UCONN Asks for waiver for APR (Grades)

[jordoo]

UConn is a distant 3rd right now it sounds like. I don't think his decision at all revolves around Drummond or Lamb.

Available Scholly's is an issue I believe as they will still be limited next season and have no seniors.

 

[jdubs30]

Having a Scholly for Noel would be an issue next year if everyone stays correct? Even if Drummund leaves that doesn't free up a scholly so you need Lamb to go as well I suppose.

Yeah because Calhoun has no history of getting rid of unnecessary players...

Expect Wolf or Bradley to "leave the program"

 

[caw]

UConn is a distant 3rd right now it sounds like. I don't think his decision at all revolves around Drummond or Lamb.

I would say fourth.

It does, for a few reasons but mainly scholarship-wise. Let's assume both Drummond and Lamb stay and Drummond is going to scholarship. Omar Calhoun is signed up for next year also. That means UConn would need 2 transfers or 2 scholarships back from the NCAA/APR issue or some combination of that. If Noel were to want to come that would be 3 of the previous. It's possible, sure, but not likely to get 3 scholarships.

Of course if UConn get's one back from the NCAA, gets one transfer and has Drummond stay as a walk-on, it's possible.

It would be a lot easier if someone transfers or leaves early. It of course has been the assumption all year that Lamb/Drummond would leave early. Now, who knows? Both could very well be back if this season continues it's downward spiral.

The fact UConn has no-one graduating this year means scholarships will only open if someone leaves early or transfers or the NCAA accepts UConn's waiver.

Edit:
If both Lamb and Drummond leave, UConn would still need a transfer or get a scholarship back from the NCAA.

 

[Garbs]

would Mookie hurt our APR or did he technically leave before the semester started?

 

[OttoMets]

1. The main culprit is grades of seniors and early entrants to the NBA. If those players leave school early to workout at draft camps and don't finish that semester's courses the school loses points. Some schools do a great job of making sure their players "finish" those courses.

Not quite. My understanding is that players don't need to finish that semester's courses; they only need to be up-to-date on their coursework. If you leave school on 10 April, you don't need to finish out the semester through exams. You only need to have taken care of midterms and any coursework that was due by the 10th.

It's a very low bar.

 

[OttoMets]

would Mookie hurt our APR or did he technically leave before the semester started?

Good question. I assume he left before the semester started. He probably had to withdraw before drop/add ended or something like that.

 

[VirginiaOrange]

They get caught cheating, Boatright takes extra benefits and they want a waiver on the APR. Watch Emmerrt give it to them. What a joke Uconn and Calhoun are.

Is that you on the KU board?

 

[caw]

Not quite. My understanding is that players don't need to finish that semester's courses; they only need to be up-to-date on their coursework. If you leave school on 10 April, you don't need to finish out the semester through exams. You only need to have taken care of midterms and any coursework that was due by the 10th.

It's a very low bar.

I admit I could be wrong, and the NCAA.org site isn't exactly the best. I believe the school would lose 1 point for that player due to "retention" if not for eligibility as well.

I can't find anywhere that mentions what you are talking about, not that I doubt you, but I have never seen anything like that.


I do agree it's a low bar, but this is from the NCAA.org:

• Student-athletes must complete 40 percent of the coursework required for a degree by the end of their second year, 60 percent by the end of their third year and 80 percent by the end of their fourth year. Student-athletes are allowed five years to graduate while receiving athletically related financial aid.
• All student-athletes must earn a minimum of six hours each term to be eligible the next semester.

 

[rrlbees]

Not quite. My understanding is that players don't need to finish that semester's courses; they only need to be up-to-date on their coursework. If you leave school on 10 April, you don't need to finish out the semester through exams. You only need to have taken care of midterms and any coursework that was due by the 10th.

It's a very low bar.

I don't think that is correct.

Sent from my DROIDX

 

[OttoMets]

Here's my understanding, based on this synopsis. Anyone more knowledgeable, please feel free to correct.

In calculating APR, each scholarship player can earn up to four points: one for being academcially eligible each semester, one for staying enrolled each semester. The APR is 1,000 multiplied by (the number of points earned by the team divided by the maximum number of points earned by the team).

I think that means that an 11-man Syracuse roster could earn as many as 44 points for an academic year. If two players leave school prior to graduation (by withdrawal or transfer), they would each forfeit the point for staying enrolled. If they're academically eligible when they leave, each earns the other point for eligibility. If they aren't eligible when they leave (because of missed classes or neglected coursework during that term), they don't get either point.

The system is set up to minimize penalties for teams whose players leave early but are eligible when they leave; they're only penalized half as much as they would be under a review of graduation rates, which many coaches claimed was unfair.

 

[NKR1978]

The system is set up to minimize penalties for teams whose players leave early but are eligible when they leave; they're only penalized half as much as they would be under a review of graduation rates, which many coaches claimed was unfair.

It makes no sense that schools would be penalized at all if the kids leave early for any reason so long as they're in good academic standing. I agree with you that there needs to be standards, and think the requirement that athletes be in good academic standing is fair and reasonable, to a point.

My main problem with the implementation of the NCAA's policy is that the majority, possibly vast majority, of kids who are going to leave school while not being in good academic standing are going to be disadvantaged in some way. The majority of those kids will likely be African American. Basically, the NCAA is telling schools that they will be punished for taking a chance on academic risks. These are the kids who can really benefit from an education at a Syracuse or UConn. I'm not naive enough to think that basketball coaches recruit kids to get them away from a negative hometown environment, but it certainly can't hurt the student. Some guys may be mature enough to make the most of their opportunity and work hard to get their degrees. The others might not be at that level, and may never reach that level. Regardless, the fact that schools will think long and hard about taking risks is kind of depressing.

