http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6853878/ncaa-committee-approves-increase-apr-cutline
Mixed feelings about this. I like that fact that the NCAA is emphasizing academics and punishing teams that underahieve in the classroom. On the other hand, I have never read a story about a kid that didn't think NBA team workouts weren't beneficial for them in terms of exposure. If team workouts (or spending time at Jordans gym in Chi with other draft prospects) are coordinated before the spring semester is over, what is a kid suppose to do? Skip the pre-draft stuff so he can take finals? will that improve his draft stock? Those workouts can mean the difference between lottery and middle first round pick...or 1st round vs. 2nd round. Big money difference. It puts coaches in a tough spot. I'm guessig more kids will show follow UK and make kids show up early so the can take a couple of summer classes before fall semester. The US jr teams and world games teams will likely take a hit since NBA prospects will spend their summers on campus instead of on travel teams.
Ridiculous. This is just going to lead to a bunch of sham degrees. IMO, the NCAA shouldn't be mandating any sort of "academic progress."
Does this have anything to do with annual interest rates?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 11, 2011, 05:55:04 PM
Ridiculous. This is just going to lead to a bunch of sham degrees. IMO, the NCAA shouldn't be mandating any sort of "academic progress."
Yep, likely. Plus, universities will go out of their way to hold the hands of athletes and guide them through their 9 months of studying. The AD's of the SEC collectively farted when they heard the news. "NCAA? Do they still think they are important? We can probably change that thought by getting rid of them altogether." Though, what impact will this have on the BCS? None? What a mess.
Thinking more about this....what a 'traveshamockery' it would be if...say, an SEC school competed for the BCS title while it's bball team was prevented from competing in the NCAA tournament despite the fact that the team was a lock to get in. Forget the BCS championship....any bowl game will do.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 11, 2011, 05:55:04 PM
Ridiculous. This is just going to lead to a bunch of sham degrees. IMO, the NCAA shouldn't be mandating any sort of "academic progress."
Why not? They do already in many regards - such as incoming Freshman and transfers.
The NCAA has lost control of football completely. The BCS and Bowls are the tail wagging the dog. They do not want to see the same happen in basketball, yet it's main impact in basketball is eligibility and the NCAA Tournament. They have little impact beyond that. The conferences rule much of that. I think they are trying to take control. The President's are nor happy with the black eye they see from schools that have players take one class or none the last semester (predominantly football).
As for this legislation, I believe it is overreaching. Let's see the impact of the original APR first. Those are just being felt now. See if that helps correct what they perceive to be the problem first.
..."NCAA: Raise Your Grades, Or Else
The NCAA ruled Thursday to ban teams with a four-year APR below 930 from participating in the postseason. The following teams would have missed the 2011 men's basketball NCAA tournament under the new rules with these APR scores, released in May 2010.
Team APR
Alabama State 907
Kansas State 924
Morehead State 906
Ohio State 929
Purdue 919
San Diego State 921
St. Peter's 928
Syracuse 912
UAB 825
UC Santa Barbara 902
USC 924
UT San Antonio 885..."
At the risk of a contrary view, I hope and think this is a good result.
I would enjoy seeing MU make a tourney, and OSU and Syracuse not make it. Its a recruiting edge to assure a kid he'll be able to play in the NCAA, and your school can tell the parents his child will get a degree. It also speaks to the primary purpose of the institutions who sponsor college athletics--the education of our youth.
There is much good from promoting an education, and from getting a degree.
I am a college basketball fan ...because, and not despite its included term "college" defines the sport, and distinguishes it from the pros.
Quote from: MUMac on August 11, 2011, 07:17:57 PM
Why not? They do already in many regards - such as incoming Freshman and transfers.
Because I think the NCAA is a sham and the idea of the "student athlete" is antiquated. I really don't care all that much if student atletes graduate or even go to class.
