MUBB, athletics and academics, etc.

[forgetful]

I just don't see why if they want better behavior they want to raise the intellectual barrier.  It is well documented that higher iq and higher intelligent levels lead one to be more likely to be involved in illicit drug use.  So are they trying to create a culture of drug use.

[brewcity77]

I just don't see why if they want better behavior they want to raise the intellectual barrier.  It is well documented that higher iq and higher intelligent levels lead one to be more likely to be involved in illicit drug use.  So are they trying to create a culture of drug use.

Someone figured out the real agenda.

[seinfeld]

Someone figured out the real agenda.

yeah, a lot for crockett and tubbs lookalikes will be wondering around campus.

[Henry Sugar]

I can also correlate the fact that people who smoke weed also drink milk.

Can I see your scatter plot for this?  It would help explain some other research I've been doing.

[Benny B]

Can I see your scatter plot for this?  It would help explain some other research I've been doing.

You can make up correlations to prove anything... the correlation between people who know this and Scoopers is .40.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

What are they raising the minimums to?

2.25? - I don't think that is a big enough bump to scare off potential recruits and damn MU to basketball purgatory.

In fact, I would hope most/all of the guys are above 2.2GPA right now.

If MU raises it to 3.5 or something, then I think you'll see a different looking roster in a number of years.

[Lennys Tap]

What are they raising the minimums to?

2.25? - I don't think that is a big enough bump to scare off potential recruits and damn MU to basketball purgatory.

In fact, I would hope most/all of the guys are above 2.2GPA right now.

If MU raises it to 3.5 or something, then I think you'll see a different looking roster in a number of years.

What's the current minimum for "regular students" at Marquette? Is it fair that the general student body have lower thresholds than the basketball team?

Moving away from the fairness issue, would it hurt us competitively if our requirements go from = to Wisconsin, Purdue, Indiana, etc. to >those same schools? Duh.

As to your last statement, forget about Marquette. If Harvard raises minimums to 3.5 you'll see a different looking roster - and it won't take a "number of years".

[Goose]

Raising GPA by 0.40 is a big deal when recruiting kids to play at high level, which hopefully is our goal. I am still confused on this whole topic. Does anyone have facts on new standards or just speculation?

[MUfan12]

What are they raising the minimums to?

2.25? - I don't think that is a big enough bump to scare off potential recruits and damn MU to basketball purgatory.

In fact, I would hope most/all of the guys are above 2.2GPA right now.

I'm not sure exactly what it is, but the player involved was struggling under the old system, so the change will make it that much more difficult.

I don't necessarily have a problem with bumping up the minimums. But doing it midyear, and expecting a player to improve that much more in a short time frame is a bit ridiculous.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Moving away from the fairness issue, would it hurt us competitively if our requirements go from = to Wisconsin, Purdue, Indiana, etc. to >those same schools? Duh.

I'd have to know how many guys are currently barely getting by before I can agree with this.

If most of the guys are already getting 2.5GPAs, then a slight adjustment up to X GPA isn't really a big deal. If a lot of guys are barely getting by with 1.9GPA, then you are right... it could hurt MU.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I'm not sure exactly what it is, but the player involved was struggling under the old system, so the change will make it that much more difficult.

I don't necessarily have a problem with bumping up the minimums. But doing it midyear, and expecting a player to improve that much more in a short time frame is a bit ridiculous.

Yea, the mid-year thing is weird, but it's all internet rumor so far, so I'm not sure that is actually what is happening... we'll have to wait and see.

As far as the current player who is struggling, you are right, he would probably struggle with the new standards.

However, that's 1 player our of 12, so I don't know if this is some sort of basketball genocide that some are predicting.

I guess I'll have to wait and see what is really going on before I go nuts. The stuff that has been rumored and the impending doom that has been predicted don't exactly make sense to me.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

What's the current minimum for "regular students" at Marquette? Is it fair that the general student body have lower thresholds than the basketball team?

