There are pretty significant differences between SMU and UNC. In the SMU case, an athletic department academic advisor completed coursework for a student athlete under the guise of an assistant coach. A very specific case that was focused on the athletic department in clear violation of NCAA rules.

The UNC case was an institution wide issue that "benefited" both SAs and non-SAs. Believe it or not, the scope of the UNC scandal is probably a mitigating factor. And this is why the NCAA is going to have a problem. They aren't going to be able to prove that athletic department officials engaged in any wrong doing outside of "Hey, go to this class. It's easy."