NCAA may be at it again

[reedny]

FYI- these guys count towards APR, so they like everyone else on scholarship have to complete minimum standards each semester. You are also assuming that all of SU's admitted students (athletes or not) are dedicated to academics...well good luck with that one. This is currently allowed and it's up to the coaches and admins to decide to accept any transfer. If anything a 5th yr kid who leaves after just the Fall, frees up a Jan. scholarship for the team.

If you read my posts above, I noted APR as one of the many examples of the "harm" caused by sham "student" athletes.

Secondly, I'm not assuming that all kids are dedicated to academics-- and that's exactly the point. At some schools -- it IS a sham. The difference is that, when kids come to a legitimate educational institution, like SU, and they promise to attend class and complete academic requirements -- as all SU recruits are asked to do -- they owe it to themselves, their teams, the University, the coaching staff and all SU alums and fans ... to do their level best to meet that commitment. Ask Mookie and Derrick what that means.

 

[reedny]

This is funny. You do know schools knowingly invite these players to be on scholarship, right? And that for the small sum they risk with a scholarship - they might elevate the program - and in some cases bring in tons more cash, notoriety, etc. Schools are getting the bargain.

My wife works at a college. I am a Syracuse alum. I know the value of education. It's up to the player to take advantage of any scholarship. If they don't - it's on them.

If a school or student doesn't want to enter into this mutually beneficial relationship - they can back out or not accept transfers, no?

Also - it's not a violation. It's written into the rule books.

The onus is on BOTH the player and institution to play by the rules (maintain full-time student status and fulfill academic requirements as a condition to participation). There are schools with legitimate intentions that get burned by poser "graduate" students. But there are also sham schools inviting 5th year (and other) kids knowing they have no intention of doing any real coursework. That's fraud and those kids don't belong on the field competing against real student athletes. My issue with your post (nothing personal) is that, in either case, there is harm. So asking, "what's the big deal" (as you seemed to be asking) is a Kentucky-style question, which is anything but "funny". Maybe I read you wrong. But that's what it seemed like you were saying.

 

[Ottoble]

They do have to finish their undergraduate degree in good standing in order to qualify for that grad transfer rule so don't forget about that when we talk about this.

 

[reedny]

They do have to finish their undergraduate degree in good standing in order to qualify for that grad transfer rule so don't forget about that when we talk about this.

That's also a good point. 5th years aren't even eligible for transfer unless they've completed course requirements at the undergraduate level. For kids wanting to extend their eligibility without any academic intentions, it's bogus to ask, "what's the big deal (harm)". That's exactly what they're asking at the sham schools.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

If they don't intend to go to class, there's no difference. Sham students are an insult to the University, SU alums and fans, and most especially people like DC and Mookie Jones .. who've worked so hard to get a degree having finally realized how important it is.

Then get rid of FB and BB if you don't want sham students.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Many grad programs go beyond one year. If you are only on scholarship for one year, it may be harder to complete the degree.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

When the NCAA says it's about academic integrity, it's about the money and not about academics. No sports franchise wants to invest 4 years of training a kid to have him become a free agent.
Academically, the expected path is a Masters at a different institution, but again, the NCAA puts money ahead of the student.

 

[reedny]

Then get rid of FB and BB if you don't want sham students.

lol.

 

[reedny]

Many grad programs go beyond one year. If you are only on scholarship for one year, it may be harder to complete the degree.

In the case of graduate school programs, t doesn't matter if the degree takes 100 years. All that is required is that the SA attend classes and fulfill his/her academic commitments while they're at the institution.

 

[HtownOrange]

Sorry I added a section after the initial post (and your response). This is not personal to you, BTW. But obviously, the rules don't allow for it (all SA's have to maintain full-time academic eligibility) and it is a scam, and we have no business encouraging it or tolerating it ... that is IF we want to get off probation and elevate ourselves above the gutter schools that recruit pass-throughs.

This is a good discussion, nothing was taken as personal. The intent of a rule may be one thing, but the effect and the application of the other things. The NCAA is not nearly as organized or clear on many issues. Much worse, their application is far from consistent or even based in reason.

