Academic Progress Rate Out, Ugly As Expected Comment Count

Brian June 9th, 2010 at 2:56 PM

apr-books apr-birds

Michigan's 2010 APR is out, and all sports that aren't football are well clear of the 925 penalty mark. Football is down to 936 thanks to the 897 they put up last year, something this site repeatedly fretted about before getting the raw numbers and concluding it would take a San Jose State level of failure to get in trouble this year.

That 897 is ugly, considerably uglier than even my revised estimate was, but Michigan avoids falling below the 925 mark that would see them suffer "contemporaneous penalties"—eye-for-an-eye scholarship losses that prohibit you from replacing students who leave ineligible. Since the just-released numbers cover 2008-09 and Kurt Wermers (and possibly others) left ineligible, Michigan would have gotten hit.

Next year is when Michigan might feel some pain and the corresponding Super Fun Headlines that go along with it. The fancy 979 from 2006 drops off the calculation and Michigan will have to deal with the 918 put up in Lloyd Carr's last year, the 940 from Rodriguez's first, and the transfer-saddled 897 just posted. To avoid falling under the 925 mark they'll have to put up a 945 next year.

How bad is that 897? It depends on what the breakdown is. Michigan spent the last couple years witheringly short of scholarship players, which magnified the impact of each transfer. The NCAA keeps separate numbers for eligibility and retention, but unfortunately the site which has those numbers has not yet been updated with the latest numbers. If Michigan has a terrible retention rate and a good eligibility rate, the problem is solely the flood of Carr-to-Rodriguez transfers. If the eligibility rate is poor, that would not be good.

That would not be due to Rodriguez's recruiting. Since the numbers are from last year, the only RR recruits on the team were the scattered late adds to the 2008 class and the 2009 freshmen. Of those players, only Justin Feagin and Taylor Hill have left, and Hill might not even count since he left the team so quickly he probably beat the drop/add deadline. Feagin played last year at Texas Southern.

Not that tomorrow's newspaper articles will mention anything but the 897.



June 9th, 2010 at 3:16 PM ^

Another great day to be a Michigan fan.  Gotta love the off-season.


I need to see a report about Craig Roh saving a baby by picking up a car to make me feel better again.  

STW P. Brabbs

June 9th, 2010 at 4:56 PM ^

I would say that this, rather than whatever nasty things Mark Snyder wrote about Dorsey's recruitment, is the more likely motivation for Demar's admissions brouhaha. 



June 10th, 2010 at 1:25 PM ^

Would they have had the numbers prior to their release today though?

FWIW - I don't think it was character issues publicized by Snyder, my personal theory is that they plugged DD's final results into a formula and despite meeting the NCAA minimums, his final results did not get him past the bottom threshold for M admittance which are apparently ever so slightly higher than those minimums (read, not any kind of Stanford-type excuse for a diminished talent level). A technicality on the applicability of his LifeSkills curriculum that brought him up short of credits, coming up just shy of some overall point total, or whatever? The fact is we will never know. To deny him based on perceived character issues would be unethical and would go against precedent, not to mention possibly open the U up to some kind of litigation given that technically his record is free of convictions (stretch, I know)

I think they reviewed his status when he signed his LOI and indicated that he 'could' make himself eligible by the time he left school and for some reason he fell into an area where he qualified for NCAA minimums, but the formula just didn't get him past some 'slightly' higher bar that M has and they couldn't just make an exception.

Future solution for borderline recruits, an initial review that says 'possible/not possible' prior to an LOI going out. Repeated communication and check-ins throughout the period following a commitment to determine whther or not the student is on track to make the grade and a much earlier decision when it looks like it will not happen.

One thing that is lost in all of this is that DD himself, his parents and perhaps even his football coach bear some amount of blame for the situation. Putting your/his nose to the grindstone last October is simply too late to be guaranteed of anything and by all reports he wasn't that invested in the initial stages of trying to catch up.

Demar, we will certainly miss you, your talent and your personality because to me you seem like someone that is putting it all together despite the disadvantages you have faced growing up. For that you get my utmost respect and I will be cheering for you to continue to prove everyone wrong no matter where you play ball. You and your parents have been a class act throughout this whole process and i wish you nothing but the best.

Tha Quiet Storm

June 9th, 2010 at 5:37 PM ^

just a day full of sunshine.  We got double the usual bi-weekly bad UM football news.  I refuse to listen to Drew Sharp's radio show, but I'm wondering how he can focus today, what with the raging hard-on he undoubdtedly has.


June 9th, 2010 at 8:16 PM ^

This is the first I've heard of this APR ridiculousness.  Can someone explain to me why the NCAA punishes a school for having a student transfer to another institution?    Are you trying to tell me that if John Nash played football at Michigan, and decided that he wants to transfer to Princeton, the NCAA would punish Michigan???  WHY???


June 10th, 2010 at 11:46 AM ^

What a ludicrously imprecise metric to measure whether coaches are flushing out team members.  Does this APR metric punish a school for dismissing an athlete that commits robbery?  Does a coach have to worry about his APR numbers before dismissing an athlete that commits murder?

Sorry if I'm being ignorant, but it seems to me that athletes should be protected by treating their scholarships like contracts (I'm surprised if this isn't how it works already).  Coach can't "flush" out a team member because he has too much leverage.  If push comes to shove, the athlete can just sit on the bench and enjoy his scholarship for 4 years.  Only way an athlete can truly be "dismissed" is for cause (stabbing someone, etc.).  Same way it works in pro sports.  If there's some superficial dispute between a pro coach and a pro player, there's nothing the coach can do because the player ultimately has the leverage.  Even if the player sucks, he can ride the bench and collect his paycheck.

Why is it necessary for the NCAA to provide more protection than this?  F*(@[email protected]! NCAA is a power hungry beast.  Someone tell the players to unionize and start demanding paychecks and the NCAA will be brought to its knees.

Bronco Joe

June 22nd, 2010 at 6:26 PM ^

but it is an interesting thought. Personally, I think it is only a matter of time before someone starts offering these 4 and 5 star high school players a chance to play in a 18-21 league, sets a pay scale based on age, and starts robbing the NCAA blind for players. How tough would it be to tell kids that may be NFL bound, "We'll give you $250,000 as a "freshman," $500,00 as a "sophomore," and $750,000 as a "junior," and then you go pro. We'll play hard, work hard, and focus on developing you for the NFL, like college does, but year round, without practice limits, etc." I think there is a gold mine there for the person that can organize it. Same for basketball...