Bball elites will find a way around the new APR, not adhere to it. Don't be naive. There will be no benefit to MU based on the rule change. $$ talks, NCAA walks.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 11, 2011, 08:33:40 PM
Because I think the NCAA is a sham and the idea of the "student athlete" is antiquated. I really don't care all that much if student atletes graduate or even go to class.
You must love USC, Memphis or the SEC then.
I find that line of thought frightening. Are you looking at College (should that word be included in your world) Basketball as a minor league team that just happens to be sponsored by a College or University?
Quote from: MUMac on August 11, 2011, 09:14:31 PM
You must love USC, Memphis or the SEC then.
I don't love them. I don't have much of a problem with them.
Quote from: MUMac on August 11, 2011, 09:14:31 PM
I find that line of thought frightening. Are you looking at College (should that word be included in your world) Basketball as a minor league team that just happens to be sponsored by a College or University?
Well, first of all, that is exactly what they are. Secondly, if the player is given the tools to obtain a college education (a full ride), it is up to them to do it. I do think that the NCAA should regulate practice time, recruiting, etc. But honestly, it is up to the school and the player to monitor "academic progress." If the player doesn't care...and the school doesn't care...why should I???
Quote from: muhs03 on August 11, 2011, 08:35:20 PM
Bball elites will find a way around the new APR, not adhere to it. Don't be naive. There will be no benefit to MU based on the rule change. $$ talks, NCAA walks.
If the "BBall elites" have to figure a way around the APR rule, and MU is in compliance already, we already see the benefit -- we dont have to break or bend the rule, to compete. That is good-- and preferable, even to the naive, such as me. lol
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 11, 2011, 09:20:04 PM
I don't love them. I don't have much of a problem with them.
Well, first of all, that is exactly what they are. Secondly, if the player is given the tools to obtain a college education (a full ride), it is up to them to do it. I do think that the NCAA should regulate practice time, recruiting, etc. But honestly, it is up to the school and the player to monitor "academic progress." If the player doesn't care...and the school doesn't care...why should I???
I don't really know where to start. Stunning to read, trully.
It is
College Basketball, is it not? No, I guess it is minor league basketball. :o
Quote from: MUMac on August 11, 2011, 09:34:21 PM
I don't really know where to start. Stunning to read, trully.
It is College Basketball, is it not? No, I guess it is minor league basketball. :o
College bball became "minor league basketball" when the NBA adopted the age limit rule. Notice that UK has never suffered from the APR at all? Also notice that UK players have never participated in the U-17 USA team (at least their best recruits)? Wonder why? Because they are on campus taking classes during the summer so that when they announce for the draft, they dont kill the program (even under the old rules). Quite frankly, it takes a guy like Calipari to make a total mockery of the NCAA....and, I guess I dont have a problem with that. It's stupid from the outside looking in; nevermind the inside looking in.
Quote from: muhs03 on August 11, 2011, 09:56:53 PM
College bball became "minor league basketball" when the NBA adopted the age limit rule. Notice that UK has never suffered from the APR at all? Also notice that UK players have never participated in the U-17 USA team (at least their best recruits)? Wonder why? Because they are on campus taking classes during the summer so that when they announce for the draft, they dont kill the program (even under the old rules). Quite frankly, it takes a guy like Calipari to make a total mockery of the NCAA....and, I guess I dont have a problem with that. It's stupid from the outside looking in; nevermind the inside looking in.
Frankly, I thought the NBA Rule was a mistake at the time and still feel that way. There are some people who do not want to be in college. The one and done's know they don't need to take schooling seriously. That has, as you stated, made a mockery of the NCAA.
Calipari is one example - both at Memphis and UK. That is what the NCAA is
trying to reign in. Sultan apparently has not issue with that type of program. That is not the type of program I want at MU or to be the norm in College Basketball. It is because of the Calipari's of the world that the NCAA is implementing standards like this.
I guess I don't know what I have said that is so stunning. I am not going to delude myself that we continue to live in the glory days of amateurism where fine representatives of the student body fight for their school in a fine display of athletic competition.
