Originally Posted by grapplefan  Some sports and some schools have a miserable record of student academic performance and graduation rates. This has to change. As I see it, colleges need to recruit students who can handle the academic work. If you can't, you shouldn't be a student at that institution. Making an cottage industry out of academic support for under-prepared student athletes isn't the answer either. |
If the measure was truly about academics that would be fine. But this isn't. For instance we had a wrestler transfer from Maryland with a 3.5 GPA because he wanted to be closer to home. We are penalized under the APR for this.
Recruiting is hardly an exact science. You recruit an athlete who has a good high school GPA and good SATs. They are required to attend study hall sessions as freshmen until they can prove the are able to handle work at the college level. But the kid refuses to go to class and flunks out after a year. By all indications the kid should have succeeded academically but, short of the coach escorting him to class every day, there is only so much you can do.
As for basketball. If an athlete has exhausted eligibility, is in good academic standing but still short of a degree, but has an opportunity to play professional basketball in Europe for well over $100k per year....what do you do?
Also consider that every school doesn't grant credit for the same things nor do they have the exact same academic calendar. For example, Duke's semester ends nearly one month earlier than Marylands so their bball players only have to go to class for another couple of weeks after the season and can then enter the recruiting combines. Add to that that Duke grants credit for summer overseas basketball tours of Europe while Maryland doesn't.
This is another example of the NCAA forcing a one size fits all "solution" on member institutions in an effort to whitewash the problem.