Academic Progress Report

**mikeiastat** · 05-07-2009, 10:28 AM

Granted this is for all sports, but given the GMac contract, this seems most relavent here. It's the academic Progress report taken directly from the NCAA website.

http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/apr2008/311_2008_apr.pdf

We are still below the standard (925 for those who don't know), but are improving. Therefor we avoid sanctions, is how I read this. But, keep in mind that it is a 3 year avg, so an almost 10% increase in a year is a bit significant. Wish it were better, but its a decent step. So, take it for what its worth.

All other sports seem to be doing pretty well.

**d4nim4l** · 05-07-2009, 10:30 AM

I believe we're still reeling from the Eustachy and Morgan years as far as that is concerned.

Before it is said, transfers have nothing to do with the score as long as they leave in good academic standing. Which I believe all of them did.

**MNCyGuy** · 05-07-2009, 10:31 AM

what level of improvement do you have to be seeing to avoid sanctions while you're under the standard?

**mikeiastat** · 05-07-2009, 10:35 AM

also if anyone cares here is the base page for APR. From here you can look at other years and other schools if you like. I always hate it when a page doesn't follow a progression from a root page. Drives me crazy not to be able to navigate to related information.

So here it is.

http://http://www.ncaa.org/wps/ncaa?ContentID=1220

**BryceC** · 05-07-2009, 10:36 AM

Originally Posted by d4nim4l

Before it is said, transfers have nothing to do with the score as long as they leave in good academic standing. Which I believe all of them did.

This was a fairly recent change, (I think within the last 3 years) so that could account for the jump as well.

**mikeiastat** · 05-07-2009, 11:07 AM

As far as progress and improvement. I think that, like everything else that the NCAA does, this is a moving target. Each school that "struggles" defines a "get well plan" <----- real name for it.

I'm GUESSING that "improvement" is defined in this. As far as I can tell, the get well plan is not made very public unless the university choses to make it so. The get well plan is submitted by the university and needs to be approved by the NCAA. Therefor, every situation could be different. I know your thinking NCAA moving targets, inconsistancy, no way.

But its true.

**mplscyclone** · 05-07-2009, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by d4nim4l

I believe we're still reeling from the Eustachy and Morgan years as far as that is concerned.

Before it is said, transfers have nothing to do with the score as long as they leave in good academic standing. Which I believe all of them did.

Good point. When you have everyone leaving the program instead of playing 4 years and not graduate, you'll get plus scores.

Good job McDermott!

**Clone5** · 05-07-2009, 01:00 PM

Originally Posted by mplscyclone

Good point. When you have everyone leaving the program instead of playing 4 years and not graduate, you'll get plus scores.

Good job McDermott!

But every team in the nation has that same problem.

**Chipper** · 05-07-2009, 01:08 PM

1-10th percentile. Sweetness.

**swarthmoreCY** · 05-07-2009, 03:14 PM

Originally Posted by mplscyclone

Good point. When you have everyone leaving the program instead of playing 4 years and not graduate, you'll get plus scores.

Good job McDermott!

Although not the ideal situation, it was a good tactical move. If you are going to take a marginal prospect that will likely not make it all four years, take the smart ones. Don't think this wasn't considered in the recruitment of Mann.