From this article http://espn.go.com/ncb/s/2003/0403/1533643.html it looks like the NCAA is getting ready to implement some kind of plan that will punish programs who don't graduate at least some of their student athletes. From the article: What do you think? Will it work? Is it good for the athletes or will it just increase incentives for academic fraud and athlete only courses and majors? Who benefits and who loses? I think it's a good idea in principle and I think it will force coaches to pay more than lip-service to academics. In the article, Boeheim and Calhoun come off as lame apologists for their programs. It's not their fault if players leave early for the NBA, but you can't tell me a 25% graduation rate is acceptable. Or the 6% that Tennessee football had over the same period. Is it the coaches responsibility to make sure his students make progress toward a degree? IMO, yes, because they are employed by and represent primarily academic institutions. Though I disliked a lot about Bobby Knight as a coach, this is something he understood. OTOH, this has the potential to promote academic fraud, "athlete" classes and majors, and make a further joke of undergrad education at some institutions.
Oh yeah, can't wait to see more college ballers with such great majors as "communications", "general studies" and of course, everyone's favourite "african-american studies."
I wouldn't mind the NCAA implementing some sort of rule like this. It never hurt me with my grades. And my last two years in college I was an assistant coach. Put in a lot more hours than the players.
Why would you see more athletes with joke majors? Players who would be affected by this proposal, those in poor academic standing, already have joke majors. Players with real majors are most likely on course to graduate anyway.
This should be interesting to see how much they punish schools like Cincinnati who will show having graduated only one Senior this year, none last year, and one two years ago, inspite of actually graduating all eight of their eight seniors in that span for what anyone but the NCAA would call a perfect graduation rate. In order for thist to work, JuCo transfers that graduate must be counted as seniors, and fifth year students need to as well.
I'm not sure if I'm understanding your post exactly, but doesn't the NCAA give you six years to graduate?
ok, just on the subject of "joke" majors... what is an acceptable liberal arts major then? (Or is the whole dept. just a joke?) I mean, at least coms is extremely useful. 99% of the people couldn't do pre-med and play D1 basketball. Pre-law? Nah. Education is even more of a joke than lib. arts majors. Psych? Hah, no use for it unless you goto grad school. History? (my minor ) Joke. Philosophy? Haha. So let's hear them, tell me some acceptable majors that most of us could do in 4 years given the dedication you have to give to D1 basketball.
Yes, it does give a student athlete six years (under soma circumstances) however, no matter how few years it takes a JuCo transfer student to graduate, they do not count as a graduating senior.
I get you - I wasn't aware that JuCo transfers don't count towards the graduation rate. But I can't see NCAA implementing this rule without changing the way they calculate graduation rates and "good academic standing".
Plus kids that decide to tranfer, be it for playing time, homesickness or whatever, count against your graduation rate, even if they graduate in the time frame. Not that there isn't a problem with graduation rates at some schools, but the NCAA will have to come up with a better way of calculating rates before they go on a witchhunt.
My understanding is that under the proposed rules, early draftees and outgoing transfers won't count as long as they're in good academic standing. Whether there will be an NCAA standard for what constitutes "good academic standing" or it will be school-by-school basis, we do not know, but I think it's reasonable.
do you think this will impact coaches scholarship decisions? take carmelo anthony, for example. everyone knows he would leave after 1 year. he has no real incentive to study. he could flunk all his classes this semester, leave for the nba and jimmy b would be in trouble because carmelo didn't leave school in "good academic standing". would coaches be willing to potentially sacrifice their graduation rate for a great player for 1 year? of course, you could argue that people like caremlo have no business attending college in the first place and that this system would prevent kids from using college as a basketball trade school.