Jones didn't qualify and won't enroll this semester. Perhaps he was the rumored other player who wasn't going to qualify? A hit to QB depth, although marginal. Hopefully all the other kids make it in.
Jones didn't qualify and won't enroll this semester. Perhaps he was the rumored other player who wasn't going to qualify? A hit to QB depth, although marginal. Hopefully all the other kids make it in.
Way to support our players and hope they maximize the talent. And how did you develop these low hopes? Extensive scouting and thorough knowledge of the game, I'm sure
hope for you.
Let's make a haiku
On how fast he's losing points
will lesson be learned?
Jones was never here
He would have been really good
At very least depth
...a sublime athlete, a perfect body type. [no homo.]
We spent so much time
on the "R" (or lack thereof);
Lo, we spelled in vain.
Now that's just fucking annoying.
not that there really is a positive side, but it was a clearinghouse issue and not our admissions process.
I wonder how many times this happened in the past and we never knew anything about it. I would give anything to go back to the days when I had no idea what anyone's name was until they were on the field producing. Having said that, I don't like hearing this story this many times (talking about players not getting in, not about this story being posted twice).
I was thinking the same thing. Up until the last year or two, when my reading of this site became obsessive, I never followed recruiting or players not getting in. After seeing the news on Jones, all I could think was, "Has this become a problem or am I just now more aware of the status quo?"
Originally a 2002 recruit. Went to prep school and joined the team in 2003. [Left before the 2004 season.]
Other examples have already been mentioned. This happens from time to time, but three cases in one year is unusual -- the result of two factors that I can think of:
Right now I'm not sure exactly when the formula for eligibility changed, but as far as I know it was within the past decade. I'm thinking that in the past Michigan's minimum admission standards (with regard to grades and test scores) were closer in line with the NCAA eligibility requirements and that is less true now. But more research is needed. I'm thinking of doing a post on this if I find something illuminating.
I've been following recruiting since '99 (not to go all Pat Caputo on you). I've never seen anything like this happen before.
Huh? This has happened plenty of times. Marques Slocum ring a bell? Bernard Robinson Jr.?
I remember specific times here and there, but not this many players in a 2 year span. That's my whole point, has it always been like this, but with media coverage in the modern era we're just actually hearing about it now? I was thinking along the lines of the 80's and 90's.
These numbers are out there somewhere, perhaps all someone needs to do is FOIA the NCAA and UM admissions. It would be interesting for someone to run them through SPSS. I would bet there is no significant difference between the RR era and any other era. The nature of this particular coaching era thus far just seems to make issues like this more salient.
Good luck getting any school to give you detailed information about a select group's GPA. A FOIA wouldn't cover personal confidential information for student athletes.
And as for your second point, I would also bet that you're wrong. Don't get me wrong, I think Rodriguez is a great coach, but he's already lost more potential players due to qualification issues than I think Carr did his entire tenure.
Come on - are you serious? Why would anything need to be personalized? All we need is numbers and years - # who made it through NCAA clearing house, # who made it through UM admissions. We don't need GPA's or anything of that sort.
It's comparing two perfectly dichotomous variables - NCAA: yes/no; UM: yes/no, with a stratified variable in terms of coaching eras, based on grouping years. Then we can compare coaching eras with the number that made it and the number that didnt. It can be perfectly anonymous.
You're assuming somebody keeps these statistics. I don't think anybody does. Even if you did FOIA all of the athlete admissions documents that somehow didn't violate privacy laws, everything that you'd want would be blacked out.
If you're also talking overall numbers, a ridiculous number of people are cleared by the NCAA clearinghouse every year and choose to go to Michigan rather than take a low NCAA division scholarship. There are also many people cleared by the clearinghouse that get rejected by Michigan and end up doing something like Crew at Boston College. They would also count for the overall statistics for Michigan. This means the overall numbers are almost useless at any major school like Michigan.
Now, if you knew the names of people who submitted a full application (Dorsey did not) who made it all the way through the process (because if they decide not to commit...) you might get somewhere. But you can't take this small subset of data, because that violates an athlete's privacy.
1. I really don't think it would be to difficult to isolate those who were offered a scholarship from Michigan to play football from those who were not. You request the number from the NCAA each year of those who were offered a scholarship for Michigan football and, of that set, the number that the NCAA didn't clear for academic reasons. Nothing too difficult there.
2. I think you are putting the bar for privacy too high. From what I know from academic research, as long as you can ensure anonymity, no harm, and justice, you are good. Again, it would not be difficult to ensure anonymity in terms of the number of students the admissions department accepted who were also offered a football scholarship and the number they did not accept who were also offered a football scholarship. Again, nothing too difficult there.
3. The nature of the comparison makes this much simpler still than you seem to appreciate - we are comparing UM to UM over time, not UM to other schools.
4. There is no doubt people keep these statistics. Its just a matter of matching data points.
But this is useless, as I have no inclination to conduct such a study.
I think you are putting the bar for privacy too high. From what I know from academic research, as long as you can ensure anonymity, no harm, and justice, you are good.
Man, I wish you served on the University's Institional Review Board. Wouldn't my life be easier!
Not to be too argumentative, but this would take more legwork than you might think. For one thing, the central admissions & student records system doesn't work that well for athletics, so the athletic department have their own shadow system for keeping track of what they do. There's a lot of work that goes on reconciling the two systems for things we have to have (like NCAA graduation rates, etc). The whole question is thornier than you might expect.
