Shit happens
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/21/uconn-loses-2-scholarship_n_865...
the just released schedules were a flat-out statement that the B10 doesn't believe SOS will matter in playoff selection
OT-UConn loses 2 schollies with low APR's
May 22nd, 2011 at 11:32 AM
#1
OT-UConn loses 2 schollies with low APR's
May 22nd, 2011 at 11:44 AM | 
UK
UK
May 22nd, 2011 at 12:25 PM |
.
.
I'm pretty sure it only hurts you if the player is academically ineligible at the time they leave.
May 22nd, 2011 at 12:45 PM |
So "one-and-done's" help APR?
So "one-and-done's" help APR?
"One-and-done" players really only need to go to class for one semester. If they get passing grades in those classes and then leave, no harm to APR. In comparison, four-year players must take ever higher level classes and pass those classes for eight semesters. Now I understand the attraction of a place like UK or OSU. Maybe the NCAA should rethink how it calculates APR.
May 22nd, 2011 at 1:21 PM |
This has nothing to do with
This has nothing to do with
This has nothing to do with attractiveness to players, especially if they're one and dones. They could care less what the APR is if they're planning on leaving anyway.
May 22nd, 2011 at 1:39 PM |
FWIW
FWIW
I think you mean "couldn't".
May 22nd, 2011 at 2:30 PM |
Two Points to Lose
Two Points to Lose
I don't believe this is correct. There are two points that could be lost. If the SA leaves academically eligible, one point is lost, if they leave academically ineligible, two points are lost.
May 22nd, 2011 at 5:50 PM |
Personally, I'd include a
Personally, I'd include a
Personally, I'd include a caveat that if the athlete in question transfers to another school while eligible or is playing professionally, then they shouldn't count against APR. If one of the most important goals of higher education is to help students develop a marketable skill (which I personally believe is/should be a goal), then a former student earning 30+ times the mean income in the United States probably shouldn't reflect poorly on a university. If Mark Zuckerburg left Harvard mid-semester and failed all of his classes because Facebook was exploding, no one would have wanted to penalize Harvard for failing to retain him.
May 22nd, 2011 at 1:27 PM |
Louisville lost 3 schollies
Louisville lost 3 schollies
Louisville lost 3 schollies
Current Smug rating: "lethal"
May 22nd, 2011 at 12:29 PM |
This is why they should just
This is why they should just
This is why they should just let these kids go straight to the NBA instead of making a drive by appearance for a year in college. It would be in everybody's best interest except for the NBA.
May 22nd, 2011 at 12:39 PM |
That, or up the age
That, or up the age
That, or up the age requirement.
May 22nd, 2011 at 12:55 PM |
So...
So...
Why would the NBA do this if it's not in their interest? I really don't see why the wellbeing of college basketball is a major concern of theirs, especially at the expense of their own interests. I would question whether the 1
May 22nd, 2011 at 3:23 PM |
if your question is why would
if your question is why would
if your question is why would the NBA raise the age limit, then the answer is to help distinguish between the LeBron James's and the Kwame Brown's. Yes the draft is not anything close to a science, yes there are plenty of busts that were in college for four years, but obviously the chances of drafting a bust is less likely the longer they are evaluated.
May 22nd, 2011 at 12:56 PM |
The NBA should require at
The NBA should require at
The NBA should require at least 2 years of college for future players in the new collective bargaining agreement. Finance courses should be part of the requirement.
If an OSU fan divorces his wife are they still brother and sister?
May 22nd, 2011 at 5:09 PM |
My issue with the APR has
My issue with the APR has
My issue with the APR has always been that the NCAA punishes schools for getting kids who leave early for the NBA, but there is a perverse need to get the big-name recruits to get the media and web/print coverage the NCAA seemingly wants for many of its top progams. So on one hand, the NCAA punishes UConn for having kids leave early for the pros, but also rakes in the money from their NCAA run.
If guys leaving early for the pros lowers a team's APR, how does Kentucky not have the same problem?