Nerlens Noel cleared by NCAA...

[Huskymaniac]

I absolutely agree about upping the entrance requirements. That would put a dent in the squid's scam. And they need to get rid of the one year requirement. If a kid can't meet college entrance requirements, let him jump to the NBA or D-league out of high school. That would also put a dent in the squid's plans as any of his stud recruits might suddenly decide to jump right before the draft. Imagine Kentucky's team if Davis declared for the draft in May after his senior season. No championship for squiddy.

Personally, I don't care if the higher entrance requirements and zero year rule meant lower quality college basketball. At least it would bring some academic integrity back. I also don't care about the people who would scream racism about the higher academic requirements. Fix the problem, don't lower the standards to line up with the lower performance due to the problems.

 

[mauconnfan]

"Calipari seems to be simply all about himself, period"

So youve met him? Did you play for him? Did he recruit you? If not, then how do you know who he is as a person? You dont. these are all your opinion and shared by many but it doesnt make any of it true the same way the perception shared by many outside of connecticut that jim calhoun is a cheat who doesnt care about academics just wins and losses.
Im not going to get into a debate on who is a better person or who cares more about their players. the point i was making isis
1. Uconn fans spend way to much time and energy on hating calipari and whatever program he may be at and whether or not they would like to admit it it does have something to do with jealousy. sure there are other reasons but jealousy plays a part. If he were coaching at prairie view and winning 5 games a year no one would care. but since he is pulling in recruiting classes that we can only dream of as fans and hes won a national title and seems set up to possibly win more some fans just have to try to knock his success by trying to invalidate it with criticism.
I personally couldnt care less if he wins or loses my only concern is uconn. And although it would never happen but hypothetically speaking if he were to become head coach at uconn he would have my full support.
and

Again there is no jealousy and I have no idea where you come from on this. I agree, way too much time talking about the slime ball. But anyone spending time sticking up for the piece of crap has either been living in a hole for many years or has a mancrush on the squid.....it is that simple. He has fooled the media, the NCAA and some other poor unfortunate souls.....congrats!!

 

[upstater]

It is my opinion that the real scandal is that there is no standardizing what constitutes a degree or a credible college course and that there is no verification by the NCAA of the results sent by the universities.

But this is how it should be. The NCAA has no business getting involved in curricular concerns at schools. UNC should be sufficiently embarrassed by the revelations that they self-police. If they don't, UNC will forever bear this mark.

That being said, a university official from another school said that the NCAA did get involved with their coursework in the past, so the NCAA's excuse is bogus. This is also evident when then NCAA hammered Cal Tech for a policy that's in place to benefit all students, and that's maximum flexibility when it comes to course selection. If I'm a college administrator, the last thing I want is the NCAA standardizing courses.

Look, it's just great that UConn's basketball players got to spend a whole week in NYC visiting art galleries for one course. Everyone should have that opportunity. I'm not against that at all. My problem is that many such courses are strung together to keep the players eligible, rather than have them proceed toward a degree and graduation. Why is it done? For the APR public relations scam. Let the schools go back to the old way. Many kids are struggling to finish school right now, not just athletes. These kids are grown--at 18 they should be able to make decisions about the level of education they need. Just make sure the students are qualified to sit in a college classroom, and from then on, it's their responsibility. Presumably, the school will fail them if they don't show up. Presumably. But that's the most the NCAA should require.

Otherwise, tweak the scholarship guarantees and admission requirements.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

The other schools sufficiently downgraded their educational mission, and they did it swiftly enough.

This is what gets me about your posts. It's akin to people posting about shady recruiting at other schools when UConn's on probation for recruiting violations.

Are you really saying that UConn's inability to comply with the APR requirements stems from their refusal to "downgrade their educational mission" relative to other schools? So UConn's embarrassing non-compliance is actually a reflection of the school's commitment to the education of its student athletes at the expense of the NCAA's PR stunt?

Well, good to know. I guess we should congratulate UConn and its fellow trailblazers who also refused to compromise in their academic mission: Jacksonville St., Miss. Valley St., Texas A&M Corpus Christi, Towson, Arkansas Pine Bluff, UC Riverside, UNC Wilmington, Toledo, and Cal State Bakersfield. What a joke.

 

[upstater]

This is what gets me about your posts. It's akin to people posting about shady recruiting at other schools when UConn's on probation for recruiting violations.

