Editorial today

[Inyatkin]

Appeared in Connecticut Post, three other Hearst dailies this morning

If this were simply a matter of the University of Connecticut being punished for failing to meet established criteria, there would be no complaint, and certainly no call for congressional action.
That's not the case. The UConn men's basketball team is a victim of retroactive application of the rules. The team will be banned from next year's NCAA and Big East tournaments based on rules that were not in effect at the time of the transgressions.
It's egregious enough that it prompted Gov. Dannel P. Malloy to say the NCAA, the sport's governing body, is simply out to get UConn. It's getting hard to escape that notion.
Since the NCAA is in essence answerable to no one, most of the state's congressional delegation signed a letter asking it to revisit its decision, especially in light of the fact that the team's performance on the Academic Progress Report has greatly improved in the past two years.
An NCAA spokesman replied with half-truths and non-sequiturs: "They've essentially had since 2006" to improve scores, he said.
But the NCAA didn't announce that APR would be tied to postseason bans until late 2011, saying it would include scores from previous years to calculate banishments.
UConn had poor scores in 2010, the year before the punishment was announced. It was, therefore, impossible for UConn to clear the threshold set by the NCAA because those scores were already in the books. A fair system would have only used scores from that point forward, giving everyone notice that the penalties were getting more severe.
At this point, the NCAA has backed itself into a corner, seemingly intent on punishing a high-profile school. It is highly unlikely it will change course because it would be viewed as giving in.
At the same time, no one should excuse poor academic oversight. Schools have a responsibility to their students. Coaches, presidents and athletic directors must be held accountable. No one is arguing those facts.
But the NCAA is wrong here. By all means, punish teams and schools for failing to meet accepted standards. But don't do it like this.
Whether you find UConn sympathetic or not, retroactive punishment is wrong, no matter who is on the receiving end.


Read more: http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/UConn-hit-by-faulty-reasoning-3498356.php#ixzz1svGm5oQ9

 

[HuskyBandDad]

Appeared in Connecticut Post, three other Hearst dailies this morning

If this were simply a matter of the University of Connecticut being punished for failing to meet established criteria, there would be no complaint, and certainly no call for congressional action.
That's not the case. The UConn men's basketball team is a victim of retroactive application of the rules. The team will be banned from next year's NCAA and Big East tournaments based on rules that were not in effect at the time of the transgressions.
It's egregious enough that it prompted Gov. Dannel P. Malloy to say the NCAA, the sport's governing body, is simply out to get UConn. It's getting hard to escape that notion.
Since the NCAA is in essence answerable to no one, most of the state's congressional delegation signed a letter asking it to revisit its decision, especially in light of the fact that the team's performance on the Academic Progress Report has greatly improved in the past two years.
An NCAA spokesman replied with half-truths and non-sequiturs: "They've essentially had since 2006" to improve scores, he said.
But the NCAA didn't announce that APR would be tied to postseason bans until late 2011, saying it would include scores from previous years to calculate banishments.
UConn had poor scores in 2010, the year before the punishment was announced. It was, therefore, impossible for UConn to clear the threshold set by the NCAA because those scores were already in the books. A fair system would have only used scores from that point forward, giving everyone notice that the penalties were getting more severe.
At this point, the NCAA has backed itself into a corner, seemingly intent on punishing a high-profile school. It is highly unlikely it will change course because it would be viewed as giving in.
At the same time, no one should excuse poor academic oversight. Schools have a responsibility to their students. Coaches, presidents and athletic directors must be held accountable. No one is arguing those facts.
But the NCAA is wrong here. By all means, punish teams and schools for failing to meet accepted standards. But don't do it like this.
Whether you find UConn sympathetic or not, retroactive punishment is wrong, no matter who is on the receiving end.


Read more: http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/UConn-hit-by-faulty-reasoning-3498356.php#ixzz1svGm5oQ9

Right on the money. Hopefully it does some good and puts pressure on the NCAA.

 

[61cygni]

Something most of us have known for a long time already, but doesn't seem to ever gain traction.

