NCAA: UConn Men's Basketball has lowest grad rate among Top 25 teams

[Carnac]

At first glance, this appears to be an alarming headline. In reality, under Kevin Ollie, the program's graduation rate has improved over the last two years. The numbers count the players who came into the program between 2005 and 2008 and graduated within six years.

The UConn women's basketball team had a 100 percent graduation rate, according to the NCAA.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas...-huskies-graduation-rate-20-percent-improving

 

[UConn79]

How can anyone be lower than the Kentucky men ? They do not graduate anyone, everybody leaves for the pros. Are these Rhodes scholars really returning on their own dimes to complete a degree ? Can someone clarify how those players are counted ?

 

[Stinger92860]

It's awesome that there is a thread on this in every forum. The numbers count the players who came into the program between 2005 and 2008 and graduated within six years.

That's 2005-2008. Let's stop helping the ESPN anti UConn crusade.

EDIT: Great title btw

 

[stamfordhusky]

It's awesome that there is a thread on this in every forum. The numbers count the players who came into the program between 2005 and 2008 and graduated within six years.

That's 2005-2008. Let's stop helping the ESPN anti UConn crusade.

Or 2011-14. That is the max range for when they players should have graduated.

 

[OldAlum]

It is great that it is improving. But why was it this bad? I don't believe it is harder to graduate from UConn than any other school (except maybe UNC!) Those leaving for the NBA don't account for this. So did they have poor academic counseling? Lack of allowable tutoring? Recruit kids who just couldn't or wouldn't do the work? What have they changed since?

 

[HiDribble]

Thanks Jim Calhoun for putting us on this path.

 

[4evercard]

How can anyone be lower than the Kentucky men ? They do not graduate anyone, everybody leaves for the pros. Are these Rhodes scholars really returning on their own dimes to complete a degree ? Can someone clarify how those players are counted ?

I'll never understand why bother with this system. I think it grades you only if you're on track to graduate for the period you were at that school. Many of these Kentucky players actually finish only one full semester before going to the NBA camps. We were in this boat when Denny Crum was our coach. After four years, players would still be 20 plus hours from graduation. He never gave any attention to graduation rates. It's embarrassing. You wonder how the President of the school does not step in and halt it. I guess that's why some of us need the purity of women's basketball in our life to offset it. Look what we, with our men's program at U of L, are going through right now. There's still the other side of the story to come out beyond the prostitute's side, so I'm not going to comment on it, but it's something we never have to be concerned about with the women.

 

[Deadrody]

Thanks Jim Calhoun for putting us on this path.

Real nice. Yes, thank you VERY much Jim Calhoun for putting UConn basketball on the map with the Dream Season in 1990. Even BEFORE the women made their first final four.

Frankly, the Athletic Director should be directly accountable for academic performance. While the coach would seem the most likely to hold that role, the idea that in D1 basketball the head coach is somehow directly in control of the players academics is laughable.

Jeff Hathaway failed in many, many ways. This is just one.

 

[vtcwbuff]

It's none of the NCAA's business how the NBA runs their farm teams.

 

[CL82]

It is great that it is improving. But why was it this bad? I don't believe it is harder to graduate from UConn than any other school (except maybe UNC!) Those leaving for the NBA don't account for this. So did they have poor academic counseling? Lack of allowable tutoring? Recruit kids who just couldn't or wouldn't do the work? What have they changed since?

Here's the best answer that I've seen on the board:

There was a period of about 5 years when UConn had a lot of early departures for the NBA along with some program dropouts/transfers who failed to maintain good academic standing before leaving. This was before there was any APR. Of course, if you are going to the NBA, you have to train and perform in tryouts in prior to the draft, so there is no way to finish classes.

Other schools that play athletics at a high level required athletes to take summer classes and intersession classes, so that they had completed a year's credits before spring semester started, and early departures after basketball season ended but before spring semester ended did not hurt their statistics. UConn, on the other hand, having recently joined the club (joined Big East in basketball in 1979, but first championship in 1999, and didn't start having athletes leave early for NBA in any numbers until the 2000s; joined DI-A football in 2003), still kept to a traditional academic calendar: fall and spring semesters. So when athletes lost interest in classes in April of their final year, it dinged the statistics.