It would astound people, how many things that we "surely must keep records on" are done in arcane ways. And a lot of U-M systems are designed around day-to-day adminstrative needs, with less thought to how the U might pursue good research questions retrospectively. Which is really my point in replying--people don't realize how difficult it can be for the U to keep track of what seems like basic things, or do to analysis on them later.
I am very familiar with the IRB. And my impression is that these data would be accessible. Like I said, while they might not be readily available, some matching would do the trick. I am not arguing that a administrative assistant has a pile of papers with these data just sitting pretty waiting for someone to pick them up. It would take some work to match data points. As is the case for any research.
I would co-sign Feat of Clay's post. It's incredibly difficult to get any information out of admissions. Don't believe me? Try to get a look at your own application and essays.
Remember, the university used the craigslist style version of Wolverine Access until a couple years ago out of sheer laziness. I mean... think about using that on a day to day basis to manage all of the university's records.
And to let you know, the university has the analysis complete. Brian's post on the subject is pretty spot on. It actually puts a rosier spin than what I've seen happen. If you compare the last era to the current one, each year Carr brought in an average of X players per year who were academically marginal. RR is trying to bring in a large multiple of X players each year who could be academically marginal. The numbers are far off enough to see a large difference.
Again, like Brian said, this is not all Rich Rod's fault, it's more of a culture clash/This is what we did at WVU thing. The problem is, nobody in the athletic dept really explained all the potential minefields to him, and now we're in this mess.
It sounds like we're on the same page then--and it wasn't directed just at you; there are a lot of people who say "surely we can just analyze this..." when in fact it's a real bear to analyze some questions. Which is why I am gainfully employed.
And as for the IRB--they might okay it, but that doesn't mean I don't still have to full out a 32+-page application to hear them say that. LOL
I'm talking about players just flat out not making it to campus. also, i'm not saying it hasn't happened here and there, but i can say that having this many players not make it to campus from a single class is out of the ordinary. that is all.
I'm sorry, but I don't think you've been paying as close attention as you claim if you believe that. Almost every year we've lost at least one kid before August.
This has happened in the past, but more on the scale of 1 every couple of years or so. They've increased dramatically over the last 5-6 years.
This is the second recruiting class I've really followed, but it seems like a huge number of non-qualifiers. Based on past years is this over the top or just the way things work out?
All this talk about next year sounds good, but we are wasting scholarship opportunities for players who could have come in this year. While we may not lose the scholarship, we lose another player who might have an immediate impact, like Dorsey, or someone who could have started the maturation process this year.
If he does well enough at Fork Union and achieves a qualifying SAT score, he'll enroll in January.
I'll believe it when I see it. Most of these kids never make it back to Michigan, especially now that it seems admissions is taking a hard-line stance against these so-so academic qualifiers. Even with good grades and a good test score, I'd be surprised to see Jones end up in Ann Arbor.
admissions is acting any differently than ever. I think we're probably focusing on it a little bit more strongly, and I also think there is a good chance that poor kids from florida, which were rare recruits for us before, are probably a little more likely to toe the line.
I agree about the admissions thing. Dorsey is the only example I can think of of a kid getting a scholarship, clearing the NCAA, then admissions turning him away. I don't think one instance counts as a change in policy/philosophy.
Adrian Witty disagrees.
But what are some of these kids thinking. I mean, seriously, they are great football players, with a great gift and the world ready to open up for them. They can get an education almost anywhere they want for free, and have a great time doing it. Yet they can't get it together for a few hours a day (also known as class) and meet the minimum requirements. Also, personally, I think the minimum requirements are a joke. I'm not asking for straight A students, but reading at a 9th grade level and knowing addition/subtraction/multiplication/division really shouldn't be too much to ask. When I see a kid doesn't qualify, the first thing I think is that its his own damn fault. And spare me the "he spends so much time on football" argument, b/c I'm not about to buy into that one.
That's because people were much more upset about Dorsey not qualifying than Jones.
That's true, but Dorsey had an NCAA-qualifying application. He just didn't have a University of Michigan-qualifying application.
Very true. It was frustrating because it was self-imposed within the school. Given that Jones didn't pass the NCAA qualifying standards, I'm sure we would have seen the same thing with his application if he had gotten to the the threashold.
I agree. This should be the case beyond just sports though. Many people get pushed through school without actually ever learning anything. I wonder sometimes if our schools are better at pumping out CEO's or customer service reps at McDonald's given their general aptitude after high school.
You almost have to be trying not to learn to get that type of score.
I know a lot of it has to do with the school systems and such, but there aren't many kids who are incapable of getting the scores/grades necessary to get into college.
Have you ever seen The Wire?
Even the kids in situations portrayed in The Wire could get good enough grades/test scores to qualify if they put their mind to it. They're highly disadvantaged, and the school system is to blame as well, but it's not like they're not mentally capable of it.
I think you're a little naive here.
Normally I agree with you, but he has the GPA. I understand it could have been better, but he has qualifying grades. His SAT score was low and if you want to rip him on that, ok. The talk of not working hard enough might be a moot point. He may be a poor test taker, he may have screwed around as a 9th grader and not be able to recover, he may not have the money to take the test prep classes, or he may just have thought his talents will let him slide. Should a kid get higher than a 2.5 so his SAT score didn't have to be so high? You betcha, but for some it is a greater struggle than others.