The probation non-sense is just the NCAA trying to be impressive while ignoring the 800lb gorilla in the room that is the SEC, UNC, etc. PSU getting their wins restored and probation being removed is excellent proof that the NCAA has no teeth and has no stomach for doing what they are allegedly in place to do.

 

[TheCusian]

The onus is on BOTH the player and institution to play by the rules (maintain full-time student status and fulfill academic requirements as a condition to participation). There are schools with legitimate intentions that get burned by poser "graduate" students. But there are also sham schools inviting 5th year (and other) kids knowing they have no intention of doing any real coursework. That's fraud and those kids don't belong on the field competing against real student athletes. My issue with your post (nothing personal) is that, in either case, there is harm. So asking, "what's the big deal" (as you seemed to be asking) is a Kentucky-style question, which is anything but "funny". Maybe I read you wrong. But that's what it seemed like you were saying.

I think you're reading too much into it. Every scholarship awarded assumes academic good standing and effort by the student athlete. It's then up to the student athlete to take advantage of that. If they enter into the arrangement (like some one and dones) with no intention of completing the work, then sure it's a sham. But that's not something the school can or should monitor prior to enrollment.

In other words, you offer the scholarship assuming that the student is there for both academics and athletics. You support them in both and "lead them to water" - but you cannot force them to drink.

That some don't "drink" is sad, but it is what it is.

And I think that this whole argument is even weaker when applied to graduates. There literally is no victim in this particular crime.

 

[Cheriehoop]

A few question. Aren't most graduate programs more than a year? If colleges will have to guarantee 2 years of scholarship for a players' graduate degree, how is this bad unless that isn't the real goal? Will programs or players be as excited about a grad transfer with the 2 year stipulation? Why not?

Since few players complete their degrees in 3 years (unlike Rak in basketball), these transfer grads are mostly redshirt players, either purposely held out of competition or injured - could it effect whether programs would redshirt a player, encourage summer classes, give student athletes preference when registering for classes? (how many student athletes gets closed out of needed classes vs a regular student?)If we're looking at the good of all players, how do transfer grads effect the program players including seniors being over-recruited? I'd think their welfare would or should count too somehow. I just have lots of questions.

I would think that basketball with only 5 starters would be most effected by grad transfers. In basketball the bigger programs seem to covet the experienced mid major transfer grads.

I can understand a graduated bench player at a major football school who's been "stockpiled" wanting the possibility of actually playing at maybe a mid major after graduating? Sadly every rule, no matter how well intentioned, there will be some people who will game and manipulate it.

 

[reedny]

I think you're reading too much into it. Every scholarship awarded assumes academic good standing and effort by the student athlete. It's then up to the student athlete to take advantage of that. If they enter into the arrangement (like some one and dones) with no intention of completing the work, then sure it's a sham. But that's not something the school can or should monitor prior to enrollment.

In other words, you offer the scholarship assuming that the student is there for both academics and athletics. You support them in both and "lead them to water" - but you cannot force them to drink.

That some don't "drink" is sad, but it is what it is.

And I think that this whole argument is even weaker when applied to graduates. There literally is no victim in this particular crime.

I agree with your sentiments except that, in either the case of students with no real intention of attending classes or universities running sham programs, there is obvious harm to every party ... the university that has to fend off the NCAA, athletic departments who have to clean up the APR mess, coaches and tutors who waste valuable time and resources monitoring fraudulent students, all the legitimate players and schools who are playing by the rules, the fans who are expecting (in the case of legitimate programs) athletic contests between genuine student athletes (not semi-pros). On that one point I think you're wearing blinders and, worse, adopting the convenient viewpoint of Kentucky/'Bama boosters who aren't smart enough to figure out what the "harm" is. If your'e an SU grad I know you're smarter than that. Again, nothing personal, I just vehemently disagree with the "no big deal" attitude about genuine academic participation. If this is really you'r viewpoint ... I suggest following the SEC.

