That would allow only academically qualified student athletes(2.3gpa or above) to be made verbal or written scholarship offers? If no, why not? It's time that the NCAA and college coaches live up to both their claims and responsibilities that education comes first!
Should there be a new policy written by the NCAA...
- Thread starter jwarigaku
- Start date
JW
Rarely do we agree but here we do. I agree that the ACT score and GPA should be hard and fast rules - but $$$$$ rules all in collegiate athletics. The fact that when the tournament is going on and the PR wonk from the NCAA calls the kids "student athletes" is a sham.
Look what's happening at Baylor right now. You think those kids that are raping and assaulting women are spending their spare time on their calculus homework?
It's a sham and a joke and we all know it is.
Rarely do we agree but here we do. I agree that the ACT score and GPA should be hard and fast rules - but $$$$$ rules all in collegiate athletics. The fact that when the tournament is going on and the PR wonk from the NCAA calls the kids "student athletes" is a sham.
Look what's happening at Baylor right now. You think those kids that are raping and assaulting women are spending their spare time on their calculus homework?
It's a sham and a joke and we all know it is.
LCN,
I'd rather not generalize because I know a lot of true student athletes that play at the highest level and a few are even at Baylor. Again, won't pretend to know the whole story but let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater!
My poll question on the other hand is addressing High School Student athletes that are gaining offers from programs up and down the prestige ladder with GPAs in the 1.xxx's or even 2.0-2.299999.
My question or perhaps my belief is that no High School Student athlete should be eligible to receive a verbal or written offer from a coach until the coach certifies that the students NCAA core GPA is above a 2.30. How do you feel about a policy on that?
I'd rather not generalize because I know a lot of true student athletes that play at the highest level and a few are even at Baylor. Again, won't pretend to know the whole story but let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater!
My poll question on the other hand is addressing High School Student athletes that are gaining offers from programs up and down the prestige ladder with GPAs in the 1.xxx's or even 2.0-2.299999.
My question or perhaps my belief is that no High School Student athlete should be eligible to receive a verbal or written offer from a coach until the coach certifies that the students NCAA core GPA is above a 2.30. How do you feel about a policy on that?
I don't know what problem, perceived or otherwise, such a policy would solve. In fact it might be counterproductive in the sense that kids that are on the edge of qualifying might give up if offers are contingent upon the attainment of a 2.3 GPA. Those kids that receive offers who at the time they receive the offer know what they have to do to make the offer a reality. In some cases it's not the GPA it's the ACT.
I know kids who were non qualifiers going into June who qualified in June and went on to successfully complete in the classroom and football field.
I know kids who were non qualifiers going into June who qualified in June and went on to successfully complete in the classroom and football field.
Great, great topic and question.....one that makes kore than a few college coaches a bit nervous.
I say yes....only way to send a real message when it comes down to it. So many kids get "offers" who aren't anywhere close to being a qualifier. Always a weird deal..but on the flip side several kids do find the right path and qualify so...
I say yes....only way to send a real message when it comes down to it. So many kids get "offers" who aren't anywhere close to being a qualifier. Always a weird deal..but on the flip side several kids do find the right path and qualify so...
We have had a few late qualifiers graduate in 4 years. Not sure exactly what this will accomplish for high school athletes.
There is a difference between a late qualifier and a kid with a 1.3 GPA and 1.0 Core GPA being plastered all over the internet with their offers. With the rule changes for Seniors it will be even harder for kids to get in, unless their counselors give them the Derrick Rose treatment.
LHS,
Late qualifiers after 2016 will generally only be caused by test score not core GPA. The reason why I say this is because in addition to the 2.3 Core GPA requirement there is the "no grade replacement beyond the 6th semester." The point of this rule would be to make sure these kids that are supposed to be student athletes get on the right path to start with because it's a goal they cherish. Any kid that respects the game needs to respect the class room from day one, not late in the process. The college coaches should learn to appreciate this after the initiatal GULP because it will bring them kids that are prepared, dedicated, respectful of the process, and moving away from the me generation! Wow I just read this and I must be getting old.
Late qualifiers after 2016 will generally only be caused by test score not core GPA. The reason why I say this is because in addition to the 2.3 Core GPA requirement there is the "no grade replacement beyond the 6th semester." The point of this rule would be to make sure these kids that are supposed to be student athletes get on the right path to start with because it's a goal they cherish. Any kid that respects the game needs to respect the class room from day one, not late in the process. The college coaches should learn to appreciate this after the initiatal GULP because it will bring them kids that are prepared, dedicated, respectful of the process, and moving away from the me generation! Wow I just read this and I must be getting old.
