Serious Question: APR & Sanctions

**JonDMiller** · 07-20-2007, 10:15 AM

If I remember correctly, ISU's basketball program was flirting with some APR troubles. Did ISU choose to take a penalty this last year? I really can't remember, but when you lose three players of a five player recruiting class (Mac's first class last year), that is going to be tough to absorb when you were on a bubble.

I am hoping that ISU had already bitten the bullet on this, because with the addition of a couple of guards in recruiting this coming year, this team looks stacked for the future.

**JonDMiller** · 07-20-2007, 10:19 AM

I found something on this:

The ISU men’s basketball team fell below the cutoff mark with a multi-year score of 852. However, the NCAA has granted ISU a conditional waiver from further penalties given this year’s score was impacted by the loss of six student-athletes after a coaching change in 2006. The men’s basketball program had already been penalized with a loss of two scholarships in Coach Greg McDermott’s first year due to the team’s academic performance prior to his arrival. To avoid future penalties for the men’s basketball program, Iowa State must record yearly APR scores above 925 and maintain progress towards a four-year composite of 925.

“Although we are concerned that our men’s basketball APR score is below the cutoff mark, it is important to note that we received perfect APR scores (1,000) in men’s basketball in the semester before and after our coaching change,” Director of Athletics Jamie Pollard said. “We are confident that with Coach McDermott’s emphasis on and track record in the academic performance of his student-athletes that improvement will be made. The large exodus from our team (2006 spring) has, however, created challenges because our ability to absorb further departures from our men’s basketball team could result in not meeting the requirements of the conditional waiver.”

**hursts** · 07-20-2007, 10:21 AM

I am almost 100 percent sure that ISU took the penalty this past basketball season. I'm not sure how these recent departures will effect their APR but if Taylor, McIntosh, and Dunson were on track to graduate. (Whatever that means!) I think ISU will be ok with the APR.

**hursts** · 07-20-2007, 10:24 AM

Pollard's quote at the end of Jon's post makes it sound like these departures will maybe hurt us.

**ISUFan22** · 07-20-2007, 10:26 AM

Those quotes are old I think. To the best of my knowledge, we already took the hit. I think we're in some sort of probation or something like that - they're keeping an eye on us or whatever. Can't recall for sure.

I would guess this one instance (MT) won't hurt us, but one or two more and I'll assume more penalties would be headed our way.

**Jeremy** · 07-20-2007, 10:33 AM

Iowa State already took the hit on the scholarship issue but the conditional waiver for further penalties will be up for review on a constant basis until the yearly ranking rises above that threshold. The Taylor situation will be taken into consideration with our conditional waiver, but unless we have any more issues, we aren't expecting any more scholarship penalties.

The rule isn't there to say that you can never lose a player before they graduate, it's to make sure you don't push players out to make room for better players and to make sure you do everything possible to have the kids graduate. Each school and each situation is taken into consideration separately and the NCAA has shown that they care more about what you're doing to fix the potential problems and have a clean program than what happens to one or two kids that you couldn't help.

It's my understanding and belief that there won't be additional penalties solely from losing Taylor.

**CYdTracked** · 07-20-2007, 10:38 AM

This APR thing is somewhat stupid sometimes. We got burned by some of Wayne Morgan's mess on this and GMac had to clean it up. There should be some kind of "exception" or way for that stuff to not hurt a new coach that comes in. You can expect turnover with a coaching change and maybe do some kind of "probation period" or something where the scholarship penalties are put on hold and new coach has a clean slate but if his new players don't meet certain criteria/expectations you incur the penalty. At least that way a new coach has a full set of scholarships to work with from the start and as long as his system is clean the mistakes of a past coach don't hurt his ability to field a team.

I don't know, something needs to be tweaked though. It's one thing if a tenured coach has problems but for a new coach to take over another person's mistakes is a disadvantage. Sure the university is still accountable too I guess but all I'm saying is you could "defer" the penalty based on what the new coach's players do and if he cleans things up the penalty is forgiven.

**mustangcy** · 07-20-2007, 10:38 AM

Good info...thanks everyone!

