majerus mojo Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 Chicago State banned from postseason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetorch Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 Maybe we can negotiate something with the NCAA to have this game not affect our RPI so adversely. Play 4 against 5 maybe? Have all our guys shoot lefthanded? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOSLU68 Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 Chicago State banned from postseason APR issues Scott Powers, ESPN Chicago area reporter has story they also lose scholarship and have 5 day 16 hour per week practice limit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 OK, I am confused. in the other APR thread some were leaving you to believe that the penalty was immediate once you dropped below the magic 925 #. From reading this article, the NCAA gives you a couple of warning years to get the # up. If this is true then I am not sure our 925 is a big deal. It is still in the acceptable range and I understand that WR's drop out is a problem for the next year # - although I wonder since he was kicked off the team before he dropped out does he still have an impact on our #? - it looks like we will still have plenty of time to resolve this issue. Another thought that crossed my mind is since WR entered the NBA draft why would he count against us if other schools don't get impacted when a kid leaves? and since he was kicked out of school for disciplinary reasons during the first semester then if he was current the previous fall then why would he count against us? I know these are technical questions but I just wonder if he is not some kind of a loop hole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 OK, I am confused. in the other APR thread some were leaving you to believe that the penalty was immediate once you dropped below the magic 925 #. From reading this article, the NCAA gives you a couple of warning years to get the # up. If this is true then I am not sure our 925 is a big deal. It is still in the acceptable range and I understand that WR's drop out is a problem for the next year # - although I wonder since he was kicked off the team before he dropped out does he still have an impact on our #? - it looks like we will still have plenty of time to resolve this issue. Another thought that crossed my mind is since WR entered the NBA draft why would he count against us if other schools don't get impacted when a kid leaves? and since he was kicked out of school for disciplinary reasons during the first semester then if he was current the previous fall then why would he count against us? I know these are technical questions but I just wonder if he is not some kind of a loop hole. Cheesman, I think you ask very good questions and quite frankly I don't think anybody really knows the answers. Here are my thoughts. - It seems like a hard sell to me that Willie wouldn't be an "0 of 2" meaning a player that left the program while being academically ineligible. Maybe I'm wrong and there is a loop-hole somewhere but can't see it. - Willie leaving will almost certainly affect the score that comes out next year. Maybe he's somehow already been included in this year's number but I highly doubt it. - Its important to remember the 925 number is a four year average so its not enough to know only our score in the 2010-2011 year but also what our score was in 2006-07 which will roll off in the next calculation. I did some back-of the envelope calculations based on our rolling averages and I believe we lost 2 points in the 2006-07 year. - Which means if we lost more than 2 points in the 2010-11 year we would drop below the 925. - Now here is where I get confused. The people at SLU are aware of this and almost surely know how many points can be lost to stay above the 925 number. WR leaving on his own, even if he was an 0-2 would not put us over the top. If so, why would they left Christian leave and cause us to lose another point? If we are/were right on the edge, why not tell CS he'll get plenty of minutes, blow smoke up his ass and keep the number at 925? - The fact that CS did leave, and arguably was at least nudged in that direction, suggests to me they have already thought it through and either WR won't hurt that much or we plan to get a bonus point back somehow (returning players that graduate like BE or DP can help), or quite frankly they just don't care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
For-DaLove Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Cheesman, I think you ask very good questions and quite frankly I don't think anybody really knows the answers. Here are my thoughts. - It seems like a hard sell to me that Willie wouldn't be an "0 of 2" meaning a player that left the program while being academically ineligible. Maybe I'm wrong and there is a loop-hole somewhere but can't see it. - Willie leaving will almost certainly affect the score that comes out next year. Maybe he's somehow already been included in this year's number but I highly doubt it. - Its important to remember the 925 number is a four year average so its not enough to know only our score in the 2010-2011 year but also what our score was in 2006-07 which will roll off in the next calculation. I did some back-of the envelope calculations based