UConn outlines self-imposed penalties in effort to qualify for 2013 NCAA tourney

[UChusky916]

Retweeted by Borges:

APNewsBreak: UConn proposes self-imposed penalties in effort to qualify for 2013 NCAA tourney

https://twitter.com/#!/peatonrobb/status/167323571952160768

http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/8da26c5491c9439ea238e40c8bef45b7/BKC--UConn-APR/

The school currently does not qualify for the tournament based on several years of low academic progress reports, but filed a waiver last month.
That document, obtained this week by The Associated Press under a Freedom of Information request, outlines proposed self-imposed penalties that will be instituted if the waiver is granted.
Those include forfeiting the revenue awarded to the Big East for participating in the tournament, reducing the number of regular-season games played in the 2012-13 season from 27 to 23, and barring coach Jim Calhoun from meeting off-campus with prospective recruits during the fall 2012 contact period.

 

[UChusky916]

Wow...

biggest thing is probably barring Calhoun from meeting fall recruits.

 

[Reno]

Man, can we go back to March 2011?

 

[aceboon]

Did the NCAA already decide they weren't going to re-examine when APR scores could be submitted? If the school has to go through all of this to qualify for the tourney they need to give them the 2 schollies back.

 

[HooperScooper]

Does this mean they had no success trying to convince the NCAA that the previous APR scores should not be used to barr teams from the 2013 NCAA Tournament? I thought they were going to try that first.

 

[gwhuskyfan]

Borges doesn't think these self-imposed penalties will work either...

 

[UChusky916]

This can only be bad news. I doubt the NCAA accepts this.

Double jeopardy? Time to man up the legal team

 

[superjohn]

This is so unbelievably unfair, to retroactively penalize a school is insane. It's so clear that the NCAA has it out for UConn.

 

[SubbaBub]

This can only be bad news. I doubt the NCAA accepts this.

Double jeopardy? Time to man up the legal team

I think you mean, ex post facto, but I agree.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk

 

[CTGoonie]

This is so unbelievably unfair, to retroactively penalize a school is insane. It's so clear that the NCAA has it out for UConn.

Exactly. If Uconn had just fudged the grades and been caught (like several ACC and SEC schools) the penalty would have been much less than missing out on the NCAA tournament.

 

[Reno]

This is so unbelievably unfair, to retroactively penalize a school is insane. It's so clear that the NCAA has it out for UConn.

How is this having it out for UConn? The rules exist and UConn didn't meet them. I don't necessarily agree with the ideas behind the rules, but the rules were in place and the schools all knew about them.

 

[GemParty]

I View it as a Strong plan B if the Feb 20th review produces a negative result. I believe it's Bull we are in this Double Jeopardy spot, but the school appears to be saying $$$ Blame us, NOT kids currently doing Great in school. No exhibition gms to warm up- yikes!

 

[djct1999]

hmmmm.....uconn has already been punished for the rules that were in place (loss of scholarships). the 2013 tourney ban is something new and after the fact. it makes no sense whatsover.

 

[aceboon]

How is this having it out for UConn? The rules exist and UConn didn't meet them. I don't necessarily agree with the ideas behind the rules, but the rules were in place and the schools all knew about them.

The guidelines were in place and schools understood that they could lose scholarships if they didn't meet them. The school has been docked their 2 scholarships, you don't see how unjust it is to introduce a new rule that is enforced retroactively, and penalizes them again for something they've already been penalized for??

 

[Drumguy]

The guidelines were in place and schools understood that they could lose scholarships if they didn't meet them. The school has been docked their 2 scholarships, you don't see how unjust it is to introduce a new rule that is enforced retroactively, and penalizes them again for something they've already been penalized for??

Agreed we were punished under the existing rules, you can't change them just because you want to punish a school ortwo since we've already been punished. Only 23 games is a tough reduction.

 

[Dann]

is is way to much for a kid that never saw the court. they are mad baout us still winning and ad. they tried and tried again with boat and now this. last year Ark fball got a wavier being in the same position we are going to be in next year. They got it based off improvement, which is what we would have on the resume. So to try again they changed the rules to hurt uconn. now how can they put these in place for next year if the scores of the last 2 years are grandfathered into the old set of rules? doesn't makes sense to me. also these self imposed ideas are brutal. i'm not worried about JC traveling, that can be worked around considering the next 2 years in new england recruit wise. but 23 games? come on now, lets leave the fuuucking ncaa for 1 year and play in the d league. this is outa control. reggie bush, corey magheto, cam newton, shapiro, tressel and 100 other poeple are all laughing at this. just insane.

