cheeseman Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Ruben Cotto, Brett Thompson, Jon Smith, Anthony Mitchell, etc. are all candidates. Basically anybody that left the program in the last 4 years could hurt the APR. The APR is BS for a bunch of reasons (not the least of which it really doesn't measure graduation rates) but as others point out, it is the rules we have to live by. The real problem, is the NCAA for the longest time said if your rating drops below 925 you can lose a scholly or two, but nothing more than that. Then, they go and re-write the rules last summer and say 930 or higher or no NCAA tourney. They are giving teams a little slack time to get in in line but the APR is a 4 year average and it doesn't appear they are giving 4 years to do so. There is also a 2 year average that will likely save SLU from any punishment. Uconn was essentially legislated out of a potential appearance in 2013 and has never been given the opportunity to get their act in order. The good news for SLU is that while our long term average isn't good, the most painful year was 2007-08 and that will roll of the average soon. With transfers slowing down materially we should be OK going forward. It was my understanding that BE only has to pay the money he got and did not turn over for the course work - per RM. Now RM said he would pay the fee but was told that it was an NCAA violation so he could not do that. John Smith left on track but Cotto and the other guard from IN from Smith's class did not. Smith is currently on the Ohio roster so he must be good and not a problem for us. Mitchell - I have no idea but he did transfer to a D1 school and is playing - SIUE. TL is working on graduating and does anyone know his possible graduation date. The BE thing is just crazy - stupid behavior on his part - he gets screwed as does us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 It was my understanding that BE only has to pay the money he got and did not turn over for the course work - per RM. Now RM said he would pay the fee but was told that it was an NCAA violation so he could not do that. John Smith left on track but Cotto and the other guard from IN from Smith's class did not. Smith is currently on the Ohio roster so he must be good and not a problem for us. Mitchell - I have no idea but he did transfer to a D1 school and is playing - SIUE. TL is working on graduating and does anyone know his possible graduation date. The BE thing is just crazy - stupid behavior on his part - he gets screwed as does us. Could he lose some money where BE or his mom or someone could find it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Could he lose some money where BE or his mom or someone could find it? According to RM - his parents could pay it and supposedly they are trying to raise the money. No, to your question - if it got back somehow we would be screwed royally. These things have a habit of poping up because somebody wants something so it is a bad idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 SLU still has its integrity intact, Roy. The problem is that we took a flyer on kids like Jordan, Smith, Cotto, Reed, Thompson, and a couple others, not all of whom were able to cut it academically here. So they transfer out, short on credits, and have a year to get up to speed while they sit and become eligible for the year after. Should SLU's program be punished for taking a chance on guys who don't turn out to be smart enough, hard working enough, or whatever the reason may be they're unable to accrue all the credits they need? The NCAA already has minimum standards for GPA and test scores to be eligible for competition. So why is it that students who meet those guidelines but who fail to meet the academic standards of the school they attend become major detriments to that school's athletic program because of an arbitrary "academic progress" measurement created by the NCAA? Doesn't it seem insane that the NCAA is penalizing schools for having higher academic standards than the NCAA itself has? I understand why the rule was set up- to prevent programs like Huggins-era Cincinnati from doing what they do, just recruiting any guys the coach wants but none of who ever have any intention of performing academically, let alone graduating. I don't think it had the foresight, though, to realize it would be penalizing places like SLU, who aren't going to have professors keeping kids eligible no matter what. Not to mention, is it really fair to keep punishing a program 3-4 years after a kid signed, couldn't cut it academically, and had to leave? who besides willie and cotto couldnt cut it academically? even jordan eventually got his act straightened out. second the way the APR was explained to me it isnt just about credits. those credits have to be going towards an actual degree program. bottom line we are paying for the revolving door. hopefully we got a roster he can finally be content with and will stop it going forward. that's how we fix it. now if kentucky and syracuse figured out how to beat the system, good for them. i dont want to be kentucky. ever. i dont care if they win the title every year. i want to be a school that actually succeeds in both winning basketball games and producing true student athletes that can be winners in society regardless if they ever play basketball again after saint louis university or not. it that makes me unrealistic or a dreamer, at least i can sleep at night. plenty of schools do have it both ways. we should as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Not to go all mathy today, but here is how the APR is calculated. If there are 13 scholarships for a team... 11 guys remain eligible and in school for both semesters. 1 is ineligible for 1 semester 1 leaves after spring semester You lose 2 points total, because there are 2 points per semester per player. So 26 points total available, and a team gets 24 of them. Multiple that percentage by 1000. That puts you at the cut off line of 925 give or take. So all it takes is 2 total screwups to put you at the dangerzone. So basically - a completely stupid rule. Edit - I should mention you get a retention point reinstated once that player is enrolled into another 4 year program. Same with losing someone to a professional league. So if a player is eligible and transfers to another 4 year program, no loss. If he is ineligible and transfers/drops out, thats 0/2 and takes you to the danger zone right there. So basically - someone like Thompson hurts the most. 0/2 on him. Someone like Relphorde wouldn't hurt at all because he transferred into a 4 year program and was eligible for the next semester when he left. i think you are missing a couple of things. one is the player that is technically behind at semester break but catches up before school starts i dont think hurts us either as long as he is at slu. however if that player leaves slu, but is behind he does cost us even if he catches up over the summer at the new school. now the likes of jordan that took a year to catch up would have cost us regardless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 who besides willie and cotto couldnt cut it academically? even jordan eventually got his act straightened out. second the way the APR was explained to me it isnt just about credits. those credits have to be going towards an actual degree program. bottom line we are paying for the revolving door. hopefully we got a roster he can finally be content with and will stop it going forward. that's how we fix it. now if kentucky and syracuse figured out how to beat the system, good for them. i dont want to be kentucky. ever. i dont care if they win the title every year. i want to be a school that actually succeeds in both winning basketball games and producing true student athletes that can be winners in society regardless if they ever play basketball again after saint louis university or not. it that makes me unrealistic or a dreamer, at least i can sleep at night. plenty of schools do have it both ways. we should as well. and what does the apr have to do with that? Aren't we that now despite what the apr says? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 and what does the apr have to do with that? Aren't we that now despite what the apr says? according to the ncaa, no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 i think you are missing a couple of things. one is the player that is technically behind at semester break but catches up before school starts i dont think hurts us either as long as he is at slu. however if that player leaves slu, but is behind he does cost us even if he catches up over the summer at the new school. now the likes of jordan that took a year to catch up would have cost us regardless. Eligible according to the APR means eligible for the next semester. So as long as a guy is eligible by the fall it doesnt hurt. As long as the player is eligible at another 4 year in the fall after transferring in the spring, he doesn't hurt. Thus why guys like Thompson, Tommie, and Barry hurt the most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 according to the ncaa, no. and if we just passed them we would be eligible per the NCAA. Is 'per the ncaa" your guideline to determine if we are doing a good job of educating our players? If so, then why do you speak poorly of Memphis and Kentucky? The NCAA says they are doing ok 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.