**JonDMiller** · 07-20-2007, 10:43 AM

"The rule isn't there to say that you can never lose a player before they graduate, it's to make sure you don't push players out to make room for better players and to make sure you do everything possible to have the kids graduate."

That is true, however if you have players leave early for the NBA, or transfer for legit reasons (other than being run off), it hurts you. I have read several articles that quoted the likes of a Tom Izzo who complain about the APR due to kids leaving early for the pros and how that hurts their rating, which is nuts.

**mkcrawford** · 07-20-2007, 11:07 AM

In my opinion and the way I interpreted Pollard's quote was that becuase of the coaching change and the exodus of players, we were somewhat exempted from the APR requirement - BUT that we would be monitored yearly (instead of over 4 years) for achievement of a score above 925 and maintain progress for a 4 year composite score of 925. :Confused:

Me thinks that means we get to start from scratch.

**psycln11** · 07-20-2007, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by JonDMiller

That is true, however if you have players leave early for the NBA, or transfer for legit reasons (other than being run off), it hurts you. I have read several articles that quoted the likes of a Tom Izzo who complain about the APR due to kids leaving early for the pros and how that hurts their rating, which is nuts.

Weren't people in Texas worried that Kevin Durant would stop going to class after the season, therfore, not making the necessary progress towards his degree before he declared for the NBA??

**Oldgeezer** · 07-20-2007, 11:56 AM

Originally Posted by psycln11

Weren't people in Texas worried that Kevin Durant would stop going to class after the season, therfore, not making the necessary progress towards his degree before he declared for the NBA??

Right! And one of the purposes of the rule is that it gives the University and the NBA bound athlete a reason to keep gong to class after he decides to go pro.

**psycln11** · 07-20-2007, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by Oldgeezer

Right! And one of the purposes of the rule is that it gives the University and the NBA bound athlete a reason to keep gong to class after he decides to go pro.

Except that the NBA bound athlete, in most cases, could care less about school once the season is over. Why would he want to go to school if he knows he's going to be making $Millions$?

Didn't Tinsley drop out of school shortly after the season to prepare for the draft?? Did he end up coming back to complete his degree??

**JonDMiller** · 07-22-2007, 09:42 PM

"Didn't Tinsley drop out of school shortly after the season to prepare for the draft?? Did he end up coming back to complete his degree??"

I think the Big12 rule at the time made it so kids could sort of skate on classes at the start of the year, without any problems during either the fall or spring semester. I think that has been changed now.

**darts180** · 07-22-2007, 09:56 PM

Originally Posted by travman23

This APR thing is somewhat stupid sometimes. We got burned by some of Wayne Morgan's mess on this and GMac had to clean it up. There should be some kind of "exception" or way for that stuff to not hurt a new coach that comes in. You can expect turnover with a coaching change and maybe do some kind of "probation period" or something where the scholarship penalties are put on hold and new coach has a clean slate but if his new players don't meet certain criteria/expectations you incur the penalty. At least that way a new coach has a full set of scholarships to work with from the start and as long as his system is clean the mistakes of a past coach don't hurt his ability to field a team.

I don't know, something needs to be tweaked though. It's one thing if a tenured coach has problems but for a new coach to take over another person's mistakes is a disadvantage. Sure the university is still accountable too I guess but all I'm saying is you could "defer" the penalty based on what the new coach's players do and if he cleans things up the penalty is forgiven.

It wasn't Wayne Morgan, we will go through this AGAIN. The revolving door of players that occurred the last two years of Larry's tenure was what started the ball rolling. The ONLY player that left before eligibility was up during Wayne's three years as coach was Reggie George. Stinson and Blaylock declared for the draft, but up until their final semester, they were in good academic standing.

Now when Wayne was fired, all of the players, except the four that stuck around, transferred out. It seems that at schools like Iowa State, that when there is a coaching change, players that signed up to play for the coach who was fired tend to want to explore other options. The grass was greener for a lot of these kids and they left. Wayne was like a father to these kids, a fact that was ridiculed by many, like you.

EDIT

With the ISU UVA game being shown, there is one other player that did not leave in good standing, that was Robert Faulkner. He played for a semester then flunked out. So you were right, it is all Wayne Morgan's fault.