 

[UChusky916]

Agreed we were punished under the existing rules, you can't change them just because you want to punish a school ortwo since we've already been punished. Only 23 games is a tough reduction.

Also, doesn't it make NO sense that while we're trying to IMPROVE APR, we also have 2 less scholarships available?

We currently have 2 less people with the ability to improve our APR, correct? Or does this apply to non-scholarship players as well?

 

[UConnSportsGuy]

Can we just serve our NCAA tournament ban this year?

 

[Dann]

#freeUConnFtheNCAA

 

[UConnSportsGuy]

.....while this is horrible news, there is one bright spot in that release. It confirms that Calhoun is not planning on retiring after this season.

Or could you imagine if we impose the penalty of having Calhoun not be able to contact recruits....only to find out that he is retired anyway?! Then the NCAA would hire a team of 5 investigators to permanently sit on the UConn campus to find violations and punish us!

 

[superjohn]

These self-imposed penalties are ridiculous. If the NCAA isn't going to do the fair thing and grant us a waiver, why don't we just sue the hell out of them?

 

[caw]

How is this having it out for UConn? The rules exist and UConn didn't meet them. I don't necessarily agree with the ideas behind the rules, but the rules were in place and the schools all knew about them.

Not true, from my understanding.

The rules were not in place. This is a new rule that is being implemented. It uses data previously used against UConn, the reason UConn is now 2 scholarships down.

If they wanted to implement this new rule they should have started it with new data or you are punishing schools twice (once under the old rule and once under the new). Basically, they should either change the speed data is processed and the dates used or they should make this for the 2013-2014 season.

The lag time on the data is pretty horrid as is, I don't know who processes it for the NCAA but it's pathetically slow.

To be fair, it may not be "having it out for UConn", but it is having it out for teams in UConn's situation.

Teams that were in UConn's shoes a year before or two years before are only penalized under the old rules (loss of scholarship, ie Cuse). Teams that are in UConn's shoes a year after UConn are only penalized under the new rules. UConn falls in the overlap, which could be viewed as "having it out for UConn" if you believe the NCAA committee enacted the new rule at this time just to further punish UConn, or believe they are not going to change their mind on the "double jeopardy" simply because it is UConn.

 

[UCweCONN]

Jeez, with only 24 games we may not have enough wins to make the tourney anyway. If UCONN agreed to all of these self-sanctions it really is time for JC to retire this season and have a fresh start. Given the impact of these self-imposed sanctions we just can't have the additional uncertainty of JC's status to deal with. Just hire Brad Stevens or Shaka Smart and move on.

Agreed we were punished under the existing rules, you can't change them just because you want to punish a school ortwo since we've already been punished. Only 23 games is a tough reduction.

 

[Fishy]

I have set my alarm clock for 2017.

By then, I hope we are out of the Big East, Ollie is in his second year of coaching with a 72-1 career record (we lost his first game), the practice facility is open and LeBron James II is telling every recruiting site that he hopes UConn offers. And the football team has recruited a quarterback who can throw.

Do not forget to come get me if I oversleep.

 

[Prezidint]

Unfortunately, I don't think that saying, "these new kids, they had nothing to do with it," has any weight, nor should it. The program is getting punished. It's like a school losing its accreditation. Sure, the current students had nothing to do with it, but they get slammed. Kids who get caught up in it get screwed, no doubt. Oh well. That's life. It's a piece of pie that you've got to eat sometimes.

I don't buy the argument that "kids today are being punished for what kids did X years ago" could ever be a valid defense, because, if it was, there would never be any incentive to get better. You'd just keep up, and then, when it came time to pay the piper, you'd say, "whoa nellie. That wasn't THESE kids. That was those other kids, and they're gone."

So there are innocents here. Oh well. If you're unhappy about innocents, I'd suggest sending a letter to Jim Calhoun telling him he really screwed over those innocents by not controlling his idiot assistant coaches, and by pursuing a known problem child like Nate Miles. Do that.

Or piss and moan on an Internet chat board about "unfair" and "we're being targeted."

One or the other.