Isn't this the week the NCAA GIVES IT'S FINAL OPINION

[phillionaire]

Harvard's APR was 974, the lowest it has been ever but still well above the minimum. So you're wrong.
And it's only a matter of time before Kentucky gets banned and you know it.
And most men's basketball players don't attend class anyway at UConn. What difference does it make if they're enrolled or if we eliminate the lies and disguises?

Just because they're not in your classes doesn't mean they don't go to class. I see them going to and leaving class all the time.

 

[upstater]

Harvard's APR was 974, the lowest it has been ever but still well above the minimum. So you're wrong.
And it's only a matter of time before Kentucky gets banned and you know it.
And most men's basketball players don't attend class anyway at UConn. What difference does it make if they're enrolled or if we eliminate the lies and disguises?

Well it appears I am wrong on Harvard. Someone wrote that they didn't make the cut here at the BY last week. They may have confused it with Howard.

Most men's players don't go to class at UConn?

Kentucky has fantastic APR scores. Why? The APR has nothing to do with academics. Quite the opposite, they encourage academic fraud.

People are making out that Ted Taigen was some sort of schlep that didn't a damn about academics for former players. Now all is right with the world, apparently.

What difference does it make if players are mercenaries? Are you really asking that?

 

[upstater]

I'm trying to find some facts here but I'm not seeing any. Kentucky finds a way to have a perfectly fine APR score year after year, so how exactly are they going to ever get banned for APR reasons? And while it's true that men's basketball players miss a ton of class time due to travel schedules, do you really think that the work doesn't get made up? Given our current situation, do you actually think that there is nobody making sure that our players get their work done and make the grade academically?

I tend to doubt they can make the work up properly. I think in Spring, when travel is heavy, they take fewer courses, and the ones they take are fluffier. Intersession courses between the two are the norm.

 

[specialisthusky]

Harvard's APR was 974, the lowest it has been ever but still well above the minimum. So you're wrong.
And it's only a matter of time before Kentucky gets banned and you know it.
And most men's basketball players don't attend class anyway at UConn. What difference does it make if they're enrolled or if we eliminate the lies and disguises?

that would be there 4 year multiyear rate of 974. Considering the score was a 991 the two years prior and a 995 the year before those 2, its pretty clear that a lousy score occurred last year.

 

[upstater]

that would be there 4 year multiyear rate of 974. Considering the score was a 991 the two years prior and a 995 the year before those 2, its pretty clear that a lousy score occurred last year.

You're right, judging by three prior years scores of 995, 991, 991, the score HAD to be below the NCAA's threshold. More likely more than 10 points below, below 920.

In other words, Harvard's players are bad students compared to Kentucky's.

Why is that?

 

[Gregory Koch]

that would be there 4 year multiyear rate of 974. Considering the score was a 991 the two years prior and a 995 the year before those 2, its pretty clear that a lousy score occurred last year.

Ok. I'm pretty sure non scholarship schools like Harvard are exempt though anyway. They couldn't strip them of scholarships and give them negative two, could they? So this really isn't relevant. I'm surprised Harvard had a low score but it could have something to do with Jeremy lin.

Also it's a lot harder to maintain a 2.6 gpa taking real Harvard classes than it is while taking easy UConn classes. Which is part of why the rule is so stupid. We all know Kentucky doesn't care one bit about the student athletes academic success and we all know Harvard cares a lot. But Harvard treats them like regular students who are naturally going to do worse than jocks taking easy courses. That is why the rule is incredibly stupid.

 

[specialisthusky]

i think we all agree on the premise the aPR is "so stupid." It's everything else you are saying that no one agrees with.

 

[Gregory Koch]

So you are discussing whether it was a crime? The answer is no, it isn't. If you are asking, as you were originally, whether the University would have "grounds to sue", the answer is yes.

Really, what's with the bug up your butt? Do you think if you flame and accuse UConn of a lack of insitutional integrity regarding its athletics problems that you will drive viewers to your site? I think you couldn't be more wrong. I encourage 'yarders to avoid it like the plague.

What grounds do we have to sue? I'm sorry, I still don't see what you're saying. I think it's incredibly stupid that the NCAA is applying its rules retroactively. And I don't think UConn is any worse than any other big basketball school, so again, you're putting words in my mouth. But despite all this, we still don't have grounds to sue. "It's a stupid rule" is not grounds to sue. I'm sorry.