But I just feel like hes probably known he wanted to play college football for a long time. If this is the case, he should have known what it takes to be academically eligible to play, and should have made it happen. I am positive he can get access to at least a few free SAT practice tests, and I'm sure there are many people willing to help him improve his score.
Like I said, I don't know the specifics of the situation, but to me this screams football player getting passing grades b/c of who he is, and not actually learning, or caring to learn a thing. I hope I'm wrong, but this is my knee jerk reaction to cases like this.
He needed an 810. You do not need prep classes to get an 810. You just need to take school somewhat seriously, which is what the vast majority of athletes who managed to qualify did.
You didn't need prep courses to get an 810 all you had to do was take classes somewhat seriously. Some people have had a pitiful public education their whole lives or gone undiagnosed with learning disorders like dyslexia and need more. Let's reserve judgment about his work ethic.
These kids aren't thinking. For starters they are young kids....lots of young kids don't see the big picture. Of more importance is that they don't appreciate the value of a degree from a great institution be it Michigan or somewhere else.
In my case, my parents stressed the need for a college education and they were pretty pissed when my grades in HS slipped. I think my experience would probably be a common denominator around Michigan and other universities. I would guess the substantial majority of the kids that end up playing college football don't come from the type of environment where education is stressed from early childhood on. It is not until very late in the game that minimal academic achievement becomes important, and for many kids with athletic ability, that is too late.
I think saying that, "the substantial majority of the kids that end up playing college football don't come from the type of environemtn where education is stressed..." is a bit of an unfair generalization. There are a lot of people who make it through no problem, we just highlight the exceptions.
I'm not saying that there aren't plenty of people who fall under your characterization. I just don't think it's to the degree you insinuate.
This is a generalized observation - not a specific comment about Cornelius. I wish Cornelius the best.
Having spent the week immersed in baseball at the 18U USA Baseball Tournament, sometimes I wonder if baseball has a better model. There are GCL / Single A, etc. teams to develop post high school players who are excellent athletes, but either are uninterested in continued education at this time, or otherwise not really college ready. Then there are college programs for athletes who may be very good at this level and may not have a MLB career in front of them, or someone who is projected to be MLB caliber, but also is "college ready" and would like to continue their education while developing into that projected player.
I read about kids not qualifying at other schools too, so while I would like to see these guys succeed, I also am more meh if a few don't make the cut. Not everybody in this world is ready for college education at 18 or 19. The way the feeder paths run to the NFL, forcing fits where maybe they shouldn't be is commonplace ...
I think you need to take a deep breath. Do you know Jones can't read at a 9th grade level? Do you know that he cant do arithmetic? I'm not blaming anyone else for his situation - he had to pass the test, and he didn't. But just understand that every person is different - people have socio-economic differences that can impact their test results, learning disabilities that can impact their test results, and I'd REALLY hesitate to flame someone whose situation I was completely ignorant of.
You are way out of line here. You don't know anything about this kid.
This dude's post shocks me in two ways:
1. That he seemingly knows about Jones' personal situation enough to declare him an idiot.
2. Even if that's true, the lack of compassion and ANGAR at Jones for not meeting the standars. Jones himself is paying the price for that much, much, much more than these assholes.
I agree. If the guy knew anything at all about what Conelius Jones has gone through in his life I would imagine he'd be saying something completely different. I get that it's the internet and that everyone is supposedly entitled to express their opinion, but this attitude is really narrowminded and ignorant.
You bleeding hearts! He's entitled to his opinion just like Lee J. Cobb in 12 Angry Men.
I'm not a bleeding heart at all. I'm just familiar with this situation.
but at the trend establishing of kids' life long dreams being shattered b/c they can't make the grade. I'm simply stating that they have no one to blame but themselves.
Perhaps instead of just giving smug replies about what an asshole I am for having this opinion and that I know nothing of the situation, you could bring to light some information that might change my mind. I'm sure you can, because everyone always has an excuse.
Further, I think the growing trend on this board is to say "oh no, he didn't qualify, what tragedy. As if there is some unknown reason or force that determined they wouldn't qualify. I think a little accountability is important. Remember, the UM program and coaches wasted time and resources on this kid thinking he would hold up his end. So he essentially screwed us. For some reason I don't feel bad for him.
I'm simply stating that they have no one to blame but themselves.
Nobody has denied this.
Perhaps instead of just giving smug replies about what an asshole I am for having this opinion and that I know nothing of the situation, you could bring to light some information that might change my mind. I'm sure you can, because everyone always has an excuse.
See, you just don't get it. I don't know one single bit of information about Jones - WHICH IS PRECISELY WHY I DIDN'T OPINE ON A MESSAGE BOARD ABOUT HIS STATUS. You were ignorant, and chose to suggest that he can't read at a 9th grade level. I was ignorant, and kept my mouth shut, because I knew that I don't know enough to say anything. See how that works?
Further, I think the growing trend on this board is to say "oh no, he didn't qualify, what tragedy. As if there is some unknown reason or force that determined they wouldn't qualify. I think a little accountability is important.
It IS sad that a kid may have ruined his largest opportunity. Having compassion isn't the same as excusing him. And who the fuck are YOU to hold him accountable? I'm sure that Conelius has learned his lesson now that "judgemental internet guy" has decided to hold him accountable. He doesn't need you to excoriate him on a message board - regardless of whether you choose to fling your ill-informed nonsense around, he has to deal with the consequences of his test score. In other words - this is happening to HIM. Not you.
