UConnSwag11
Storrs, CT The Mecca
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 14,204
- Reaction Score
- 55,984
Well, that SUCKS!!!!!
i think that answers my question... bc the end of the statement makes it sound that they can still reverse it#UConn: As of now, Huskies are ineligible to play in 2013 NCAA Tournament, but that could change if the criteria to measure APR is changed
love the gifThe NCAA is doing a fine job looking out for the "student-athlete's" best interests
yeah thats what I'm confused by"When this change in legislation was adopted by the NCAA Board in October 2011 and made effective for the 2012-13 academic year, it gave the illusion that institutions had time to adjust to the legislation. Yet the data had already been submitted under a different penalty structure, one that would not have excluded our men's basketball team from participating in the post-season," said Manuel. "The approach to APR marks the first time in the history of the NCAA that it has ever implemented an academic rule significantly impacting current student-athletes without allowing the members time to adjust to the adoption of the legislation.
"In recent months, CAP chairperson and University of Hartford President Walter Harrison has been quoted as saying that CAP wanted to provide institutions with `a chance to adjust'. In actuality, these changes were a retroactive application of the rules. It remains the belief of the University of Connecticut that CAP and the Board of Directors should consider delaying the effective date of the implementation for all institutions to 2013-14, and/or use the APR scores from the 2011-12 academic year to determine postseason eligibility for the 2012-13 year."
"When this change in legislation was adopted by the NCAA Board in October 2011 and made effective for the 2012-13 academic year, it gave the illusion that institutions had time to adjust to the legislation. Yet the data had already been submitted under a different penalty structure, one that would not have excluded our men's basketball team from participating in the post-season," said Manuel. "The approach to APR marks the first time in the history of the NCAA that it has ever implemented an academic rule significantly impacting current student-athletes without allowing the members time to adjust to the adoption of the legislation.
"In recent months, CAP chairperson and University of Hartford President Walter Harrison has been quoted as saying that CAP wanted to provide institutions with `a chance to adjust'. In actuality, these changes were a retroactive application of the rules. It remains the belief of the University of Connecticut that CAP and the Board of Directors should consider delaying the effective date of the implementation for all institutions to 2013-14, and/or use the APR scores from the 2011-12 academic year to determine postseason eligibility for the 2012-13 year."
Or can the players sue?correct me if I'm wrong all you people who are more legally educated than i am but doesn't the university have grounds to make a pretty strong lawsuit against this bs
No matter what, this latest action will kill any hope of landing any decent recruits this Spring and probably be the deciding factor for Lamb and lead to another transfer or two. JC will fill out the roster with JC transfers or lesser recruits just to have warm bodies next season and this is only going to compound the problem. I can now relate to the persecution that Jerry Tarkanian was subjected to. The university seriously needs to not so subtly advise the NCAA of it's intention to sue. It's a crime if they haven't done so already. From reading the university's response, it's sounds like they're accepting this or am I reading it wrong?
No matter what, this latest action will kill any hope of landing any decent recruits this Spring and probably be the deciding factor for Lamb and lead to another transfer or two. JC will fill out the roster with JC transfers or lesser recruits just to have warm bodies next season and this is only going to compound the problem. I can now relate to the persecution that Jerry Tarkanian was subjected to. The university seriously needs to not so subtly advise the NCAA of it's intention to sue. It's a crime if they haven't done so already. From reading the university's response, it's sounds like they're accepting this or am I reading it wrong?