![]() |
|
|
#1 | |||
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
|
NCAA academic reform - teams could lose scholarships
NCAA teams could lose scholarships
In general I like the concept of penalizing programs with consistently poor academic performance, but a few elements of this story really concern me: Quote:
Umm, why the hell should a program be punished because a player leaves early for the pros? What in the hell does this have to do with how that program is doing in terms of academics? Seems to me this is actually a punishment in the guise of academic reforem for teams that are ultra-successful on the court/in the field. And why should a program be penalized for transfers? There are any number of reasons why a player might transfer out of a program, and not all of them reflect badly on the original institution. Again, successful teams may take an unfair hit here as kids decide they're buried behind too much talent on the depth chart. And as for the means of measuring academic performance, I don't like the fact that it doesn't appear as though the formula considers mitigating factors. Let's take the Washington Husky basketball program - the previous coach, Bob Bender, didn't emphasize academics, and as a result the classroom performance of many members of the team suffered. Once Lorenzo Romar was hired 3 years ago, players were held accountable by the coaching staff for not just meeting minimum academic expectations but exceeding them. However, Romar faces the possibility of losing a scholarship next season partly due to events that happened under his predecessor, and the fact that some players transferred out when he arrived and another left early for the draft after a season under Romar. Granted there exists the ability to apply for a waiver from the punishment, but a better system would account for situations like Romar's and look closely at how a program that was struggling academically under a previous coach is now peforming under the new coach. To me, this "reform" looks like the classic blunt instrument approach to a complex issue. Last edited by dawgfan : 03-01-2005 at 02:55 AM. |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springfield, USA
|
Man, that is stupid. Classic, short-sited, NCAA response.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
College Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The Dirty
|
Do they still get free prostitutes though?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Pro Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cary, NC, USA
|
Well, the problem is a distinction between leaving for the pros and dropping out.
If I, as a junior FB player, was about to fail out and decided to leave school; what's the dividing line between being penalized for dropping out and leaving for the pros? Being drafted? What about if I wasn't drafted but signed as an UDFA? Or, if I was signed as an UDFA, given a trial, and was cut after a week? Or, I went off and played in the Arena League - that's pro, right? |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springfield, USA
|
Quote:
So, what you are pointing out, it is impossible to do this at all. You cannot penalize a school for having players walk away to make millions of dollars, but you also are going to have a hard time deciding between players leaving to "go pro" and just leaving ahead of the hatchet. Therefore, the wisest choice is not to do anything at all. What are the odds they'll make the wisest choice? Last edited by HomerJSimpson : 03-01-2005 at 08:38 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
College Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Federal Way, WA
|
Its not just the NCAA's fault, they do have mounting pressure against them. People in general have to realize that lax standards within a university is the individual universities problem. Especially when there is little or no special treatment to athletes given(special treatment is something that can be addressed inside or outside the university, thats academic fraud). If an athlete takes up a universities space by taking 4 years of worthless classes without earning a degree thats something that university has to live with, because it may be no worse than some BS program at another school that looks legit on the surface, but is just there to look legit to give easy degrees. No outside governing body can determine if a university is living up to its own specific academic standards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springfield, USA
|
There is a line that gives me pause in the article.
Quote:
Is this saying players that transfer or drop while still academically eligible will not count against the university? That would make a little more sense. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
H.S. Freshman Team
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Spain
|
The more rules the NCAA has, the more rules the universities will break
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
College Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The DMV
|
For what it's worth you can get the APR numbers here:
http://www2.ncaa.org/academics_and_a..._apr_data.html A 925 or below will get you penalized. A few notables: Duke 984 Notre Dame 979 Stanford 979 Illinois 973 Michigan 973 North Carolina 970 Rutgers 962 Florida State 959 Kentucky 954 Florida 949 Auburn 944 Colorado 937 Nebraska 927 Oklahoma 925 USC 919 And as a point of reference: Yale 999 Princeton 994 Penn 993 Harvard 990 Cornell 987 Columbia 982 Brown 971 Dartmouth 966 |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
|
Quote:
Yeah - that point wasn't made very clear in the ESPN article, but in follow-up articles locally that seems to be the case. Still, I don't see why players leaving early for the pros or transferring should be looked-upon as negatives for the schools affected - I ask again, what the hell does this have to do with academics? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
Pro Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cary, NC, USA
|
Quote:
That's a 925 or below /per sport/. Which would create problems for some schools. Alabama (Football): 880 Kentucky (Basketball): 827 Georgia (Basketball): 853 USCal (Basketball): 761 The oddest sport seems to be baseball - most if not all major baseball programs are under 925, because of the propensity for teams to give partial scholarships (therefore there are only a handful of data points), and the NCAA rules about allowing Juniors to jump to the MLB. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
College Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The DMV
|
Quote:
Yes, the 925 is per sport (I quoted overall program scores, which don't matter as much). As for your point on baseball, the partial scholarship situation shouldn't matter since the NCAA has ratings for Ivy League schools which don't give out athletic scholarships at all. It would be interesting to see what is going on with Baseball though... If you're talking major programs, I would think that, as you mention, drafted Juniors leaving the program would be somewhat common, affecting the APR that way... Last edited by Klinglerware : 03-01-2005 at 06:29 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Philly
|
I definitely dont understand why universities are being penalized because students transfer. Many football & basketball players choose a university based on coaches. A coaching staff changes every year almost. Penalizing universities(and in turn students) for that seems ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: East Anglia
|
Quote:
Not only baseball. In fact, there are probably few, if even any schools that allocate all the allowed scholarships for every sport. And with sports like track or swimming the number of allowed scholarships is significantly lower than the number of athletes it takes to fill out a team. Football and basketball are really the only sports where you can properly fill out an entire roster with full rides. All the other sports rely heavily on walk-ons or partial scholarships to even get a full team on the field.