Remember, the UM program and coaches wasted time and resources on this kid thinking he would hold up his end. So he essentially screwed us. For some reason I don't feel bad for him.
What an arrogant, self-serving, shitty thing to say. He didn't fucking screw you. He screwed HIMSELF. HE'S the one who lost his scholarship opportunity. HE'S the one who lost a crack at higher education. HE'S the one that lost the opportunity to play at a high-visibility program. What the fuck did you lose? The ability to cheer for him? He's the one who lost all this shit and somehow we the fans are the ones who warrant sympathy? This is his fucking life - it's just your entertainment for a few weeks a year. Never forget that.
In the last part of your response. He is the one who will pay, and I'm sorry I included that sentence in my post. It was inappropriate.
Also, the second quote wasn't directed at you.
"Perhaps instead of just giving smug replies about what an asshole I am for having this opinion and that I know nothing of the situation, you could bring to light some information that might change my mind. I'm sure you can, because everyone always has an excuse."
You can read my other posts and threads on the topic yourself. I'm not going through the effort of re-posting stuff that I've already posted because you didn't take the time to do it youself. Seriously, if you had the slightest idea what this kid has been through in his life you would (likely) realize how much of an ignorant jerk you sound like. Also, don't forget, these kids read this blog.
You are criticizing me for making speculative comments about someone I don't know (which by the way I'm not really doing, my original comment was a broader statement about recruits not qualifying), yet in this criticism you speculate on what my feelings would be if I knew more about the situation. I believe you should take your own advice and not pretend to know how I would feel/act.
Also, I read the whole thread and you really don't give much information other than saying something about how the school is funded, he comes from a rough situation and he works really hard. You also speculate (without actually knowing) that his poor score was due to nerves/pressure and/or just having an off test day).
Finally, with respect to kids reading this blog, its unfortunate that everything they do is scrutinized, but if he wants to play D1 football, he should either get used to it or not read blogs/critical news articles. I mean hell, there was a post today about Tate looking at someone funny and claiming he was a Douchenozzle b/c of it. It is the nature of what they are trying to do. I don't necessarily think its right, but its unavoidable. Athletes and public figures for that matter are held to a higher standard, everyone knows that.
He had some good looks by some pretty superb schools: Duke, Stanford, Wake Forest, etc. and Rivals had him listed at a 3.5 GPA. Interesting to say the least.
That had not occured to us, dude.
Duke, Stanford......3.5 GPA......these are not the stats of our newly ineligible QB are they?
it is incorrect. He had a 2.5 GPA
Anybody still think we don't need a QB in the 2011 class?
Never thought we didn't.
Nice Pivot there Magnus. If I remember correctly YOU were the one pissed that RR offered a QB.
think you remember correctly
Luckily for me, you remember incorrectly.
Check out the "TomVH: Kevin Sousa Has an Offer" thread. Or conjure up the numerous threads over the past two years where I reiterated that Rodriguez wants 5-6 scholarship quarterbacks at all times.
I am sure it was one of the 20K+ guys..just thought it was you.
This was the post by Magnus that spells out why we need a QB in this class:
We need a QB in this class, and here's why:
We only have 3 bona fide quarterbacks on the roster right now. Conelius Jones is a "maybe" - he might be better off at another position. And I know Denard looked great in the spring, but what if he reverts to his old ways of throwing interceptions like crazy and completing 45% of his passes?
Hypothetically, let's say one of the QBs transfers. That leaves us with 2-3 scholarship QBs. Then one of them goes down with a torn ACL. That leaves us with 1-2 QBs. What if one breaks a finger or gets the wind knocked out of him?
Anyway, Rodriguez has said repeatedly that he'd like to have 5-6 scholarship quarterbacks on the roster at all times. Sousa (or any QB in this class) would give us a max of 5. It would also give some flexibility to move Robinson/Jones to other positions if necessary.
If all things stay the same, we won't necessarily need a QB in 2012. But we need one in 2011.
His left arm was super tiny anyway.
So glad I made it this far in the thread...hadn't seen that picture. +1
This is more than just a few coincidental incidents. Obviously the coaching staff has been looking at some young men that just aren't the Leaders and Best. Hard not to sound judgemental and elitist, but there have certainly been times that Carr turned down some very gifted athletes because they weren't a good fit for the expectations of an ambassador for the University of Michigan, and I kinda liked that. It's tempting to jump to the conclusion that Rodriguez seems more interested in good fits for his style of play than the school.
It just seems that he doesn't run as tight a ship as we have had in the past, and it's beginning to leave a bad taste.
If he's not turning away other players I don't care. Michigan isn't bending any rules. Whatever kids get offers still have to qualify. Nobody who has failed to qualify this year took up a schollie that someone else needed or caused a talented kid to go somewhere else.
Nobody who has failed to qualify this year took up a schollie that someone else needed or caused a talented kid to go somewhere else.
I refer you to the stories of Rashad Knight, Sean Parker, and Tony Grimes. All three were defensive backs who might have been pulled in if not for the pursuit of Dorsey. Perhaps we could have made a push for Munchie Legaux, a QB recruit, instead of Jones.
All three of those kids committed elsewhere before Dorsey committed. Michigan was still gunning hard for Parker. I don't know about the other two. Dorsey was the last guy to commit. Without Dorsey, we would have had nobody (like now).