Are you really saying that UConn's inability to comply with the APR requirements stems from their refusal to "downgrade their educational mission" relative to other schools? So UConn's embarrassing non-compliance is actually a reflection of the school's commitment to the education of its student athletes at the expense of the NCAA's PR stunt?

Well, good to know. I guess we should congratulate UConn and its fellow trailblazers who also refused to compromise in their academic mission: Jacksonville St., Miss. Valley St., Texas A&M Corpus Christi, Towson, Arkansas Pine Bluff, UC Riverside, UNC Wilmington, Toledo, and Cal State Bakersfield. What a joke.

You forgot Harvard and Cal Tech.

How do you think UConn raised its scores the last couple of years? How do you think Kentucky does it? UNC?

It appears you don't know the first thing about APR.

 

[Huskymaniac]

You forgot Harvard and Cal Tech.

How do you think UConn raised its scores the last couple of years? How do you think Kentucky does it? UNC?

It appears you don't know the first thing about APR.

He doesn't know anything about anything except how to make thinly veiled attacks against a coach and team he supposedly supports. Trying to get him to understand this is like trying to teach the Theory of Relativity to groundhog. He will NEVER understand that it is a relative thing. How good are the players, academically, relative to the curriculum they are being forced/allowed to take. Some of these kids have ZERO justification to be in college. They will fail to stay eligible at even the worst schools unless they are allowed to take fake classes. Some of them are marginal college students and either they are allowed to take easy courses to keep them eligible or they are forced to take real classes and risk failing to stay eligible. Some of them are actually college capable but go to a school that expects them to do work that is beyond their ability.

So when UNC wants/needs to recruit marginal students, they create fake courses or steer their players to easy courses and create fake majors filled with easy courses. They are not alone. And now UConn is among them.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

You forgot Harvard and Cal Tech.

How do you think UConn raised its scores the last couple of years? How do you think Kentucky does it? UNC?

It appears you don't know the first thing about APR.

You just sound absurd when you group Harvard, Cal Tech and UConn together as they relate to the APR. I was a student at Harvard. Gut classes that a 6 year old could pass are available to athletes there just like they are at every other school. Why Harvard's APR scores are what they are is of no consequence whatsoever to me, and frankly could not be less relevant to what happened at UConn.

UConn got bitten by the APR because whoever was tasked with monitoring the kids on the basketball team fell asleep at the wheel. Kids left early, kids transferred, and kids couldnt stay eligible. UConn did a ****** job looking after these kids - a ******* job than a lot of the programs we like to mock here were able to do. That's pretty much it. They realized this and they started to take it seriously, and things changed.

You're obviously implying by constantly citing Harvard and Cal Tech that UConn has some kind of kinship with those schools vis-a-vis the APR, and frankly I find that to be among the most absurd arguments put forth on here in some time. It just sounds foolish. The idea that UConn **** the bed on the APR because it wouldnt compromise its academic mission like other schools is an argument that someone like HuskyManiac would offer. As if UConn basketball players weren't taking the same joke classes that every other school's players were taking before the APR. UConn's bball program was derelict in its responsibilities and they got hammered. The end.

 

[Huskymaniac]

Just lost a lot of respect for Harvard. Oh wait, he is full of crap. No one from Harvard could be that bad at reading comprehension.

 

[upstater]

You just sound absurd when you group Harvard, Cal Tech and UConn together as they relate to the APR. I was a student at Harvard. Gut classes that a 6 year old could pass are available to athletes there just like they are at every other school. Why Harvard's APR scores are what they are is of no consequence whatsoever to me, and frankly could not be less relevant to what happened at UConn.

UConn got bitten by the APR because whoever was tasked with monitoring the kids on the basketball team fell asleep at the wheel. Kids left early, kids transferred, and kids couldnt stay eligible. UConn did a ****** job looking after these kids - a ******* job than a lot of the programs we like to mock here were able to do. That's pretty much it. They realized this and they started to take it seriously, and things changed.

You're obviously implying by constantly citing Harvard and Cal Tech that UConn has some kind of kinship with those schools vis-a-vis the APR, and frankly I find that to be among the most absurd arguments put forth on here in some time. It just sounds foolish. The idea that UConn **** the bed on the APR because it wouldnt compromise its academic mission like other schools is an argument that someone like HuskyManiac would offer. As if UConn basketball players weren't taking the same joke classes that every other school's players were taking before the APR. UConn's bball program was derelict in its responsibilities and they got hammered. The end.