__________________
Molon labe |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Pro Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cary, NC, USA
|
Quote:
Many of the scores are noted that they will be adjusted - these are basically teams where there aren't a certain number of data points. There's some sort of progression that is done on those, I think based on the overall school's APR, before the 'final' score is put together. From what I understand, partials aren't counted towards this, but I'm not 100% sure. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
College Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The DMV
|
APR score overview for football and basketball (from USA Today, I think):
MAKING THE GRADE, MISSING THE MARK Looking at the Division I schools that met NCAA standards and the major college football and basketball programs that fell short. Making the grade | Not making the grade MAKING THE GRADE The 142 Division I schools whose programs met the new minimum academic performance standard set by the NCAA: America East (6 of 10): Albany, Binghamton, Boston University, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont. Atlantic Coast (7 of 11): Duke, Georgia Tech, Maryland, Miami (Fla.), North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest. Atlantic Sun (2 of 11): Belmont, Stetson. Atlantic 10 (8 of 12): Dayton, Duquesne, Fordham, George Washington, La Salle, Richmond, Saint Joseph's, Xavier. Big East (6 of 12): Boston College, Georgetown, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Villanova. Big Sky (2 of 8): Eastern Washington, Weber State. Big South (5 of 9): Birmingham Southern, High Point, UNC-Asheville, Radford, Virginia Military. Big Ten (7 of 11): Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin. Big 12 (0 of 12). Big West (3 of 10): UC-Irvine, Idaho, Utah State. Colonial (6 of 10): Delaware, Drexel, Hofstra, UNC-Wilmington, Towson, William & Mary. Conference USA (6 of 14): Marquette, Saint Louis, South Florida, Southern Mississippi, TCU, Tulane. Horizon (7 of 9): Butler, Detroit, Illinois-Chicago, Loyola-Chicago, Wisconsin-Green Bay, Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Wright State. Independents (1 of 4): Texas A&M-Corpus Christi. Ivy (8 of 8): Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, Harvard, Pennsylvania, Princeton, Yale. Metro Atlantic (8 of 10): Canisius, Fairfield, Loyola (Md.), Manhattan, Marist, Niagara, Rider, Siena. Mid-American (3 of 13): Ball State, Miami (Ohio), Ohio. Mid-Continent (3 of 9): Oakland, Southern Utah, Valparaiso. Mid-Eastern Athletic (1 of 11): Maryland-Eastern Shore. Missouri Valley (7 of 10): Bradley, Creighton, Drake, Evansville, Illinois State, Northern Iowa, Wichita State. Mountain West (2 of 8): Air Force, Colorado State. Northeast (7 of 11): Fairleigh Dickinson, Mount St. Mary's, Quinnipiac, Robert Morris, Sacred Heart, St. Francis (N.Y.), Wagner. Ohio Valley (4 of 11): Austin Peay, Morehead State, Samford, Tennessee State. Pacific 10 (2 of 10): California, Stanford. Patriot (6 of 8): American, Army, Bucknell, Holy Cross, Lehigh, Navy. Southeastern (2 of 12): Mississippi State, Vanderbilt. Southern (8 of 12): The Citadel, College of Charleston, Davidson, East Tennessee State, Elon, Furman, UNC-Greensboro, Western Carolina. Southland (4 of 11): Lamar, Sam Houston State, Southeastern Louisiana, Stephen F. Austin. Southwestern Athletic (1 of 10): Alcorn State. Sun Belt (2 of 11): Arkansas State, North Texas. West Coast (5 of 8): Gonzaga, Loyola Marymount, Pepperdine, St. Mary's, San Diego. Western Athletic (3 of 10): Rice, SMU, Tulsa. NOT MAKING THE GRADE The 34 major-college (Division I-A) football programs flagged by the NCAA as APR-deficient: Score........................... School 802................................Middle Tennessee State 814............................... San Jose State 849............................... Oregon 850............................... Toledo 852............................... San Diego State 854............................... Buffalo 860............................... Temple 862............................... Arizona 862............................... UCLA 868............................... UNLV 870............................... Ohio State 872............................... New Mexico 872............................... Troy 874............................... Louisiana-Lafayette 877............................... Cincinnati 879............................... Nevada 880............................... Alabama 880............................... Central Florida 881............................... Purdue 882............................... New Mexico State 885............................... Washington 887............................... Arizona State 887............................... Texas A&M 892............................... Oregon State 893............................... Houston 894............................... Alabama at Birmingham 896............................... Oklahoma State 896............................... Western Michigan 897............................... Eastern Michigan 898............................... Louisiana-Monroe 899............................... Kansas 901............................... Wyoming 902............................... Marshall 905............................... Louisiana Tech The 61 Division I men's basketball programs flagged by the NCAA as APR-deficient: Score........................School 611........................... Fresno State 647........................... Baylor 750........................... Cal State-Fullerton 759........................... Sacramento State 761........................... Southern California 783........................... San Jose State 796........................... Hampton 796........................... South Alabama 800........................... Jacksonville 800........................... Texas Southern 804........................... Louisiana-Lafayette 806........................... New Mexico State 808........................... DePaul 808........................... Louisiana-Monroe 813........................... LSU 815........................... Colorado 