Miss the grade, miss the tournament

[X-band '01]

CBSSports.com: Postseason bans for teams with low APR (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/15426179/ncaa-postseason-bans-for-teams-with-low-apr)

There's no date etched in stone yet, but the NCAA is moving closer to adding further sanctions to teams that have an APR below 930. In other words, teams can not only lose scholarships under the new rules, but risk losing out on invitations to postseason play if they fail to graduate their players on a timely basis. The APR will be calculated over an average period of 4 years instead of just being calculated year-to-year.

[Juice]

CBSSports.com: Postseason bans for teams with low APR (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/15426179/ncaa-postseason-bans-for-teams-with-low-apr)

There's no date etched in stone yet, but the NCAA is moving closer to adding further sanctions to teams that have an APR below 930. In other words, teams can not only lose scholarships under the new rules, but risk losing out on invitations to postseason play if they fail to graduate their players on a timely basis. The APR will be calculated over an average period of 4 years instead of just being calculated year-to-year.

I believe UConn's APR was about 890 last year.

[xu drew]

While noble in theory, it seems to me like that would just lead to more doctoring of grades and outright cheating in the classroom.

[danaandvictory]

I sympathize somewhat with Boeheim's complaining on this -- not much a coach can do when a player decides he's going pro early and just ducks out on school. And I'm not sure how the APR can legislate for that.

I pulled up XU's APR numbers for the last few years, they are posted on D&V. Obviously X has nothing to worry about with the new regs.

[Jumpy]

So, instead of a yearly number, they are having a rolling four year average? If a school should fall below the line, it could be years for them to repair the damage to the average. Wuold they be blacklisted that entire time?

[American X]

I sympathize somewhat with Boeheim's complaining on this -- not much a coach can do when a player decides he's going pro early and just ducks out on school. And I'm not sure how the APR can legislate for that.

cheese a Boeheim apologist. You sicken me.

Sorry, if a school is going to function as a NBA farm team, essentially bringing in mercenaries to win, then face the consequences. I have no sympathy for the UConns, Syracuses, and UKs of the college basketball world, especially as a sanctimonious fan of Xavier and its graduation rate.

[danaandvictory]

cheese a Boeheim apologist. You sicken me.


Blowheim is a narcissistic, pouting fraud. But even the devil has a point here and there.

[Xavier]

cheese a Boeheim apologist. You sicken me.

Sorry, if a school is going to function as a NBA farm team, essentially bringing in mercenaries to win, then face the consequences. I have no sympathy for the UConns, Syracuses, and UKs of the college basketball world, especially as a sanctimonious fan of Xavier and its graduation rate.

Would you be against one and done players at Xavier?

[LA Muskie]

Would you be against one and done players at Xavier?
No. Not at all. Coaches shouldn't be faulted for being successful. And make no mistake about it: having players in a position to "graduate" to the NBA is at least somewhat a function of the coach.

The question shouldn't be graduation rates. It should be GPA while taking a course load toward a degree while the student is enrolled. Athletes should be required to take a full-time course load and be in good academic standing at *all* times. Put another way, we should expect student athletes to always be true "students", and coaches should be responsible for their academic development for as long as the athlete is on campus.

[DC Muskie]

Athletes should be required to take a full-time course load and be in good academic standing at *all* times. Put another way, we should expect student athletes to always be true "students", and coaches should be responsible for their academic development for as long as the athlete is on campus.

I agree. We should should cut out all travel by plane, and our conference should be against schools within a two hour driving distance, so these students don't miss so much class. In fact, we should schedule games only on weekends, to ensure no class is missed.

[LA Muskie]

I agree. We should should cut out all travel by plane, and our conference should be against schools within a two hour driving distance, so these students don't miss so much class. In fact, we should schedule games only on weekends, to ensure no class is missed.
That's not my point at all. Not even remotely close. My point is that if the NCAA is concerned about schools keeping up their end of the bargain on the education side, merely looking at graduation numbers is a dumb way to measure it because so much of that is out of the school's control. The question should be how does the school do at things it can control.