 

[CL82]

Doesn't mention that we were already serving a punishment for the same period when the NCAA decided to change the rules so that it punish us twice for the same offense but otherwise it was good to hear.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Nobody cares. The NCAA made up a rule so they could punish UConn with it. All the editorials in the world won't make a difference.

 

[CL82]

Nobody cares. The NCAA made up a rule so they could punish UConn with it. All the editorials in the world won't make a difference.

I not so confident about that Nelson. The notion that the NCAA changed the rules to punihs one school twice for the same offense, while going easy on other institutions is a story that has legs, in my opinion. This isn't about UConn winning a popularity contest, I don't think we win that on a national level. Instead it's the story of an organization that become too powerful and randomly abuses it's authority, looking the other way for big football powers and picking on other institutions.

 

[uconnfan68]

Nobody cares. The NCAA made up a rule so they could punish UConn with it. All the editorials in the world won't make a difference.

A lawsuit or Congressional inquiry would get some attention.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I not so confident about that Nelson. The notion that the NCAA changed the rules to punihs one school twice for the same offense, while going easy on other institutions is a story that has legs, in my opinion. This isn't about UConn winning a popularity contest, I don't think we win that on a national level. Instead it's the story of an organization that become too powerful and randomly abuses it's authority, looking the other way for big football powers and picking on other institutions.

They don't care. UConn is getting punished because it is UConn. Kentucky can wire WorldWideWes all the money they want for recruits, Duke can give jobs to the parents of recruits, and all the other schools that cheat can continue to cheat in the various and sundry ways they cheat. NOTHING WILL HAPPEN TO THEM.

There is nothing random about this abuse. Everyone knows UConn is getting singled out by the NCAA because it is UConn, so there aren't any broader repercussions from the NCAA's assault on the Huskies. Why hasn't a single other institution stood up for UConn? Because they either don't care or approved this with the NCAA.

 

[Palatine]

Where was this stuff before the fact, when it might have made a difference in public opinion?

 

[bobbygt]

Where was this stuff before the fact, when it might have made a difference in public opinion?

Go with the status quo for fear that they will be hammered down by the mob (people at yahoo, espn, and everywhere else), who are louder and only care about putting their thoughts into other people's minds!

 

[freescooter]

I agree with this editorial, though I don't completely agree with Nelson. I do think this was designed to get a "big name" and unfortunately for UCONN it was the big name who happened to be available. The NCAA has been embarrassed recently with their backing down on Auburn, Ohio State and others. This in many respects was the perfect storm...a basketball school, not football, that had developed a reputation as something of a rogue program (you can argue that it isn't true, but if perception is reality, that is the perception outside 50 miles from Storrs) but with a high level of success. Nobody can make the old joke about the NCAA this time...UCONN is in trouble so Central will probably lose 2 scholarships doesn't apply.

 

[upstater]

I agree with this editorial, though I don't completely agree with Nelson. I do think this was designed to get a "big name" and unfortunately for UCONN it was the big name who happened to be available. The NCAA has been embarrassed recently with their backing down on Auburn, Ohio State and others. This in many respects was the perfect storm...a basketball school, not football, that had developed a reputation as something of a rogue program (you can argue that it isn't true, but if perception is reality, that is the perception outside 50 miles from Storrs) but with a high level of success. Nobody can make the old joke about the NCAA this time...UCONN is in trouble so Central will probably lose 2 scholarships doesn't apply.

Explain to me why, then, they had a chance to hammer North Carolina for plagiary, cheating and paying players, and instead they decided to issue North Carolina the same penalty that Uconn received for players leaving early? UNC was punished in the same time frame that the APR decisions came down on UConn.

 

[UConn76]

Hard for me to believe also that the NCAA didn't envision the impact of these post season bans on college programs: a mass exodus of players seeking to play elsewhere. This is in the best interest of a student athlete? And it certainly tells you the real reason these players are in these major programs...and getting a degree is secondary.

