Decision on Tourney Eligibility within 10 days

[CL82]

LINK

Uh oh. I'm a little worried that the NCAA thinks it has a basis to use the old data.

 

[Tenspro2002]

The NCAA wants their scalp and will claim it regardless of whether it is fair or just to do so.

 

[UConn5]

I am not hopeful. But just to clarify, the way I am reading the article, they are referring to UConn's appeal of the initial decision to deny their waiver request for a recalculation of scores from past years, right?

I don't think this article is referring to the NCAA's exploration of the feasibility of using the two most recent year's data, is it? Then again, since UConn is requesting that the two most recent years be used, they could be deciding both questions.

 

[UCDaveD]

I'm glad, and kind of shocked, that the NCAA is doing us the "favor" of announcing this before the draft deadline, but I can't help but believe this is baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad news.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

This article is unclear as to whether the NCAA is ruling on our appeal or if the more current data can be used.

 

[SaeHusky]

In 10 days they are deciding there 2nd appeal not whether they will use the last 2 yrs data. This is different than what will probably be determined in July. If our appeal gets axed a 2nd time there is still a chance (very small) that they will use data from last 2 yrs.

 

[8893]

Whether they rule favorably on our appeal or not, I'd rather know sooner than later. I'm assuming that if they do not rule favorably, we will go to court for an injunction. An earlier ruling gives us more time to get that rolling.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I cannot believe that Nantz and Emmert were each able to keep a straight face when discussing this at halftime and I am convinced that the conversation was scripted so not to make Emmert (or the supposed reasoning behind the APR) look bad. He stated that the purpose was to require schools to reach a 50% graduation rate. The comments on Kentucky and their numerous one and dones did not immediately follow and the delay allowed the response (that as long as they are in good standing it won't hurt the school if they leave for their careers) to not appear absurd. I imagine also that Nantz was instructed to not point out that if most players leave after one years (with a handful leaving after two) there is no way a 50% graduation rate can ever be reached.

They are attempting to give the impression that they are doing the right thing and we are the sacrificial lamb. We are a perfect candidate in fact in that we've had as much success as anyone recently, are not a historical (pre ESPN/tournament overkill) program and are not recipients of media darling status (Duke). The way the NCAA sees it they can smack us around without getting anyone they believe is important angry.

 

[Hi-Low]

Nantz's "interview" with Emmert was a total joke. How about asking him "why must the ncaa use 2010 & 2011 student data in determining 2013 tourney eligibility if the 2011 & 2012 data will be readily available from the school...wouldn't the most current data available give the ncaa the most accurate picture of the current student athletes academic performance....or are you not concerned with fairness?"

It's 2012 for christsakes, not 1950....the student academic performance rate can be calculated about 30 seconds after the semester ends....the ncaa looks like complete idiots but ofcourse no one is going to call them out.

He should just be honest and say "we want to punish Calhoun and Uconn and we don't give a crap about anything else."

 

[champs99and04]

I'm honestly sick that the fate of UConn's program for the immediate future is in the hands of such a corrupt organization. The NCAA is looking to hang a head on the wall, and they don't care if they get the right one or not. Like it or not, UConn is the perfect program to make an example of from a public perception standpoint. Calhoun has a lot of enemies. UConn's a big money producer but they aren't in the same boat as a Duke, UK, or UNC. I'm glad they're giving us the decision earlier rather than later, but as I've said, if I were Herbst I'd go right ahead and take the NCAA to court. It just makes me sick when I hear that clown Emmert on National TV talking about graduation rate. It's just such a flawed stat when you consider all of the transfers, early departures, and dropouts.

I'm wondering if the Oriakhi family knew something about this decision when they decided on transferring. You'd think he could have waited a couple weeks to at least give UConn a shot to resolve these issues.

 

[Ts5034]

This is garbage. Why has no one put them on the spot by bringing up the fact that its unfair to the current players and its double jeopardy? What is their view on this?

 

[VAHuskyFan]

If UConn didn't want to sit out the 2013 season, then it should have stopped Cam Newton's dad from shopping his son's services around the SEC. The school also shouldn't have let Ohio State's football players sell their rings. We're practically an accessory to both incidents.

 

[upstater]

I simply want to know why U-Louisiana-X was granted a waiver and UConn wasn't.

Anyone know the reason?

 

[RS9999X]

"
It's 2012 for christsakes, not 1950....the student academic performance rate can be calculated about 30 seconds after the semester ends....the ncaa looks like complete idiots but ofcourse no one is going to call them out.

He should just be honest and say "we want to punish Calhoun and Uconn and we don't give a crap about anything else."

I agree it was aimed at UConn but there are good reasons for rejecting the prior years data as a standard..

Transfer Enrollment and pro-contract waivers can't be verified until October or so. While that is in time for the tournament it isn't in time to tell incoming Freshmen whether UConn is eligible or not until after classes started.

