[Goose]

Secondly, in general the NCAA enforces rules that are supposed to have some kind of effect on competitive balance between institutions.

Yes, and I would argue that suppressing information about known criminal activities (of any kind) by players at your institution does in fact drastically alter the competitive balance. Those players should be facing charges, not competing on the field. Further, new recruits should not be able to go to Baylor and expect immunity. That is also an unfair advantage, just as fake classes are.

Primarily, the people that should be doing something about the Baylor situation are Baylor University and the federal and Texas court systems. Baylor seems to be doing at least something: the head coach, athletic director, and president are all fired. That's something. I hope they are doing a lot more, but I don't have any connections to Baylor so I don't know.
Of the new stuff, the football ops guy was fired one month into the job, so they acted there. The statement by Kim Mulkey was certainly tone deaf (and stupid), but not exactly a firing offense.

I agree Baylor itself should be the first line of defense against improper conduct. But they were not. While things may appear to be better, it is not clear that whatever institutional shortfalls that previously existed and allowed such misconduct have been addressed. That is where the NCAA has a role to play, to ensure that the playing field is level.

Personally, with regards to the NCAA itself, I am more worried about the UNC case; though again I don't know enough details. Fake courses and fake grades to players definitely undermines the competitive balance, is in the realm of things the NCAA oversees, undermines the whole point of athletics in college, and I haven't heard that UNC has taken the matter overly seriously. [To be fair, it may be that the key part here was "I haven't heard".] Unless UNC itself has done more than I know, I don't like the rumours that the NCAA isn't looking at significant sanctions.

I don't like those rumors either. Keeping people in school who really don't qualify is quite unfair competition. It goes to the heart of competitive fairness. That should certainly be NCAA territory.

[Goose]

Secondly, in general the NCAA enforces rules that are supposed to have some kind of effect on competitive balance between institutions.

Yes, and I would argue that suppressing information about known criminal activities (of any kind) by players at your institution does in fact drastically alter the competitive balance. Those players should be facing charges, not competing on the field. Further, new recruits should not be able to go to Baylor and expect immunity. That is also an unfair advantage, just as fake classes are.

Primarily, the people that should be doing something about the Baylor situation are Baylor University and the federal and Texas court systems. Baylor seems to be doing at least something: the head coach, athletic director, and president are all fired. That's something. I hope they are doing a lot more, but I don't have any connections to Baylor so I don't know.
Of the new stuff, the football ops guy was fired one month into the job, so they acted there. The statement by Kim Mulkey was certainly tone deaf (and stupid), but not exactly a firing offense.

I agree Baylor itself should be the first line of defense against improper conduct. But they were not. While things may appear to be better, it is not clear that whatever institutional shortfalls that previously existed and allowed such misconduct have been addressed. That is where the NCAA has a role to play, to ensure that the playing field is level.

Personally, with regards to the NCAA itself, I am more worried about the UNC case; though again I don't know enough details. Fake courses and fake grades to players definitely undermines the competitive balance, is in the realm of things the NCAA oversees, undermines the whole point of athletics in college, and I haven't heard that UNC has taken the matter overly seriously. [To be fair, it may be that the key part here was "I haven't heard".] Unless UNC itself has done more than I know, I don't like the rumours that the NCAA isn't looking at significant sanctions.

I don't like those rumors either. Keeping people in school who really don't qualify is quite unfair competition. It goes to the heart of competitive fairness. That should certainly be NCAA territory.