Oh, as far as this point is concerned, I think you can slice it anyway you want.

It's not really "fair" to have higher standards for basketball players.

However, hoops players get a lot of things the average student doesn't (special meal plan, gym access, tutors, separate dorms, etc.). In fact hoops players get a lot more things than any other team (look at the locker rooms).

I think the basketball players bust their ass and deserve everything they get, but it's hard to talk about "fair" when comparing them to the average student. It's apples to oranges for me.

[Lennys Tap]

As far as the current player who is struggling, you are right, he would probably struggle with the new standards.

However, that's 1 player our of 12, so I don't know if this is some sort of basketball genocide that some are predicting.

A significant % of top high school players fit "this 1" player's profile. If he flunks out, the fallout will be minimal. If he "flunks out" by MU's standards but tranfers as a student in good standing to another D1 program then parents, coaches and athletes will all take notice. If a coach has a great player from a crappy high school who's an indifferent student why encourage him to go to a school with more difficult requirements and furthermore evidently ok with changing them in midstream.

[Lennys Tap]

I'd have to know how many guys are currently barely getting by before I can agree with this.

If most of the guys are already getting 2.5GPAs, then a slight adjustment up to X GPA isn't really a big deal. If a lot of guys are barely getting by with 1.9GPA, then you are right... it could hurt MU.

You're limiting discussion to our current team. I'm talking about where this goes over time. The best basketball players in the country are predominantly urban and African American. They are disproportionly from poor and single parent households. Their grammar schools and high schools are mostly seriously substandard. Considering that they also have full time jobs while in college, it's not surprising that guys struggle. If you want to eliminate possible strugglers, fine, but assuming it won't have consequences is naive.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

You're limiting discussion to our current team. I'm talking about where this goes over time. The best basketball players in the country are predominantly urban and African American. They are disproportionly from poor and single parent households. Their grammar schools and high schools are mostly seriously substandard. Considering that they also have full time jobs while in college, it's not surprising that guys struggle. If you want to eliminate possible strugglers, fine, but assuming it won't have consequences is naive.

How many hoops players have been barely getting a 2.0GPA at MU (say over the past 20 years)?

Is it 100 players? Is it 2 players?

If it's 100 players, you are absolutely correct, MU is going to fall hard. If it's 2 players, we won't really notice a precipitous drop as people have predicted.

When all is said and done, I still think it's a stupid idea (if true)... but I don't know if it is the end of MU hoops as we know it.

Not enough information for outrage. Give it time though. I'm prepared.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

A significant % of top high school players fit "this 1" player's profile. If he flunks out, the fallout will be minimal. If he "flunks out" by MU's standards but tranfers as a student in good standing to another D1 program then parents, coaches and athletes will all take notice. If a coach has a great player from a crappy high school who's an indifferent student why encourage him to go to a school with more difficult requirements and furthermore evidently ok with changing them in midstream.

You're right, but I'm not sure the impact/fall-out is going to damn MU to basketball purgatory... AND I don't know if Buzz is even recruiting guys who aren't interested in school. Buzz seems like he is pushing these guys to do well in the classroom, so I'm not sure it would be a big deal.

[Lennys Tap]

How many hoops players have been barely getting a 2.0GPA at MU (say over the past 20 years)?

Is it 100 players? Is it 2 players?

If it's 100 players, you are absolutely correct, MU is going to fall hard. If it's 2 players, we won't really notice a precipitous drop as people have predicted.

When all is said and done, I still think it's a stupid idea (if true)... but I don't know if it is the end of MU hoops as we know it.

Not enough information for outrage. Give it time though. I'm prepared.

I have no idea as to how many players, past or present, would be affected. If it's an insignificant number, though, what's the point of the change?

Agree that as of now not enough info for outrage - yet - hope it turns out to be much ado about nothing.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I have no idea as to how many players, past or present, would be affected. If it's an insignificant number, though, what's the point of the change?

Agree that as of now not enough info for outrage - yet - hope it turns out to be much ado about nothing.

