NCAA increases APR cutoff. UM now under?

:|

theres some sort of grandfathering in. We were above the threshold, I cant imagine they'd knock us for being 2 pts below a newly-raised threshold. Then again, the NCAA is not known for being "reasonable."

Now or at somepoint in the future?

Begin recalculation of what our APR would be if Tate hadn't flunked out....

The NCAA will not impose the cutoff limit immediately. It will be phased in over a period of time as to allow the member institutions to meet the limit. It was discussed on the SVP show this afternoon.

The NCAA typically doesn't change a rule related to academics and immediately commence retroactive enforcement. Michigan traditionally has been fine in APR and should improve now that RR has departed. Rodriguez took more than his fair share of recruiting risks in terms of bringing in players who were destined to struggle academically and either fail out or leave, and that's what led to an APR this year that is lower than Michigan is accustomed to. But we're not in awful shape and should be able to rebound fairly easily with the new staff.

when the new regulations would go into effect, but not immediately, it seems (emphasis added):

The presidents felt strongly that the academic principles be adopted swiftly and decidedly, with details to be finalized in October. The Board directed the Committee on Academic Performance to produce particulars about the new changes in academic requirements, including a timeline for phased-in implementation for both the new 930 benchmark and the penalty structure.

From the NCAA web site.

That's what I want to know.

Documents on the NCAA website confirm that the implementation of the new limits will begin (as other posters have already stated) in the '14-'15 academic year, and the new penalty structure will not be implemented until the 2015-'16 academic year.

Lots of details here, along with lots of useless information:

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/DI_MC_BOD/DI_BOD/2011/August/BOD%20Combined%208....

The timeline is on page 31.

The cutoff does not refer to a single year, but a four year average. So one bad year would not get you banned from post-season participation.

On the radio this morning...

http://www.npr.org/2011/08/11/139519301/ncaa-devises-rescue-plan-for-tarnished-sports-programs

During the NCAA's 2-day retreat in Indy (more than 50 university presidents present), they discussed three major changes to clean up big-time athletics.  Excerpt from the broadcast below.  They are discussing some major changes and talking about putting them in near-term.

Mr. MARK EMMERT (President, NCAA): That we needed to have change in a number of key areas, and we needed to have it quickly.

GOLDMAN: As in over a period of months, not years. So, with the clock ticking, here are some of those key areas.

Mr. EMMERT: We all agree that the NCAA rule book needs some serious editing. The rules are, in some cases, too complex, unenforceable in some ways, convoluted in some ways, even irrelevant.

GOLDMAN: Emmert says a rule book focusing on serious infractions, like paying athletes to move to another school, providing inappropriate benefits, academic fraud, combined with tougher penalties will put a healthy fear in those contemplating breaking the rules. Another key area: ensuring student athletes are just that. Proposals include raising academic requirements for incoming freshmen and transfer students from two-year colleges.

And perhaps the most controversial idea: raising the standard for a team's academic performance and linking that to postseason play. Penn State President Spanier talked about it in a phone interview.

Mr. SPANIER: If you're a basketball team and your numbers are historically too low, not enough people are continuing in school - they're flunking out, they're not graduating - as good as you might be, you're not going to play in the NCAA tournament.