So, UConn improved its scores because they are now monitoring and doing better with the student-aspect of the basketball team than they were 5 or so years ago. Basically, the new coordinator is much better at the job than Ted Taigen. That's your theory.

And I'm the deluded one, supposedly.

Some people get suckered by the NCAA's PR sham, and you're one of them.

 

[TheChamps990411]

I met him three times when he was at UMass. He didn't coach me, he didn't recruit me. He was a from my somewhat limited interaction with him, all in non-basketball settings.

funny you say that because the same has been said of both jim calhoun and geno auriemma by people i know personally who have met them. i myself had very good experiences with both in the handful of times ive met them.

 

[TheChamps990411]

Again there is no jealousy and I have no idea where you come from on this. I agree, way too much time talking about the slime ball. But anyone spending time sticking up for the piece of crap has either been living in a hole for many years or has a mancrush on the squid.....it is that simple. He has fooled the media, the NCAA and some other poor unfortunate souls.....congrats!!

are you on this forum bashing calipari constantly? if so then i am talking about you and others like you. if your one of those like myself who couldnt care less then i was not referring to you. im not defending anyone just a little annoyed by the constant stream of calipari topics. lets move on already.

 

[ctchamps]

But this is how it should be. The NCAA has no business getting involved in curricular concerns at schools. UNC should be sufficiently embarrassed by the revelations that they self-police. If they don't, UNC will forever bear this mark.

That being said, a university official from another school said that the NCAA did get involved with their coursework in the past, so the NCAA's excuse is bogus. This is also evident when then NCAA hammered Cal Tech for a policy that's in place to benefit all students, and that's maximum flexibility when it comes to course selection. If I'm a college administrator, the last thing I want is the NCAA standardizing courses.

Look, it's just great that UConn's basketball players got to spend a whole week in NYC visiting art galleries for one course. Everyone should have that opportunity. I'm not against that at all. My problem is that many such courses are strung together to keep the players eligible, rather than have them proceed toward a degree and graduation. Why is it done? For the APR public relations scam. Let the schools go back to the old way. Many kids are struggling to finish school right now, not just athletes. These kids are grown--at 18 they should be able to make decisions about the level of education they need. Just make sure the students are qualified to sit in a college classroom, and from then on, it's their responsibility. Presumably, the school will fail them if they don't show up. Presumably. But that's the most the NCAA should require.

Otherwise, tweak the scholarship guarantees and admission requirements.

The reality is that some schools have a higher set of standards for their school athletes than others. Sadly more and more schools are caving in to the pressures to lower their standards for student athletes in order to be competitive.

No amount of oversight will reverse this trend imo. It has to start with a significant majority of people with invested interests in sports to insist on a change. It won't come from networks. They make too much money to care. And now the colleges have been corrupted by the money. So it has to come from the fans. I don't see that happening anytime soon.

I wasn't clear in my previous post. It was directed towards those who are appalled by the UConn APR situation without the in depth analysis of the problem and who sincerely believe that the system isn't gamed. These people cannot believe this was a personal vendetta by Emmert and Hathaway for past slights with JC.

FWIW:

freescooter's agenda is very clear. He wants UConn to be considered a football school because he loves football and is, at best, a disinterested basketball fan. So he comes to these forums with the agenda of polluting peoples opinions about the basketball program with the hope of convincing bb fans that the program wasn't as good as we believe it is. When he discusses standards during JC's tenure he really wants to corrupt the legacy. Many of us see through this. But there are those who are more susceptible to this type of mindbending. Whatever logical discussions you are having with him are wasted because he isn't interested in learning the truth.

Waquoit is a bb and football fan. He has supported JC in the past but he is also a Hathaway supporter. He has demonstrated a resentment towards Hathaway's termination and believes JC was responsible for this.

BigErnMcCracken is a men's bb and JC fan. However he thinks UConn fans on this forum are homers who automatically defend UConn's indiscretions while attacking other programs unfairly. He is correct to some extent, but this is such a bugaboo for him, that any of us, even those who offer reasonable explanations, such as yourself, are nothing but conspiracy theorists.

 

[mauconnfan]

are you on this forum bashing calipari constantly? if so then i am talking about you and others like you. if your one of those like myself who couldnt care less then i was not referring to you. im not defending anyone just a little annoyed by the constant stream of calipari topics. lets move on already.

