NCAA regs passed: 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 900 multiyear or 930 avg over two years

[Rumrunner]

The new post-season eligibility structure will take effect in the 2012-13 academic year, with a two-year implementation window before the benchmark moves from 900 to 930. For access to post-season competition in 2012-13 and 2013-14, teams must achieve a 900 multi-year APR or a 930 average over the most recent two years to be eligible.

In 2014-15, teams that don’t achieve the 930 benchmark for their four-year APR or at least a 940 average for the most recent two years will be ineligible for post-season competition.
In 2015-16, the 930 benchmark for post-season competition participation – and additional penalties – will be implemented fully. The APR requirement for post-season competition participation would be waived only in extraordinary circumstances.

The structure will allow for some adjustments for teams that improve once they enter the second level of penalties. The Board provided special allowances for historically black colleges and universities (HBCU) and low-resource schools and supported the creation of an HBCU advisory group to study academic performance of student-athlete at those institutions.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect...anges+to+academic+and+student-athlete+welfare

 

[Dann]

i think were safe with this the way it works considering the past couple years. just have to put good #'s up thats all.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

So it's confirmed that our terrible 2009 and 2010 scores will have absolutely no effect on whether we make the postseason.

 

[upstater]

$2,000 a year per student athlete.
And now the horse is out of the barn.
Someone will have to explain to all the kids getting their funding cut (teaching assistantships) and the kids already shelling out $500 a year to the AD in fees are less deserving than the student athletes.

Is everyone certain that UConn will be one of the schools that pay $2k per player?

Hey Anthony Bennett, come to UConn. You'll get $2k above your per diem. Or not...

 

[Rumrunner]

2007-08 (909),
2008-09 (844),
2009-10 (826)
2010-2011 976 Official number released in May, 2012
2011-2012 950 (number totally chosen at random)

2012-2013 season requires a 900 4 year average OR 930 two-year average

4 year average
888
2 year average
901

UConn will need a waiver for 2012-2103 unless my reading comprehension and math skills need work (which hopefully they do)

 

[SubbaBub]

2007-08 (909),
2008-09 (844),
2009-10 (826)
2010-2011 976 Official number released in May, 2012
2011-2012 950 (number totally chosen at random)

2012-2013 season requires a 900 4 year average OR 930 two-year average

4 year average
888
2 year average
901

UConn will need a waiver for 2012-2103 unless my reading comphrension and math skills need work (which hopefully they do)

Pretty sure the 2 yr avg would be 963.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk

 

[HuskyBballFan]

2007-08 (909),
2008-09 (844),
2009-10 (826)
2010-2011 976 Official number released in May, 2012
2011-2012 950 (number totally chosen at random)

2012-2013 season requires a 900 4 year average OR 930 two-year average

4 year average
888
2 year average
901

UConn will need a waiver for 2012-2103 unless my reading comphrension and math skills need work (which hopefully they do)

Actually you're right. But I don't see any reason why they wait until May of the following year to release the numbers. Uconn already knows what last year's number will be - why shouldn't they be able to use the 2011 and 2012 numbers (which they'll know) for the 2013 two-year requirement?

 

[Rumrunner]

Which is why I don't foresee any impediment to the 2012-2013 tournament, so long as this current academic year's numbers (2011-2012) are "unofficially known" with respect to the waiver process.

It sounds like they won't grant waivers once the rule is implemented fully in a couple of years.

As far as reporting it in May 2011, I think it's a function of the NCAA's bureacracy and the member schools having to fill out, verify, and send in the statistics.

Kind of like what happens if you crossed the DMV with the Post Office and appointed Marinatto to run it.

Actually you're right. But I don't see any reason why they wait until May of the following year to release the numbers. Uconn already knows what last year's number will be - why shouldn't they be able to use the 2011 and 2012 numbers (which they'll know) for the 2013 two-year requirement?

 

[mets1090]

I think that if they see the 2010-2011 numbers are good and they have reason to believe 2011-2012 will be good before the APR is"officially" released, they will use that as our 2 year average and let us into the 2012-2013 post season.