 

[freescooter]

this was a pr move, upstater, exactly as you have always said it was. the NCAA wants to look tough but it would much prefer to look tough with basketball programs, not football. Football drives the bus, so the NCAA will normally go easier on football. As I said, this situation is tailor made for them...it is basketball, it is a big name, it is a perceived renegade program, so there will be little sympathy, and they can cover themselves in the blanket of academics...and UCONN played right into their hands by not taking care of business...if this had been Toledo, its a blip on the screen. If it had been alabama football, they'd have issued a waiver.

 

[upstater]

this was a pr move, upstater, exactly as you have always said it was. the NCAA wants to look tough but it would much prefer to look tough with basketball programs, not football. Football drives the bus, so the NCAA will normally go easier on football. As I said, this situation is tailor made for them...it is basketball, it is a big name, it is a perceived renegade program, so there will be little sympathy, and they can cover themselves in the blanket of academics...and UCONN played right into their hands by not taking care of business...if this had been Toledo, its a blip on the screen. If it had been alabama football, they'd have issued a waiver.

I think it's pretty astounding, what is going on. I'm much more in favor of opening the flood gates at this point and allowing schools to pay for play (the athletes can't be students, however) as long as not one dime funds it from the academic side. The school can still continue to fund a basketball team at the club level or perhaps scholarship level if the sport is popular enough.

I find it maybe coincidental that Ted Taigen stepped down with the institution of the APR rules. He had several good years with the APR after it was instituted, but the scores were just near the line. When the scores dropped in 2009, he retired. It begs the question: was there pressure at that point to institute a new system that would ramp up compliance with the APR? If so, was Taigen comfortable with the new system? I know that if it were me I would be totally uncomfortable as an advisor charged with meeting the criteria of the APR. I would either refuse such a job, if offered, or else resign my position as an advisor to student athletes. Some professors don't have such qualms, as we see from stories in the SEC of kids in Sociology majors who have never taken classes with any faculty other than some stooge supremely placed in a position of authority. I will note that the new advisor (who seems like a good person, a former student athlete herself) does not have the same credentials as Taigen and she may be an employee of the AD, which is not the case for someone like Taigen who has a line through his department at the university. Two very different things.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

The new system for APR compliance at UConn, and every other school, is that athletes will be issued passing grades for every class they take.

 

[freescooter]

I think it's pretty astounding, what is going on. I'm much more in favor of opening the flood gates at this point and allowing schools to pay for play (the athletes can't be students, however) as long as not one dime funds it from the academic side. The school can still continue to fund a basketball team at the club level or perhaps scholarship level if the sport is popular enough.

I find it maybe coincidental that Ted Taigen stepped down with the institution of the APR rules. He had several good years with the APR after it was instituted, but the scores were just near the line. When the scores dropped in 2009, he retired. It begs the question: was there pressure at that point to institute a new system that would ramp up compliance with the APR? If so, was Taigen comfortable with the new system? I know that if it were me I would be totally uncomfortable as an advisor charged with meeting the criteria of the APR. I would either refuse such a job, if offered, or else resign my position as an advisor to student athletes. Some professors don't have such qualms, as we see from stories in the SEC of kids in Sociology majors who have never taken classes with any faculty other than some stooge supremely placed in a position of authority. I will note that the new advisor (who seems like a good person, a former student athlete herself) does not have the same credentials as Taigen and she may be an employee of the AD, which is not the case for someone like Taigen who has a line through his department at the university. Two very different things.

My favorite one is the SEC school where all the basketball players were Philosophy majors...can you imagine the discussion on the bus to an away game? I rebound, therefore I am...If a player dunks the ball and there is nobody there to see it did it really happen?

The APR is a phony system but in many ways it is the perfect conclusion for a system that allows schools to recruit one-and-done and 2 and done guys who are in effect phony students for a year or so, and in fact come to campus with zero intent or interest in being students. So how do you measure that? Phony students get ranked according to a phony system. Perfect plan.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

Not sure if anyone here watched the women's championship game, but they announced the players' majors along with the starting line-ups. Guess what either 4 or 5 of the Baylor starters majored in? Human Health Performance and Recreation!