[xubrew]

I sympathize somewhat with Boeheim's complaining on this -- not much a coach can do when a player decides he's going pro early and just ducks out on school. And I'm not sure how the APR can legislate for that

If players leave eligible and sign a pro contract, the team will not lose an APR point. Granted, it is difficult if a kid just quits going to classes once the season is over, but it isn't as if EVERYONE who leaves to go pro is hurting the APR. Some do, but most don't.


So, instead of a yearly number, they are having a rolling four year average? If a school should fall below the line, it could be years for them to repair the damage to the average. Wuold they be blacklisted that entire time?

There has always been a four year rolling average. If a team's four year APR was below 925, but above 900, and their single season APR was above 925, they were in the clear. But, to answer your question, technically a team can be blacklisted the whole time. That has always been the case. It's just that most teams used waivers to avoid missing the postseason.



Put another way, we should expect student athletes to always be true "students", and coaches should be responsible for their academic development for as long as the athlete is on campus.

This is a common attitude that I believe is misguided. Here is a list of things that coaches are commonly NOT allowed to do....

-contact a professor
-contact the registrar's office to inquire about grades
-be present for a tutoring session
-have any sort of ivolvement in generating a grade report
-be present when a student registers for classes
-attend a class

If a coach wants to hold is own study hall, the athletic director may become squeamish because he doesn't want people to get the impression that the coaches are doing the work for them. Yet, people feel the coaches should be directly responsible for someone else's academic career. I completely understand their frustration. Don't tell someone they're responsible for something, and then give them no say or control over it. This is one of the reasons many programs take academic advisors on the road. They don't even want to give an outside party the opportunity to say that the coaches are directly involved with study hall...even when it's on the road. Otherwise, the question becomes 'well, how do we know the coaches aren't doing the work for them??'

[xubrew]

I posted this on the board of our neighbors to the north. (yeah, I do read and post on UD Pride). It basically expresses my frustrations with the change....


What really bothers me about all this is that most of the people inacting and signing off on these rules have never actually worked in an athletic department. I don't know of any university presidents off the top of my head that worked in athletic departments. Most of those at the NCAA League Office, including the current president, have also never worked in an athletic department. It's the equivelant of some corporate executive in the automotive industry who is put in charge of overseeing the factories, and makes all these rules and regulations regarding the factory, yet he has never even set foot in a factory at any point in his life.

I believe these rules are well intended, but they are also COMPLETELY impractical and were implimented by university presidents who do not have an understanding of what the APR is. I know this because I had a university president (not going to say who) who asked me what Rollo asked above regarding walk-ons. The answer is only those on athletic aid factor into the APR. I'm not picking on Rollo, but I am pointing out that the majority of the presidents who are weighing in and implimenting these changes do not know basic and critical information about what they're implimenting. That is a problem.

Another example is that at the majority of places that I am familiar with, the APR takes a bigger hit from retention than it does from academic eligibility. In other words, most of the athletes who hurt the APR are actually in good academic standing. They just choose to leave or quit and go somewhere else. This is true at Dayton, among many other places. This president didn't know that.

Another thing this president didn't know is that the APR numbers listed DO NOT reflect this season. The fact of the matter is that every single player that played in the NCAA Tournament WAS ELIGIBLE TO PLAY!!! That should be painfully obvious, but for whatever reason people don't seem to realize that. The numbers you're seeing are over a year old. The two players that left UD won't be reflected in it's APR until a year from now. So, this legislation could potentially tell players who are eligible to play that they can't play because someone decided to transfer two years earlier. GREAT PLAN!!!

Here is another thing that burns me up. I know it's not a pleasant topic of conversation, but it is entirely relevant. The number one indicator of success in college isn't high school GPA. It isn't ACT or SAT scores. It is socioeconomic status. You can look it up. It's completely true.

The NCAA has raised issues with the general state of men's basketball. Why is the grad rate so low?? Why is the APR so low?? The answer (and this is a generalization, but it is based on ACTUAL DATA and statistics) is that men's basketball produces more players from a low socioeconomic status than any other sport the NCAA sponsors. It shouldn't surprise anyone that the academic performance is lower.