Every kid situation is different. All kids with unfavorable grades are not me generation kids. Some actually have reasons that most wouldn't understand. Besides they can still qualify late and be an automatic redshirt.
In the end I don't agree with painting every kid with the same brush. Unfortunately it's not that simple. As long as they are successful, that is all that matters. Not interested in punishing kids or a university/ Coach that want a certain kid. On the surface it seem to be selfish thinking.
If you enroll full-time at a Division I school before Aug. 1, 2016, and you have not met all the Division I academic requirements, you may not practice, compete or receive an athletics scholarship in your first year at college.
Starting this year if you have a 2.0 Core you can academic Red Shirt and receive scholarship/practice.
As far as the "stories all over the internet" deal again we (media) don't extend those offers. It's also the responsibility of the schools to pull a transcript etc. and it's on them to decide to offer or not. Again I feel fortunate to have as much access with college coaches and high school coaches etc so I generally have a good idea on the academic side...but again if I decide to take the moral high ground and not write about it then 250 others will. I ask literally every kid I interview the first time "how are the grades" and I get either "great I have a ___ gpa" or "decent" or "I'm working on it". Not much else I feel I can do here...
There isn't much you should do as I still don't see what the issue is. What is the harm in offering a kid scholarship who hasn't met the GPA requirements? What exactly are we trying to fix here? I feel there is a point to be made but, as of now I am not following it. Someone please explain the issues created by an offer to a kid that haven't or may not qualify. Isn't the school taking all the risk? Also, who from the college ranks actually say and mean education come first. That is not even close to reality.
LHS,
The 2.0 Academic redshirt is NOT a late qualifier. The student may or may not be granted admission by the university due to their academic profile, and as MC140 pointed out the student "may not participate in ANY team activities." This policy would be designed to reward players that are truly student athletes, and yes, is punitive towards players that could careless about school. It time kids learn life has consequences!
Regarding learning disabilities, I'm a huge proponent of helping those students, but the vast majority of grade issues are completely unrelated and this excuse tends to be floated as causal in far to many cases. If we truly want to instill responsibility in our youth and our athletes it's time to make them accountable from day 1...after all the student athletes are being rewarded with a 4-5 year check valued at between $100-350!
The 2.0 Academic redshirt is NOT a late qualifier. The student may or may not be granted admission by the university due to their academic profile, and as MC140 pointed out the student "may not participate in ANY team activities." This policy would be designed to reward players that are truly student athletes, and yes, is punitive towards players that could careless about school. It time kids learn life has consequences!
Regarding learning disabilities, I'm a huge proponent of helping those students, but the vast majority of grade issues are completely unrelated and this excuse tends to be floated as causal in far to many cases. If we truly want to instill responsibility in our youth and our athletes it's time to make them accountable from day 1...after all the student athletes are being rewarded with a 4-5 year check valued at between $100-350!
LHS,
If you can't see that this is a problem than you place zero value on the education and all the value in college as a platform to become a pro. If that's what you believe, than your philosophy is the biggest part of the problem because we as parents, coaches, and educators fail the student far more than they ever failed themselves! Less than 0.1% of this year's graduating class will have the chance to play pro! Education during these years is paramount to all.
If you can't see that this is a problem than you place zero value on the education and all the value in college as a platform to become a pro. If that's what you believe, than your philosophy is the biggest part of the problem because we as parents, coaches, and educators fail the student far more than they ever failed themselves! Less than 0.1% of this year's graduating class will have the chance to play pro! Education during these years is paramount to all.
Not getting into the university is punishment in itself right. They gain nothing but a little press by receiving an offer before qualifying. Based on your statements, one would think that money is exchanged or somehow school are paying something for kids that don't qualify. In the end you have to qualify with or without an offer. If you can't get into school, the offer isn't valid. The old written offers stated continent on qualifying. This take care of everything you mentioned above.
College coaches get a paid millions of dollars to win football games, not bring in the smartest football players they can find. By the way, GPA don't determine how much of a student a kid really is nor his intelligent level. It's a lot that goes into the school system and when that is broken you can't hold kids accountable.
LHS,
Accountability is what the world has been built upon. People need to be held accountable, whether they are parents, educators, or students. This whole attitude of "not my fault or not my job" is a perfect example of what's wrong with today's world. I won't politicize this because I think politicians are to blame regardless of affiliation. Everyone matters in this world and everyone has a stakehold, but without the checks and balances of every person holding the other accountable we risk being in an ever declining society. Let's start giving people a hand up and holding everyone accountable starting with our students!