Let's look at how athletics has essentially bastardized academics...
...many college athletes would not be admitted to the schools they attend if they weren't athletes.
...they are directed into majors that have little to do with their interests, but are easy to complete. (I mean, how many UW football players major in "Agricultural Journalism?")
...many of the athletes do not have any interest in going to class or completing their degrees anyway.
Despite this, the NCAA clings to some ideal from the 1950s about the role of athletics in higher education and puts on a good face about things like "academic progress" without addressing the three items above. I guess the NCAA really doesn't mind if kids who shouldn't be in a particular school, get an easy degree from that school in a subject matter they don't really have an interest in. To me, I would rather face reality...we have given the students the tools they need to suceed (a full ride scholarship). It is then up to the student to take advantage of those tools, and up to the school to determine if they are comfortable with the relationship. The APR is just putting frosting on a crap cake, instead of realizing that you are eating a crap cake to begin with. It is a complete PR move more than anything.
(Ha...this board autocorrects "sh*t" to "crap")
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 12, 2011, 07:58:21 AM
I guess I don't know what I have said that is so stunning.
The stunning part to me is the lack of interest if an athlete attends class or not. I agree with much of what you just posted. That said, the kids are given opportunities. It is definitely up to them to take advantage of it. If they do not, though, I fall in line with the actions have consequences. Turning a blind eye to whether or not they attend is a slippery slope. They have other avenues to play if they do not wish to attend college.
I previously stated I did not agree with the APR either. I understand what the intent and goal is. Without it, coaches would be like you and care little if the athlete attended class and progressed towards a degree. As it is now, the coaches (most, at least) do have an interest in the student part of the student athlete. That has benefits beyond the program, as I believe it benefits the student - who as you stated in many cases may not have qualified to attend the school without their athletic accomplishments.
To treat them solely as athletes and not as students is better left for other avenues. Your brazeness in this regard is truly what is stunning to me.
I think you are misinterpreting what I mean. I want college athletes to use the tools they have been given to earn their degree - but if they choose not to do so, I am not going to lament it. It's their choice.
I personally think that the schools need to step up and be more true to themselves. I would much rather have them set whatever guidelines they want, than have the NCAA mandate some phony APR system that is nothing but a public relations move. Say what you want about Kentucky and Calipari, but in many respects he is at least honest. He knows why the kids are there. He knows what their motivations are. He at least has the balls to admit it instead of playing along with the charade. If UK is comfortable with what he is doing, I don't have a problem - I have enough to worry about in life to worry about if the University of Kentucky coddles their student athletes.
Does this change recruiting? Can a school like Kentucky risk signing so many one and dones? Do schools start refusing to release players form scholarship so they can transfer? Do you start recruiting lesser talented players for roster spots 11, 12 & 13, targeting players that will stay and graduate? My guess is as soon as Kentucky, Kansas, North Carolina or Duke are at risk of being banned from tournament the rule will be changed to a lesser standard.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 12, 2011, 09:33:21 AM
I think you are misinterpreting what I mean. I want college athletes to use the tools they have been given to earn their degree - but if they choose not to do so, I am not going to lament it. It's their choice.
I believe I have misinterpretted your meaning. The caveat I would place on the latter portion of the captioned statement is that the student athlete does need to demonstrate progress toward a degree to be eligible in the future. The way I read your comment is they could be eligible all 4 years and if they never attended class, it was not a concern of yours.
As for the APR, I am in agreement with you. I wish the universities would take a principled stand. I am speculating, though, that some Presidents may favor this type of legislation to avoid standing up to the influential boosters.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on August 11, 2011, 05:55:04 PM
Ridiculous. This is just going to lead to a bunch of sham degrees. IMO, the NCAA shouldn't be mandating any sort of "academic progress."
Already exists. Grade inflation as well. John Clay at Wisconsin goes three years barely eligible to suddenly making the Dean's list is one example of many. MU is not clean on this either.