I dont like this.....
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7148713/big-east-meet-conference-usa-mountain-west
That would be a football league only. Either scenario: Inviting full members and trying to keep a BCS bid, or the football schools making this arrangement won't stop any current Big East schools from trying to get into the ACC/SEC/Big 9/10/12. From our standpoint, the best short-term fix right now for the basketball-only schools in the Big East is if football finds a home and they don't even have to add bad basketball programs to the conference to do it.
Not as WORST as your grammar!
/YOUR brain has a shell on it
//Shut up Richard
Is this about sausages?
If this were to happen, i can't believe that it would be any better than the current format for the remaining Big East football teams. At what point does Marinatto stop if WVU leaves? That would leave us with what 5 football teams? And the others will jump ship the moment another opportunity comes along. He has to realize that this solution will only allow the remaining football teams to compete in this 'association' until they find a better home in another conference.
Ugh. Football-only conferences. Basketball-only conferences. Hybrids.
Just stop the madness. Let the fball schools create a huge clusterfluff of a conference and accelerate the birth of a bball-only conference that doesnt span the entire continental United States. Since Marinatto will be at the meeting, I expect nothing will get accomplished. When he sends roses, then it's time to worry.
In other news, these BCS schools are an academic joke in regards to the revenue sports...
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/story/2011-10-25/graduation-rates-football-mens-basketball-connecticut/50908162/1
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on October 25, 2011, 07:06:41 PM
In other news, these BCS schools are an academic joke in regards to the revenue sports...
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/story/2011-10-25/graduation-rates-football-mens-basketball-connecticut/50908162/1
Garbage. I'm not buying it. At least when it comes to bball, so many players that are hell-bent on going to the NBA are virtually required to skip their second semester final exams. If a player is a borderline lottery pick, is it in his best interests to take a history exam, a grammar exam, a geography exam and a retail business exam OR attend pre-draft try-outs and try to sneak his way into the lottery and make a lot of money? How much money would straight 'A's' translate to money made in the NBA. If Im in a player's shoes, I ditch finals and try to sneak my way into the lottery/the first round/the second round. We are talking about hundreds of thousands/millions of dollars for these kids. Like Coach K said, you cant MAKE kids stick around and finish the academic year; we as coaches only take the NCAA punishment for players that decide to do what is in their best interests. The NCAA plays second fiddle to the NBA. Cant blame the kids and cant blame the coaches. What? Should coaches stop recruiting kids that are likely to be 1-and-dones? 2-and-dones? Of course not. Their job is to recruit the best talent available and win. Its simply a conflicting message.
Quote from: muhs03 on October 25, 2011, 07:20:44 PM
Garbage. I'm not buying it. At least when it comes to bball, so many players that are hell-bent on going to the NBA are virtually required to skip their second semester final exams. If a player is a borderline lottery pick, is it in his best interests to take a history exam, a grammar exam, a geography exam and a retail business exam OR attend pre-draft try-outs and try to sneak his way into the lottery and make a lot of money? How much money would straight 'A's' translate to money made in the NBA. If Im in a player's shoes, I ditch finals and try to sneak my way into the lottery/the first round/the second round. We are talking about hundreds of thousands/millions of dollars for these kids. Like Coach K said, you cant MAKE kids stick around and finish the academic year; we as coaches only take the NCAA punishment for players that decide to do what is in their best interests. The NCAA plays second fiddle to the NBA. Cant blame the kids and cant blame the coaches. What? Should coaches stop recruiting kids that are likely to be 1-and-dones? 2-and-dones? Of course not. Their job is to recruit the best talent available and win. Its simply a conflicting message.
So what's your excuse for football where there is barely no (red shirt common/limited) early entry? And, there are a lot less slots in basketball for the NBA, btw. Six years to finish and UCONN is on probation? Sorry, dripping with hypocracy in all this are the college presidents. It is a zero sum game but they just don't know it.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on October 25, 2011, 07:39:01 PM
So what's your excuse for football where there is barely no (red shirt common/limited) early entry? And, there are a lot less slots in basketball for the NBA, btw. Six years to finish and UCONN is on probation? Sorry, dripping with hypocracy in all this are the college presidents. It is a zero sum game but they just don't know it.
LOL. Seriously? I like that you started off your post with the words "Whats your
excuse...". I made no EXCUSE, just stated the facts. And, I clearly made my case for basketball programs, not football programs. The article YOU cited included the sentence, "Connecticut already stood somewhat awkwardly atop
basketball's mountaintop" with regard to their BASKETBALL APR rating. The article doesnt cite UConn's football rating, does it? I didnt see it.