Accountability is what the world has been built upon. People need to be held accountable, whether they are parents, educators, or students. This whole attitude of "not my fault or not my job" is a perfect example of what's wrong with today's world. I won't politicize this because I think politicians are to blame regardless of affiliation. Everyone matters in this world and everyone has a stakehold, but without the checks and balances of every person holding the other accountable we risk being in an ever declining society. Let's start giving people a hand up and holding everyone accountable starting with our students!
So you're in favor of semi-pro football and nevermind setting these kids up for the real world after football ends in 3-10 years?
What are you talking about????
This discussion is about kids getting offers before they qualify, not kids putting their all into football and not achieving an education. I can name you 5 players that all struggle to qualify but ALL graduated from their University in 4 years. The Universities are (Illinois, Kentucky, Kansas, Jackson State and Carbondale) On the flip side, I have a couple of players that had a GPA of 3.0 or higher that dropped out or got kicked out after 2 years. How you get that I don't value education is beyond me. I don't agree with painting everyone with the same brush like you are trying to do.
Now specifically about the NFL. Most like to quote the success rate of making to the NFL however I never see the same information provided when a kid say he wants to be a Doctor, Lawyer, Engineer, etc. I truly don't understand why people like to discourage kids and their dreams.
So how is offering a kid a scholarship IF he makes the grades not holding them accountable?
That's precisely the point If/when he/she makes the grade. If he or she is not a qualifier they should not be rewarded with the offer, they should have to earn the right to gain the offer...lets make it like the real world, you don't get a job or salary unless you are capable of, and actually do the work. Yes I know they are not exchanging any money in making a scholarship offer, but you wouldn't obtain a job offer( see no money exchanged here either) without having the grades or certificate proving you could do the job.
I have no use for an organization that would take away wins from USC, but give them back to Penn State. I have no use for an organization that made millions off the likeness of players via a video game, but would suspend a player for accepting a meal. Ask Emmanuel Omogbo what he thinks of the NCAA.
I also have no use for an organization that flaunts the money and power, while doing all they can (my opinion) to stomp on the backs of the very people who give them that money.
I mean good lord, we have another thread on this board about Illinois universities being sinking ships and I'm guessing the highest paid state employee is either a football or basketball coach.
Let's also be honest with ourselves, none of us give a damn about Mike Dudek chemistry test results. Most of us are more worried about the number of targets he gets on a Saturday.
Okay so let's take that approach. They can qualify as late as August 31st. So you want a coaching staff to either put everything on hold or offer kid and take it away once the kid they really want qualify? To me, that is a much worse scenario for everyone. The kid that finally qualify is now getting harassed during the season because that is the first time someone was able to contact him. The college coaches are now trying to scramble and spend tons of more money to recruit this kid late. Finally the kid that had an offer is now without a home because a kid qualified late.
What are we really gaining by doing this? What if a kid had the GPA as a freshman, but lost it as a sophomore? He received the offer as a Freshman. If there is something that can truly be gained from this I have no problem with it. Right now, I see this as a measure to hopefully get a lesser talented kid offered based on the fact that the more talented kid hasn't qualified yet. In the end, the college coach is going to take the most talented kid available that will attend their University.
LHS that's great for those students that pulled up their bootstraps and were successful how many are statistics on the other side of that equation...if you're honest far more than 5! Imagine how much better and less streesful their lives might have been if they had prepared from day one knowing the expectations. With my proposal they still would have had the opportunity.
I'll quote the stats for medical school because I'm familiar with them. Every year there are about 190,000 students that enter college with the end intent of a MD. There are about 19,000 MD's awarded per year so the success rate is hovering around 10%. However, let's examine that along the way the vast majority of those students still get a very good education along the way and are prepared to enter the workforce in a successful manner even though they did not earn an MD. I'm not saying we should discourage a player from trying to reach the pinnacle of a professional career, but rather that we also need to ingrain in them that they must be prepared for the end of sports and entry into the real world. After all even the most successful athletes have a dismal record of staying out of bankruptcy courts or away from destructive behavior(see Johnny football)!
I'll quote the stats for medical school because I'm familiar with them. Every year there are about 190,000 students that enter college with the end intent of a MD. There are about 19,000 MD's awarded per year so the success rate is hovering around 10%. However, let's examine that along the way the vast majority of those students still get a very good education along the way and are prepared to enter the workforce in a successful manner even though they did not earn an MD. I'm not saying we should discourage a player from trying to reach the pinnacle of a professional career, but rather that we also need to ingrain in them that they must be prepared for the end of sports and entry into the real world. After all even the most successful athletes have a dismal record of staying out of bankruptcy courts or away from destructive behavior(see Johnny football)!