 

[upstater]

Ok. I'm pretty sure non scholarship schools like Harvard are exempt though anyway. They couldn't strip them of scholarships and give them negative two, could they? So this really isn't relevant. I'm surprised Harvard had a low score but it could have something to do with Jeremy lin.

Also it's a lot harder to maintain a 2.6 gpa taking real Harvard classes than it is while taking easy UConn classes. Which is part of why the rule is so stupid. We all know Kentucky doesn't care one bit about the student athletes academic success and we all know Harvard cares a lot. But Harvard treats them like regular students who are naturally going to do worse than jocks taking easy courses. That is why the rule is incredibly stupid.

That's all I was trying to say. It's a stupid rule. But your initial post was about APR and academics, as though the two were intertwined. They're not.

 

[Gregory Koch]

That's all I was trying to say. It's a stupid rule. But your initial post was about APR and academics, as though the two were intertwined. They're not.

Allegedly, they are. And by "allegedly", I mean the NCAA claims they are. That's why it's called "Academic Progress Rate". It's "supposed to" be intertwined with academics. That's what I was saying.
Now, we all know the NCAA is wrong. And by "we" I mean everyone except the NCAA.

 

[champs99and04]

Ok. I'm pretty sure non scholarship schools like Harvard are exempt though anyway. They couldn't strip them of scholarships and give them negative two, could they? So this really isn't relevant. I'm surprised Harvard had a low score but it could have something to do with Jeremy lin.

Also it's a lot harder to maintain a 2.6 gpa taking real Harvard classes than it is while taking easy UConn classes. Which is part of why the rule is so stupid. We all know Kentucky doesn't care one bit about the student athletes academic success and we all know Harvard cares a lot. But Harvard treats them like regular students who are naturally going to do worse than jocks taking easy courses. That is why the rule is incredibly stupid.

How do you know the players at UConn take easy classes? You don't have any idea. That's also another reason the APR is so stupid - it encourages students to opt for the easier courses rather than challenging themselves. The fact of the matter is, Harvard posted a lower APR score than Kentucky last year. If that right there doesn't show you that the statistic is bogus, I don't know what will (to clarify, I'm talking about the NCAA, not you).

Upstater is correct when he states the APR doesn't have all that much to do with academics. It's all about earning retention points, and schools with a high transfer rate are naturally going to post lower scores than schools with a lower transfer rate. That also goes for kids who leave school for draft workouts a semester before they are able to graduate, ala Gavin Edwards. To act as if Eric Bledsoe got a more thorough education at Kentucky than Gavin Edwards did at UConn would be making a complete mockery of the rule.

I also don't agree with you that Kentucky is going to eventually be banned from the tournament. The NCAA has their head on the wall. Schools just know to game the system now.

 

[Gregory Koch]

How do you know the players at UConn take easy classes? You don't have any idea. That's also another reason the APR is so stupid - it encourages students to opt for the easier courses rather than challenging themselves. The fact of the matter is, Harvard posted a lower APR score than Kentucky last year. If that right there doesn't show you that the statistic is bogus, I don't know what will (to clarify, I'm talking about the NCAA, not you).

Upstater is correct when he states the APR doesn't have all that much to do with academics. It's all about earning retention points, and schools with a high transfer rate are naturally going to post lower scores than schools with a lower transfer rate. That also goes for kids who leave school for draft workouts a semester before they are able to graduate, ala Gavin Edwards. To act as if Eric Bledsoe got a more thorough education at Kentucky than Gavin Edwards did at UConn would be making a complete mockery of the rule.

I also don't agree with you that Kentucky is going to eventually be banned from the tournament. The NCAA has their head on the wall. Schools just know to game the system now.

I agree 100%. And as I recall, someone on this forum mentioned in a post about Bradley that he was taking by far more challenging courses than anyone else on the team. Which means that Bradley was actually being a real student and everyone else was not. And in theory, yes, I was right, APR is about academics. But that's the NCAA's theory, not mine. We all know it's wrong. Except the NCAA. Nevertheless, you would think that the Academic Progress Rate does deal, at least in theory, with academics. And yeah, it's only in theory. We all know Harvard's players got a more thorough education than Kentucky's and UConn's. Even if UConn's players were all taking challenging courses (and they're not), challenging at UConn is much easier than challenging at Harvard. Yet UConn had a higher one-year APR in 2010-11, and judging by the numbers it probably wasn't even close. Which is another cruel irony - our 978 is considered "excellent", yet because our two-year and four-year APRs were bad, we're banned. At the very least, the NCAA should have made a one-year APR minimum that allows a school to play, just as a two year good score can cancel a bad four year score. Of course, the one-year minimum should be higher than the two-year minimum, which in turn should be higher than the four-year minimum. (As with now, meeting any one of those would allow a school to play). But even if we made it 975, the threshold for excellence, we'd still be in. None of the other 9 banned schools had even close to what we had in 2010-11.