I don't know what the details are, or the motivation from the BOT. There might be a super great underlying reason we don't know about. Or, maybe it's just a bush league rule put in place by some rich honkies.

I don't really know why they are doing it, and I'm not really in favor of it.

I just don't agree with some alarmists that think this is some sort of huge deal that is going to send MU hoops back to the stone ages.

Too early for that kind of talk. We don't really know if this is a big deal or not. I know this isn't a "fun" opinion, (more fun to RAGE!!!), but I think it's reasonable.

[kmwtrucks]

One thing that I find odd is BUZZ makes all the player's goto class.  2 years ago in late march or early april a Graduating Mo Acker had a unexcused class absence and he made the whole team meet and run Killer's.  This was a SR that was on pace to graduate who exhasuted his eligiblilty.

So I think Buzz takes school for his players very seriously.  My general feeling is that like most predictions this will come and go with nothing happening.

If the AD boots a BBALL player off for going to class and getting C's, I would voice my displeasure as loud as I can.  

[Canadian Dimes]

Can someone share with me one iota of evidence that this is going into effect??

This reminds me of our last 100 page created by another chicken/goose little

[Benny B]

A few points (and I realize I may be repeating comments, but 9 pages deserves an in-thread summary somewhere):

1) Considering the speculation that the academic bar being raised is the crux of the issue (and it is speculation at this point), I find it hard to believe that anyone at MU would not allow a student-athlete to "right-the-ship" rather than create a threshold that was unattainable within a current or upcoming term for a given individual or individuals.  Such may not be the basis for any legal action, but such a travesty would not sit well with university appeals board or the NCAA.

2) If the bar was set in a way that it would be unattainable for an individual, why hasn't that been brought to light by the "victim"?  If I find out about a new standard in February and figure out a couple days later that there's no way for me to comply under any circumstances, you better believe I'm screaming to any media outlet that will listen as soon as the season is over.  (If I'm the coach, you better believe I'm taking that SMU job strictly as a matter of principle.)

3) If there is an individual that is being targeted (and I don't, even for a second, believe there is), then there has to be much more to the story as to why that individual is being targeted... yes, even more than you, I, Goose or Don Walker knows; something that, if brought to light, the University wouldn't have to defend its decision -- the decision would inherently defend itself rendering the academic issue a moot point.

4) If anyone who would otherwise be non-compliant under the new standard cannot bring him/herself into compliance within a reasonable & achievable time frame, then I have no sympathy for that person.  There isn't a kid on the basketball team who can't pull C's just by showing up to class and doing homework; how much harder can it be to pull down B's for a semester???  (Unless he isn't showing up and doing his homework.)  Bear in mind these kids have the best tutors and academic advisers at MU watching over them.   I don't care what your background it... to not be able to get a 3.0 in at least one course of study (*cough*communications*cough*) with those resources at your disposal means you're either lazy, apathetic or perpetually high --- neither of which should elicit any sympathy from anyone.

5) If we're hearing about this now, then the student-athletes heard about it months ago, i.e. those most affected aren't likely to be caught off-guard by all this.  And as soon as the coaching staff would have heard or known who could be affected, you better believe that every last one of them started busting their own posterior to get those kids in line.

6) The conclusion that improved academic standards are being employed predominantly as a reaction to or an effort to stem behavioral issues is one of the most uneducated things I've heard... I don't know who came up with that theory, but I bet it was a communications major.

In essence... those promoting or forecasting a major upheaval need to check themselves.  There's nothing wrong with improving academics amongst student-athletes when reasonable and fair.  If someone finds himself on the short end of the alleged new threshold, then the only person responsible is the kid getting cut.


(My apologies to all MU Comm majors... even including those related to me.  I needed an example, and you all know damn well you're the best one there is.  Take heart, though... we all agree you're much more edumakayted than those studying "HIST501 -- History of Kentucky Basketball (2011 to present day)" .)