Agreed but I have had my share basically because people disagree.........I can't leave it alone if someone sticks up for the man. Sorry....so if everyone stops I'm in!! LOL

 

[mauconnfan]

The reality is that some schools have a higher set of standards for their school athletes than others. Sadly more and more schools are caving in to the pressures to lower their standards for student athletes in order to be competitive.

No amount of oversight will reverse this trend imo. It has to start with a significant majority of people with invested interests in sports to insist on a change. It won't come from networks. They make too much money to care. And now the colleges have been corrupted by the money. So it has to come from the fans. I don't see that happening anytime soon.

I wasn't clear in my previous post. It was directed towards those who are appalled by the UConn APR situation without the in depth analysis of the problem and who sincerely believe that the system isn't gamed. These people cannot believe this was a personal vendetta by Emmert and Hathaway for past slights with JC.

FWIW:

freescooter's agenda is very clear. He wants UConn to be considered a football school because he loves football and is, at best, a disinterested basketball fan. So he comes to these forums with the agenda of polluting peoples opinions about the basketball program with the hope of convincing bb fans that the program wasn't as good as we believe it is. When he discusses standards during JC's tenure he really wants to corrupt the legacy. Many of us see through this. But there are those who are more susceptible to this type of mindbending. Whatever logical discussions you are having with him are wasted because he isn't interested in learning the truth.

Waquoit is a bb and football fan. He has supported JC in the past but he is also a Hathaway supporter. He has demonstrated a resentment towards Hathaway's termination and believes JC was responsible for this.

BigErnMcCracken is a men's bb and JC fan. However he thinks UConn fans on this forum are homers who automatically defend UConn's indiscretions while attacking other programs unfairly. He is correct to some extent, but this is such a bugaboo for him, that any of us, even those who offer reasonable explanations, such as yourself, are nothing but conspiracy theorists.

Bingo......Big Crack especially!! Waq?....not sure if he is a Hathaway guy and God I hope not!! Free? Not sure what he is minus the fact he's not at all happy with KO......

Good stuff fleudy

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

The reality is that some schools have a higher set of standards for their school athletes than others. Sadly more and more schools are caving in to the pressures to lower their standards for student athletes in order to be competitive.

BigErnMcCracken is a men's bb and JC fan. However he thinks UConn fans on this forum are homers who automatically defend UConn's indiscretions while attacking other programs unfairly. He is correct to some extent, but this is such a bugaboo for him, that any of us, even those who offer reasonable explanations, such as yourself, are nothing but conspiracy theorists.

I appreciate the diagnosis. However, I have to say I disagree with the premise that any "reasonable explanation" has been offered. What is it that Calhoun always says? You're known by the company that you keep?


Arkansas-Pine Bluff
California-Riverside
Cal State Bakersfield
Jacksonville State
Mississippi Valley State
North Carolina-Wilmington
Texas A&M-Corpus Christi
Toledo
Towson

These are the other schools that also find themselves banned from the NCAA tournament.

To your point about some schools having higher standards for athletes, is it really your position that UConn's "higher standards" are the reason it is the only BCS school in the country that finds itself in this position? If so, do you have anything resembling evidence for this?

Are we to assume that the 9 august schools on the list above have similarly high standards? Or that they, too, have taken a principled stand based on their deep and abiding convictions regarding the proper method of educating college students, and that's why they've run afoul of the APR?

I mean, c'mon. Show your work here.

 

[ctchamps]

Bingo......Big Crack especially!! Waq?....not sure if he is a Hathaway guy and God I hope not!! Free? Not sure what he is minus the fact he's not at all happy with KO......

Good stuff fleudy

Thanks mau.

BigErn is an enigma as far as I'm concerned. I can't remember his previous name on the rivals forum but he was one of the more level headed contributors. He always had a disgust for the Husky Blue bias, but outside of that, his contributions were more even handed, with him occasionally going toe to toe with someone who disagreed with him. The change in his writing style from the rivals site to here is dramatic. I used to look forward to reading his comments on the rivals site. Sadly his commentary is far more bitter now.

Waquoit is brief and to the point. He doesn't hold back. I may disagree with him about a lot of things but I like his style.