If Legaux didn't come to Michigan because of the depth chart, I would say that Forcier, Gardner, and Robinson had a lot more to do with that than Jones.
Yeah . . . three casualties in one class is pushing it. And all three of them were positions of need (quarterback, linebacker, cornerback), although with our scholarship player shortages, pretty much every position was a position of need...
In other words, because we really need you it suddenly doesn't matter. I thought that's usually how kids end up in scarlet and gray, or any team being coached by someone named Saban.
I'll also reserve the right to be dead wrong on this, and I hope I am. But we just need to look as clean as we possibly can from here on out, with an equal focus on integrity as well as talent. And I'm not sure I'm seeing it.
I don't understand how having a few more white-knuckle-qualifiers equates to running a less clean program or that the coaching staff isn't focusing on integrity. What rules have been broken with any of these guys?
The list of guys who were marginal in previous recruiting classes is as long as my arm. According to his Rivals profile, LaMarr Woodley had an ACT of 16 with a GPA of 2.8 ; that ain't so hot. This is nothing new.
I personally don't think this is the end of the world especially given the headwinds we have in recruiting right now. If we had the pick of the litter then, OK, focus on guys that you know will make it and wont get rejected. But that simply isn't the case right now. This attitude that we're to good for some of these guys will only leave us further hamstrung in competition with Ohio State, Florida, Alabama, and the rest of the lot.
It sucks that guys we want aren't making it but I don't see how this equates to a lack of integirty.
Integrity is more than simply following the rules. It is firmly upholding a moral code and not attempting to subvert it.
The University of Michigan subscribes to the ideal that its athletes should be student athletes, namely people who is able to succeed academically and perform athletically. If we are offering a bunch of kids who cannot qualify or pass through admissions, then it follows that we're short-changing the academic part of the equation.
I understand, but what code has been subverted in this case or in any other? Jones didn't make the NCAA threshold; he got denied. Dorsey made the NCAA threshold, but not Michigan's; he got denied. Witty, same thing.
What evidence is there that the current coaching staff isn't expecting it's players to be students as well? In fact, there are many indications to the contrary: the high team GPA, disciplining players for missing class, the suspencion of Cissoko, and so on.
The leap you and 60 seem to be willing to take from white-knuckle qualifiers to "short-changing the academic part of the equation" is enormous and unsubstantiated. Did Carr show a lack of commitment to academic performance when he offered Woddley and the slew of other players that were skin-of-their-teeth qualifiers?
and his f*#$-lion agree with you.
Kelly Baraka too
This argument is the same argument that "Mike Hart was a 3* and he was awesome lols"
Count all the problems Carr had over his entire term. Then tally to the issues with Rodriguez's first 2.5 classes.
Carr recruited Baraka, Benton and a kid who liked to walk around campus with his dong hanging out for all to see. As soon as a coach comes in and asks for a little more work than they've been use to, suddenly Boren(A RR lover until practices started) and all 5th yr senior linemen decide they don't want to work that hard. That kind of tells me they were more "Lloyd Carr" men than "Michigan Men" to start with.
No one is saying this never happened under Carr, they're saying it's happening more under Rodriguez. I think that's been the trend so far and personally I don't have a problem with it.
you mean guys like Charles Woodson, who was a marginal qualifier, Shawn Crable another marginal qualifier maybe a Kelly B (sorry can't spell his name). Michigan has always accepted athletes who were marginal in the class room, albeit very few at a time and certainly not like on the scale of an Auburn or some other SEC schools. I just have to wonder about why is there a change now?
And how could you allude that RR interest in these kids is as you say good fits for his style of play than the school, when Cissoko was kicked off the team when he started to fail academically, and the Cummalitve Team GPA is at it's highest point in modern day Michigan history. I believe RR has ran a tight a ship as Carr ran if not better.
Back to the OP topic, Conelius Jones just needs to go to prep school get what he needs to get past the clearing house and enroll at Michigan if that is his choice. RR got in on this kid at a very young age and hopefully he comes to Michigan. AT any rate he will still have great choices in which ever college he chooses. Good luck
supposed to take the SAT for Jones? His GPA was fine and, as mentioned, he was being recruited by other highly regarded insitutions in terms of academic reputation. I would argue that RR was working hard to pick up a kid that would be:
an ambassador for the University of Michigan.
As far as the Carr comparison goes, Carr was exposed to "Michigan's way" for 13 years before he became head coach at Michigan. I think it's fair to say that the situations are not similar.
That's a really good point about Lloyd's assistant years. He had already been around the block many times and seen how things work at Michigan for years. It's all new to RR. He deserves a little bit of slack to get used to things.
Good point, but with the roster short of all 85 scholarships (I think that's still true) and being so thin at QB, DB, and other spots, it really feels like every loss is freaking huge. Like, really freaking huge.
So maybe he choked on the SAT - I can relate. I was absolutely terrified when I took the ACT, "Oh here your entire life rides on this test, no pressure, have a super day!"
This sucks all around though. This team has depth issues in many places and we just can't afford to lose kids for any reason, IMO.
...to name a few. Lloyd was not above taking a recruit who had grade/character issues if he thought they could help the team.
Some of our best players on the '06 team were in the Demar Dorsey academic category, and they got in. According to Sam Webb, UM passed on a pretty major recruit (who went to a BCS school) this past year who wanted to commit, but there were past issues that prevented that from happening.
