Jump to content

Incoming recruits - updates (2017)


bauman

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, gravilst said:

How did SLU not get penalized during those early RM years?  I thought if your APR fell bellow 230 for two years in a row the NCAA could reduce practice time and even cut the number of scholarships available.   

SLU was punished I believe but it was just the first level which means they lost practice time (which also meant mandatory study time).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 438
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Ncaa has been inconsistent with its Apr penalties. They review it on a case by case basis and there have been schools punished harshly for low scores like Syracuse and u conn but others have been allowed to skate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kwyjibo said:

SLU was punished I believe but it was just the first level which means they lost practice time (which also meant mandatory study time).

I think the rules were different back in 2010 and 2011. They've gotten more punitive since then. I don't think we actually incurred any penalties, just were close to the line.

 

1 hour ago, thetorch said:

Ncaa has been inconsistent with its Apr penalties. They review it on a case by case basis and there have been schools punished harshly for low scores like Syracuse and u conn but others have been allowed to skate.

UConn really did get screwed, IMO. They had a poor APR but the poor scores occurred under an NCAA regime where the punishment was just lost scholarships. Then the rules were changed to involve post-season bans and because of the 4 year averaging they couldn't get out of the hole to get to the minimum required levels. To me it was the equivalent of speeding and being told after you got pulled over that the penalty was no longer a fine but the laws have changed while you were speeding and now you are going to jail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, kshoe said:

 

I think the rules were different back in 2010 and 2011. They've gotten more punitive since then. I don't think we actually incurred any penalties, just were close to the line.

 

I believe this is correct.   had our roster creaming practice continued, we likely would have fallen to penalty level.  but we stopped the practice about the time crews took over.  

its my understanding that if the transferring player is on pace to graduate with his freshmen class there are no penalties.   the problem is that a lot of D1 basketball players lessen their academic load during the season and then use the summer to catch up academically.  thus when they are asked to seek school options elsewhere they are behind academically. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kshoe said:

I think the rules were different back in 2010 and 2011. They've gotten more punitive since then. I don't think we actually incurred any penalties, just were close to the line.

You are right.   SLU did get the first level of punishment but that was just a warning letter.  I think it looked bad for the next year but the score went up and SLU avoided the practice penalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Glorydays2013 said:

Thats pretty savage if Zeke is still on this team next year

...or maybe they talked about it and Zeke told him he could have 23.  Goodwin wore 23 for Althoff.  My guess is he decided on 0 because Zeke already had 23, Zeke told him he could have 23 if he wanted it, and now Goodwin is trying to decide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

...or maybe they talked about it and Zeke told him he could have 23.  Goodwin wore 23 for Althoff.  My guess is he decided on 0 because Zeke already had 23, Zeke told him he could have 23 if he wanted it, and now Goodwin is trying to decide.

Yea that would be my guess.  What number was Zeke in high school?  Maybe he would've taken 0 but Bartley was a late transfer and already had it so he was already 23 by then but would be fine being 0 or 23 and will let Goodwin decide.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

...or maybe they talked about it and Zeke told him he could have 23.  Goodwin wore 23 for Althoff.  My guess is he decided on 0 because Zeke already had 23, Zeke told him he could have 23 if he wanted it, and now Goodwin is trying to decide.

That shows to me that Zeke doesn't have too much confidence in himself. I don't know about you but I wouldn't have a freshmen take my number, especially someone I would "compete" for playing time with

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Bills_06 said:

Yea that would be my guess.  What number was Zeke in high school?  Maybe he would've taken 0 but Bartley was a late transfer and already had it so he was already 23 by then but would be fine being 0 or 23 and will let Goodwin decide.  

Zeke was 23 @ Riverview

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Glorydays2013 said:

That shows to me that Zeke doesn't have too much confidence in himself. I don't know about you but I wouldn't have a freshmen take my number, especially someone I would "compete" for playing time with

This may be your dumbest post ever.  A jersey number, yes a piece of clothing = confidence in oneself?  Really?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...