SMU Athletics Admission Review Results

[cutter]

One of the big issues was consistancy in computing the gpa, especially when re-taking core courses. Basically the issues were objective definitions (objectivity), consistancy in application, appication of NCAA guidelines, and finally transparancy. I understand that June and Steve were able to make a good presentation to a receptive audience of faculty, administration and outsiders. If this was the case we may have really made some progress between a number of factions that may have had the wrong oppinion of one another and made real progress uniting the university.

if that's the case, that is really good to hear.

[LakeHighlandsPony]

They should have made an exception for the players who were turned away. We stepped on our pecker all the way.

[Stallion]

Because of the unique facts involved with those recruits(late March commitment, late California spring semester and a second semester retaken ACT) I'm not so sure any of these changes would have made a difference in these particular cases. There are unique facts in these kids file that alot of people are glossing over. However, hopefully, there is a set protocol for informing commitments of their status earlier and the qualification scores they need in final semester or on retaken SAT/ACT scores.

[Stallion]

DMN regurgitation of press release. The Daily Campus article has much better analysis. The one point I would take from this story is that SMU is not saying they are academically competitive with ALL NCAA schools but instead, "the current athletics admission policy and procedures have worked well and are consistent with those of other academically competitive universities," In other words we ain't the lowest common denominator like Troy, Marshall, Fresno, NTSU, ECU or Southern Miss but we are on a par with the types of players admitted to UT, A&M, TCU and Baylor etc. After seeing the practical application of how these standards have been applied for the last 3 years and the substantial expansion of the recruiting pool I have no problem with that whatsoever.

http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews.com ... olici.html

[Mexmustang]

One important thing...now the coaches know what is required. This summer's mistakes were not unique. The policy was not clear nor uniformally applied. We had the same situation a year and a half ago and a number of these "near/late" qualifiers did get in and the coaches came to rely on this appication of policy. If admissions rules are transparent and clear it shouldn't happen again.

[smuuth]

Do the coaches understand the requirements so they can explain it to the kids and their parents so that there are "no hard feelings"? Is it given to them in writing or is just a verbal? It needs to be standardized in writing so that SMU doesn't suffer a publicity nightmare again and to make sure the recruit and parents understand. Otherwise, forget trying to recruit the state of Texas and it's strong 12,000 Texas High School Coaches Association! Word spreads quickly among the high school coaches about college staffs and in particular coaches on the staffs. What might work in California with the laid-back surfer dude attitude isn't going to work with the conservative, hard-working TX staffs.

[Stallion]

there is always going to be some complexity in these GPA issues-go back and check out my post on how the GPA calculations are made by the NCAA-but a rule consistent with the NCAA GPA Calculation does make it easier for the recruit to compare. The unmentioned issue is that SMU did not say a thing about its requirements on the SAT/ACT side of the sliding scale being the same as NCAA minimums. That's really where we have and probably will in the future lose a few recruits-however not many sub 700 SAT kids belong at a school like SMU anyway.

[ReedFrawg]

If you correctly calculate your Core GPA after reading this, add 2 pts to your English and Math Core Courses.

+1

[redpony]

No froggie- he said +2 not +1 Good god don't they teach math at tcu?

GO PONIES!!!

[Top 25]

This would have made a difference in Jackson's case.

Bottom line...significant, meaningful, (and overdue) progress. Great work by Orsini, Wollman, Kupchynsky, Cecil, and many others.

Be pleased.

[rlm1951]

there is always going to be some complexity in these GPA issues-go back and check out my post on how the GPA calculations are made by the NCAA-but a rule consistent with the NCAA GPA Calculation does make it easier for the recruit to compare. The unmentioned issue is that SMU did not say a thing about its requirements on the SAT/ACT side of the sliding scale being the same as NCAA minimums. That's really where we have and probably will in the future lose a few recruits-however not many sub 700 SAT kids belong at a school like SMU anyway.

In retrospect, it's questionable that one of the recruits SMU lost could have cut it academically. He struggled in HS and always had intense tutoring to stay eligible in football and basketball. Without that, he might not have made it.

I'm encouraged that this shows some uniformity and, I hope, does away with the capriciousness about admissions that seemed to prevail last summer. The Brenham coach told me that has been the most difficult thing for him to get over - the scholarship was there one day and gone the next - with nothing changing.