Needless to say, Baylor has not had any trouble meeting the APR standards.

 

[CL82]

They don't care. UConn is getting punished because it is UConn. Kentucky can wire WorldWideWes all the money they want for recruits, Duke can give jobs to the parents of recruits, and all the other schools that cheat can continue to cheat in the various and sundry ways they cheat. NOTHING WILL HAPPEN TO THEM.

There is nothing random about this abuse. Everyone knows UConn is getting singled out by the NCAA because it is UConn, so there aren't any broader repercussions from the NCAA's assault on the Huskies. Why hasn't a single other institution stood up for UConn? Because they either don't care or approved this with the NCAA.

I'm not sure who the "they" are that don't care. If you are saying that no other institution has stood up for UConn because it's not in their best interests to do so, I agree. If you are saying that the NCAA doesn't care about screwing over UConn, I still agree. If you saying that the NCAA doesn't care about public, I'll disagree. If this story can morph into a fairness story, about how the rules were changed to punish a "have not" school while the "haves" continue business as unsual. It will get the NCAA's attention quickly. Many on this board is that our punishment is a PR move. If that's correct, and it starts generating negative PR, you'll see that the NCAA isn't quite as thick skinned as you believe.

 

[UConn Hoops1]

A lawsuit or Congressional inquiry would get some attention.

I am not normally a fan of lawyers(no insult intended to any Yarders who practice law). My experience has been that, in the end the only "winners" in a great deal of legal action are those collecting the fees. HOWEVER, I would love to see a bunch of lawyers/diehard UConn fans(working pro bono) make the NCAA's life absolutely miserable. I have no clue on what grounds a suit could go forward; but, it really is time to fight back; and it bothers me alot that the University seems to be content with getting screwed over by those pompous blowholes who say they have the best interests of the student athlete and college hoops at heart. Again, let me say that I am a big fan of academic responsibility and accountability but this is just dead wrong. They have not only punished a group of players who had nothing to do with the scores; but they have done their best to destabilize the program with the impact of players leaving and recruits shying away. Thank God for JC. He is one of a very few coaches with the backbone and know-how to get the program through this nonsense.

GO HUSKIES!!!

 

[Deadrody]

Why hasn't a single other institution stood up for UConn? Because they either don't care or approved this with the NCAA.

Don't forget fear. The NCAA is effectively saying outloud to every team - "Nice basketball program you got there. Be a shame if something were to happen to it."

If they can make up rules that retroactively punish one school, they can certainly make up rules to punish whomever they choose.

 

[huskyniner]

A lawsuit or Congressional inquiry would get some attention.

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[CL82]

I am not normally a fan of lawyers(no insult intended to any Yarders who practice law). My experience has been that, in the end the only "winners" in a great deal of legal action are those collecting the fees. HOWEVER, I would love to see a bunch of lawyers/diehard UConn fans(working pro bono) make the NCAA's life absolutely miserable.

GO HUSKIES!!!

I'm not sure what you do, but I think you should do it (for free) for six months to 3 years for the betterment of the Boneyard.

GO HUSKIES!!!

 

[uconnfan68]

Where was this stuff before the fact, when it might have made a difference in public opinion?

Have to agree here...the PR people have totally dropped the ball, so to speak.

 

[orangehomer]

The new system for APR compliance at UConn, and every other school, is that athletes will be issued passing grades for every class they take.

this is the bottom line. the problem is that the standard is based on self-reporting, so the renegade universities can report what they want and "typical" schools have to at least make it look good. unfortunately uconn was caught in a perfect storm of transfers, rule changes, and accurate reporting and the ncaa wanted to make it look like they care about academics. it is fairly congruent to the "drug scandal" that we are dealing with at syracuse, where we are getting beat up over not enforcing a drug policy that we didn't have to have. the ncaa has made it where the basketball schools are better off not having educational requirements because that way they aren't broken, and don't have to be reported. why should we have policies that other schools don't have?