Summer work that qualifies for the previous year for Incompletes or GPA calculation purposes.

I don't think the issue is tourney eligibility: the issue is the students. Would it be fair to wait until November to tell Alex Oriakhi that UConn isn't eligible because player didn't transfer to a qualifyng shcool (as he said he would) or because player never did get a pro-contract by the cut off or because player got himselft in legal problems and is rethinking their commitment to college ball.

 

[CAHUSKY]

I simply want to know why U-Louisiana-X was granted a waiver and UConn wasn't.

Anyone know the reason?

Id assume that has to part of the appeal. Seems to me the circumstances are awfully similar.

 

[TheChamps990411]

I really hope they rule in our favor.

 

[upstater]

I agree it was aimed at UConn but there are good reasons for rejecting the prior years data as a standard..

Transfer Enrollment and pro-contract waivers can't be verified until October or so. While that is in time for the tournament it isn't in time to tell incoming Freshmen whether UConn is eligible or not until after classes started.

Summer work that qualifies for the previous year for Incompletes or GPA calculation purposes.

I don't think the issue is tourney eligibility: the issue is the students. Would it be fair to wait until November to tell Alex Oriakhi that UConn isn't eligible because player didn't transfer to a qualifyng shcool (as he said he would) or because player never did get a pro-contract by the cut off or because player got himselft in legal problems and is rethinking their commitment to college ball.

But... you can tell if a school meets the standard in early May if it has no issues with transfers and pro contracts.

 

[dsturdy5]

I simply want to know why U-Louisiana-X was granted a waiver and UConn wasn't.

Anyone know the reason?

I would assume it has to do with the self imposed post season ban ULL put on themselves for this season...even though they had no chance of making the postseason in any way, shape, or form.

 

[uconnfan68]

I simply want to know why U-Louisiana-X was granted a waiver and UConn wasn't.

Anyone know the reason?

They weren't UConn.

 

[UCFBfan]

So I've heard rumors that something like 13 of the current Tournament teams would also be banned by this APR rule besides UConn. Yet you hear nothing about this. Syracuse is one of these teams. Does anyone know more about this? Is it just a rumor I've seen on message boards and such or is it legit?? If it's true, how is it only UConn that's being punished?

 

[champs99and04]

I agree it was aimed at UConn but there are good reasons for rejecting the prior years data as a standard..

Transfer Enrollment and pro-contract waivers can't be verified until October or so. While that is in time for the tournament it isn't in time to tell incoming Freshmen whether UConn is eligible or not until after classes started.

Summer work that qualifies for the previous year for Incompletes or GPA calculation purposes.

I don't think the issue is tourney eligibility: the issue is the students. Would it be fair to wait until November to tell Alex Oriakhi that UConn isn't eligible because player didn't transfer to a qualifyng shcool (as he said he would) or because player never did get a pro-contract by the cut off or because player got himselft in legal problems and is rethinking their commitment to college ball.

It's no less fair than changing the rules and then punishing innocent student-athletes retroactively. When the kids currently on scholarship signed their LOI's, there was no hint of a possible postseason ban. UConn was below the requirements for APR, but the consequences of that were cut and dry (loss of scholarships). The problem lies in the fact that the NCAA is now going back on their word and changing the rule. I understand what you're trying to say, but at least if you use the most current data, the players on the roster get what they deserve if they performed poorly academically. While the NCAA has given the players on the current roster a waiver to transfer, it's quite unfair to just say, "Look, I know these weren't the rules when you agreed to play here, and I know this news has come out of nowhere, but you're going go have to find another place to play".

And even if they can't use the more recent data, they should at least be able to LOOK at the current data and grant UConn a waiver (assuming the scores are as good as we all expect).

 

[champs99and04]

So I've heard rumors that something like 13 of the current Tournament teams would also be banned by this APR rule besides UConn. Yet you hear nothing about this. Syracuse is one of these teams. Does anyone know more about this? Is it just a rumor I've seen on message boards and such or is it legit?? If it's true, how is it only UConn that's being punished?

Syracuse would be ineligable this season, but since the rule doesn't go into effect since next year, they're ok.

 

[UCFBfan]

Syracuse would be ineligable this season, but since the rule doesn't go into effect since next year, they're ok.

Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I simply want to know why U-Louisiana-X was granted a waiver and UConn wasn't.

Anyone know the reason?

What I want an explanation on is Arkansas. Their APR (per what was published about ten months ago) was worse than ours yet we lost two scholarships while they were not punished. The reason the NCAA gave was that they felt Arkansas' progress was sufficient to warrant consideration (while we happened to have made better progress over the period in question than they did).

It is the discretionary enforcement of the rules that makes this completely ridiculous.

 

[upstater]

I would assume it has to do with the self imposed post season ban ULL put on themselves for this season...even though they had no chance of making the postseason in any way, shape, or form.

I hope UConn self-imposed a Sweet 16, Final 8 and Final 4 ban for this year's tournament.