Knowing Mikey since he was in 3rd grade, I'd beg to differ with you and honestly so would his Parents. Also a very bad example since he's been an honors student as long as I can remember.
Wether it's the NCAA or some governing body it's the self policing we need in order to get away from the Money Grab you're pointing out.
Wether it's the NCAA or some governing body it's the self policing we need in order to get away from the Money Grab you're pointing out.
Just so we are clear 10% are not really great odds. Also there are other positions in this world that an athlete would be great at. Law enforcement, Fireman, Union Laborer, etc. I completely agree with your desire to enhance the human race through education (I stopped at my MBA to raise my family) however not every kid will follow in my foot steps. Even my kids will all choose different paths. Players going bankrupt is specifically due to the high dollar amount in a short period of time with guidance. Look at the individuals who win the lottery that end of broke in 5 years. College education has nothing to do with it. There are people that have degrees that can't managed their money.
In the end, I get your point of holding certain kids accountable however you are talking the lower end of the structure. In the last 10 years there has only been one kid that I know received an offer and never went to school. I know a couple that have gone to Juco and made the best of their situation. Most use the offer as motivation which is why I disagree with your theory. Sometimes a light at the end of the tunnel will do wonders for a kid.
I am not. Your statement said offer kids who care about being a student athlete instead. That implies that those kids aren't getting offers because the talented (assuming based on having the offer) non qualifying kids do.
Talent has nothing to do with GPA and in some cases neither does intelligence.
Wow, I'm agreeing with Jwar...
What about the kids who feel they are blocked by the higher star rated kids at a university when they look at the list of offers?
Take, for example, an academic institution that people actually want to get into for football as well as academics such as Stanford. Not saying they do this, just using this school as an example.
Let's say they "offer" a large number of kids, above the number of open scholarships.
What if you were a three star athlete with a Stanford offer who is an academic qualifier and you look at the list of other kids with offers and you see many four and five star kids at your position,
Remember, this is Stanford, so the kid can do the math, does he and his family decide that they should accept an offer that they may have from a lower academic institution because they don't think the Stanford offer will be real when it comes to crunch time?
What if those four and five star offer kids were academic non qualifiers and the kid would have gotten in?
So now the kid ends up at a school below his abilities from an academic standpoint.
So do we not care about the kids who really are qualifiers?
What about the kids who feel they are blocked by the higher star rated kids at a university when they look at the list of offers?
Take, for example, an academic institution that people actually want to get into for football as well as academics such as Stanford. Not saying they do this, just using this school as an example.
Let's say they "offer" a large number of kids, above the number of open scholarships.
What if you were a three star athlete with a Stanford offer who is an academic qualifier and you look at the list of other kids with offers and you see many four and five star kids at your position,
Remember, this is Stanford, so the kid can do the math, does he and his family decide that they should accept an offer that they may have from a lower academic institution because they don't think the Stanford offer will be real when it comes to crunch time?
What if those four and five star offer kids were academic non qualifiers and the kid would have gotten in?
So now the kid ends up at a school below his abilities from an academic standpoint.
So do we not care about the kids who really are qualifiers?
Walk me through this. A kid that wants to go to Stanford, has a Stanford offer, chose another school and somehow this is the fault of the kid who isn't a qualifier receiving an offer from Stanford? Let's not even get into you admitting that academics isn't priority one for the academic kid based on choosing a different school for playing time. If my kid received an offer from Stanford, I could care less how many other kids received an offer, he going. 1. I don't recommend anyone running from competition or a challenge. 2. Its Stanford and California. I think we are going a little overboard trying to prove something or make an issue out of something that isn't an issue. If the kids and the parents don't do what they are supposed to, an offer is irrelevant and doesn't exist. The only positive for the kid is a possible signing day blunder.
Well you kind of missed the point...
Your kid is going if you have to pay the entire $60,000+ annual cost because now there is no scholarship for him?
Plus now he is a walk on of some sort.
They aren't running from competition, there isn't any open competition, it's star ratings.
The point was nonacademic qualifiers blocking the position from a kid who is an academic qualifier.
Most people aren't going to want to play the game of chicken to see who falls off of the list ahead of them only to discover the other good offers are now filled at the last minute.
