At this point, the NCAA has given up on logically defending their decision to ban UConn from the tournament and have instead decided to go with the "NANANA BUBUBU" approach, meaning they are ignorantly rejecting every valid appeal because they want to stick it to Calhoun.
UConn's other athletic programs passing the grades has zero to do with the current situation, and more to do with the NCAA conveniently and desperately searching for an excuse for the seemingly indefensible.
The situation at hand is simple: Calhoun ran a program with a low retention rate, the NCAA passed a rule discouraging this, Calhoun agreed that he needed to change, Calhoun did change. If I hear the "Members have been aware that low APR scores could result in negative consequences since 2006" retort one more time, I'm going to take an axe and head down to the NCAA offices. Yeah, they knew they were going to be negative consequences, but they didn't know a slap on the wrist was going to turn into a hammer to the nutsack without any time to adjust. If the NCAA had given UConn a reasonable amount of time to adjust to the harsher penalties, they would have been rewarded with some very good APR scores in the 2010-11 and 11-12 seasons, which I'm guessing would register as one of the biggest progressions in D-1 from where UConn was before. Given the fact that the NCAA imposed a rule that they knew would *k UConn without considering any fundamental concepts of fairness, I know hope they are rewarded with a law suit.
