I know we are all sick over this APR stuff. I even hate to ask this ? but I thought there was going to be a final determination sometime in March as to exactly how this would be applied to our scores if including 2011 @12 that we would be in and if not we would have to win our appeal. Did I miss something or is this still in play? Probably won't happen as to anything that could help us the NCAA would nix that. Seems stupid to just go to 2010 to calculate your scores that's freaking over 2 years ago and I don't want to hear any freaking rationale as to why they could not do this. Only bringing this up since they broached the subject in last night's game and I was cringing when they talked about it and gladly they did not talk to long on this. I truly feel sorry for even bringing this up but if anybody could shed some light on this , much appreciated. Thanks.
APR
- Thread starter Donyell
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2011
- Messages
- 2,957
- Reaction Score
- 5,401
The NCAA met yesterday to see if they could speed up the reporting process and therefore base 2013 eligibility on 2011-2012 scores. Surprisingly to no one, a final decision was not made at this meeting. Their next meeting is in April, however they may meet via conference call prior to that (yay technology!).
On the waiver appeal front, whatever NCAA committee that rules on waiver appeals apparently has not yet discussed our case.
I'd say the chances of our appeal being successful are less than 1%. If the NCAA is going to let us play next year, they're going to figure out a way to use the more current data. This way, they can say "it's more fair to use current data and Uconn's current scores make them eligible." There's no way they're going to accept our appeal and have Pat Forde write articles about how they "are a powerless organization that let Uconn off the hook."
On the waiver appeal front, whatever NCAA committee that rules on waiver appeals apparently has not yet discussed our case.
I'd say the chances of our appeal being successful are less than 1%. If the NCAA is going to let us play next year, they're going to figure out a way to use the more current data. This way, they can say "it's more fair to use current data and Uconn's current scores make them eligible." There's no way they're going to accept our appeal and have Pat Forde write articles about how they "are a powerless organization that let Uconn off the hook."
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 16,456
- Reaction Score
- 37,106
Agreed. I'd actually reduce your "less than 1%" to a flat 0. The only way the NCAA relents is if they admit that intentionally using outdated scores instead of the most recent available data is wrong.
Of course, even if that happens, I'd bet dollars to donuts it wouldn't stop Pat Forde's crusade.
(Edit: got the damn dollars/donuts phrase backwards)
Of course, even if that happens, I'd bet dollars to donuts it wouldn't stop Pat Forde's crusade.
(Edit: got the damn dollars/donuts phrase backwards)
Dann
#4hunnid
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9,901
- Reaction Score
- 7,180
i know that our 2013 ncaat is the main topic that we have all been stressing/anrgy at lately but there is also another aspect of this people are forgetting.
when the ncaa gave us our first punishment we were docked ships for 3 years. 12-13 season is year 3 of that and with our arp scores improving we were supose to get some of those ships back on good imporvement. the ncaa has done this in the past so we would qualify for it. now with this stuff going on people forget about the orginal give back. there is alot to be hopeful as a uconn fan but the ncaa is really trying to f us. there is not way that the ncaat ban would hold up in court/basic common sense of double punishment and on top of that they may have to give us ships back ealry based on past ruling for other teams like Ark recently.
when the ncaa gave us our first punishment we were docked ships for 3 years. 12-13 season is year 3 of that and with our arp scores improving we were supose to get some of those ships back on good imporvement. the ncaa has done this in the past so we would qualify for it. now with this stuff going on people forget about the orginal give back. there is alot to be hopeful as a uconn fan but the ncaa is really trying to f us. there is not way that the ncaat ban would hold up in court/basic common sense of double punishment and on top of that they may have to give us ships back ealry based on past ruling for other teams like Ark recently.
Doesn't seem so for Kentucky. There rules make no sense when a one and done and not even completing 2 semesters does not count against you, but if you go to school for a number of years you are penalized. I don't know all the in's and out's of the computation of the APR but common sense does not seem to be one of them.
RS9999X
There's no Dark Side .....it's all Dark.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 5,626
- Reaction Score
- 562
The only reason they accept UConn's appeal is
A) the APR this year is exceptional AND
B) they need to delay implementing the new calculation.
Otherwise the new rules were targeted at UConn specifically and they have to explain that
A) the APR this year is exceptional AND
B) they need to delay implementing the new calculation.
Otherwise the new rules were targeted at UConn specifically and they have to explain that
C
Chief00
That's correct - they specifically targeted UConn last Fall ; due to UConn circumventing their ships punishment and the long standing feud between Calhoun and Emmert..
- Status