The Role of Admissions and D.Brandon
I have a question for anyone who knows about this process. I am fairly certain that the admissions process for athletes is significantly more lenient than that for the rest of us. I had a 3.7 GPA in High School and was waitlisted. Something tells me, if I could run a 4.3 I wouldn't have been.
So my question, is this. Why does the admissions department all of a sudden have strong moral ground when it comes to Dorsey? Does it not seem that there is something more here?
Question #2. Although this is a total consipracy theory: Does the recent publicity of the Kentucky Basketball recruit who miraculously made the grade in their last semester hold any merit in this conversation?
I admit I am uninformed but am just finding this entire situation very strange (if DD was seen to be unfit, they wouldn;t have waited until now).
I guess my point is that the admissions department has never played the moral authority before (with dozens of athletes who barely passed the academic requirements) so why now? Something tells me, D.Brandon found out something that made cutting DD go the better option than dealing with more scrutiny. Thoughts?
...Angelique's story that includes her interview with Brandon and then tell me what you think.
"This is a decision that is owned by the admissions department, our admissions office," Brandon said. "It's always been owned by the admissions office. It is not unusual for a letter of intent to be signed with a prospective student-athlete where there's far more that needs to be done for the student-athlete to be admitted. It involves course work, it involves test scores, and a variety of criteria some of which is fact-based and where and how they went about improving their test scores."
This is about Dorsey not doing enough academically to satisfy the Admissions Dept. Nothing more, nothing less.
Brandon balked at the suggestion he had anything to do with Dorsey not gaining admission.
"That's ridiculous," Brandon said. "Admissions is not part of my portfolio at this university. I've got plenty else that I'm doing.
"The misinformation is the athletic department is involved and there is some conspiracy involved. In this particular case, and, frankly, other cases, the admissions office concluded and made a judgment.
"I think it's unfortunate this particular young man is being singled out with the sensationalism around this, in light of the fact this has happened before and it will happen again. Not everybody passes the test by the admissions department to come to Michigan. And we are not at liberty to talk about the reasons behind a prospective student not being admitted."
I have some beachfront property to sell you.
Are you suspicious of the statement that this is related purely to academics (as opposed to "character issues") or are you incriminating that David Brandon had something to do with this?
Yes I am suspicious of the statement.
...you selling at the beach? I might be interested as long as it's not on the Gulf Coast.
but the oil will NEVER come near you--promise!
...not interested then. Thanks for the offer.
My doctor says that fish oil is good for me.
When Brandon says the athletic department doesn't get involved. I have a very good friend who's dad I've known for over 20 years that is a coach for a Big Ten athletic team. For as long as I can remember he has been telling me stories about fighting with admissions to get his guys admitted and trying to push them through. I know for a fact at most good academic schools the coaches have to fight with admissions and can only get so many borderline athletes in. So the athletic department might not be making the decision but you can bet your ass they are involved.
... for this statement:
I guess my point is that the admissions department has never played the moral authority before (with dozens of athletes who barely passed the academic requirements) so why now?
Honestly, there is so much stuff flying around here regarding the DD situation that seems made up out of whole cloth.
Newsflash: the UM cannot say why it did this without violating applicant privacy. Everyone seems to think it was unfair or nefarious in some way.
I, for one, am willing to trust AD Brandon and give him the benefit of the doubt. Casting aspersions on him without any basis in fact is not appropriate, IHMO.
"The admissions department has never played the moral authority before" doesn't gibe with Brandon's comment, "I think it's unfortunate this particular young man is being singled out with the sensationalism around this, in light of the fact this has happened before and it will happen again."
I'm going to go with DB's take. I guess this has happened before, just maybe not in the Age of the 24-Hour Scrutinizing Internets.
But Brian's right: this will almost certainly cost us academically-challenged recruits in the future.
So, somehow, there has to be a widely-publicized certainty that this doesn't happen again.
If you read Bandon's remarks, he throws the following in right at the end of one of his answers:
"... and where and how they went about improving their test scores."
If Dorsey just didn't have enough credits or high enough scores, would Brandon have included that? Also, my understanding is that this is the same issue that killed Adrian Witty. His SAT or ACT scores jumped an unusual amount when he retook them and there was some question about how that happened. So maybe whatever changed to get Dorsey's grades or scores up just didn't look believable by Admissions.
This should put to bed all of the various conspiracy theories floating around. It's absolutely clear, as you said, that this is all about academics, and that's all.
It's interesting that Brandon specifically said that it's not unusual for an offer to go out to a kid who has plenty of ground to make up before admissions will say yes.
This is an interesting statement, though:
"... and where and how they went about improving their test scores."
Makes me wonder if Admissions had some doubts about how DD got things done.
Whatever, it's done and over. I'm going to worry about whether our defense is getting the shimmy down and where Missouri will end up.
Huntington Wolverine: did you mean insinuating?
I did intend to write "intimating" instead of "incriminating." It's been a mentally draining week. Good catch though.
i want to hit something
From my discussions with a former admissions employee, the football department had final say on character issues, at least under the Carr regime.
Now potentially that could have changed, but that would all just be based on speculation, nothing more.