And you can't make a mockery out of a rule that's already a mockery of itself. In other words, the "Academic Progress Rate" is a mockery of Academic Progress. As you say, it encourages athletes to take the easy courses like History of Rock and Roll. (Yes Greg Oden, I'm looking at you). How is that promoting "academic progress"?

And at a school like Harvard, where the student athletes are real students who HAVE to take challenging classes just like everyone else, there will naturally be a higher failure rate than at Kentucky or UConn. So it's possible that Harvard will be banned in a couple years (assuming that's possible as a non-scholarship school), and Kentucky will keep playing their one-and-dones who take completely easy courses that a fifth grader could get a 2.6 GPA in. If that happens, hopefully it will be the end of the APR. Because people will at that point recognize it as ridiculous. Not that that would necessarily stop the NCAA.

 

[Huskymaniac]

Did you actually go to college? You are either incredibly ignorant or incredibly arrogant. On top of that you are either incredibly obstinate or incredibly bad at reading comprehension because at least three people have told you that the players take the same core courses as everyone else AND they actually attend classes. MY OWN WIFE HAD THEM AS STUDENTS IN ECONOMICS!!! The same economics as pre-med and engineering students were taking! If Harvard has a poor APR because their athletes take real classes, doesn't it seem logical that UConn's poor APR might be for the same reason?

 

[Gregory Koch]

Did you actually go to college? You are either incredibly ignorant or incredibly arrogant. On top of that you are either incredibly obstinate or incredibly bad at reading comprehension because at least three people have told you that the players take the same core courses as everyone else AND they actually attend classes. MY OWN WIFE HAD THEM AS STUDENTS IN ECONOMICS!!! The same economics as pre-med and engineering students were taking! If Harvard has a poor APR because their athletes take real classes, doesn't it seem logical that UConn's poor APR might be for the same reason?

Ok.... Was your wife teaching "Intro to economics" or was your wife teaching "Super-advanced macroeconomics"? Because some Harvard players are taking the latter, and if they're not taking that, they're taking the equivalent biology, engineering, or whatever-their-major-is course. And yes, they are taking the same core courses. I go to UConn. You have a choice of what core courses to take, and students (athletes or not) can almost always find an easy one in each area. Its the other courses that are different. Somehow, I don't expect to see any basketball players in my Advanced Financial Mathematics course this fall. Yeah, that's not a core course. That's one for my REAL major, not some ultra easy "Undeclared" or "General Studies" major.

 

[Robertelamin]

Or maybe those Harvard basketball players are taking Sociology, Art History, and Political Science classes so they can meet the requirements for a major in Sociology, Art History or Political Science. Who freaking knows.

 

[Gregory Koch]

Or maybe those Harvard basketball players are taking Sociology, Art History, and Political Science classes so they can meet the requirements for a major in Sociology, Art History or Political Science.

Yeah, there's intro to sociology/art history/political science and then there's those advanced courses that majors take. But there is no "Advanced General Studies" or "Advanced Undeclared".

 

[Hoophound]

I think we could sue on grounds of the NCAA causing the university financial harm by using unfair and uneven enforcement among members. NCAA membership is necessary in order to compete with other institutions. Therefore, while voluntary, membership is imperative to the success and prosperity of the university. The NCAA has a responsibility to the membership to act appropriately and fairly or risk harming certain members. If they act inappropriately, I think they can be held accountable.

 

[Gregory Koch]

I think we could sue on grounds of the NCAA causing the university financial harm by using unfair and uneven enforcement among members. NCAA membership is necessary in order to compete with other institutions. Therefore, while voluntary, membership is imperative to the success and prosperity of the university. The NCAA has a responsibility to the membership to act appropriately and fairly or risk harming certain members. If they act inappropriately, I think they can be held accountable.

We'd have to prove that they targeted us specifically. Considering 9 other schools got banned, that would be hard. I suppose we could join forces with them in the lawsuit, but other than that, it definitely wouldn't work. Even if we did, it's questionable. The fact that we are the most prominent member that got banned is not legally admissible evidence.

