PonyFans.com

SMU Excels In APR Reports
Three Squads Awarded NCAA Public Recognition Awards
March 1, 2006

INDIANAPOLIS (NCAA/SMU) - The NCAA released the first set of two-year Academic Progress Rates on Wednesday, and three SMU programs - men's basketball, men's swimming and women's golf - have been awarded NCAA Public Recognition Awards for ranking in the top 10 percent of NCAA teams in their respective sports. Overall, each of SMU's
16 teams exceeded the NCAA's APR requirements for the 04-05 academic year as well as the multi-year average.

For the two-year period, SMU's women's golf and men's swim programs scored perfect 1,000s on the APR, while two more teams - women's soccer and women's swimming - were perfect for the 2004-05 season. Men's basketball posted an APR of 990 over the two-year span to rank in the NCAA's top 10 percent and earn academic recognition. Eleven of the Mustang programs scored above 975 - men's basketball (990), men's golf (976), men's swimming (1,000), cross country (984), rowing (989), women's golf (1,000), women's soccer (984), women's swimming (981), women's indoor and outdoor track (981) and volleyball (989) - and another squad, women's basketball, just missed, finishing at 974.

The APR uses a system based on eligibility and retention. Every student-athlete can earn two points each term: one for eligibility and one for returning to school. If a student-athlete maintains eligibility for the next semester and returns, the team he or she plays for gets two points (2/2). If a student-athlete is eligible but leaves school, the school loses one point (1/2). If a student-athlete loses eligibility and also leaves school, the school loses two points (0/2). Every student-athlete's score is added to come up with a team total and APR. While the NCAA will eventually require a four-year average score for each sport, the multi-year average only includes the 2003-04 and 2004-05 academic years.

"We're happy with the results of the latest APR report and are very proud of the academic successes of our student-athletes," said SMU acting Athletic Director John Koerner. "SMU presents a rigorous academic environment and for all of our teams to exceed the requirements - with three teams earning NCAA Public Recognition Awards - is a compliment to our student-athletes, coaches and SMU's academic support staff."

Congratulations SMU STUDENT-ATHLETES!

APR excellence is something that anyone who cares about SMU as an academic institution can be proud of.

Also, to the Mustang coaches and academic support staff --- well done!

Ditto -- congrats to the teams and coaches.
This is impressive.

We now have documented proof of what the coaches keep telling recruits.

If you want to play sports and get an education, then SMU has so much to offer. This is the place go do both. Now Mom and Dad have proof that this is the truth, not just a coach's sales pitch.

Great job coaches and student-athletes.

Now let's tell our story to the world and bring more student-athletes to the hilltop.

That report should be shoved in front of the parents of every recruit we go after.

Thanks for posting that ponypride. They represent academics well and they win on the field ....................true student-athletes.........

I still would not mind having a separate "barn" for some of the remedials that can play ball and deserve a chance at a college education and possible pro football career. In the banking business we are required by law to designate a portion of our investments and loans to the low income customers and areas. These folks, although not always, are often made up of the lesser educated and less savvy individuals. That is in no way meant to degrade them, but they deserve some consideration and assistance to become home owners and viable members of the community. I do not necessarily agree with the government telling my bank's owner how to use his money, but at the same time I enjoy the opportunity to help those that need a leg up sometimes. Prospective student athletes need the same consideration. A college education is something to be cherished but earned. However, if we design the school entrance to only those we know will excel in certain areas, we are forgoing the opportunity to make a good education available to all who desire. And, as a side note, we are possibly missing out on some very good athletes at the same time.

Not all great athletes are dumb. And not all dummies are great athletes. But there are great athletes that do come from underpriviledged areas that could use some help in getting started in school and obtaining a college degree. This is the person on which we are missing out at this time. Yes, it could possibly lower our graduation rates if they do not all make it. The decline ratio at my bank went up tremendously when I began my duites 12 years ago. However, my institution is recognized as one of the most successful in making affordable homes avaiable at market rates, in the State of Arkansas, and for that I am proud.

We need friendly majors for new entrants and the ability to transfer hours for JC transfers. we can mold them into good students after they arrive. Is that not the job of the professors anyway?

Not disagreeing with you but there are seperate barns, and I also think it is up to the student to mold themselves not the professors, I had plenty of them turn me off of learning more than help and it did not matter if it was grade school, university or higher academia..................

APR punishes the have-nots of college sports
By Pat Forde
ESPN.com


Now here is shocking news, ranking right up there with religious strife in the Middle East for sheer unexpectedness:

The NCAA's new Academic Progress Rates benefit the big-time schools and hurt the small timers.

That's the primary conclusion that can be drawn from the report released Wednesday. (There is no truth to the rumor that the letterhead on the report read, "NCAA: Of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.") The report trumpets the fact that less than 2 percent of NCAA sports teams nationwide will be penalized with scholarship reductions for poor academic performance.

That's swell. But look at the list of Division I schools that will be penalized and see if you notice a trend:

Football: Temple, Toledo, Middle Tennessee State, Western Michigan, Buffalo, New Mexico State, Northern Illinois, Hawaii.

See any Rose Bowl contenders in that group?

Basketball: Cal Poly, Centenary, East Carolina, Hampton, Jacksonville, Kent State, New Mexico State, South Carolina State, Texas State, Maryland Eastern Shore, DePaul, Florida A&M, Prairie View, Louisiana Tech, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisiana-Monroe, Sacramento State.

See any programs that will find this report a distraction on the way to the Final Four?

This is a little like the old 1980s compliance joke, "The NCAA is so mad at Kentucky, it's going to give Cleveland State three more years' probation."

