RichRod's lasting Michigan legacy--the APR

Submitted by Happyshooter on

Going forward I have a serious concern that RichRod may have crippled Michigan football for years to come. To be blunt, his NCAA academic progress rate bordered on horrible.

2010 numbers are not out yet, but given what we know happened with academics and the team this year I am fairly worried that things got worse.

2009 report link in PDF: http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/apr2009/418_2009_apr.pdf

Football, as of June, had an 897. Not only are we facing contermpoeneous penalties, but based on his tending we may be facing historic penalties.

We know Tate failed and is likely to leave the school. If Michigan did not improve over 900 for 2010 and he is counted as leaving after a failure we face a loss of 10 percent of program scholarships.

We already have gotten our warning letter, which means even if Tate is not counted as leaving school after a failure, we will still lose scholarships and practice time if RichRod did not get us back over 900.

If the trend is not corrected next season we lose post season play.

Happyshooter

January 9th, 2011 at 9:51 AM ^

That was a lot of if's used in your writing.

 

Yes, because the program doesn't comment on these things and the sports media is too busy to dig into the facts here. I hope I am wrong, not just because of the effect on the program but because it would make Michigan a laughingstock in the area where we are unquestionably and have always been the leaders and best, in academics.

Section 1

January 9th, 2011 at 9:51 AM ^

But I think you are wrong.  I don't think that our APR is, or would be, in serious jeopardy if Rich Rodriguez had remained, and had more years like his student-athletes had in the 2009-10 academic years especially.  The 200-09 transfer/hangover APR period hurt us, but there's no reason to think that Rich Rodriguez was taking us down a direct path to APR failure.

And, I'd suggest that if we do face any future APR jeopardy (I think we won't), a large part might be the firing, not the retention of Rich Rodriguez. 

Your point appears to be, to try to smear Rich Rodriguez for where we are on APR; here is Brian Cook, addressing the issue:

http://mgoblog.com/content/academic-progress-rate-out-ugly-expected

scottcha

January 9th, 2011 at 10:54 AM ^

Yes. Blaming RR is easy because he's gone, but some of the blame certainly needs to be placed on the AD (pick one or both). Two coaching changes in a 4 year period, especially ones that bring to light serious personnel discrepancies with regard to "the system" are much more at fault as far as transfers are concerned.

But DB wants long term success, so who are we to waiver from our 100% support of him when he shoots himself in the foot in the short term. ::rolls eyes:: (How the RR firing fits into that long-term/short-term logic is beyond me, btw...).

HAIL-YEA

January 9th, 2011 at 11:12 AM ^

The OP is right. We will lose scholarships, it's a done deal.

Vlad Emillion, Justin Turner, Austin White, Anthony Lolata. If Tate leaves or not does not matter, the fact is he is ineligable and already damaged Michigan's APR.

We needed to have a 950+ APR year to avoid being penalized, we have no chance of reaching that.

CalifExile

January 9th, 2011 at 2:15 PM ^

Transfers and academic ineligibility both count. If a player transfers, you take a hit. If a player fails academics, you take a hit. If a failing player transfers, you take a double hit.

It matters if Tate transfers. Read the post by Brian that Section 1 links above. It points out that alot of the problem during RR's tenure comes from LC's players transferring after RR came in. Guess what? If a lot of players transfer when the new coach comes in Michigan takes a big hit.

dennisblundon

January 9th, 2011 at 9:46 AM ^

This is yet another bullshit NCAA rule. Young athletes transferring should not count against you. Only those who fail out should, and Tate has yet to officially do that.

jmblue

January 9th, 2011 at 1:02 PM ^

The rule is well-intentioned.  The NCAA wants to encourage teams to win with players that stay in school four years.  This is one way to get back at schools like Alabama that massively oversign.  Really, something is amiss when a school has a huge number of players transferring out.  I don't think anyone - even RR himself - would agree that the number of transfers we've experienced over the past three years is normal.  We've got to get that transfer rate down if we want to be a powerhouse again. 

mGrowOld

January 9th, 2011 at 9:52 AM ^

Let me see if I am correctly following the logic of the OP...

1. We had borderline APR concerns in the past two years

2. Tate was declared academically ineligiblefor the Gator Bowl

      A . Which means Tate will leave school

3. Because of Tate's issues the entire program has APR issues

4. We will face sanctions and punishments of biblical proportion

     A. Perhaps including a ban on bowl game appearances

5. The sky has fallen

 

Yup....I can sure see how 1+1+1+1 = 632,475,212.

mGrowOld

January 9th, 2011 at 10:38 AM ^

Ahhhhhh.....you are correct sir!  I now see the folly in my and the OP's calculations.  I had originally thought it was 1/1/1/1=632,475,212 and changed my formula but it is clear to me it is multiplication, not division or addition that leads to the obvious conclusions he reached.

HermosaBlue

January 9th, 2011 at 12:24 PM ^

Hasn't there been some indication that Tate's "failing to live up to Michigan standards" was about his behavior in Jacksonville, rather than his academic performance?

In other words, do we have confirmation that it was indeed Tate's academic performance that was at issue here?

I realize this speaks to none of the other points made, but I think it's worth exploring.