Ooops double post
This makes you wonder why his other potential schools were Wake Forest, Stanford, and Duke. And he wouldn't even qualify at the bottom-of-the-barrel SEC school.
Makes Sousa a "must get" now. I wonder if that opens up 2 QBs in the '11 class? Maybe Cardale Jones if he still wants to come?
You also have to remember that Stanford also suffered something like 10+ decommitments this year, allegedly due to their Admissions department saying no.
I disagreed with this view before I saw that Dorsey had a 1.9 and 12 ACT. Assuming those numbers are true, RR should have NEVER recruited DD, particularly given the background issues. RR simply doesn't have the political capital to spend on such kids at this time. And, if that recruitment cost us parker, Grimes or Knight then it really seems foolhardy.
Those numbers are false.
DD did cost us Knight, IMO.
... has apparently come down from on high to toe the line in every possible way.
Long term, this is a good thing, IMHO.
Welp, time to burn Devin Gardner's redshirt.
I read that article earlier, he reported that he was 20 points short of his ACT, looks like the author changed it. Good reporting there.
Currently, the sports page of mlive.com that links to an annarbor.com story on this states that "his ACT score fell 20 points short of qualifying." I don't think one year of prep school is going to make up that difference.
It's great that he's headed to a prep school. We'll get "CoJones" on campus next year.
Yeah that was obviously a mistake on the writer's part, he changed it in the link provided by the gentleman above.
That would mean he scored like a -6 on his ACT...
And it seems like the numbers that recruits report vary randomly between the old scale and new scale.
Apparently, the ACT also has a new scale.
Why do they keep doing that?
When my kids find out about my ACT/SAT scores, they're gonna think I was a fricking moron.
Without ever telling my children what my ACT score was--because I can't remember anyway--I assume, when they're teenagers they are going to think I'm a moran anyways. That's just the way these things work.
Please tell me there are no more for this incoming class.
I've heard that Davion Rogers was questionable, too, but hopefully not. That's just a rumor I've heard. I haven't seen anything to substantiate it.
seen Ryan mentioned as well fwiw
Good luck to him. Hopefully he can get those grades up and once again become a Wolverine.
in this thread need to take a trip outside the suburbs once in a while re: the "anyone can easily qualify" arguments being thrown around. A lot of these kids are growing up very poor and have to worry about basic human needs every day - where the next meal will come from, where will I sleep tonight, etc. Not to mention underfunded school systems, broken family dynamics and a host of other issues you and I will likely never have to worry about. Go figure - it's a little tougher to succeed in an environment like this.
this reply was even more perfect.
Right on the money (except the part about the school system).
Care to expound?
Edit: n/m, I just read your comment below...
To the people who have decided to "neg" my prior post: realize that I actually DO know these things about this particular situation (i.e. with respect to Conelius Jones). I was not just making a general comment about society in general. The poster that I was responding to was, in fact, right on in his post, with the exception of the part about the school (which is actually a really good school that doesn't face any sort of funding problem). If anyone disagrees with what I have to say here, instead of "negging" my post, why don't you take a moment and tell us all about Jones' family and academic history.
Furthermore, many times big-time athletes are allowed to skirt the rules of their world (school mostly, sometimes even society) b/c of their status. Read Friday Night Lights and you will get a good idea of what I mean. When their entire life growing up is being spent above the laws of society, it is no shock to me when some of these kids fail academically. Why should they study now? They've never had to before and always afforded the spotlight.
Now, I have no earthly idea whether or not this was the case with Jones, but it is a phenomenon I have read about and also seen firsthand. This was more of a response to the, "I don't get how these kids can't qualify, it's so easy."
Well this sucks.
Some of you are WAY out of line here. All I hear from several posts is what you THINK or FEEL without any connection to reality. You have no idea what this kid's situation is or the quality of the school that he went to, yet you have no problem speculating that the problem here relates to laziness or a poor school. You couldn't be further from the truth on either account. I am literally shocked that this has happened because, from everything that I know from people here (not here on MGoBlog, but here where I live), he is an incredibly bright kid with an incredibly high work ethic who went to a school that is recognized as being a very good school. Kids don't just get pushed through this school because they are athletes. My guess (and it's just a guess) is that he bombed the SAT under pressure. Given his life history and family background situation he had to have known that he had A LOT riding on that test score. There is literally NOTHING about this kid that would lead me to believe that this type of score is an accurate reflection of the kid's intelligence.
Those of you who have made assumptions that, because of his low test score, he must have not taken school seriously or isn't bright really need to get a grasp on reality, and more importantly, owe the kid an apology. This is a kid that has an incredibly difficult life and had made significant strides to put his life back together after a rough start. This is the type of kid that we should all be rooting for and trying to help in any way that we can rather than making uninformed assumptions about. Don't make stupid assumptions without anything other than your opinion to back it up. You just end up looking ignorant. Reading garbage like this makes me really ashamed and embarrassed to be associated with this site.
That's good to hear, but couldn't he just have taken the test again? If he's as bright as he's made out to be (and he absolutely could be), I don't see why he couldn't retake the SAT and get a better score.
I looked up the next test online and it said that the next test won't be until October 9th. That may be the reason he can't just re-take the test.
Yeah, that's probably true.
Just curious... is it normal for kids to only take the SAT once, and at the last offered time? Most people at my high school took it end of junior/beginning of senior year so they had another chance if they botched it.
My high school worked the same way as yours. Normally people only took the very last one if they needed to take it a third time IME. It does seem strange that he took the very last one offered, but are we sure that this one is the only one he has taken?
