majors have come under intense scrutiny. An internal investigation at North Carolina last year found that many football and basketball players were enrolled in "no attendance" classes in the African and Afro-American Studies department, where the only requirement was the submission of a single research paper. The NCAA has told North Carolina it is investigating the matter.

Wait. What?
Actually, the NCAA hit North Carolina in June with a Notice of Allegations alleging major violations, including a lack of institutional control, stemming from no-show classes and bogus grades that kept UNC athletes eligible for years.
But since The Wall Street Journal just happened to mention the North Carolina scandal, this story must've made similar allegations about Auburn, right?
Um, no. Not exactly.

This story is an interesting and well-documented investigative piece that makes two key points: 1.) Auburn football players in recent years have clustered in the public administration major; and 2.) After the school began a move in 2012 to eliminate that major, the athletics department rallied to save it, in part by offering to help pay for it.

The story says the school declined the financial assistance but retained the major.
That financial offer seems a bit unusual and presents at least the appearance of a conflict of interest. Was the athletics department throwing its weight around on an academic matter where it didn't belong? Were the athletics department and the administration complicit in preserving an easy major so some key football players wouldn't be overwhelmed by academic responsibilities during their pursuit of SEC and national championships?

Those are legitimate questions the story raises, but they're probably of more interest to SACS, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, than the NCAA. It's a long way from saving a less-than-rigorous major to committing academic fraud. That distance rivals the career arc from national championship head coach to second-chance defensive coordinator.
Now, if Auburn's public administration major did involve no-show classes and bogus grades, if it was a fraud and a front, that would and should set off the NCAA's alarm, but The Wall Street Journal's story doesn't document or report anything of the sort.

It just invites the possibility with the brief and gentle mention of the alleged misbehavior at North Carolina. You're free to let your imagination take it from there.