LHS,
Your myopic look at the world is unbelievable. To say only one kid in the last 10 years extended a scholarship offer hasn't gone is just silly and can be disproven quickly. I refuse to do it here because I will not call out any specific kid on an issue like this to prove my point. Now granted 10% isn't great but it is still 2 orders of Magnitude (100X) better odds than making it to the NFL, and once you make it then you need to stay more than 2.7 years. Your comments lend to the old adage of the dumb jock, lets stop this and encourage the student athletes to become just that, students who are athletes. This policy would slow down the runaway train that has become recruiting. Coaches would slow the process back down so that everyone was vetted with oversight and then the most talented athletes, who are qualifying students, would gain offers and eventual admittance to the programs. The silliness of offering kids is 8th grade or sooner would go away and things would revert to the days kids played sports, rather than jockeying for position in sport illustrated at 14.
Yes every kid is different but they need to be encourage to succeed in the classroom and life not just on the sports field and hope and pray everything else falls in line. Sports in school is a privilege not a God given right...make all the excuses you want that its about money or this student is different that this one because of where he/she comes from or what he/she's been exposed to, but what I want to see is EVERYONE treated equally regardless of any affect! If you read this as anything other than "is the athlete a 2.3 core or not" you're trying to distort and misrepresent my intent. A core GPA of 2.3 is the bar that has been set and that must be achieved period. If the more talented athlete can't achieve that level of academic success so be it, he/she can go JUCO or not go at all.
By the by I'm also a proponent of an early signing period at say the beginning of the Senior year of High school and would also make it mandatory for colleges to support official visits once an offer is extended and mandatory prior to signing a LOI.
Your myopic look at the world is unbelievable. To say only one kid in the last 10 years extended a scholarship offer hasn't gone is just silly and can be disproven quickly. I refuse to do it here because I will not call out any specific kid on an issue like this to prove my point. Now granted 10% isn't great but it is still 2 orders of Magnitude (100X) better odds than making it to the NFL, and once you make it then you need to stay more than 2.7 years. Your comments lend to the old adage of the dumb jock, lets stop this and encourage the student athletes to become just that, students who are athletes. This policy would slow down the runaway train that has become recruiting. Coaches would slow the process back down so that everyone was vetted with oversight and then the most talented athletes, who are qualifying students, would gain offers and eventual admittance to the programs. The silliness of offering kids is 8th grade or sooner would go away and things would revert to the days kids played sports, rather than jockeying for position in sport illustrated at 14.
Yes every kid is different but they need to be encourage to succeed in the classroom and life not just on the sports field and hope and pray everything else falls in line. Sports in school is a privilege not a God given right...make all the excuses you want that its about money or this student is different that this one because of where he/she comes from or what he/she's been exposed to, but what I want to see is EVERYONE treated equally regardless of any affect! If you read this as anything other than "is the athlete a 2.3 core or not" you're trying to distort and misrepresent my intent. A core GPA of 2.3 is the bar that has been set and that must be achieved period. If the more talented athlete can't achieve that level of academic success so be it, he/she can go JUCO or not go at all.
By the by I'm also a proponent of an early signing period at say the beginning of the Senior year of High school and would also make it mandatory for colleges to support official visits once an offer is extended and mandatory prior to signing a LOI.
Nothing is legal and binding until signing day. If a school is willing to sign a kid and send him to Juco vs offer my son it's pretty clear on where my kid stands. Either I pay out of pocket or move on. Sorry, I don't see
I am somewhat disappointed but it is also expected. From the very beginning I spoke of kids that graduated from higher education in four years!!! How is that not supporting the education agenda???? You are a very smart person but you are very lost in your agenda. Trying to turn my words into something different is not possible. I KNOW every kid that received an offer and I KNOW every kid in the last 15 years who went to school and who didn't . You can challenge me privately or on this board, I can care less either way. I don't have an agenda or a point to prove. I simple stated and stand behind the current issue with recruiting is not offering kids that haven't qualified yet. I backed this up with kids that have graduated college after receiving offers well before they qualified. I am not talking general, I am talking specific. Had either one of those kids had to wait until they qualified before receiving an offer, I may not be able to use them as a college graduate in today's examples. Your process would have eliminated those kids from going to college and graduating with a degree. I can never support such agenda.
Yes I feel strongly about kids pursuing their dreams! Whether its a "dumb jock" that want to be a professional athlete or a player that want to be a lawyer (Please note that we had a player graduate law school at the top of his class). It's there dream to have and not mine as an adult to crush or make their life my reality. You can call it whatever you like but until you walk in these kids shoes or even try to live their life for one day I don't think you are qualified to past judgement on what is best for them.
As far as recruitment is concerned parents, coaches, and the kids can control how far recruitment goes. Participating in the recruitment hoopla is voluntary.