No, we're not.
I know plenty of smart people, and there is a natural ability to take a test. Sure, classes can help, but if you're a good test taker it can carry you a long way.
My ACT score ended up being more than 200 converted points higher than my PSAT... so I didnt take the SAT (it was out of 1600 then). The penalty for guessing and a couple other things meant that I did better on one type of test than the other.
Scoring well on tests =/= knowledge/smarts/whatever... a major reason for the sliding scale in terms of GPA and Test Scores. Some people are better at classes than tests, vice versa, both or neither.
He might just not be a good test taker
Oh, absolutely. I consider myself to be a smart, not brilliant, person, and ended up with a great score on the ACT just because I have a knack for standardized tests. However, the 810 or whatever it is that is necessary to qualify should really only require a basic comprehension of vocabulary and multiplication/division story problems.
I'll stop now, because I know it's not a case of "He's dumb." or "He's a brilliant kid who just can't seem to fill in bubble correctly." I wish him the best, and hopefully he does end up at Michigan at some point if for no other reason than it sounds like he deserves a good education.
My ACT got me into U of M, and i did well in high school, not great... But who knows... hopefully this kid goes blue soon anyway
I know you're closer to the Conelius Jones situation than most/all of us. However, I do find it a tad bit absurd that if he's as highly intelligent and hardworking as you say, he wouldn't pass the test with a qualifying score.
Something just doesn't compute.
Maybe he's smart and hardworking, but didn't get any rest the night before. Maybe he's smart and hardworking, but his pencil broke and he didn't have a backup. Regardless, getting a non-qualifying score on the SAT is disappointing for all parties involved.
Oh, trust me. I agree that something doesn't compute. But I would be willing to bet a large sum of money that that "something" is not some sort of grade inflation or anything else untoward by the school, as some have suggested. It's a fair guess that this was the first standardized test of the type that he's taken, though, so unfamiliarity with the test coupled with stress definitely could account for a lot of it. There has been a lot of talk here about PSATs and what not, but you can bet your bottom dollar that Conelius Jones didn't take it. That much is abundantly clear from his academic record during the years that he would have taken the PSAT. What ever it is it's definitely disappointing, though, no doubt about that.
the most is that I thought, just by looking at the types of schools that were recruiting(and had made offers to) him, that he was one of those guys who was also a serious scholar as well as an athlete. His offer list is essentially a who's-who of high academic institutions: Michigan, Duke, Syracuse, Stanford and Wake Forest.
This one blind-sided me.
and am unable to post a new thread, will someone do me a favor and start one about the rivals.com michigan top 30 recruits. Thanks.
The MGoCommunity has spoken. Start your thread.
Let me preface by saying I don't know a thing about Jones' upbringing, or his specific case. BUT:
1. Many people in this country cannot blithely toss out the $100+ it costs to take an SAT test several times in the pursuit of a higher score.
2. Many kids cannot afford preperation courses.
3. Many schools do a vastly inferior job of preparing their students for these tests in general.
4. PSAT's and other standardized testing are not done everywhere, and by everyone. For many kids, the SAT/ACT is the first time they've seen a test of it's kind.
5. Many school districts are stretched so thin that kids with learning disabilites are rarely, if ever diagnosed, and can go through their entire high school career without receiving the extra time, or guidance they need.
I have no idea if all, some, or none of these apply to Jones, but I'd venture nobody else here does either. As such, maybe we shouldn't hold his feet too much to the fire.
And finally, even IF none of these apply to Jones, remember that HE is the one suffering the consequences of failing to qualify - not you. You don't get to be angry with him. Have some fucking compassion.
Reading this thread was making me pull my hair out, until now.
Is this a vote for more education funding in this country so kids like Jones get what they need? It would surely help in Michigan's recruiting. Haha.
To play upon Newman's essay title, what is the role of a university? Is it to win football games and entertain the public, or is it to educate? Should a university seek the brightest or the fastest? I sometimes feel many on this board have forgotten that the name of this institution includes the word "university." Should an athlete with admission test scores that fall below the UM parameters for acceptance be granted entry? What if this means an academically capable and motivated student is rejected as a result of an ill-prepared athlete's admission?Is that what the university should do? Do you give the poorly prepared athlete a break because he is fast? What about the non-athlete? Does he get a break as well? What message does this send to all those high school students who want to participate in collegiate sports? forget the books and hit the weights? Is television, entertainment, and money behind all of this? is this your idea of a university? is Harvard really the Michigan of the East? Does Harvard admissions (or any other Michigan peer institution) conduct itself as some would have UM act? Are our standards equal to theirs? What do you want Michigan to be: a university for the leaders and best or a source of entertainment?
Will you write in anything other than than rhetorical questions?
it would generate discussion and be less argumentative. I am sorry if it is bothersome. That was not my intention.
I was merely trying to be clever. I actually agree with your point, but I don't think this thread has that many people saying Jones should have been admitted. In other words - I agree with your point, but don't think THIS thread contains much of what you're talking about.
