410 schools wrong by Ncaazi standards.

[BAMMAR]

It is now on Cnnsi.com that 410 schools have below standard graduation rates.
So maybe we shouldn't use Basketball or Baseball in these standards when they can go to the pro's straight out of high school but the NFL won't let them.
I understand that we could be talking about five different thing here but is basketball gonna be hurt, how bout Baseball? if thats the case hurt the basketball or baseball and only recruit who wants to stay and let the team that take the player pay. If I lose a scholly let the yanks or the Braves PAY! of course I would pay the ncaa their due because they wouldn't deny their pound of flesh.

 

[BamaGrad05]

Grade Reports

I saw this on ESPN yesterday and was astonished at the amount of teams in the NCAA that would be hit under the rule. I think it is noble in theory but the weight transferring students can account ot this is wrong. For instance, Baylor who in the wake of the Patrick Dennehy fiasco lost several players, whether in good academic standing or not, to other schools via transfer. In its eventuiality Baylor fell far below the mark of a 92.5% "good academic standing" rate that is needed under the system. In our case, not knowing how far the window is on this system, we lost several guys early to the NFL as well as Grant Dickey, Nic Luke, and several others to transfer. This doesn't play as major of a role in football as in basketball, yet it still hurts the progress report. The fact though is that these guys are here to play football first, whether we may like that or not. I for one want them to gain an education as well, as nothing can be more vital to success than an education. The bottom line though in college athletics is that atheletes are here for sports. There needs to be a medium between the proposed academic reform and what is currently going on in student-athlete progress. As Jackie Sherril once put it..."Coaches aren't fired for not graduating players...they're fired for not winning games." Therefor we have to see that there is a business part to the equation. To turn a blind eye to this is proposterous. In the end institutions can not be completely responsible for graduation rates...and athletic programs in specific. Coaches are paid for winning more and more games, should they not be repremanded for not graduating a set number of players. Even this would obviuosly have its doubters but something has to be done between what's going on now and the ludacrous system that is to be put in place.

 

[BAMMAR]

BAMAgrad05, Is your degree in prelaw? A great post , or reply to mine. Thanks I feel the same way. BUt for the ncaa to look for something like this and not allow schools to change before the law is like saying anybody owning a bar is now under arrest for selling alcohol. I just think that they have a good Idea but they are going the wrong way.

 

[davefrat]

however you look at it, we're doing the worst job in the SEC at retaining and graduating players. the same criteria are applied to all schools and the 880 score for our football team is simply unacceptable. i wrote a letter to the athletic department registering my disappointment. with all our recent troubles, we have a bullseye on our chest...both with the ncaa and in the court of public opinion.

it's unfortunate, but we don't really have much room to defend ourselves anymore. we got caught cheating, we got hammered, a court of law essentially endorsed the findings of the ncaa in the means affair, and now, in addition to being the most penalized team in the league over the past 10-15 years, our football program ranks at the bottom of the barrell in academics.

go ahead and flame all you want, and say it's all a conspiracy by the ncaa, fulmer, the toothfairy, and bigfoot. but like it or not, the overwhelming evidence points out that our football program has been out of control for years, from the recruiting trail to the classroom.

as an alumnus of the university, i find all these sordid affairs to be a major embarrassment to myself, the school, and the state. i pray that things are getting on the right track, but this recent APR information is yet another blow to the prestige of the university.

furthermore, i dare say that coaches recruiting against us will now use our reputation as an academic cellar dweller as additional ammunition to sway kids away from the capstone.

the athletic department better get its house in order, and soon. otherwise, we'll be so far behind due to scholarship reductions from recruiting violations and academic casualties that we'll become a perennial also ran in college football.

and more important than that (and yes, there are things more important than crimson tide football) the reputation of the university of alabama will be forever tarnished. that would be a tragedy, because the university deserves better than that.

i have a dear friend under whom i studied and worked while at the university. he has long harbored serious reservations about the football program's dedication to educating its players. this latest news lends a great deal of credence to his concerns. sadly, it appears that things within the football office at bama are worse than i ever expected.

 

[Tradition4ever]

How does this work?

I have read plenty of articles and posts on this board about this APR score and how it will affect the football program, but I still don't have a clear understanding of how transfers and early exits (to the NFL or otherwise) will affect the score. Will someone please clarify!

