Other programs had kids transfer and leave to pursue NBA dreams, yes. Other programs also found ways around the APR rules and standards, including illegal ways like UNC. And that is what UConn should have done. Not cheated as UNC clearly did, but found a legitimate way around the problem. We did not do that, in part because Calhoun figured that nobody would get upset at him over the penalties, and he was right though reportedly he was very ticked off that the school imposed the penalty that was included in his contract, and he didn't foresee that the NCAA would suddenly decide to get tough on APR violators. He was willing to accept a penalty. He simply guessed wrong on what it would be. And for all the bashing Emmert takes, it was the Presidents who approved the change that bagged UConn. There is a fundamental problem with academics among college athletes in the NCAA. An APR score isnt going to resolve that. NCAA's APR is not a measure of 'academic progress' if schools are finding ways around penalties. Don't disagree with this. Schools cheated their way around sanctions.As far as we know to date, 1 school cheated. That does not excuse UConn for its failure, however. UConn simply accepted the fact that there was a fundamental problem and they weren't going to cheat their way around the APR issues. As has been demonstrated by something like 315 other schools, you don't have to cheat to work the system. You merely have to pay attention. We should have paid attention. We saw the problem looming but ignored it.
Would you rather have UConn cheated their way around the APR penalties? The university was working towards changing the academic culture. The issue is that the APR penalties were applied retroactively. Again, paying attention to a looming problem and making changes to avoid said problem doesn't equate to cheating to address it. Unless you
You're right... no one would have paid attention if the APR crackdown only hit Toledo and Northern South Dakota... that's why is obvious that Emmert targeted UConn to set an example by applying these retroactive penalties. It's bull$hit.I agree with this too. But, and its a huge but, if we had paid attention back in 2007-8 or so when this first became an issue, there would have been nothing to target. If we had gotten our program back into compliance it wouldn't have mattered what the NCAA did. But our scores were 909, 844, 826, and averaged 893 against a minimum of 925. We had 2 consecutive years below 900, another NCAA benchmark,and a year where we barely stayed above the limit and Calhoun basically told the NCAA to stuff it. And here's the really stupid part, UConn knew how to do it. In the past we have had the odd bad year, but always followed it up with better than average years. 885 in 20044-5 was followed up with 2 better than average years in 2005-06 and 06-07. If we had followed that model in 2008 when the scores dropped precipitously or even 2009, we had a fighting chance of building sympathy. We ignored the problem and said its easier to take the NCAA's wimpy penalties. Unfortunately they had the power to change the rules and they did.