I guess I responded to the Dorsey, admissions office reference. I have two perspectives on admission of marginal students for athletic purposes: 1. I fear it sends a self-defeating message to high school athletes ( I taught in a high school for 35 years) and 2. My son was a varsity letter winner at Michigan in cross country. Most of the athletes on his teams were fine student- athletes who often excelled in the classroom. I would much rather see UM recruit athletes who will graduate and make a substantive contribution to our society; I do not consider professional sports as substantive. It is nothing more than another form of light entertainment. Pouring in money to qualify or keep a marginal athlete in school is not the way to go. The reality is that it is often being done so the teams will win, not for the intellectual advancement of the athlete. A number of these borderline cases were often (not always) pampered prima donnas pandered to by self-serving trainers/counselors/guardians who had little or no concern about education and the intellectual and moral advancement of our society. The recent goldmine of conference TV networks and subsequent bandwagon-like league expansion does nothing to advance academic excellence. It is just another way to raise money to pay for greater salaries for coaches. All of this self-serving does little to elevate the financial and academic development of a university. If it did, Harvard, MIT, and Cal Tech would be in the top 10 every year.
I agree with your point. I think you need to remember that there are a number of people on this board whose only association with the University IS the Football team. As such, I think it might be easier for those people to see it as an athletic franchise - not a school. This leads to silly things like asking "Why is Mary Sue Coleman not allowing Demar Dorsey?", as if the President of the University is ruling on the individual cases of football players. The simple fact is that the football team is a small piece of the institution as whole - and the needs of the U will. and should, supersede those of the football team.
I will be the person Chitown is referring to: I don't attend U of M (though I do attend a pretty good school, and I can tell you for sure no one is worrying about our football players playing in the NFL). I agree with most of your points. However, the one I take issue with is this part: "I would much rather see UM recruit athletes who will graduate and make a substantive contribution to our society; I do not consider professional sports as substantive. It is nothing more than another form of light entertainment."
If football is their best opportunity to make loads of money, and that's their goal, are we to deny them because they do not, instead, want to do what we've decided is 'substantive'? I would argue that tons of graduates of U of M go on to do absolutely nothing substantive. Athletes are not the only ones who get special treatment in terms of acceptance, just as at every school, and just as at every school, there are plenty of people who will go on and do very little, change very little. This isn't because they're 'pampered prima donnas'; they just don't have the drive or determination or work ethic or moxie or mojo or whatever you want to call it to do something. Or, they lose all their capital in an unlucky situation, or a million other things happen. I guess what I'm trying to say is: who are we to say what is substantive, and if we are to arrive at what is substantive, then what? Is Michigan only to recruit athletes in general who will make substantive contributions to society when they finish, rather than play in the NFL? Is Michigan prepared to extend this standard to every student who enters the school, athlete or not? Will Michigan follow them after graduation to make sure they are contributing to society in a 'substantive' way?
Again, I'd like to reiterate that I thought your post was very well thought-out, and a 'substantive' contribution to the board. Do not let the fact that I took issue with one point as an indication of how I felt about it in general. A lot of it was quite well-said.
are scrutinized, judged, poked prodded, all in the public eye. Can you imagine your SATor ACT score posted across the universe for everybody to see after you failed to make a qualifying score. man that must be awful. Look at it this way having an unfavorable or less than satisfactory employee appraisal in the local paper, damn time to reassess what hell it is I like about recruiting.
I posted this in the comment thread after Brian's post today, but I thought I'd re-post it in here since the body of this discussion is located here...
"Meanwhile, the other blame meme floating around is that Rodriguez is bringing in a lot more kids at academic risk. That may or may not be true but unless Jones's transcripts and offers were just totally fictional this doesn't seem like an example. It's one thing to take a guy who has a lot of work to do, and another to take a guy well above the minimums only to watch him collapse."
They weren't. David Cutcliffe had very high praise for Jones in several interviews that I saw last year and offered him in person. Knowing what I do about Jones' high school (which is a very good school), I highly (and I mean HIGHLY) doubt that there was grade inflation. That would be a really big deal here and I haven't heard anything about it with any athletes and that school regularly puts out division one athletes in multiple sports.
One thing that is very important in discussing the GPA issue is that there is a key difference between the quote as originally reported on Scout and the quote that Brian used fromm AnnArbor.com.
""Academically (GPA-wise) he wound up fine ... his core is 2.53-2.55."" (emphasis added)
"According to Brown, Jones went through a rough stretch with personal issues over the winter. Although he graduated with the rest of his class and maintained a 2.5 grade-point average, the 6-foot-2, 190-pound Jones struggled with the SAT, which kept him from qualifying."
That distinction is hugely important in this case. It doesn't mean that he had a 2.53-2.55 overall GPA, but rather a 2.53-2.55 GPA in core classes. It is core class GPA, not overall GPA, that the clearinghouse uses to evaluate qualification. The higher the core GPA, the lower the SAT/ACT that you need to qualify. The problem with core GPA in this case is that it is highly weighted toward grades nine through eleven, which is when Jones had some pretty severe personal and academic problems, including being out of school for a long period of time. That obviously would not help his core GPA. It is entirely possible that he did, in fact, have an overall GPA of 3.7ish as of last fall as was reported last year, but a much lower core GPA and overall GPA by the time the end of the senior year came around due to the personal problems that Brown touched on in the article.
its too bad for the kids who didint make it this year, an guaranteed (if they stay out of trouble) education is always a good thing, and you never know what will happen in prep school, or louisville for that matter. but in terms of good for the football team, i would like to see a roughly equal amount of sholarships each year so when a large senoir class leaves we don't have 35-40% of the team as freshman. if neither of the prep school kids make it here, plus dorsey, we will be able to add 3 schollies for next years small class