 

[CrimsonGlory]

No one institution can "give" anyone an education, it has to be "earned" by the individual. That being said, the burden of graduation is not on the institutions or organizations, but on the individual student athlete. The only responsibility that the football program bears is to provide the best possible resources to assist the student in obtaining their education. I believe Alabama offers outstanding resources to their student athletes.

Also, the participation in football is incredibly difficult in combination with academics(not an excuse just but notable). So it can be determined that it is unrealistic to hold student athletes to the same standard as regular full-time students. Perhaps it would be more accurate to compare student athlete graduation rates with that of full time working students in the same period of time. Just a thought.

 

[davefrat]

No one institution can "give" anyone an education, it has to be "earned" by the individual. That being said, the burden of graduation is not on the institutions or organizations, but on the individual student athlete. The only responsibility that the football program bears is to provide the best possible resources to assist the student in obtaining their education. I believe Alabama offers outstanding resources to their student athletes.

Also, the participation in football is incredibly difficult in combination with academics(not an excuse just but notable). So it can be determined that it is unrealistic to hold student athletes to the same standard as regular full-time students. Perhaps it would be more accurate to compare student athlete graduation rates with that of full time working students in the same period of time. Just a thought.

you may be correct about the student earning the degree. but the fact still remains that we are at the bottom of the list compared to our brethren in the sec, so regardless of the "shoulda, coulda, wouldas," we're obviously doing the poorest job according the criteria employed in this study.

although other schools in the sec are underachieving, they're at least close to the cut off point. we're about as bad as it can get. that's a serious problem, and one that will come back to eviscerate the football program if we don't get it cleared up.

 

[TerryP]

you may be correct about the student earning the degree. but the fact still remains that we are at the bottom of the list compared to our brethren in the sec, so regardless of the "shoulda, coulda, wouldas," we're obviously doing the poorest job according the criteria employed in this study.

although other schools in the sec are underachieving, they're at least close to the cut off point. we're about as bad as it can get. that's a serious problem, and one that will come back to eviscerate the football program if we don't get it cleared up.

What you may be forgetting is the impact no bowl's and coaching changes have caused. We couldn't have done any better, under the current system. In fact, the only other players that could have made the score better didn't have any eligibility left.

Another example of how the above can effect a program...look at Georgia's basketball program.

 

[TerryP]

Quick note:

Cecil just mentioned this.

It's not the NCAA that created this. It's the University's Chancellor's and President's which make up the Div 1 Board of Directors.

 

[TerryP]

The NCAA didn't create the APR.

Cecil just mentioned this.

It's not the NCAA that created this. It's the University's Chancellor's and President's which make up the Div 1 Board of Directors

 

[davefrat]

What you may be forgetting is the impact no bowl's and coaching changes have caused. We couldn't have done any better, under the current system. In fact, the only other players that could have made the score better didn't have any eligibility left.

Another example of how the above can effect a program...look at Georgia's basketball program.

what does not going to a bowl have to do with this? miss. st. did better than we did, and they've been absolutely horrendous over the past few years. and vanderbilt hasn't been to a bowl since the reconstruction era. i don't claim to know much of anything about the system, but i'm sure that it didn't just spring into being and catch our athletic department by surprise.

also, i don't really remember all that much turnover in players as a result of the coaching changes. in fact, i thought that was one of the big bright spots, that all the kids stayed with the program even though they were allowed to leave initially. and as far as instability in the coaching staffs, that's something the athletic department should have taken care of...making sure the kids stuck to their studies.

i have no doubt that all the probation and collateral problems created some negative effects, but we're so far out of the running that it's not even funny. 10th percentile...that's not even close to acceptable.

whatever the causes, we've got to clean this mess up soon or we'll get fried once again...and this time, the damage will likely be a permanent slide into complete mediocrity.

 

[runtheoption22]

whatever the causes, we've got to clean this mess up soon or we'll get fried once again...and this time, the damage will likely be a permanent slide into complete mediocrity.

ok, that's a little too pessimistic.....

I think we need to lean more towards Terry's perspective....it was rough on us, we had defections (do Smiley and Wortham count negative towards us on this too?- long day can't think), and people who ran out of eligibility.....but like all the articles, we have a plan, and we'll be alright. If we do lose scholly's, it won't be anywhere close to 9, like was first reported

 

[Liberty Bell 7]

davefrat, I agree with most everything you write. Folks, I don't know about you, but I for one am glad the University began to reconstruct Bryant Hall when it did. Surely a facility such as this can improve the academic performance of our athletes. Also, it appears to me that Coach Shula is the type of guy who will emphasize the importance of grades to his players. I believe everything will turn out all right.