And, to continue my argument in the same direction in which I started it (ya know, from a bball viewpoint), midwestern schools that are close in proximity to Chicago (specifically Jordan's gym) have a HUGE advantage. Marquette players dont have to pack up and move to spend the end of their second semester in Chicago like a player from...Zona...or UNC....or Duke....or UT has to. Most 1st rounders (if you follow their transition) all make Chicago their home base and fly in and out of that city to attend workouts with NBA teams. Cant fault them. Cant fault their coaches. Cant fault their respective athletic departments. The kid is interviewing for a job!!! It just so happens to be a job that doesnt require a high GPA or a college diploma yet still pays better than the best job of a kid that received an academic scholarship and studied hard for 4 years. Oh, and that kid that left in bad academic standing returned more money to the university that most Rhodes scholars might.
Quote from: muhs03 on October 25, 2011, 08:06:03 PM
LOL. Seriously? I like that you started off your post with the words "Whats your excuse...". I made no EXCUSE, just stated the facts. And, I clearly made my case for basketball programs, not football programs. The article YOU cited included the sentence, "Connecticut already stood somewhat awkwardly atop basketball's mountaintop" with regard to their BASKETBALL APR rating. The article doesnt cite UConn's football rating, does it? I didnt see it.
If you actually read the article, it also talks about and lists the pathetic graduation rates of BCS football schools as well, where redshirting is extensive (you would think it would improve with a 5th academic year). It is also interesting to me, with all the conference realignment talk from BCS schools like...let's say... Syracuse, with their basketball graduation rates in the 50% or less, yet their presidents talk about the the academic fit of the ACC, and not the TV money. Yet, you have no agenda? To even defend the hypocrisy dripping in that report is what's laughable...truly.
muhs03,
I get what you're saying, but having a guy leave early for the NBA does not a program kill. If that was the case North Carolina and UCLA would have been heavily penalized for this APR period. APR isn't simply as cut and dry as graduating everyone. It gives you a lot of leeway for players who leave for the NBA. You do realize that having an APR under 900 means less than 50% of the "student"athletes. It's pathetic. Transfers and dropouts are what really kill a team.
As to your point about Chicago, it's not easy even for the Marquette players here. Zar is still finishing up his degree as we speak and Jimmy has classes remaining as well. Declaring for the draft is a full time job, but that is why the NCAA allows for 6 years for graduation. It's a very low standard and only the worst of the worst have difficulty meeting the requirements.
And one more thing - The top 6 NCAA executives took home a combined $12M last year. Question: Was that $12M created by bball schools like South Dakota....or like UConn? Just wondering.
The NCAA makes money off of the very programs they supposedly despise? Ok. Fine. Change the rules then! Require all athletes to stay until they graduate with a diploma. In other words, make it a four year commitment. Let's see what happens to tv revenues (and the pay checks of the NCAA executives ) when the best players play elsewhere. Maybe the professional leagues are only allowed to dictate the age of a rookie, though (not sure the NCAA has the legal right to implement a commitment). They do, apparently, believe they hold the naming rights and 'likeness' of players that played well before the age of video games, game playbacks, etc despite the fact that none of those old school athletes signed off on that when they committed to play in an NCAA sanctioned sport. Who cares; that wont stop the NCAA money drubbers from profiting off of them (though, I know that decision went to the Supreme Court but dont know what the verdict was). Pretending like the NCAA is a high-and-mighty organization is like saying the Enron executives were simply dealt a bad hand.
Quote from: pux90mex on October 25, 2011, 08:21:48 PM
muhs03,
I get what you're saying, but having a guy leave early for the NBA does not a program kill. If that was the case North Carolina and UCLA would have been heavily penalized for this APR period. APR isn't simply as cut and dry as graduating everyone. It gives you a lot of leeway for players who leave for the NBA. You do realize that having an APR under 900 means less than 50% of the "student"athletes. It's pathetic. Transfers and dropouts are what really kill a team.
As to your point about Chicago, it's not easy even for the Marquette players here. Zar is still finishing up his degree as we speak and Jimmy has classes remaining as well. Declaring for the draft is a full time job, but that is why the NCAA allows for 6 years for graduation. It's a very low standard and only the worst of the worst have difficulty meeting the requirements.
Right. I understand that. But you cant fault a coach or athletic department for drop-outs and transfers, can you? As I mentioned in my previous post, Coach K said that coaches cant MAKE a player do anything. They are essentially hand-cuffed. And for top programs, the draft is a killer as well (aside from drop-outs and transfers). How UK gets by is anyone's guess. I have heard that they all enroll for classes at the earliest possible summer session and take as many courses as they can (while obviously still taking the NCAA credit minimum during the fall and spring academic calendars.
