- Joined
- Aug 17, 2011
- Messages
- 17,076
- Reaction Score
- 97,394
Yup, we're on it. The writer doesn't mention the retroactive penalty which is what I consider the major problem with the penalty.
The most ridiculous NCAA violations in college basketball
4. UConn's APR postseason ban
The sentence: UConn was ruled ineligible for the 2013 postseason, regardless of how the team performed during its 2012-13 season.
The infraction: The school's two-year APR score, otherwise known as academic progress rate scores, fell below the NCAA's required threshold.
Let us explain: Simply put, schools get APR points deducted when its players leave the university in bad academic standing. Whether a player's departure is a function of graduating or transferring does not matter.
According to the NCAA's rule adopted in the summer of 2011, the penalty for schools falling below the 900-point APR threshold was a postseason ban in addition to a reduced number of scholarships.
There was one problem, though. The APR score is calculated on a rolling, four-year basis.
Here's ESPN to explain what that meant for the Huskies:
"Under rules approved in October, a school must have a two-year average score of 930 or a four-year average of 900 on the NCAA's annual Academic Progress Rate, which measures the academic performance of student athletes. Connecticut's men's basketball scored 826 for the 2009-10 school year. UConn's score for the 2010-11 school year was 978.
That would not be high enough. It would give Connecticut a two-year score of 902 and a four-year score of below 890."
In an appeal to the NCAA, UConn argued that the team showed incredible improvement in the year preceding the adoption of the new rule, and therefore should be grandfathered into postseason eligibility based on the school's two-year APR score, and not its four-year score.
Their appeal was denied, and again, the NCAA punished a majority of players for an infraction that their predecessors committed.
The most ridiculous NCAA violations in college basketball
4. UConn's APR postseason ban
The sentence: UConn was ruled ineligible for the 2013 postseason, regardless of how the team performed during its 2012-13 season.
The infraction: The school's two-year APR score, otherwise known as academic progress rate scores, fell below the NCAA's required threshold.
Let us explain: Simply put, schools get APR points deducted when its players leave the university in bad academic standing. Whether a player's departure is a function of graduating or transferring does not matter.
According to the NCAA's rule adopted in the summer of 2011, the penalty for schools falling below the 900-point APR threshold was a postseason ban in addition to a reduced number of scholarships.
There was one problem, though. The APR score is calculated on a rolling, four-year basis.
Here's ESPN to explain what that meant for the Huskies:
"Under rules approved in October, a school must have a two-year average score of 930 or a four-year average of 900 on the NCAA's annual Academic Progress Rate, which measures the academic performance of student athletes. Connecticut's men's basketball scored 826 for the 2009-10 school year. UConn's score for the 2010-11 school year was 978.
That would not be high enough. It would give Connecticut a two-year score of 902 and a four-year score of below 890."
In an appeal to the NCAA, UConn argued that the team showed incredible improvement in the year preceding the adoption of the new rule, and therefore should be grandfathered into postseason eligibility based on the school's two-year APR score, and not its four-year score.
Their appeal was denied, and again, the NCAA punished a majority of players for an infraction that their predecessors committed.