 

[TerryP]

what does not going to a bowl have to do with this? miss. st. did better than we did, and they've been absolutely horrendous over the past few years. and vanderbilt hasn't been to a bowl since the reconstruction era. i don't claim to know much of anything about the system, but i'm sure that it didn't just spring into being and catch our athletic department by surprise.

You have to put all of this in perspective with the actual numbers on the football team. We don't have that many that started with this senior class. 16 on campus now with 12 graduated at this point. Then you have to include the two RTO mentioned along with Dickey and his transfer, Luke and his transfer, those who have quit....

There is a plan in place from the NCAA to take this into account. However, it isn't supposed to be implemented until this spring. Remember, these figures were drawn from 2003-2004. Add to that, we have two more in that class graduating this spring so if this was calculated in May the total would be differe coaching changes.

There are a lot of details which have yet to be finalized. As example, those transfers wouldn't have resulted in the loss of scholly's because the players were in good academic standing. The same can be said for the early departure of Smiley to the NFL.

This transfer issue could be addressed this year. "On the table" is a modification/addendum called the GSR (Graduation Success Rate.) The GSR is an alternative graduation-rate methodology the NCAA will launch this spring. The new rate, which will supplement and not replace the federal methodology, credits institutions for transfers -- both incoming and outgoing -- as long as they are academically eligible.

 

[TerryP]

Now, on a personal opinion/note....

I can see what the University President's and Chancellor's have in mind. Heck, a third grader could see it. BUT, I can't help but think this is another set of rules/regulations that the schools/boosters will try to find a way to circumvent. IE: Boosters paying players to stay in school instead of turning pro. 2) Schools changing course loads, degrees, etc. to help ensure the athletes will remain eligible. Grade changing doesn't seem to much of a stretch either. That only makes "common sense" to me...

 

[GulfCoastTider]

Davefrat,

First of all, I agree with your sentiment that the University needs to get serious about academics, and that its failure to do so has tarnished our image.

However, I really don't think that going forward, things will be as bad as they sound.

When we suffered the scholarship reductions under the sanctions, we were working with a lower basis than the other schools in the SEC. At the same time, the team saw about the usual numbers of attrition. Lower basis + same attrition = lower score.

As the number of our scholarshipped athletes returns to normal, so will the basis for calculating the score. Assuming we have the usual attrition, our score should increase.

The sanctions did have an effect on our ability to graduate players vis-a-vis the number of scholarshipped athletes on the team. As did coaching changes. The best thing we have going for us now is stability and character at the top.

 

[davefrat]

Davefrat,

First of all, I agree with your sentiment that the University needs to get serious about academics, and that its failure to do so has tarnished our image.

However, I really don't think that going forward, things will be as bad as they sound.

When we suffered the scholarship reductions under the sanctions, we were working with a lower basis than the other schools in the SEC. At the same time, the team saw about the usual numbers of attrition. Lower basis + same attrition = lower score.

As the number of our scholarshipped athletes returns to normal, so will the basis for calculating the score. Assuming we have the usual attrition, our score should increase.

The sanctions did have an effect on our ability to graduate players vis-a-vis the number of scholarshipped athletes on the team. As did coaching changes. The best thing we have going for us now is stability and character at the top.

i hope you're right. by the way, i was wondering if anyone knows whether the APR policy makes allowances for the death or serious illness of a player. it would seem like a no-brainer, but we are talking about the ncaa here. furthermore, if the old system had been in place back when the ncaa told our players they could transfer w/out sitting out a year, would those transfers have counted against us?

 

[Crimson Warrior]

It should be obvious what the pinheads...

...of the ncaa are doing (with the blessing of university presidents, of course) and that is to get college athletics to where it was in in the early 1920s and 1930s. One platoon football, with little to no practice time and dull as dishwater. The ncaa is biting the hand that feeds them. Just when you think they can't do anything more stupid, they always prove they can. I have nothing against making schools more accountable for graduation rates as long as it can be enforced. Who is going to make utk kowtow to this new rule when filmer doesn't even want an attendance policy in place? Players leaving early, transfers, kicked off the team, will kill your APR. This portion must be rescinded in some manner. It is beyond ridiculous. It's past time to leave the ncaa. They have gone completely nuts.