Q: Hi Dom. … Recently, UConn was penalized for low APR scores with a loss in scholarships. That was the penalty, and UConn is paying for it. Now, the NCAA wants to change the penalty for a tournament ban. Why would UConn be penalized twice? In past years, a number of schools showing APR improvement actually got some scholarships back. UConn has made some big strides and the only thing being discussed is how to cripple the school by reaching back with double jeopady. How is that fair?
Mike Gempartyz
Newington
A: Mike, it’s not. … The NCAA, which has moved so slowly in other areas, rushed into this without thinking it completely through, in my opinion. It wanted to make a bold statement about increased emphasis on academics, and I applaud that. But new rules should be phased in so that all schools have a chance to make improvements in future semesters, since what has already been done cannot be changed. Technically, the loss of scholarships is due to having two “0-for-2″ players who left school with unsatisfactory academic standing, and not for the low APR score, per se. UConn may, in fact, end up getting one or both scholarships back. But that is really beside the point. The new policy should have been made to take effect in 2014, or it should have been made certain that the most recent scores possible be used. What has happened is that a policy established in October 2011 is administering penalties for things that happened in the fall of 2009. This doesn’t make sense or logic. However, it doesn’t appear likely that anything will change, as things stand now, but the NCAA’s Committee on Academic Performance meets next week to discuss using more current grades to administer the penalty.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
10 Responses to Mailbag 2/15: UConn, APR and the NCAA: Double Jeopardy At Work?
Leave a Reply
- -- ADVERTISEMENT --
UConn Men Photos
Text Alerts
FREE Huskies, breaking news, and/or weather alerts sent to your mobile phone.*
*Or text UCONNFB, UCONNMB, UCONNWBNEWS, WEATHER, NEWS to 37798 Text STOP to 37798 to end your subscription. Your carrier's standard message and data rates may apply. Questions? Click here for frequently asked questions.UConn Newsletters
Score big with our Husky Hoopla email.
See a sample
Sign in to add or remove newsletters.- -- ADVERTISEMENT --
Dom, you’ve done a great job on the beat this year. One issue I have, however. Yesterday, while on ESPN’s Outside the Lines, you were a guest, and never brought up this point of double jeopardy, something many of us fans have been screaming about ever since October. ESPN won’t mention it, so I was hoping you would say something on the air about why Uconn and their fans feel this is so unfair. I understand time constraints and all, just mostly frustrated about this ridiculous penalty the NCAA has given.
Keep up the good work,
Mark
You know Dom, Mark is right no one brings this up about double jeopardy. How can you get punished twice. It’s so unfair for any school to be punished this way. I’m sure if it was a Big 10 school this would not be happening. They have to add the results from the last 4 semesters to be fair. I was watching Saturday and the CBS pre game show brought up the subject. Of course they all hammered UConn especially Seth Davis(Duke Boy) they don’t even no the whole story with double jeopardy. It stinks really bad. There is no doubt the NCAA is trying to make an example of UConn especially since it irks them they won the 2011 National Championship.
How does APR correspond to increased emphasis on academics? It doesn’t, it does the opposite.
Shouldn’t it just be called Mail Envelope since you only answer one question?
That aside, great response to an issue that no one in the media has seen fit to address. What the NCAA is doing is wrong. It’s unfair, and a misuse of power.
Where’s “Jeff Jacobs for Justice” this time? Crickets.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but is double jeopardy not only applicable in courts of law, but also binding on the NCAA? Who says that life is fair anyway? Fair would be if the atletes, staff, and coaches to live up to their responsibilities.
Who are the “0 for 2″ that left in poor academic standing? Please tell me uconn is not penalized for the kid who was kicked out of the school for the restraining order violation and never participated in a sacntioned practice!!
What doesnt make sense to me is the NCAA waits until after the kid is out of school to say “they are not in good academic standing”. Uconn hasnt had many players suspended for grades so they meet the NCAA requirements to get on the floor. Shouldnt the NCAA, if they care about students, take a more proactive approach and make the day to day, year to year, requirements tougher so that kids graduate instead of waiting until after the kid is out of school? IT doesnt make sense to me.
Don,
You should have mentioned these issues and concerns about the NCAA on ESPN’s OTL while you were on. It would have added a lot of value to the conversation and I expected that you would have said contributed to the nations understanding of issue.(unless ESPN edited your comments which would be extremely shotty journalisim)
Agree with what Joe said!
Generally I don’t learn article on blogs, however I wish to say that this write-up very compelled me to try and do it! Your writing taste has been amazed me. Thank you, very nice article.