You know what, though?? Student-athletes who come from a low socioeconomic background GRADUATE AND PERFORM AT A HIGHER RATE than people who come from those same backgrounds that aren't student-athletes. So, when people criticize college athletics, and make implications that it's not about the students, and ask what needs to be done to fix the academic performance of it's athletes, that's really unfair. This is NOT an issue that limited to college athletics. If anything, college athletics does better than the status quo. It's an educational issue in general. What we really need to ask is what needs to be done to allow young people from low socioeconomic backgrounds to succeed at a higher level??....Not just athletes, but EVERYONE.

The article quotes Arne Duncan, who is the U.S. Secretary of Education. He has a history of pointing his finger at the NCAA. To me, that says he'd rather politick than look at and deal with the bigger and more obvious issues. Pointing a finger at the NCAA will get attention and sound good. Gee, thanks Arne. You're the best. And like many of the presidents, I bet he's never once set foot in an athletic department either. This whole issue goes WAAYY beyond the NCAA, and handling addressing it really should be his job. Instead, he's politicking, and focusing the attention on a small faction of what is a really big overall problem.


So, in general, I feel the question shouldn't be what's wrong with men's basketball?? It should be what's wrong with our educational system, and why isn't it helping those who grow up with a standard of living below what is considered to be middle class??

[DC Muskie]

That's not my point at all. Not even remotely close.

This is what you said:


Athletes should be required to take a full-time course load and be in good academic standing at *all* times. Put another way, we should expect student athletes to always be true "students", and coaches should be responsible for their academic development for as long as the athlete is on campus.

True students stay on campus and are able to take full course loads. Athletes, especially ones that play basketball or football at the highest level, simply cannot do that.

They are not brought in because they are true students, they are brought in because they posses a special set of skills, and in return they have an opportunity to receive an education, if they are capable, for free.


My point is that if the NCAA is concerned about schools keeping up their end of the bargain on the education side, merely looking at graduation numbers is a dumb way to measure it because so much of that is out of the school's control. The question should be how does the school do at things it can control.

What you are asking for is for the NCAA to set a standard of GPA, and that is something they should definitely not get involved with. They can and should judge how these schools do in making sure these athletes get the degrees they should be working towards.

Schools can and do have way more control over whether their students graduate then how each of those students perform in the classroom.

[DC Muskie]

The article quotes Arne Duncan, who is the U.S. Secretary of Education. He has a history of pointing his finger at the NCAA. To me, that says he'd rather politick than look at and deal with the bigger and more obvious issues.

He is the Secretary of Education. It's his job to point out how bad we are at educating, while offering zero solutions. Everybody knows this.

[xubrew]

The article quotes Arne Duncan, who is the U.S. Secretary of Education. He has a history of pointing his finger at the NCAA. To me, that says he'd rather politick than look at and deal with the bigger and more obvious issues.

He is the Secretary of Education. It's his job to point out how bad we are at educating, while offering zero solutions. Everybody knows this.

Thank you for clarifying.

[LA Muskie]

True students stay on campus and are able to take full course loads. Athletes, especially ones that play basketball or football at the highest level, simply cannot do that.
I disagree. There may be additional challenges due to the athletic side, but athletes can get an education equivalent to the "traditional" student so long as there are policies and processes in place to assist them with those challenges.


They are not brought in because they are true students, they are brought in because they posses a special set of skills, and in return they have an opportunity to receive an education, if they are capable, for free.
This is the definition of a cop-out.


What you are asking for is for the NCAA to set a standard of GPA, and that is something they should definitely not get involved with. They can and should judge how these schools do in making sure these athletes get the degrees they should be working towards.
Legislating a GPA is no different than legislating a degree. The university controls both.

Schools can and do have way more control over whether their students graduate then how each of those students perform in the classroom.[/QUOTE]

[Xavier]

True students stay on campus and are able to take full course loads. Athletes, especially ones that play basketball or football at the highest level, simply cannot do that.



I don't buy that for a second. You really don't think these basketball/football players can successfully take a full course load? They are definitely easier classes during the season- then some more difficult in the "off-season"--but you think that is impossible to do?