This Academic stuff is BS Michigan is a GREAT school. However at Michigan and most big time Football schools you will find these guy are General Studies majors anyway. So they can beat their chest about Academics but very few get a real degree. You cant do anything with a General Studies degree but go back to school. On top of that they have so many tools to help them do well in school because they are athletes. My biggest problem is that the University of Michigan thinks it knows more than a court of law. These pass transgressions are on his juvenile record and he was never convicted. Is the juvenile court system not good enough for the University.
As far as caliber of player this is the biggest loss for Michigan since Kelly Baraka.
from umich: "This degree remains an option for students with interdisciplinary or alternate academic interests, allowing them to pursue their interests in an individually designed degree program independent of departmental requirements."
I'm sure that there are people, including athletes, who are in general studies so they can take the minimum amount of blow-off classes and still say they graduated - I'm also sure that it can be a useful program for people that are interested in multiple fields but don' t have the time/money to stay at U of M for 6-8 years for multiple bachelor degrees. For instance, my brother-in-law received a BGS degree rather than a computer science degree so he could take classes on business or things that interested him rather than prerequisites that were not going to be needed in his line of work.
If (and it is admittedly a big if) used correctly, the BGS really seems like an ideal way to use the vast academic resources that Michigan offers for people that know what they want to do and don't need a specific degree to get that job and are just looking to increase their knowledge base.
Sorry if I sound defensive, I am still pissed off about the Ann Arbor News hit piece on academics that came out shortly after my brother-in-law graduated. It seemed like a slap in the face to the people that put in a lot of work for their BGS degrees, whatever percentage of the class it may have been.
not only does it free you up from the requirements of a particular progression in a specific department, it also grants you earlier access to 300/400 level courses if you meet with the professor and either satisfy some independent study requirement or can convince them you are knowledgeable enough to forego the 100/200 level prereqs. I got to take classes in the graduate biz school, the law school, computer science, poli sci, film, chemistry, English, and many more, almost all of them at 300/400 level starting halfway through my sophomore year.
the main advantage to athletes is that they can skip the foreign language requirement which can be particularly difficult on them due to the time/lab/study requirements to complete it.
Sure, athletes have Study Table and academic counselors and other significant resources. But even within the most flexible majors at U-M, they still have to perform at a basic level. They have to fulfill the quantitative reasoning requirement for a BSG, for example.
So yeah, I think there could definitely be candidates for whom U-M is a poor academic fit, even with everything the athletic department can offer by way of support.
I wonder (and this is pure speculation) if the Admissions office is concerned about the Lifeskills thing that was discussed here last night (video and all), or whether as part of this, he had "help" with the test scores (especially with D. Brandon's comments that are quoted above). IIRC, isn't the whole Derrick Rose/Memphis issue that he increased his SATs, was cleared by the NCAA clearinghouse, then later it was discovered there were concerns about the test.
Even though the NCAA clears the students, declaring them qualified, the school is still liable if later it is found that there was a problem. I actually have a big issue with this situation in general, but that's a rant for another time.
Even though the NCAA clears the students, declaring them qualified, the school is still liable if later it is found that there was a problem.
This is the only scenario/hypothesis that I can live with. I've found this entirely upsetting because it's unfair to DD, it's a huge blow to our football team, it can make it more difficult for us to gain trust from recruits in the future, and it implies incompetence in our administration (as everyone has been saying).
That being said, if admissions felt that something academically unethical was committed by DD and the Lifeskills folks, the repercussions for RR and UM (football and academic reputation) may have been much more significant if that was revealed in the future. Imagine the field day the MSM would have with that. Maybe Memphis and Kentucky can get away with stuff like that, but we would get torn a new one.
naivete, but I'm of the opinion that it's as cut & dry as DD's interview makes it out to be. DD had every chance in the world to put the administration on blast, or insinuate that there were shady dealings going on. He didn't, so (at least in my mind) there's no trip to AA Torch & Pitchfork in my future on this....
That is the greatest ass/avatar EVAR!!
I assume people have seen the University's statement:
STATEMENT ON ADMISSIONS AND STUDENT-ATHLETES
There have been a number of inquiries concerning our admissions process as it relates to student-athletes. While we will not discuss an individual student’s situation, we can provide a general overview.
Our Office of Admissions makes all final decisions regarding whether a student should be admitted to the U-M. Academic success is our priority for all students, including student- athletes, and our admissions process works to help ensure this occurs.
A Letter of Intent is not a guarantee of admission, and student-athletes are told they must meet not just NCAA but also U-M requirements. If student-athletes meet NCAA eligibility requirements, they are not automatically admitted to the U-M.
Our admissions criteria are more rigorous than the NCAA minimums for academic eligibility. All undergraduate admissions decisions are based on the individualized, holistic review of information about each applicant that considers academic achievements and his or her potential to succeed, as well as many additional variables such as essays, letters of recommendation and other factors. In the end, some student-athletes who have received letters of intent are not admitted and that has always been the case.
We have an obligation to make sure that every student-athlete we recruit has a realistic opportunity to effectively compete in the classroom, and ultimately graduate. We are confident that our admissions process is an effective means for achieving this.