 

[TheCusian]

I agree with your sentiments except that, in either the case of students with no real intention of attending classes or universities running sham programs, there is obvious harm to every party ... the university that has to fend off the NCAA, athletic departments who have to clean up the APR mess, coaches and tutors who waste valuable time and resources monitoring fraudulent students, all the legitimate players and schools who are playing by the rules, the fans who are expecting (in the case of legitimate programs) athletic contest between genuine student athletes (not semi-pros). On that one point I think you're wearing blinders and, worse, adopting the convenient viewpoint of Kentucky/'Bama boosters who aren't smart enough to figure out what the "harm" is. If your'e an SU grand I know you're smarter than that. Again, nothing personal, I just vehemently disagree with the "no big deal" attitude about genuine academic participation. If this is really you'r viewpoint ... I suggest following the SEC.

Ha! You're under the impression that the school doesn't gain exactly what they want. They are trading scholarship, tutors, etc for all that that athlete brings (which can include a ton of cash - more than the cost of a scholarship, tutors, etc). It's a trade and for the most part the players are getting the short end of the stick.

If you think football and basketball at any p5 school is about genuine academic participation, then you might find a nice FBS school to follow. It's all tainted by the $$$$.

 

[TheCusian]

Also - I think you're failing to see the big picture. You cannot force a kid to be a diligent student. Even if I agreed that it was a sham - it literally can't be stopped. Whole horse to water thing...

 

[TheCusian]

Also my wife works for a D3 school and some of those athletes don't like to take academics seriously.

 

[ImperialOrange]

I'd say no league restrictions. If the student-athlete has graduated they have fulfilled all obligations to their current school.

I like this for 2 reasons. If a student earns a degree theyve proven themselves smart and driven enough that we shouldn't be question their decision making.Whether that is in 3 years or 4 years I'd let them transfer without sitting out because they've earned that right. The other reason is if a school wants to push bs classes and have athletes earn their degrees in 3 years to help their APR then they run the risk of losing that players 4th year if they want to try another school for any reason

 

[HtownOrange]

I like this for 2 reasons. If a student earns a degree theyve proven themselves smart and driven enough that we shouldn't be question their decision making.Whether that is in 3 years or 4 years I'd let them transfer without sitting out because they've earned that right. The other reason is if a school wants to push bs classes and have athletes earn their degrees in 3 years to help their APR then they run the risk of losing that players 4th year if they want to try another school for any reason

Add to that the fact that schools offer scholarships in one year increments instead of a guaranteed four year increment, kids should be able to walk away if they have completed a degree.

 

[reedny]

This is a good discussion, nothing was taken as personal. The intent of a rule may be one thing, but the effect and the application of the other things. The NCAA is not nearly as organized or clear on many issues. Much worse, their application is far from consistent or even based in reason.

The probation non-sense is just the NCAA trying to be impressive while ignoring the 800lb gorilla in the room that is the SEC, UNC, etc. PSU getting their wins restored and probation being removed is excellent proof that the NCAA has no teeth and has no stomach for doing what they are allegedly in place to do.

Agreed. Obviously some athletes attending legitimate programs pose as students with no intention of doing actual coursework ... a strategy that is trickier (but not impossible) to get away with at the undergraduate level in FB but much easier in BB because of the one-and-done rule. What frosts my cookie is the 800 lb.gorilla -- the schools, principally in the mid-atlantic and Southern regions where sports reign supreme (SEC). They dumb-down their coursework -- or falsify it entirely with fake courses/automatic A's, etc...-- so that athletes can maintain eligibility. This is systemic academic fraud, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, these schools are frequently revenue-machines: Ky with it's platooned, semi-professional athletes that slide en-masse to the NBA; -State/'Bama in FB, etc... They have huge television contracts and are lavished with media-exposure. The gutless NCAA just looks the other way -- hiding behind the excuse that it doesn't want to judge the "quality" of institution's academic coursework. This is, of course, BS, because the NCAA turns around and cherry-picks much smaller-scale academic issues whenever it wants to punish certain schools or coaches (SU). So consistency, and credibility, are out the window.

 

[reedny]

Also my wife works for a D3 school and some of those athletes don't like to take academics seriously.

NP, then they don't pass or graduate. They can leave and go pro -- no one's holding them back (although there will be consequences for the APR). In any case, they can't have it both ways ... refuse to go to class and still pretend to be academically eligible. That's not the system.

