Scholar athletes

[Dokey]

Given the number of games UConn women play and the amount of travel required, I would like to know what procedures are used to allow the women to succeed in classroom. I have been impressed by those who actually manage to graduate in less than four years.

Today I got a notice from the Colorado coach that five of her players earned four points during the season (65 total CU athletes earned four points). I don’t know if UConn releases that information. Only a few players will play pro ball and even those who do so will only have a few years to play.

I also wonder how academics influence recruiting. Boulder and other Colorado towns host the major softball recruiting tournament in the country. There is a box attached to every backstop where the coach can put profiles of his players. The concentration on those profiles is academics, not softball skills—that is demonstrated on the field or in tapes. College coaches don’t want to waste a scholarship on a player who could become academically ineligible. I was in the room almost 60 years ago when I heard two starters on the men’s bb team plead with a history professor not to flunk them. He explained he bent over backwards to accommodate their schedule. They were declared academically ineligible. I see high school girls rated for their basketball skills—we will have three No. 1s next year—but which top programs, like Stanford, have an edge in recruiting players who also excell in the classroom?

That doesn’t mean that basketball scholarships shouldn’t be given to less than stellar high school students but hopefully programs that take such players have the staff and procedures to help them succeed. I am sure there are programs that wink at academics and enroll such students in the equivalent of basket weaving 101. Whenever the major includes the word “sports” you have to wonder, recognizing that many athletes actually want to pursue a career in sports in some capacity.

 

[UcMiami]

Any college sport has a 20 hr rule which includes games (3hrs mandated) but not travel time. The rules are pretty clear:

NCAA.org - The Official Site of the NCAA

www.ncaa.org

Most athletes attend one or two summer sessions which can account for up to 4 courses that do not need to be taken during the fall/spring semesters greatly reducing the 'in season' work load. They also have academic advisors and if needed tutors supplied by the AD and they and the advisor work with the professors to manage work around the road trips. Total road trips at Uconn WBB run between 13-15 per regular season plus post season - some other schools play OOC almost exclusively at home.

I did theater in college and often spent significantly more than 20 hrs/per week on that - not as long as a season, but the same kind of time commitment. A lot of students have student jobs that can easily stretch to 20 hrs. Others have multiple commitments to various voluntary activities. And while in college a lot of students waste a lot more than 20 hrs a week in various unproductive ways! It gets down to time management and being efficient. College scholarship athletes tend to be very motivated and organized - the ones that aren't are either men's players killing time before turning pro, or potential drop outs like 40% of all US college students.

 

[LoboDays]

We don’t see many “academic ineligible” situations anymore. IMO, the student athletes didn’t become smarter or more dedicated. The schools have figured out a way to get them passing grades.

 

[hoopsfan22]

We don’t see many “academic ineligible” situations anymore. IMO, the student athletes didn’t become smarter or more dedicated. The schools have figured out a way to get them passing grades.

And most of the majors they take are BS majors and I don't mean ones in science.

 

[LoboDays]

Just when I thought it was the Director of Holistic and Reintegration Sports Performance that puts us over the top, it turns out to be the Director of No-tests Course Placement and Tutor Assignments.

 

[dogged1]

We don’t see many “academic ineligible” situations anymore. IMO, the student athletes didn’t become smarter or more dedicated. The schools have figured out a way to get them passing grades.

And most of the majors they take are BS majors and I don't mean ones in science.

Just when I thought it was the Director of Holistic and Reintegration Sports Performance that puts us over the top, it turns out to be the Director of No-tests Course Placement and Tutor Assignments.

Now, now, now, it's not nice to talk about UNC like that, even if it is true. Even the NCAA says so.

 

[Zinethar]

When I was recruiting college athletes and meeting with parents time committment and the like always came up. Usually something like "Jonny (or Jill) is giving up precious study time to go to practice for those 2 hours." My response was "Paractice is not taking away his/her study time. It is taking away the time they would spend walking uptown to hang out." I would then remind them that coaches are the mom or dad when the kids are away from home. If we didn't do our job making sure they got the time and help they needed to succeed in the classroom then those athletes would be removed from the team where they have value to our program. We had mandatory Study Halls for those who were not succeeding in a class. We paired upperclassmen with younger students that were taking similar courses. We did not recruit kids we didn't think could perform also in the classroom.

 

[Bigboote]

We don’t see many “academic ineligible” situations anymore. IMO, the student athletes didn’t become smarter or more dedicated. The schools have figured out a way to get them passing grades.

I think also that schools are less likely to be specific about academic ineligibility. I recall maybe 2-3 years ago a highly recruited player didn't play one semester, with no reason given. Of course there was rampant speculation, much of if concerned with academics.