Here, we see that the NCAA is so serious about academic reform, it's going to take scholarships away from the dregs of Division I. Take that, Sac State!

There is exactly one school on this list that is a member of one of the six power conferences in Division I sports. (Paging the academic counselors at DePaul. Do you know where your basketball players are?) Everyone else belongs to a shoestring budget league.

On the football list, the schools are either members of the Mid-American Conference (Western Michigan, Toledo, Buffalo, Northern Illinois and, starting next year, Temple), the Western Athletic Conference (New Mexico State, Hawaii), or the Sun Belt (Middle Tennessee State). Those happen to be the bottom three leagues in the Sagarin Ratings for 2005.

On the basketball side we have schools from the Big West, Mid-Continent, Conference USA, Mid-Eastern Atlantic, Big East, Atlantic Sun, MAC, WAC, Southland, SWAC and Sun Belt. Most of those leagues rank among the bottom half of America according to the current conference RPI, and many rank among the bottom third. The Big East is the only league among the top eight.

If this trend persists, it will only deepen the caste system in college athletics. Hopefully, the NCAA will study this data and make some determinations about the apparent academic disparity between castes.

Here's one wild guess as to a root cause: Money.

After one glance at the athletic operating budgets for the Dumb Two Dozen, I'm seeing red. Red ink. Everywhere. According to 2003-04 figures from the Chronicle of Higher Education, almost all these schools are losing millions of dollars on athletics.

Toledo: $8 million in the hole.

Kent State: $7.9 million.

Western Michigan: $7.2 million

Northern Illinois: $6.2 million.

Texas State: $4.1 million.

New Mexico State: $4 million.

And so forth. There are some among the these two-dozen schools who say they're breaking even or turning a small profit, but you wonder how they balance their books. Is it really possible that Temple took in $17.9 million in revenues in 2003-04, while spending that exact same amount?

Now compare those figures with, say, Tennessee. The Volunteers' operating budget for '03-04 shows $62 million in revenue (more than 20 times what Western Michigan pulled in) and $31 million in expenses.

Do you think it's any coincidence that Tennessee put out a release Wednesday afternoon trumpeting its success in the APR?

Read the release and you'll see that much credit is given to the work done at the Thornton Athletics Student Life Center, which is the athletic department's academic support fiefdom. The building is named for John "Thunder" Thornton, an influential Tennessee booster who helped bankroll the project.

Tennessee's athletic Web site lists 17 individuals who work at or with the Thornton Center -- not including tutors -- all dedicated to the academic advancement of Big Orange athletes. There are five academic counselors devoted to individual sports -- including one whose sole focus is the Volunteers football team. (Except for walk-ons. They report to someone else.)

What the have-nots wouldn't give to have a little Thunder on their side.

So here is the Catch-22 the NCAA presents to its smaller, weaker members: You're competing against schools with 20 times the dollars and manpower that you have -- and if you don't keep up with them academically, we're going to take away scholarships and make it even harder to compete athletically. Go get 'em.

It should be said that this issue cuts both ways. If some of the lesser schools were more realistic about their place in college athletics, they wouldn't be in this predicament.

I'd love to have someone show me the payoff for moving up to Division I-A football at Louisiana-Lafayette ($3.1 million in the red in 2003-04) and Louisiana-Monroe ($2 million in the red). They haven't even made it to the Sun Belt's sole postseason tie-in, the New Orleans Bowl.

If more of these schools knew their true place in the college sports hierarchy, the budget problem might not be so pronounced. And there might be more in the coffers to pay for academic support.

I'm all for rigorous academic standards for college athletic departments, but every NCAA good intention is infamously followed by the curse of unintended consequences. A couple of ripples we need to be aware of in this case:

• Athletic departments will have (even more) incentive to do work for their athletes, guide them to bunny classes or pressure professors to help jocks get by. (And don't even suggest it doesn't happen from coast to coast.) Too many athletes are often given grades in high school and prep school just to get to college, which makes it unrealistic to believe they'll suddenly be able (and willing) to do the work on the college level.

• There is an obvious gap between the academic success and support between the high end and low end of Division I. And taking away scholarships from the little guys only deepens the caste system.

If the NCAA wants to make us believe it really cares about the little guys, it will look into why the APR only targets its have-nots.


Pat Forde is a senior writer for ESPN.com. He can be reached at [email protected].

Anybody want to guess who had the highest incoming freshman class average sat score between ut, a&m, and SMU this year?????????

friarwolf wrote:Anybody want to guess who had the highest incoming freshman class average sat score between ut, a&m, and SMU this year?????????

Are you talking sports or in general?

First, congrats to the SMU student-athletes that are excelling in both realms of their college careers. However...

this thread should be on the "Other Sports" board. The football team didn't do so hot compared to the clubs noted in that article. I wouldn't use it as a recruiting tool... at least as far as football is concerned.

The entire incoming freshman class.

I'm sure you guys don't want to hear this-but TEXAS takes very few academic risks-maybe less than any team other than RICE in the State of Texas. The Reason-they don't have to.

Stallion wrote:I'm sure you guys don't want to hear this-but TEXAS takes very few academic risks-maybe less than any team other than RICE in the State of Texas. The Reason-they don't have to.

Are you assuming I'm surprised about this? The difference is that Texas does not recruit athletes that are good in school first, good in athletics second. Texas doesn't try to use any academic prowess as a means to recruit. If SMU does and has, maybe it should rethink its recruiting strategy.

Now, I'm not saying I disagree with the idea that good academics is good for recruiting, but I am saying it should not be used a recruiting tool.

Hey, that is the way capitalism works right?