Like the two guys above, free is one smart dude. He has an extensive knowledge of things. It's a shame his contempt for UConn men's bb is so great. I don't accept his denials to the contrary because the predominance of his writings in this forum betray this denial. I totally disagree with most of the stuff he writes in this forum (as opposed to other forums) but I admire his intelligence.

I've learned not to let these guys irritate me. For that matter I've even learned to not let chief get my goat. I'll admit that he took some doing. My intent in bringing the three guys to the picture was to point out to people that there are two things to consider when having a discussion. The first is the topic that is being discussed. The second, and far more important consideration, is to know who the person is that you are having a discussion with. And in this latter category, know that there are different hot buttons for people. When a person's hot button is pushed the situation becomes emotional and sometimes irrational for that person. Any attempt to be logical and havd a reasonable discussion are unlikely.

 

[ctchamps]

I appreciate the diagnosis. However, I have to say I disagree with the premise that any "reasonable explanation" has been offered. What is it that Calhoun always says? You're known by the company that you keep?


Arkansas-Pine Bluff
California-Riverside
Cal State Bakersfield
Jacksonville State
Mississippi Valley State
North Carolina-Wilmington
Texas A&M-Corpus Christi
Toledo
Towson

These are the other schools that also find themselves banned from the NCAA tournament.

To your point about some schools having higher standards for athletes, is it really your position that UConn's "higher standards" are the reason it is the only BCS school in the country that finds itself in this position? If so, do you have anything resembling evidence for this?

Are we to assume that the 9 august schools on the list above have similarly high standards? Or that they, too, have taken a principled stand based on their deep and abiding convictions regarding the proper method of educating college students, and that's why they've run afoul of the APR?

I mean, c'mon. Show your work here.

You wrote this as I was writing a response to mau!

I have nada with respect to specifics regarding this subject. But upstater has written extensively about this issue and his knowledge regarding this subject is extensive. There is no way of proving his knowledge is perfectly accurate but I believe he is closer to the point than you are.

The problem I have is there is no verification of what the schools send to the NCAA. That is why the North Carolina football team was able to do what they did for years. The NCAA didn't uncover the falsehood. I believe some disgruntled player spilled the beans to a reporter and that is what got the ball rolling. I'm not advocating for a verification process by the NCAA. I'm suggesting that without one, there is no way of really knowing the accuracy of academic standards for student athletes in the various college programs and therefore any condemnation of UConn in this matter doesn't take this into consideration.

 

[upstater]

I appreciate the diagnosis. However, I have to say I disagree with the premise that any "reasonable explanation" has been offered. What is it that Calhoun always says? You're known by the company that you keep?


Arkansas-Pine Bluff
California-Riverside
Cal State Bakersfield
Jacksonville State
Mississippi Valley State
North Carolina-Wilmington
Texas A&M-Corpus Christi
Toledo
Towson

These are the other schools that also find themselves banned from the NCAA tournament.

To your point about some schools having higher standards for athletes, is it really your position that UConn's "higher standards" are the reason it is the only BCS school in the country that finds itself in this position? If so, do you have anything resembling evidence for this?

Are we to assume that the 9 august schools on the list above have similarly high standards? Or that they, too, have taken a principled stand based on their deep and abiding convictions regarding the proper method of educating college students, and that's why they've run afoul of the APR?

I mean, c'mon. Show your work here.

Cal Tech. They were banned. Harvard didn't make the APR score. You're leaving off schools.

Strip all this stuff away about the company you keep, etc.

Just look at the APR rules. Realize that the best way to meet the criteria is to keep your players eligible, but prevent them from getting an education. That means short courses, intersession courses, but such courses don't allow the players to proceed toward a degree. That's well and good, because there's nothing in the APR that has anything to do with graduation.

 

[caw]

funny you say that because the same has been said of both jim calhoun and geno auriemma by people i know personally who have met them. i myself had very good experiences with both in the handful of times ive met them.

I've met Calhoun and Geno also. They weren't exactly pleasant either, but they weren't rude.

 

[PomonaHusky]

The Cal Tech case was not APR related. They were cited for a lack of institutional control because some student-athletes participated while not being enrolled in enough classes to be considered full-time (due to the students "shopping for classes" at the beginning of each trimester). See this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/14/s...-meaning-to-academically-ineligible.html?_r=0
Also, Cal Tech is division 3 and the APR specifically applies only to Division I.

