Athletes and lies: What’s changed in half century?

“In May 1961 the [basketball] point-shaving scandal spread, as Doug Moe, an All-American at Carolina, became implicated ….Although Moe had accepted no bribes, he had been given a total of $75 in his dealings with [gamblers]…. Moe told the chancellor [William Aycock] he was in ‘no way’ involved in the scandal…. It was only at a fourth meeting…. that Moe acknowledged his role….[Aycock]  brought Moe’s case before the Men’s Honor Council, [but] the council… absolved Moe…. Aycock found its decision perplexing, and… suspended Moe ‘indefinitely,’ giving him 48 hours to leave campus….

“Students marched on the chancellor’s residence that evening, and Aycock hastily set up a meeting at Gerrard Hall to explain his apparent overruling of the student government. By the end of the meeting, he was given a standing ovation.”

— From “William Friday: Power, Purpose and American Higher Education” by William A. Link (1997)

2 thoughts on “Athletes and lies: What’s changed in half century?”

  1. In the current football scandal, I haven’t heard anyone say that the players involved will go before the student honor court. Maybe that aspect is pending further review, but seems like their infractions might warrant airing in the student court. Or is that court dedicated to academic misconduct only?

  2. I don’t care what anybody says about Doug Moe. He was from the east coast and was a great coach in the NBA.

Leave a Reply to Charles Blackburn, Jr. Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.