on our rolling averages and I believe we lost 2 points in the 2006-07 year. - Which means if we lost more than 2 points in the 2010-11 year we would drop below the 925. - Now here is where I get confused. The people at SLU are aware of this and almost surely know how many points can be lost to stay above the 925 number. WR leaving on his own, even if he was an 0-2 would not put us over the top. If so, why would they left Christian leave and cause us to lose another point? If we are/were right on the edge, why not tell CS he'll get plenty of minutes, blow smoke up his ass and keep the number at 925? - The fact that CS did leave, and arguably was at least nudged in that direction, suggests to me they have already thought it through and either WR won't hurt that much or we plan to get a bonus point back somehow (returning players that graduate like BE or DP can help), or quite frankly they just don't care. We should only lose 1 point for CS leaving. I understand what you're saying, but if a kid wants to leave and isn't going to get any playing time next season, then you let him leave. Edit: If CS left with a pretty high GPA, we could earn that point back. The NCAA does adjustments if the transferring player had a high enough GPA. Willie will cost us 2 points. There's no way to get around that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Christian leaving shouldn't hurt our number. The APR penalizes for players that leave the school in bad academic standing. CS leaving won't do anything to our score. DA, you may be right as I just found something I didn't know before: "The APR is calculated by allocating points for eligibility and retention -- the two factors that research identifies as the best indicators of graduation. Each player on a given roster earns a maximum of two points per term, one for being academically eligible and one for staying with the institution. A team's APR is the total points of a team's roster at a given time divided by the total points possible. Since this results in a decimal number, the CAP decided to multiply it by 1,000 for ease of reference. Thus, a raw APR score of .925 translates into the 925 that will become the standard terminology. The NCAA does adjust APR, on a student-by-student basis, in two circumstanceswhen a player transfers to another school with a sufficiently high GPA, or leaves for a professional sports career while still in good academic standing. In the 201011 cycle, the NCAA granted nearly 700 APR adjustments in the latter category, out of a total of over 6,400 Division I teams. Nearly half of the adjustments were for baseball players." The part in bold was new to me. CS has been named in the honor roll calls at halftime so hopefully that is true. I do believe a transfer that is in "OK" standing with the school can hurt the APR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
For-DaLove Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 DA, you may be right as I just found something I didn't know before: "The APR is calculated by allocating points for eligibility and retention -- the two factors that research identifies as the best indicators of graduation. Each player on a given roster earns a maximum of two points per term, one for being academically eligible and one for staying with the institution. A team's APR is the total points of a team's roster at a given time divided by the total points possible. Since this results in a decimal number, the CAP decided to multiply it by 1,000 for ease of reference. Thus, a raw APR score of .925 translates into the 925 that will become the standard terminology. The NCAA does adjust APR, on a student-by-student basis, in two circumstances—when a player transfers to another school with a sufficiently high GPA, or leaves for a professional sports career while still in good academic standing. In the 2010–11 cycle, the NCAA granted nearly 700 APR adjustments in the latter category, out of a total of over 6,400 Division I teams. Nearly half of the adjustments were for baseball players." The part in bold was new to me. CS has been named in the honor roll calls at halftime so hopefully that is true. I do believe a transfer that is in "OK" standing with the school can hurt the APR. I changed my previous post. It could cost us a point. I don't know his exact GPA so I can't say for sure whether or not he will cost us a point. Thanks for the research! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 -this apr issue to me sheds even more light on who controls the ncaa and that is the 80 some,members of bcs confs as I highly doubt ncaa members from the a10, mvc, ovc, big south etc advocated for the 'if they go pro' loophole in the calc -that, said I hope,SLU has our ducks in line or otherwise is greasing the right people in indy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JettFlight5 Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Chicago State is banned from posteason? I thought the fact that they were horrible banned them from postseason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted May 26, 2011 Share Posted May 26, 2011 Chicago State is banned from posteason? I thought the fact that they were horrible banned them from postseason. Beat me to it. Kinda like banning the Cubs from the World Series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.