If you check the following link and search for Harvard, they have no penalties related to the APR:
http://web1.ncaa.org/maps/aprRelease.jsp

 

[caw]

I appreciate the diagnosis. However, I have to say I disagree with the premise that any "reasonable explanation" has been offered. What is it that Calhoun always says? You're known by the company that you keep?


Arkansas-Pine Bluff
California-Riverside
Cal State Bakersfield
Jacksonville State
Mississippi Valley State
North Carolina-Wilmington
Texas A&M-Corpus Christi
Toledo
Towson

These are the other schools that also find themselves banned from the NCAA tournament.

To your point about some schools having higher standards for athletes, is it really your position that UConn's "higher standards" are the reason it is the only BCS school in the country that finds itself in this position? If so, do you have anything resembling evidence for this?

Are we to assume that the 9 august schools on the list above have similarly high standards? Or that they, too, have taken a principled stand based on their deep and abiding convictions regarding the proper method of educating college students, and that's why they've run afoul of the APR?

I mean, c'mon. Show your work here.

It's quite interesting, if SI was correct, which schools would have been banned if the rule had been instituted upon last years NCAAT.

UConn did itself no favors, but all the penalty next year shows me is that UConn was a year slow in adjusting to the new rules and the way they keep men's basketball players eligible.

It's quite a flawed system and doesn't show a thing about academics of athletes at a school, let alone regular academics at a school.

Hypothetically a kid like Roscoe Smith could hurt the APR at UConn by transferring to UNLV with a 2.3, while Michael Kidd-Gilchrist wouldn't hurt UK by leaving for the NBA with a 2.0. That is a majorly flawed system. *I just used those two as examples and made up their GPA's.

The best example is the kid from UCF(USF? some damn Florida school) who would have hurt the school by transferring but didn't by declaring for the draft. The kid wasn't ready for the NBA and wasn't drafted. So now the kid not only has no college degree but he can't go back to school for on scholarship.

Syracuse is notorious for having 2-3 walk-ons with high GPA's on the team to keep the APR high.

I don't blame schools for doing those things, but to hold APR and the tournament ban as some sort of beacon that UConn is failing at educating anyone is a joke.

UConn failed to game the system, that is all the APR tells me.

 

[upstater]

The Cal Tech case was not APR related. They were cited for a lack of institutional control because some student-athletes participated while not being enrolled in enough classes to be considered full-time (due to the students "shopping for classes" at the beginning of each trimester). See this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/14/s...-meaning-to-academically-ineligible.html?_r=0
Also, Cal Tech is division 3 and the APR specifically applies only to Division I.

If you check the following link and search for Harvard, they have no penalties related to the APR:
http://web1.ncaa.org/maps/aprRelease.jsp

Right about Cal-Tech and the APR, but it's the same issue. APR only measures eligibility and returning at the start of each semester. The players were ineligible because their full-time status for the spring had dropped.

As for Harvard, it's pretty simple to do the math. Look at their APR average drop year to year. Then calculate what scores they would have had to achieve in order to drop their APR as much as it dropped. When you do the calculation, there is no doubt Harvard failed to achieve the necessary APR score. I think they scored somewhere around 915 the last time I did the math.

 

[PomonaHusky]

Right about Cal-Tech and the APR, but it's the same issue. APR only measures eligibility and returning at the start of each semester. The players were ineligible because their full-time status for the spring had dropped.

As for Harvard, it's pretty simple to do the math. Look at their APR average drop year to year. Then calculate what scores they would have had to achieve in order to drop their APR as much as it dropped. When you do the calculation, there is no doubt Harvard failed to achieve the necessary APR score. I think they scored somewhere around 915 the last time I did the math.

You could be right about Harvard, and their recent scores (I have no idea what they are). But the Cal Tech case is not related. Basically the students (all students) at Cal Tech shop around for courses at the beginning of each trimester. If they drop too many classes during this prolonged "add-drop period" and then don't re-enroll in an appropriate number of classes until the very end of the three week period they may have a short period of time during which they have fewer than "full-time" credits. Thus, during that period of time they are considered by the NCAA to be "part-time" and ineligible for athletics, even though they eventually regain "full-time" status at the end of the three week "shopping" period. It has nothing to do with the athletes actually taking less than full time credits in the spring trimester. Simply, their status temporarily dropped to part-time during the prolonged add-drop period in the Spring trimester. Cal Tech self reported that some of their athletes "temporarily" dropped below full-time status during the season of competition due to the "shopping period". Those students did not remain part-time for the entire trimester. This is totally unrelated to the APR (just a case of poor accounting practices by the NCAA), but totally ridiculous of the NCAA to penalize in this instance.

