Stallion wrote:NCAA has minimum Academic Progress Toward Degree and minimum GPA requirements that apply to all schools. Now one of the requirements is that the player must be eligible under the normal rules applicable to all students at his university. So there are slight differences in how NCAA minimum requirements apply to each 120 Division 1A schools. Its my understanding that SMU has made some changes based upon June Jones' urging in those "school rules" that conform to the rules of our rivals in recent years. But really most of those that flunked out just failed to meet NCAA minimum requirements from what I've read. A university can not have two sets of rules for athletes and regular students under NCAA rules.
Bummer instead of playing players, we should get "free" tutors" for their senior year in high school, and throughout college. We should get them volunteers to take their tests in class and for reward they get scholarships. That or just lower the standards till our sports teams pick up, but I prefer the tutor method.
SMU_Alumni11 wrote:I get that SMU is hard, but c'mon we cant have that many people flunking out. Is SMU's GPA requirement ridiculous? I mean schools like Bama and others have no worry about players flunking. It sucks, I wish we just take a bit of hit on the GPA and let athletes maintain above a 2.00. Also let them squeeze in with lower score than others. We need the player not the academic reputation. Once the program gets up then bring back the rigorous system.
I think the question of class difficulty may factor in here. Stallion's (and others) arguments for 'Jock Courses' is about being able to help a player take easier courses and stay eligible while going through physically and mentally exhausting 20 hr a week workouts. SMU doesn't offer any varieties of 'Basket-weaving 101' and that has hurt us on not only keeping players eligible but also possibly on recruiting - players and their families will notice.
I really haven't taken much of a position on curiculum issues because nobody on the board seems to have a strong command on the subject. Its a much more difficult issue because you can't have special rules for athletes and any rule change would have to be broadly applied to all students in the university. Most of my comments have always been directed toward the admission standards which I think without question have been resolved in a way that definitely allows us to compete with our rivals. We still don't allow kids from diploma mills, academic fraud, manufactured GPAs, nor the kids who score below the deemphasized SAT/ACT line- nor should we.
Last edited by Stallion on Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"With a quarter of a tank of gas, we can get everything we need right here in DFW." -SMU Head Coach Chad Morris
When momentum starts rolling downhill in recruiting-WATCH OUT.
SMU_Alumni11 wrote:I get that SMU is hard, but c'mon we cant have that many people flunking out. Is SMU's GPA requirement ridiculous? I mean schools like Bama and others have no worry about players flunking. It sucks, I wish we just take a bit of hit on the GPA and let athletes maintain above a 2.00. Also let them squeeze in with lower score than others. We need the player not the academic reputation. Once the program gets up then bring back the rigorous system.
I think the question of class difficulty may factor in here. Stallion's (and others) arguments for 'Jock Courses' is about being able to help a player take easier courses and stay eligible while going through physically and mentally exhausting 20 hr a week workouts. SMU doesn't offer any varieties of 'Basket-weaving 101' and that has hurt us on not only keeping players eligible but also possibly on recruiting - players and their families will notice.
No I understand that. We just need to make as many "aides" as possible for them, almost to the point of cheating. I mean just something that will keep the flunking rate down at least to 0.
smupony94 wrote:So you want people to take their tests?
For the dumba$$ but really good at football.... yes. Im tired of losing people because they cant handle school. If they cant handle it here then get them to squeak by and hope they get to the NFL... otherwise a few kids who wont get jobs wont hurt the school all that much. Once we get good recruits (and smart) then get rid of the cheating method.
smupony94 wrote:So you want people to take their tests?
For the dumba$$ but really good at football.... yes. Im tired of losing people because they cant handle school. If they cant handle it here then get them to squeak by and hope they get to the NFL... otherwise a few kids who wont get jobs wont hurt the school all that much. Once we get good recruits (and smart) then get rid of the cheating method.
Yeah, lets perpetuate the system of "don't bother learning because you have a 0.1% chance of playing in the NFL. And if you don't make it ... oh well back to burger king "
Id rather these kids get real tutors and learn in the classroom than fake their tests and end up on the street somewhere. I want to win too but lets think real hard about the costs to society on that one.
I thought the educations school would help with kids that want to major in things like "Exercise Science" and the like. Don't most BCS schools have a major for kids that want to either coach or teach??
smupony94 wrote:So you want people to take their tests?
For the dumba$$ but really good at football.... yes. Im tired of losing people because they cant handle school. If they cant handle it here then get them to squeak by and hope they get to the NFL... otherwise a few kids who wont get jobs wont hurt the school all that much. Once we get good recruits (and smart) then get rid of the cheating method.
wow, this may be the dumbest post i've ever seen on here. and that's saying a lot.
actually suggesting that we flat-out cheat and commit academic fraud to keep players eligible?