Maize and Blue…

January 9th, 2011 at 9:58 AM ^

That report covers a 4 year period two of which were Lloyd Carr's.  Transfers had a lot to due with the low APR as I remember a report from the athletic department that one of RR's first two years the team had one of the highest if not the highest team GPAs since that data was collected.  Haters gonna hate, but why be an a**hole.

If they bring in a non spread coach expect more transfers and another APR plunge.  So I assume you will post the same for whoever that may be even if you like that coach.

Happyshooter

January 9th, 2011 at 10:25 AM ^

They can't stop, even after he is gone. It's like a disease, or he is a relative of a freep reporter.

How dare you, sir. At no time have I ever insulted you, and yet you accuse me of being the family member of a Freep reporter?

As for my posts, I could always jump into one of the 100 Hoke/No Hoke threads, but until we get more hints either way it isn't very productive.

jmblue

January 9th, 2011 at 12:52 PM ^

I remember a report from the athletic department that one of RR's first two years the team had one of the highest if not the highest team GPAs since that data was collected. 

Unfortunately, that report seems to have been a work of fiction.  When pressed for data, Bill Martin couldn't provide any, and even claimed that the athletic department didn't keep track of these things.

bronxblue

January 9th, 2011 at 10:24 AM ^

adj - 1)  existing or occurring in a unfounded state of total ChristianFinnegan, as related to the University of Michigan and the irrational views of some "fans" that the sky is falling

n- 2)  A word generated by bloggers on message board who, in their quest to generate dumber and dumber posts, fail to re-read their comments for spelling errors.

n - 3)  A word that generates only one self-referential result in a Google search.

GoBlueMatt

January 9th, 2011 at 10:24 AM ^

This is very alarming, hopefully there was some improvement in  academics. If it turns out we face penalties, that's just another sign that RR was not not cut out for the job. They are called "STUDENT-athletes" for a reason, and a coach's first job is to help his players succeed in the classroom.

bronxblue

January 9th, 2011 at 10:29 AM ^

Honestly, the transfers had far more to do with that than RR's "failures" in promoting classroom performance.  I do think most student-athletes did well enough to stay in the program - Tate is the only person I know of from this year who had academic issues. 

g_reaper3

January 9th, 2011 at 10:26 AM ^

References that Michigan needs to get a 945 this year.  What happens if we don't?  Is it the doom mentioned at the start of this thread or something different.

A 945 seems like a tough score to get looking at our past few years, 897, 940, 918, 979.  We only topped it in 2006.  I can't believe the transfers affected every year.

bronxblue

January 9th, 2011 at 10:32 AM ^

I have a sense that the APR numbers won't be pretty, but I also don't think that UM will face the "massive" sanction issues that the OP pointed to.  The past couple of years, only like 2-3 programs have been hit with majorish penalties, and most had APR scores so low that UM would have to experience massive attrition AND failures to approach.  The numbers won't be pretty, but I don't foresee the program being decimated either by the APR board.

BlueinLansing

January 9th, 2011 at 10:49 AM ^

one of RR's failings was his emphasis on academics.  Most of the crappy APR is attributed to transfers, which as others pointed out is just stupid.

 

If RR emphasized defensive play as much as he did academic success we wouldn't be here right now, and we'd be talking about ninja football.

Maize and Blue…

January 9th, 2011 at 12:07 PM ^

was vouched for by none other than Vance Bedford, a "Michigan Man", and recruited by a lot of schools throughout the country.  Little did they know that his grades from the alternative classes he took wouldn't count towards his GPA.

For what it's worth,  it's not the first time a Michigan coach went after someone with question grades. Who was the lineman that struggled to get in finally did and then flunked out.  He was recruited by patron saint, Lloyd.  We won't get into players shooting guns of their balcony or going onto female coeds porches and exposing themself through the window and then there's Kelly Baraka(sp).  The point - all coaches try to win and sometimes take a chance on questionable kids.  Even kids assumed to be good can turn out bad such as what happened with BooBoo.

mackbru

January 9th, 2011 at 1:24 PM ^

Little did they know? Even Florida knew. Florida! And Miami We didn't know because RR either didn't do due diligence or didn't care. The kid's background was well known. It was also known that his scores were abysmal. But RR never ran DD by admissions. His claim about discussing DD with a "provost" was, um, erroneous. See reporting from MLive and Brian. RR made his bed on this one.

Section 1

January 9th, 2011 at 3:06 PM ^

But, like the rest of this thread, "Dorsey" seems to serve as a springboard for any asshole to criticize Rich Rodriguez.  Without spending 3 hours researching and writing 500 words on the subject, I submit that whether you like or dislike Rich Rodriguez, or whether you like or dislike his successor, the natural process of a coaching change will HURT Michigan's APR.  Dorsey was and is zero impact on our APR.  Dorsey was never a Michigan student.

wildbackdunesman

January 9th, 2011 at 11:00 AM ^

The APR has good intentions.  However, its calculations aren't necessarily truly reflective of its aim.

 

Anyways, can you imagine the APR in a previous era?  Bear Bryant and Bo running off a third of their teams would be severely punished.

mackbru

January 9th, 2011 at 11:55 AM ^

No, just as RR isn't responsible for the terrible record or defense, he isn't responsible for the APR.
<br>
<br>Then who is?
<br>
<br>Stop apologizing for the man.