Perhaps this link will clear it up:
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/07/16/ncaa-cracks-down-course-shopping-caltech

Most athletes here at Cal Poly Pomona are told to make sure they always add a class before they drop a class during our short add-drop period to assure they always retain full-time status, which has become more difficult for them since due to budget cuts, they can only enroll in 13 credits max during the initial "add" and "add-drop periods" and 12 are needed for full-time status.

 

[upstater]

You could be right about Harvard, and their recent scores (I have no idea what they are). But the Cal Tech case is not related. Basically the students (all students) at Cal Tech shop around for courses at the beginning of each trimester. If they drop too many classes during this prolonged "add-drop period" and then don't re-enroll in an appropriate number of classes until the very end of the three week period they may have a short period of time during which they have fewer than "full-time" credits. Thus, during that period of time they are considered by the NCAA to be "part-time" and ineligible for athletics, even though they eventually regain "full-time" status at the end of the three week "shopping" period. It has nothing to do with the athletes actually taking less than full time credits in the spring trimester. Simply, their status temporarily dropped to part-time during the prolonged add-drop period in the Spring trimester. Cal Tech self reported that some of their athletes "temporarily" dropped below full-time status during the season of competition due to the "shopping period". Those students did not remain part-time for the entire trimester. This is totally unrelated to the APR (just a case of poor accounting practices by the NCAA), but totally ridiculous of the NCAA to penalize in this instance.

Perhaps this link will clear it up:
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/07/16/ncaa-cracks-down-course-shopping-caltech

Most athletes here at Cal Poly Pomona are told to make sure they always add a class before they drop a class during our short add-drop period to assure they always retain full-time status, which has become more difficult for them since due to budget cuts, they can only enroll in 13 credits max during the initial "add" and "add-drop periods" and 12 are needed for full-time status.

There's actually nothing to clear up. The Cal-Tech case was discussed on this board a while back. I don't think anyone is confused about it. This is exactly what we've been saying for awhile now. The NCAA has some bogus measurement of what constitutes full-time status, and it somehow dictates to Cal-Tech how to run its academic programs, when the fact is, Cal Tech is doing its students a service by allowing them to choose courses 3 weeks into the semester. The NCAA has no business there.

The APR measures these exact same things. Full-time status is key. It's actually half the entire score. 1 point for returning in the spring. 1 point for returning in the fall. This is quite apart from grades. You just show up and get the points. The NCAA's emphasis on simply signing up for courses at the start of the semester is a very low bar to jump, but rather than reward a school like Cal-Tech for academic rigor, they banish them!

As for Harvard's scores, they are available at the link you provided in your previous post.

 

[PomonaHusky]

The NCAA has some bogus measurement of what constitutes full-time status, and it somehow dictates to Cal-Tech how to run its academic programs, when the fact is, Cal Tech is doing its students a service by allowing them to choose courses 3 weeks into the semester. The NCAA has no business there.

Nice discussion. I agree with you on the quoted section, but the APR metric is based on student athlete retention and academic eligibility, not simply whether a student is classified as full-time or part-time (not academic performance related). While I see how you can link them (and why you want to link them), they are still distinct, since academic performance (becoming ineligible due to poor academic performance) was not at the heart of the Cal Tech case. Also, I agree with your stance on the APR being a poor measure of student-athlete academic performance. My main point however, was a simple one, that is undeniable. Strictly speaking, neither Cal Tech, nor Harvard were previously disciplined by the NCAA due to poor APR performance. Cal Tech is not subject to the APR, since they are division 3, they do not even report an APR. Harvard has not received any penalties from the NCAA due to poor APR performance, although that may change in the future (their scores for 2011-2012 pending, those were the scores I was alluding to).

For reference you state: "The reason Cal Tech and Harvard don't meet the APR is because meeting the standards damages education."
Strictly speaking, Cal Tech doesn't need to meet the APR. It is not even subject to the APR. The APR has no influence on Cal Tech. Other ridiculous NCAA rules; however, did impact Cal Tech, but it clearly wasn't the APR.
At no previous point has Harvard's men's basketball team been penalized for not meeting the APR. To this point (2011-2012 data pending), they have always met the APR.