818........................... Temple 820........................... Virginia Commonwealth 825........................... Central Connecticut State 825........................... Prairie View A&M 826........................... St. John's 826........................... Washington State 827........................... IUPUI 827........................... Kentucky 833........................... Louisville 833........................... Texas 838........................... Cal Poly 839........................... Northern Illinois 839........................... Texas A&M 840........................... Centenary 840........................... Central Michigan 840........................... Texas-El Paso 841........................... Auburn 841........................... Southeast Missouri State 846........................... Iowa State 846........................... North Carolina State 846........................... Northeastern 848........................... Boise State 848........................... Florida International 850........................... St. Bonaventure 850........................... Western Illinois 852........................... Connecticut 852........................... Tennessee 853........................... Georgia 854........................... Florida A&M 854........................... New Mexico 854........................... South Carolina State 857........................... George Mason 857........................... UNLV 860........................... Akron 860 ........................... East Carolina 860........................... South Carolina 862........................... Arizona State 862........................... Southwest Texas State 864........................... McNeese State 865........................... Eastern Michigan 865........................... Houston 865........................... Long Beach State 865........................... Wyoming 870........................... Georgia State 870........................... Western Kentucky |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Fresno, CA
|
Quote:
The things that hurt a school like players leaving early for the pros, and the things that don't help a program like walkons that earn scholarships never count, seem to boggle the mind. The NCAA is nuts. Their academic requirements on highschool curiculum and their enforcement thereof are pretty laughable. They have punished high school students who actually took college courses because they never completed their basic highschool courses like basic math, english, or history. They didn't seem to consider that instead the students had been successfully completing College english and history courses, actually earning college credits. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 | |
|
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Back in Houston!
|
Quote:
Woohoo! At least we're consistent ![]() SI
__________________
Houston Hippopotami, III.3: 20th Anniversary Thread - All former HT players are encouraged to check it out! Janos: "Only America could produce an imbecile of your caliber!" Freakazoid: "That's because we make lots of things better than other people!" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 | |
|
High School Varsity
Join Date: Jun 2003
|
Quote:
So whats new?
__________________
wbatl1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springfield, USA
|
Quote:
I think there is a movement on the way to kick them both out. Underachievers! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 | |
|
General Manager
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Town of Flower Mound
|
Quote:
GO MINERS!!!
__________________
UTEP Miners!!! I solemnly swear to never cheer for TO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 | |
|
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
|
Quote:
If they are academically ineligible when they transfer or leave early, then it damned well better count against the schools! That is probably a big reason why they transfered or left for the pros. I applaud these rules. About time the NCAA realized the student in student-athletes.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages" -Tennessee Williams |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 | |
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
|
Quote:
If they are academically ineligible when they transfer or leave early for the pros, I would support docking the schools for that - however, the way the article reads, it's not clear that such a distinction is made. Would you agree that players transferring or leaving early for the pros that are not academically ineligible shouldn't count against their schools? And as an aside, I think you'll find that a great many players that transfer or leave early for the pros are in fact not academically ineligibile - their decisions are based on other things entirely. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Fresno, CA
|
Fresno's Basketball team is a shambles. Between the loss of scholarships from screwups during Tarkanian's reign, and the new coach(Ray Lopes) actually enstilling some discipline into the team, It will be a while before Fresno's score gets any better. Last year Lopes kicked the three best players off the team for various violations. Considering one of them is now on trial for murder, I think it's pretty clear he did the right thing, but it really puts the damper on the score above. Although, we are NUMBER 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
|
OK, I just heard an interview with the UW AD Todd Turner who was part of the NCAA committee that originally drew up this legislation. He explained that the provision that deals with players leaving early for the pros only counts against the school if that player was not on track to be eligible the next season, which makes a lot more sense than how it was originally reported in the press. He didn't specify whether the same standard applied to transfer students as well, but based on the stipulation for those leaving early for the pros, it seems likely this would also apply to transfers.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|