And The Best Recruiting Class in the WAC may be....

[Stallion]

Louisiana Tech-according to the Insiders they have 7 3 star plus JUCOs and according to an article on the WAC Forum they have commitments from four outstanding Non-Qualifiers in the last two days. Each of these commitments are at least 3 stars. The article says that apparently La Tech will load up on a big class of players who have qualification issues. This is what happens late in the recruiting season every year. Schools like La Tech and Fresno line up a series of Top Recruits who were looking at SEC, Big 12 and PAC 10 schools. The reason is that they are not admissible except to those small number of schools who are basically flouting NCAA eligibilty standards to win a few games. I'm not posting this to suggest that SMU go after these type of kids but just to point out why SMU is not as competitive on the field with other schools in our conference that cut every corner. Right now Louisiana Tech has 12 3 star players and 3 4 star players while SMU has 1 3 star player and 8 2 star players.

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 01-26-2003).]

[Sic_em]

Why doesn't the WAC adopt uniform admission standards for the member schools? If a Rice or SMU want to have tougher admission requirements, fine. But there should be a minimum standard.

In the Big XII, teams can have 1 partial qualifier per year, everyone else has to be a full qualifier. Why are the La Techs and Fresnos allowed to take unlimited non-qualifiers?

[Stallion]

obviously the fear is that Fresno St will jump to the MWC-but the fact is they can't do that without losing the advantage they have to compete. The MWC passed a rule disallowing non-qualifiers and about 23 of Fresno's players are non-qualifiers.

[LaTech77]

Stallion, why do you say this is flouting NCAA regs? Be more specific, please.

[Stallion]

because a NON-QUALIFIER is a recruit who doesn't meet either the NCAA Minimum Qualification standards for either GPA or SAT/ACT. That is why thet are NON-qualifiers. It was never contemplated that schools like Fresno St and Louisiana Tech would circumvent the rules by admitting these kids anyway in huge numbers. Are you telling me that a normal student is routinely or EVER admitted to Louisiana Tech with a 650 SAT? It is academic fraud to allow them in when they don't meet the school's own routine admission standards or the NCAA standards. The number of schools that have the ability to admit unlimited non-qualifiers due to school or conference rules is probably only about ten percent.

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 01-27-2003).]

[This message has been edited by Stallion (edited 01-27-2003).]

[EastStang]

Are these non-qualifiers getting scholarships or are they in-state kids who are specially admitted and pay their own in-state tuition? If they are awarded scholarships, I assume they get red-shirted their first year until they get academically fit, or do they lose a year of eligibility?

[Stallion]

No non-qualifiers can not receive scholarship money their first year-I'm not sure about federal Pell grants. But how does a reputable school decide to admit kids with 650 SATs? Do they have even a single student in their general population with those types of scores? Fresno had 23 NON-QUALIFIERS last year-you can't tell that is acceptable under general school policy. The schools that have a big advantage are state schools in recruiting hotbeds where tuition is relatively inexpensive.

[LaTech77]

Stallion, I'm not telling you anything. I was just trying to understand what you were saying. I know that due to some new in-house regulations we did turn away a couple of kids who were props last year after initially offering them. They wound up playing (and starring) at Division 1-AA Northwestern State. It wasn't because they were props that we turned them away. It was because they didn't meet admission standards under the regulations which were adopted after they were offered. It caused some bad feelings. I don't know enough about our admissions policies. I will try to find out more.

[PX]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by EastStang:
<B>Are these non-qualifiers getting scholarships or are they in-state kids who are specially admitted and pay their own in-state tuition? If they are awarded scholarships, I assume they get red-shirted their first year until they get academically fit, or do they lose a year of eligibility?</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Partial and non-qualifiers cannot accept a scholarship to a Div. 1 school and have to pay their own way their first year. They are ineligible to play that first year, and that year does not count as a redshirt, its lost, unless they graduate in 4 years, and then they can have the 5th year reinstated.

[LaTech77]

Stallion, our minimum SAT score is a 710. I did find an interesting clause on the State Board of Regents site. It notes that under the 1994 desegregation settlement agreement it is stipulated that each institution with admission criteria will set aside 15 percent of each incoming class for admissions exceptions -- 10 percent for other races, and 5 percent for students with special talents, children of alumni and athletes.

That may explain how we are able to make exceptions for some athletes. I am not sure if this is used or not.

[No Quarter]

PX or Stallion,

What does the current SMU Catalogue say about special admissions, i.e., number per year, reasons, and so on? What is the history of the statement? And for what purposes have any recent special admissions been granted?

[PX]

I'm not sure what you mean about the SMU catalogue, or where I would find this in there. If I posed this question to someone in the admissions office, though, I know the answer I would get. That is, anyone who didnt not make the automatic admissions criteria (what is now known as Category A) Is considered to be a special admit. That would cover anyone who was admitted after meeting with the admissions committee, or on appeal, and the number would be fairly large.
I doubt if thats the answer you are looking for, but thats the best I can do for you. Thats how admissions defines a special admit, and there is no fixed maximum on the number allowed.

[No Quarter]

I remember seeing something called the General Catalogue with a section on Admissions which more or less clearly stated that a certain number of students - I believe the number was thirty - lacking the normal academic qualifications but meeting other criteria might be admitted annually. One reason I remember it at all was because the number corresponded approximately, at least to a cynic, to the number of new FB and BB scholarships awarded each year.

The published documents and other guidelines are obviously different today based on the information you and others have presented.

[Charleston Pony]

Pat Hill has always defended his recruiting at Fresno by saying he's giving a "special" group of kids an opportunity to continue their educations and improve their lot in life. Sounds like the Louisiana State univerities are operating under a mandate to do the same. Does Texas have any similar mandate for it's public institutions?

I agree it can make it tough for the private schools to sustain their competitiveness, but does make for healthy rivalries. I'd still like to see a regional mid-major conference formed that would include SMU, TCU, Rice, Tulsa, Tulane and La Tech, UNT, Houston and one or two more publics (Ark St & La-Lafayette?). Those public schools are 2nd tier to the larger in-state Goliaths and not likely to sustain dominant programs. The TV networks might not be lining up to offer contracts, but the competition would be great and I could see some pretty healthy rivalries develop on a "mid-major" level. I also think you'd see the kind of balance where back-to-back championships for anyone would be a pretty special accomplishment.More importantly, I don't know that anyone would be a long term doormat within this group. I realize this is much too practical to ever happen, but I still enjoy thinking about it at times. How nice would it be for your LONGEST road trip to be 500 miles?

[KnuckleStang]

I second that, CP. I like the looks of that conference. There's nothing wrong with playing in a "mid-major" group, that has SOME kind of local relevance. We'd improve our attendance considerably, and also possibly save some cash on travel. Your assessment of the rivalry possibilities is also right on the mark. Charleston Pony for AD.