[DC Muskie]

I don't buy that for a second. You really don't think these basketball/football players can successfully take a full course load? They are definitely easier classes during the season- then some more difficult in the "off-season"--but you think that is impossible to do?

Okay, I'm not sure what to tell you then.

What is a full time course load, 12 credits? They have to do that. But most students take way more than that. 16 18 credits a semester.

And yes they take courses over the summer. They have to. Because they cannot carry their course load during a regular semester.

Is that is really so hard to understand?

[DC Muskie]

I disagree. There may be additional challenges due to the athletic side, but athletes can get an education equivalent to the "traditional" student so long as there are policies and processes in place to assist them with those challenges.

Legislating a GPA is no different than legislating a degree. The university controls both.


Your definition of a cop-out, is washed out by your first paragraph. Whether you like to admit it or not, these students are here because of their superior athleticism. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that fact. And with that, they get special assistance, un-afforded to the regular students who are there based on their academics.

Each school sets their own eligibility standards. And you are not going to have the NCAA come in and tell Mississippi State that their GPA for their students needs to be the same as Duke. Just won't happen.

But you can say, MSU needs to graduate X number of athletes over x number of years, just as Duke needs to. I can see that as a good overall goal, even though there are some issues with the details.

[Xavier]

Okay, I'm not sure what to tell you then.

What is a full time course load, 12 credits? They have to do that. But most students take way more than that. 16 18 credits a semester.

And yes they take courses over the summer. They have to. Because they cannot carry their course load during a regular semester.

Is that is really so hard to understand?

You said football/basketball players can't take a full course load...And then said this. So, I'm not really sure what your stance is. I thought you were saying it was too hard for football/basketball players to take a full course load during the season but then you admitted they have to. How have they been doing it so far?

I think a full course load where I went was 4 class (16 credits)- Regardless, I don't think its impossible to do that during the season.

[XUFan09]

I'm guessing that Duke and Mississippi State, along with most schools, actually have similar GPA requirements to remain in good standing, so streamlining those requirements across the NCAA would not be impossible. It's just harder to get the same GPA at Duke or Xavier than Mississippi State or Oklahoma State, but that's why Duke and Xavier and other moderately selective to highly selective schools don't take some players in the first place for academic reasons.

[XUFan09]

You said football/basketball players can't take a full course load...And then said this. So, I'm not really sure what your stance is. I thought you were saying it was too hard for football/basketball players to take a full course load during the season but then you admitted they have to. How have they been doing it so far?

I think a full course load where I went was 4 class (16 credits)- Regardless, I don't think its impossible to do that during the season.

As of two years ago, students were generally taking five classes or 15 credit hours. Some students took as many as 18 credit hours, but they were a distinct minority.

[Xavier]

As of two years ago, students were generally taking five classes or 15 credit hours. Some students took as many as 18 credit hours, but they were a distinct minority.

During the season? So for DC Muskie to say players just can not do that is wrong, considering they have been doing it at Xavier as little as two years ago.

[DC Muskie]

For Xavier's sake since I would hate for him to be confused...

This is what LA said that caused me to comment:


Athletes should be required to take a full-time course load and be in good academic standing at *all* times. Put another way, we should expect student athletes to always be true "students"...

To me, that means LA excepts athletes to carry what regular "true" students take.

That comes with the understanding that in order to just be a student, you have to take a certain amount of credits anyway. So I thought he was talking about what every student takes, which is more then the minimum.


You said football/basketball players can't take a full course load...And then said this. So, I'm not really sure what your stance is. I thought you were saying it was too hard for football/basketball players to take a full course load during the season but then you admitted they have to. How have they been doing it so far?

I think a full course load where I went was 4 class (16 credits)- Regardless, I don't think its impossible to do that during the season.

Classes are now 4 credits? If I remember correctly, they were 3 when I was there. What's the number of credits needed to graduate?

These guys take classes during the summer and more in the off season. I don't think it's a stretch to say they don't take a full course load. 12 being minimum, so I'm sorry if I misspoke about using the term full course load. 12 is not full. 18 to 21 is full.