I don't know that I believe the NCAA is intentionally racist, but in practice, its policies are pretty damn racist when you consider who they hurt the most.

You and I have agreed in the past in discussions that kind of border this topic, so I'm definitely interested in your thoughts.

 

[OttoMets]

It makes no sense that schools would be penalized at all if the kids leave early for any reason so long as they're in good academic standing. I agree with you that there needs to be standards, and think the requirement that athletes be in good academic standing is fair and reasonable, to a point.

My main problem with the implementation of the NCAA's policy is that the majority, possibly vast majority, of kids who are going to leave school while not being in good academic standing are going to be disadvantaged in some way. The majority of those kids will likely be African American. Basically, the NCAA is telling schools that they will be punished for taking a chance on academic risks. These are the kids who can really benefit from an education at a Syracuse or UConn. I'm not naive enough to think that basketball coaches recruit kids to get them away from a negative hometown environment, but it certainly can't hurt the student. Some guys may be mature enough to make the most of their opportunity and work hard to get their degrees. The others might not be at that level, and may never reach that level. Regardless, the fact that schools will think long and hard about taking risks is kind of depressing.

I don't know that I believe the NCAA is intentionally racist, but in practice, its policies are pretty damn racist when you consider who they hurt the most.

You and I have agreed in the past in discussions that kind of border this topic, so I'm definitely interested in your thoughts.

I can't go into too many specifics - though there are a couple good ones - but I can't take it quite so far as to say that it's racist in impact.

It's great to have standards, and the APR is a step in the right direction. The differentiation between academic ineligibility and withdrawal is a good one.

It's also true that a good number of basketball players (especially upper-echelon ones) are academically disadvantaged, perhaps more than some realize. I know of one SU player who came into school in the mid-1980s as functionally illiterate (if I mentioned the school system he came out of, you'd probably know why, but that'd spill the beans as to his identity). That's a recipe for some bad academic numbers. It's nice that athletic departments have seemingly unlimited academic support resources, but that doesn't mean it isn't a really difficult task (for student and tutor alike) to bring someone with a subpar education up to even a remedial college level.

So are some disadvantaged? Very. But I'd argue that the enforcement of standards is likely to benefit some of these kids by forcing coaching staffs to take academics more seriously and get the kids to buy in. (It's also likely to push more kids away from college, which isn't a good thing.) The goal, after all, should be to educate all the student-athletes to the fullest extent possible.

So I like the idea of the APR, though it could probably stand some tweaks (since, for example, the apples-to-oranges comparison between the big state schools and smaller private schools could lead to inequity). While it looks to have an impact on minority students, it's not an unfairly discriminatory one; it's applied with an even hand, and it only requires schools to do their job - to educate the students to whom they grant admission.

And that SU player? Busted his ass trying to get up to speed, graduated in four years with his degree, and seems to be doing quite well for himself these days. With a little effort and support from the coaching staff, everyone can do it.

 

[SkanSU]

Does football have this?

yes

 

[All4SU]

The NCAA has an impossible task in this regard. I agree there needs to be a standard. But college basketball is just moving so far away from the premise of student/athlete that it almost can't be policed effectively. Not to open this can of worms again, but I really wish there was a minor pro league to siphon off kids who have no interest in an education, or who really are just "one-and-done."

 

[caw]

Here's my understanding, based on this synopsis. Anyone more knowledgeable, please feel free to correct.

In calculating APR, each scholarship player can earn up to four points: one for being academcially eligible each semester, one for staying enrolled each semester. The APR is 1,000 multiplied by (the number of points earned by the team divided by the maximum number of points earned by the team).

I think that means that an 11-man Syracuse roster could earn as many as 44 points for an academic year. If two players leave school prior to graduation (by withdrawal or transfer), they would each forfeit the point for staying enrolled. If they're academically eligible when they leave, each earns the other point for eligibility. If they aren't eligible when they leave (because of missed classes or neglected coursework during that term), they don't get either point.

The system is set up to minimize penalties for teams whose players leave early but are eligible when they leave; they're only penalized half as much as they would be under a review of graduation rates, which many coaches claimed was unfair.

That is basically correct. There are a few additions:

• If a player leaves via transfer to a D1 school (with some other qualifications) the school can petition for the point lost to be gained. There have been some questions whether the point is actually added back or reduced from the divider that I haven't been able to find anywhere.
• If the player leaves via transfer to a non-D1 school or doesn't meet the other qualifications that point is lost.
• Obviously, if a player leaves to graduation the retention point is not lost.

There is also some question of what exactly eligible means. I am under the impression it means eligible at the end of the semester/or graduated (would be eligible during the following semester?).

 

[OttoMets]

That is basically correct. There are a few additions:

• If a player leaves via transfer to a D1 school (with some other qualifications) the school can petition for the point lost to be gained. There have been some questions whether the point is actually added back or reduced from the divider that I haven't been able to find anywhere.
• If the player leaves via transfer to a non-D1 school or doesn't meet the other qualifications that point is lost.
• Obviously, if a player leaves to graduation the retention point is not lost.

There is also some question of what exactly eligible means. I am under the impression it means eligible at the end of the semester/or graduated (would be eligible during the following semester?).

Thanks; those make sense.

 

[NKR1978]

I can't go into too many specifics - though there are a couple good ones - but I can't take it quite so far as to say that it's racist in impact.

It's great to have standards, and the APR is a step in the right direction. The differentiation between academic ineligibility and withdrawal is a good one.

Thanks. That's a great story about the SU player. I just hope the NCAA is willing to tweak the rules to fit the real world.