As for the 6 year limit...so what!? Did Vince Carter make the 6 year cut-off (I dont remember). Is Durant going to finish soon? Of course not. Once a player makes millions, where is the incentive to finish something he probably doesnt enjoy doing? Especially, if he was in poor academic standing when he left (I have no idea if Carter and Durant were negative APR players)?
I volunteer at Boys and Girls Clubs all around Chicago and it is abundantly clear to me that the NCAA is facing a MUCH larger problem that they clearly cant handle. Its a socio-economic problem and its way over their head (like PayPal Cal's recruiting). This past weekend, I setup a slam dunk contest for 13 year olds...and Im not joking when I say that several of the kids said they needed to win because they had to go to the NBA to help their families. These kids, when they grow up, will look out for themselves and their families....not their coaches....not their AD's....not their fans. For a lot of these kids....even at 13, the NBA is their ticket despite the odds being stacked against them. Heck, I was 13 once and dreamed big, too. If they are lucky enough to play high D1 bball, you think school is going to be a focus? Especially if an NBA pay-day is within reach? Forget it.
You missed the main point though, the players that leave for the NBA make up a very small portion of the overall number of a program's players. Certainly not one big enough to make a big enough difference in the APR.
As for the player's NBA dreams, sure, millions believe that the NBA is their ticket to ride. Of those, only thousands will ever play NCAA basketball and of those, only 60 will get drafted in a given year. You can't expect the NCAA to taylor their rules based on 60 players entering the NBA in a given year.
Listen, I completely agree that in many instances, a coach can't control a player dropping out, transferring or not graduating. He is not the player's father, and can simply make recommendations. However, if and only if the NCAA wants to maintain amateur status, the responsibility has to fall on those who reap the most benefits from that status, i.e. the schools and the coaches. The requirements are met by most Division I schools so you can't say the system doesn't work. If NBA factories like North Carolina and UCLA (during the 6 year period the APR evaluates) can maintain their APR, so can everyone else.
How much worser can this possibly get before we finally reach the absolut peek of worse-icity?
(spell check and teal ignored)
Quote from: leever on October 26, 2011, 02:30:38 PM
How much worser can this possibly get before we finally reach the absolut peek of worse-icity?
(spell check and teal ignored)
Much worserer.
Quote from: Skatastrophy on October 26, 2011, 02:33:45 PM
Much worserer.
I think for now we're stuck with the Big East, for betterer or worserer.
Quote from: leever on October 26, 2011, 02:30:38 PM
How much worser can this possibly get before we finally reach the absolut peek of worse-icity?
(spell check and teal ignored)
And here I was relieved that the news had gotten worst. I figured things can only get better from here, right?
I suspect part of the problem is taking courses that lead to a degree. I suspect some of the players that do not get a degree have enough overall credits, but not the right mix of credits to get a degree. The university that is only worried about keeping a player eligible will let the player take whatever they want. The university that is interested in the player's future will give the player guidance to get an actual degree.
Mmmmmmmmmm. Wurst.
(http://cakesandale.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c30fa53ef011571191823970c-250wi)
Quote from: bilsu on October 26, 2011, 03:31:31 PM
I suspect part of the problem is taking courses that lead to a degree. I suspect some of the players that do not get a degree have enough overall credits, but not the right mix of credits to get a degree. The university that is only worried about keeping a player eligible will let the player take whatever they want. The university that is interested in the player's future will give the player guidance to get an actual degree.
They won't necessarily let the player take whatever HE wants. Greg Oden wanted to be a biology/pre-dental major but The OSU basically told him no. He then wanted to major in finance but was again "advised" against it. They knew he was a one-and-done player and didn't want him wasting his time during that year on book learnin' so they enrolled him in some easy gen eds.
Quote from: bilsu on October 26, 2011, 03:31:31 PM
I suspect part of the problem is taking courses that lead to a degree. I suspect some of the players that do not get a degree have enough overall credits, but not the right mix of credits to get a degree. The university that is only worried about keeping a player eligible will let the player take whatever they want. The university that is interested in the player's future will give the player guidance to get an actual degree.
Your scenario, of taking courses that do not lead to a degree, can really only happen very early in a student-athlete's career. As of the end of the second year (and maybe earlier for DI?), their eligibility becomes measured based on their declared degree program, and progress toward that degree.
Quote from: NCAARules on October 26, 2011, 06:56:45 PM
Your scenario, of taking courses that do not lead to a degree, can really only happen very early in a student-athlete's career. As of the end of the second year (and maybe earlier for DI?), their eligibility becomes measured based on their declared degree program, and progress toward that degree.
[/quote/)There is a rule about moving towards a degree. However, you start out in business and when the courses get tougher you transfer to a new curriculum and start over. I doubt that there is any rule against that as the average student can change majors at anytime.