 

[Huskymaniac]

Yep, you are obstinate and arrogant. What is amazing is that you add self-loathing to that wonderful mix. You attend UConn and yet you trash UConn's education. Still pissed you didn't get into an ivy school like the kids of your parent's friends and other various relatives? You will probably do fine in spite of that crappy attitude but only because of the help you will receive along the way. Most students, like those UConn athletes, need to have a positive attitude to overcome their obstacles. I am more impressed by them taking introductory economics than I am by those of your ilk taking an advanced finance course. By the way, ever hear of Emeka Okafor? He took plenty of those advanced finance courses WHILE excelling as a division one athlete. What else do you do besides taking courses? Think about how to make lots of money?

 

[Gregory Koch]

Yep, you are obstinate and arrogant. What is amazing is that you add self-loathing to that wonderful mix. You attend UConn and yet you trash UConn's education. Still pissed you didn't get into an ivy school like the kids of your parent's friends and other various relatives? You will probably do fine in spite of that crappy attitude but only because of the help you will receive along the way. Most students, like those UConn athletes, need to have a positive attitude to overcome their obstacles. I am more impressed by them taking introductory economics than I am by those of your ilk taking an advanced finance course. By the way, ever hear of Emeka Okafor? He took plenty of those advanced finance courses WHILE excelling as a division one athlete. What else do you do besides taking courses? Think about how to make lots of money?

I'm not the one name calling. But since you appear to just be throwing insults around, I'm not going to continue this discussion. But first, I will say one more thing - UConn is a great academic school for those who came here to study. I came here to study, not because I was super talented at basketball. I manage to do just fine without all the pampering student athletes get. So stop making assumptions. I will not say any more.

 

[CL82]

What grounds do we have to sue? I'm sorry, I still don't see what you're saying. I think it's incredibly stupid that the NCAA is applying its rules retroactively. And I don't think UConn is any worse than any other big basketball school, so again, you're putting words in my mouth. But despite all this, we still don't have grounds to sue. "It's a stupid rule" is not grounds to sue. I'm sorry.

Reread my post and realize that I did not "put words in your mouth." You are a UConn student? How ironic that every post you make supports your claim that UConn doesn't take it academics seriously, albeit not in the way not that you intend.

 

[phillionaire]

Ok.... Was your wife teaching "Intro to economics" or was your wife teaching "Super-advanced macroeconomics"? Because some Harvard players are taking the latter, and if they're not taking that, they're taking the equivalent biology, engineering, or whatever-their-major-is course. And yes, they are taking the same core courses. I go to UConn. You have a choice of what core courses to take, and students (athletes or not) can almost always find an easy one in each area. Its the other courses that are different. Somehow, I don't expect to see any basketball players in my Advanced Financial Mathematics course this fall. Yeah, that's not a core course. That's one for my REAL major, not some ultra easy "Undeclared" or "General Studies" major.

Dude. Get off your high horse. Of course athletes aren't going to be taking financial mathematics. And REAL major? You must be one of those people that looks down on people who aren't taking SUPER UBER HARD MATH CLASSES. Get over yourself.

 

[Huskymaniac]

Oh please, financial math is a joke compared to the stuff I did in graduate school as an engineer/physicist. Don't give this guy any more credit than he deserves. He calls himself a big fan and then he holds a grudge against the athletes for the help they get and makes up names for classes that don't exist. Bitter much? I would love to see this guy take on their schedule and keep up with his "how to steal money from other people" classes. His grades would plummet and he wouldn't get that nice unethical job at one of the "too big to fail investment banks". The rest of us realize that the APR issue is at least partially due to these kids having to take real classes at a real university and that their success benefits the university. It brings in money to improve facilities and faculty. It brings exposure which carries with it an assumed credibility for academics. While that last bit may not make sense logically, it is reality.

 

[babysheep]

I'll never forget the first day of Introduction to Theater, by far the easiest class I took at UConn (took it for an easy A), and in walked a dozen football players.

I'll also never forget Hasheem being in my Introduction to Archaeology lecture, as a junior, literally less than 5 times all semester

 

[upstater]

I'll never forget the first day of Introduction to Theater, by far the easiest class I took at UConn (took it for an easy A), and in walked a dozen football players.

I'll also never forget Hasheem being in my Introduction to Archaeology lecture, as a junior, literally less than 5 times all semester

And, was that class in the Spring of his junior year when he was prepping for the draft?

I don't know what the answer is, but the idea that these kids can focus on classes given their schedules is sketchy at best. I don't like the intersession courses. Summer is a little better. Maybe the idea should be they take the spring off, use summer for electives, and the fall semester is the focus for their major.