And assuming pretty good scores from here out, once the 2009-2010 team comes off the books we should be fine.

 

[Deadrody]

2007-08 (909),
2008-09 (844),
2009-10 (826)
2010-2011 976 Official number released in May, 2012
2011-2012 950 (number totally chosen at random)

2012-2013 season requires a 900 4 year average OR 930 two-year average

4 year average
888
2 year average
901

UConn will need a waiver for 2012-2103 unless my reading comprension and math skills need work (which hopefully they do)

clearly math is not your strong suit.

with an official 976, they can achieve 930 on the 2 year average with a second value as low as 884

 

[Walker11]

clearly math is not your strong suit.

with an official 976, they can achieve 930 on the 2 year average with a second value as low as 884

I think he was using 09-10 and 10-11 because at the start of the 2012-2013 tournament, those will be the most recent official scores.

 

[Nully]

Good thing Rumrunner's not on the team...

 

[arnie3]

This is the news that I was hoping for! We'll be in excellent shape over the next two years.

 

[Druken Friar]

All is well again.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

Rumrunner's math was not incorrect. They key here is which two years do they use to determine the 2 year score for 2013. If they use 2011 and 2012, Uconn will be more than fine (assuming this year's team has a good score). The problem is that they don't officially release the scores until May of the following year. So by the time the 2013 tournament rolls around, the 2012 scores won't be "officially" released, even though Uconn will know what the score is. So if the NCAA says they have to use the 2010 and 2011 scores instead, we'd be out.

 

[champs99and04]

I'm not too concerned about this. So long as our score for this year is good, it's hard to imagine the NCAA leaving us out of the 2012-2013 tournament when we had been making much progression.

 

[Sportsman5]

The NCAA could change when the scores are released.

 

[Rumrunner]

And thank god you aren't my CPA!

Good thing Rumrunner's not on the team...

 

[RS9999X]

They know if this means a ban for UConn at this instant.

They know UConn's 2011 (976) number even if not formally released. They are submitted.

826 + 1000 = 1826 0r 913 two year average. If the math is based on 2010 and 2011 then its a deliberate screw job.

 

[Kitaman]

Can someone explain how this will impact the landscape of college bball. Are a lot of schools in jeopardy here or will it have minimal impact?

I guess I am asking do you think this is a major policy shift or simply a technical matter that should not change things much?

 

[arnie3]

Rumrunner's math was not incorrect. They key here is which two years do they use to determine the 2 year score for 2013. If they use 2011 and 2012, Uconn will be more than fine (assuming this year's team has a good score). The problem is that they don't officially release the scores until May of the following year. So by the time the 2013 tournament rolls around, the 2012 scores won't be "officially" released, even though Uconn will know what the score is. So if the NCAA says they have to use the 2010 and 2011 scores instead, we'd be out.

The problem that I have with that is that the NCAA would be going back to a time prior to the initiation of this program. I don't think it would fly.

 

[RS9999X]

If they credit UConn with

950 (2012 - two point deduction - unknown)
975 (2011- one point deduction Jamal Coombs-McDaniel)
826 (2010)
844 (2009)

898 average

Then it's close and likely a waiver.

any scenario including 2008 figures is a disaster unless they waiver.

 

[Druken Friar]

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/s...anel-approves-major-scholarship-rules-changes

Decent article on the changes. I would think it would be beneficial for UConn recruiting especially the ability to provide additional assistance. Academics will be more difficult but it's not all bad.

 

[RS9999X]

It won't make much difference once phased in.

Most of the deductions are for students who are ineligible after their last Spring Season whether they go to the NBA, Europe, 5th year or transfer. It can be managed. No they tend to slack off and workout and take the hit on the hardest classes which they put off to their "blow off" semester. That whole attitude has to change and be properly managed

 

[upstater]

Can someone explain how this will impact the landscape of college bball. Are a lot of schools in jeopardy here or will it have minimal impact?

I guess I am asking do you think this is a major policy shift or simply a technical matter that should not change things much?

APR changes are meaningless. $2k a year per student athlete is groundbreaking and will alter the face of college sports permanently. Some schools will pay, others won't.