 

[RF2044]

Agreed. Obviously some athletes attending legitimate programs pose as students with no intention of doing actual coursework ... a strategy that is trickier (but not impossible) to get away with at the undergraduate level in FB but much easier in BB because of the one-and-done rule. What frosts my cookie is the 800 lb.gorilla -- the schools, principally in the mid-atlantic and Southern regions where sports reign supreme (SEC). They dumb-down their coursework -- or falsify it entirely with fake courses/automatic A', etc...-- so that athletes can maintain eligibility. This is systemic academic fraud, plain and simple.

Unfortunately, these schools are frequently revenue-machines: Ky with it's platooned, semi-professional athletes that slide en-masse to the NBA; -State/'Bama in FB, etc... They have huge television contracts and are lavished with media-exposure. The gutless NCAA just looks the other way -- hiding behind the excuse that it doesn't want to judge the "quality" of institution's academic coursework. This is, of course, BS, because the NCAA turns around and cherry-picks much smaller-scale academic issues whenever it wants to punish certain schools or coaches (SU). So consistency, and credibility, are out the window.

Couldn't agree more with your last paragraph, Reed.

 

[TheCusian]

Agreed. Obviously some athletes attending legitimate programs pose as students with no intention of doing actual coursework ... a strategy that is trickier (but not impossible) to get away with at the undergraduate level in FB but much easier in BB because of the one-and-done rule. What frosts my cookie is the 800 lb.gorilla -- the schools, principally in the mid-atlantic and Southern regions where sports reign supreme (SEC). They dumb-down their coursework -- or falsify it entirely with fake courses/automatic A's, etc...-- so that athletes can maintain eligibility. This is systemic academic fraud, plain and simple. Unfortunately, these schools are frequently revenue-machines: Ky with it's platooned, semi-professional athletes that slide en-masse to the NBA; -State/'Bama in FB, etc... They have huge television contracts and are lavished with media-exposure. The gutless NCAA just looks the other way -- hiding behind the excuse that it doesn't want to judge the "quality" of institution's academic coursework. This is, of course, BS, because the NCAA turns around and cherry-picks much smaller-scale academic issues whenever it wants to punish certain schools or coaches (SU). So consistency, and credibility, are out the window.

I agree with all of this.

 

[TheCusian]

NP, then they don't pass or graduate. They can leave and go pro -- no one's holding them back (although there will be consequences for the APR). In any case, they can't have it both ways ... refuse to go to class and still pretend to be academically eligible. That's not the system.

Huh? You are either eligible or your not. I'm not condoning cheating or bypassing the system. I'm saying you can't force anyone to make good on their scholarship. Grad or undergrad. You award the scholarship, support and emphasize, hope they take it seriously.

That some do and some don't is just life - not a sham.

 

[reedny]

Huh? You are either eligible or your not. I'm not condoning cheating or bypassing the system. I'm saying you can't force anyone to make good on their scholarship. Grad or undergrad. You award the scholarship, support and emphasize, hope they take it seriously.

That some do and some don't is just life - not a sham.

I'm not sure what you mean by "making good" on a scholarship, but it's not all up to the SA. The institution has plenty of leverage to enforce athletic scholarship conditions. They're granted every year, so they can be pulled at any time (and some are for academic reasons). Second, if a SA is not going to class or completing coursework, they're subject to failing grades just like any student. And if they fail, they loose eligibility (assuming they lack enough passing credits). That can happen to any SA, undergraduate or graduate. So it's not just "give them a scholie and hope for the best", as you put it.

On the other hand, and this may be your point, if the SCHOOL itself (including the AD and the professor) is looking the other way and a SA isn't going to class or completing coursework ... then what you have is academic fraud. An example of this is the UNC situation -- and I don't say this with any animus towards UNC, which is (otherwise) a good school that fell into a pretty big trap. In that scenario, which is on a much larger scale than the Fab Melo situation (alleged "excessive assistance" to 1-3 students), the school can be be severely sanctioned. The student's eligibility is violated (can't play), past wins could potentially be vacated, and the SA's degree (or academic credits) can be rescinded.

 

[reedny]

Couldn't agree more with your last paragraph, Reed.

As you know, we've seen this problem up close and personal: the NCAA wasting time sanctioning low-level academic violations while the revenue machines get away with fraud on a massive scale.