During the season? So for DC Muskie to say players just can not do that is wrong, considering they have been doing it at Xavier as little as two years ago.

I would be surprised if players carried 15 to 18 credits during the season. If they do, then I will assume they are easier courses.

Hope that helps.

[Xavier]

My mistake, DC muskie. And, by the way- I believe you are correct about the credits... I went to OU which was still on quarters.

[DC Muskie]

My mistake, DC muskie. And, by the way- I believe you are correct about the credits... I went to OU which was still on quarters.

The coaches have put together in a presentation that shows kids and their parents how they can graduate in three years.

Personally I would love to see that.

[xubrew]

The NCAA mandates that students maintain the minimum GPA of what is required for graduation after their third year. At just about every school that I'm aware of, this is a 2.0. So, practically speaking, the NCAA DOES have a minimum GPA.

There are some universities where it varies from major to major. If nursing, for instance, requires a 2.5, and a student has a 2.4 after their junior year, they are ineligible. However, one of their teammates could be majoring in communications, and be eligible with a 2.2 GPA.

But, those are rare cases, and if you do run into a problem, a student can get around this by changing their major on the day that they're certified, and then changing back the next day. For all practical purposes, their is a minimum GPA.

[xubrew]

The coaches have put together in a presentation that shows kids and their parents how they can graduate in three years.

Personally I would love to see that.

It's not common, but it generally goes

12 hrs in fall, 15 in spring, 15 in summer. That's 42 hours a year, and will get you out in three years.

[XUFan09]

18 to 21 is full.

In order to take more than 18 credits in a semester, you need a signature to authorize going over the limit. This is only allowed for some programs, along with students taking music classes. Everyone else (as in the other 95%) take 18 credits or fewer, and most take 15.

[XUFan09]

During the season? So for DC Muskie to say players just can not do that is wrong, considering they have been doing it at Xavier as little as two years ago.

I was referring to students as a whole, not specifically student-athletes, to explain what exactly a full-time student's course normally load includes.

It makes sense for athletes to sometimes take only 12 credit hours instead of the normal 15, the difference of one class (Once again, 18 is not normal). Heck, some semesters I only took 12 credit hours in order to take on more hours of work at a part-time job or to focus on a specific class that I considered important.

[xu95]

In order to take more than 18 credits in a semester, you need a signature to authorize going over the limit. This is only allowed for some programs, along with students taking music classes. Everyone else (as in the other 95%) take 18 credits or fewer, and most take 15.

I took 21 almost every semester and never had to get anything signed. Are you referring to athletes or students in general?

[XUFan09]

I took 21 almost every semester and never had to get anything signed. Are you referring to athletes or students in general?

You were probably in one of the programs where that was okay, or the limits changed since you graduated. I never had to get anything signed either for the semesters I took more than 18, but I was in a program where I had no limits and I also took music classes.

http://www.xavier.edu/registrar/registration/index.cfm#Other_Registration_Conditions

At the end of the "Other Registration Conditions" section:

"Course Load
Undergraduate Students: 18 hours maximum
Graduate Students: 15 hours maximum

Permission to exceed maximum course load limits, even if additional hours are being taken for audit, must be obtained from the college dean in writting and can be requested in advance. When written approval is submitted to the office of the registrar in advance of priority registration, the adjustment to the course load will be made by the beginning of priority registration."

[DC Muskie]

Interesting. The only time I took less then 18 credits a semester was senior year.

[Kahns Krazy]

Interesting. The only time I took less then 18 credits a semester was senior year.

Unless the rules have changed, you would have been eligible to graduate in 7 semesters. That is an accelerated path.

[_LH]

I took 21 almost every semester and never had to get anything signed. Are you referring to athletes or students in general?

I took 24 my last semester to ensure I would graduate in May instead of coming back for the fall for 3 credits.

My dean would not sign off on anything above 21. I removed the 3 additional hours and had him sign off on 21. I then put them back on and handed it to the kid working at the registrar's office and he did not bat an eye approving the 24 hours.

[GoMuskies]

18 to 21 is full.



15 is normal for most students. I had a semester of 12 (my last). It was awesome.