[Goose]

Canadian Dimes
What evidence do you have that Lenny is wrong? Not sure why your opinion outweighs another posters. I would love to hear evidence that Lenny or Muguru are wrong. Do you have any or are you just stating your opinion? Please, please, please provide credible evidence with source and prove them wrong. Everyone on here would be very happy if you put the fire out.

[Goose]

BennyB
I have no opinion on the topic other than speculation. I have never stated any player was targeted or going to be forced out. I do not believe that "forced" transfers are coming. Please read my posts before using me as a source on this topic. I HAVE NO EVIDENCE to prove either side correct on this topic.

[Lennys Tap]

A few points (and I realize I may be repeating comments, but 9 pages deserves an in-thread summary somewhere):

1) Considering the speculation that the academic bar being raised is the crux of the issue (and it is speculation at this point), I find it hard to believe that anyone at MU would not allow a student-athlete to "right-the-ship" rather than create a threshold that was unattainable within a current or upcoming term for a given individual or individuals.  Such may not be the basis for any legal action, but such a travesty would not sit well with university appeals board or the NCAA.

2) If the bar was set in a way that it would be unattainable for an individual, why hasn't that been brought to light by the "victim"?  If I find out about a new standard in February and figure out a couple days later that there's no way for me to comply under any circumstances, you better believe I'm screaming to any media outlet that will listen as soon as the season is over.  (If I'm the coach, you better believe I'm taking that SMU job strictly as a matter of principle.)

3) If there is an individual that is being targeted (and I don't, even for a second, believe there is), then there has to be much more to the story as to why that individual is being targeted... yes, even more than you, I, Goose or Don Walker knows; something that, if brought to light, the University wouldn't have to defend its decision -- the decision would inherently defend itself rendering the academic issue a moot point.

4) If anyone who would otherwise be non-compliant under the new standard cannot bring him/herself into compliance within a reasonable & achievable time frame, then I have no sympathy for that person.  There isn't a kid on the basketball team who can't pull C's just by showing up to class and doing homework; how much harder can it be to pull down B's for a semester???  (Unless he isn't showing up and doing his homework.)  Bear in mind these kids have the best tutors and academic advisers at MU watching over them.   I don't care what your background it... to not be able to get a 3.0 in at least one course of study (*cough*communications*cough*) with those resources at your disposal means you're either lazy, apathetic or perpetually high --- neither of which should elicit any sympathy from anyone.

5) If we're hearing about this now, then the student-athletes heard about it months ago, i.e. those most affected aren't likely to be caught off-guard by all this.  And as soon as the coaching staff would have heard or known who could be affected, you better believe that every last one of them started busting their own posterior to get those kids in line.

6) The conclusion that improved academic standards are being employed predominantly as a reaction to or an effort to stem behavioral issues is one of the most uneducated things I've heard... I don't know who came up with that theory, but I bet it was a communications major.

In essence... those promoting or forecasting a major upheaval need to check themselves.  There's nothing wrong with improving academics amongst student-athletes when reasonable and fair.  If someone finds himself on the short end of the alleged new threshold, then the only person responsible is the kid getting cut.


(My apologies to all MU Comm majors... even including those related to me.  I needed an example, and you all know damn well you're the best one there is.  Take heart, though... we all agree you're much more edumakayted than those studying "HIST501 -- History of Kentucky Basketball (2011 to present day)" .)

A summary of this post:
1.Anything and everything done by the Marquette administration was (I guess always is) warranted and in the university's best interest.
2.Any student who doesn't get a 3.0 at MU (no matter their educational or socio-economic background or the fact that they're working full time) is lazy, a moron or both.

[Rubie Q]

Canadian Dimes
What evidence do you have that Lenny is wrong? Not sure why your opinion outweighs another posters. I would love to hear evidence that Lenny or Muguru are wrong. Do you have any or are you just stating your opinion? Please, please, please provide credible evidence with source and prove them wrong. Everyone on here would be very happy if you put the fire out.

You want evidence to disprove something that hasn't even happened yet?