This didn't matter until the NCAA decided to make graduation and "academic progress" rates their propaganda cover for illiterate/innumerate athletes. They introduced a sham measure of progress knowing that schools could fake their way around it with sham classes. UConn didn't realize how the game was played until too late and it had already been dinged. It didn't help UConn that the APR was imposed retroactively. So for maintaining a traditional academic calender (fall-spring classes only) and traditional grading standards (don't do the work, you fail), UConn got punished.

Now UConn has the athletes take summer and intersession classes and our APR is perfect every year.

A more cynical answer might note that Syracuse or UNC's APR and grad. rate looked great for decades, until they didn't. Yet Syracuse was able to choose to "ban themselves from the post season" in a year that their poor play had already assured they we're going to compete. People talked about doing things the Carolina way, until it was revealed the Carolina way included institutional academic fraud across all major sports. North Carolina was due to be punished this year but then had a National Championship caliber men's basketball team. They stumbled onto a desperate solution. They told the NCAA, oh not only did UNC participate in a decades of academic fraud, but it is worse than you think - you didn't catch it all, so let's hold off on punishment until we've competed our investigation, which should be done sometime after March Madness. Amazingly, the NCAA agreed. How can it ever be perceived to be a credible self-regulating agency after that?

UConn had some kids who we're struggling transfer, had some NBAers move on to their multi-million dollar careers without finishing their degrees (because the system pulls them out in their Spring semester of their senior years) and reported those facts accurately. Yet the NCAA continues to report and publicize that old, accurately reported information as a scandal while decades of institutional fraud (UNC, Syracuse), hidden drug use (Syracuse), player payments (Syracuse) gets swept under the rug.

There is a reason why neither Geno or Kevin Ollie will not shake NCCA President Mark Emmert's hand after national championship (go back and look) and it isn't just the million's that Emmert mismanaged while he was at UConn.

 

[EricLA]

There is a reason why neither Geno or Kevin Ollie will shake NCCA President Mark Emmert's hand after national championship (go back and look) and it isn't just the million's that Emmert mismanaged while he was at UConn.

Because this is the women's board and it's easier to post something like this, I wanted to expand on it.

I DON'T get the feeling that Geno's actions have anything to do with how the NCAA has treated the UCONN women. It feels to me like it's totally supportive of the men's program. In the interview ESPN did with Geno that was posted the other day, he made specific comments about how UCONN had a great coach in Calhoun (I think this was answered when he was asked about coaching a men's team - he said something like "I never considered it at UCONN - we already had a great men's basketball coach").

My point is, in the past, the men's board has taken shots at Geno either for his record, (cupcakes), accomplishments (how much easier it is due to lack of parity), or specific comments he's made (like last year at the NCAA's where he said the men's game was "a joke". He went on to explain why - they don't play the game in a way that's pleasant to watch, but in the recent ESPN interview he acknowledged he used a poor choice of words and expounded a bit on it - especially good stuff when he mentioned that sports are an entertainment business).

I get the feeling that even when Geno and JC's relationship was frosty, they were both still supportive of each other professionally (Geno more so than JC), and I think the strong relationship that Geno and KO have is a testament to great coaches who don't feel threatened by the others' successes, and who actually like one another...

 

[uconnfan68]

How can anyone be lower than the Kentucky men ? They do not graduate anyone, everybody leaves for the pros. Are these Rhodes scholars really returning on their own dimes to complete a degree ? Can someone clarify how those players are counted ?

It's a shell game Calhoun never played. It's BS, and the article is BS. If you look closely you'll it it is from 2005, not 2015. Notice UNC is at 80%... fake classes and all.

 

[uconnfan68]

Thanks Jim Calhoun for putting us on this path.

Low blow. Maybe we should have joke courses or fake courses? Seems to work for lots of other schools.

 

[CL82]

Because this is the women's board and it's easier to post something like this, I wanted to expand on it.

I DON'T get the feeling that Geno's actions have anything to do with how the NCAA has treated the UCONN women. It feels to me like it's totally supportive of the men's program. In the interview ESPN did with Geno that was posted the other day, he made specific comments about how UCONN had a great coach in Calhoun (I think this was answered when he was asked about coaching a men's team - he said something like "I never considered it at UCONN - we already had a great men's basketball coach").

My point is, in the past, the men's board has taken shots at Geno either for his record, (cupcakes), accomplishments (how much easier it is due to lack of parity), or specific comments he's made (like last year at the NCAA's where he said the men's game was "a joke". He went on to explain why - they don't play the game in a way that's pleasant to watch, but in the recent ESPN interview he acknowledged he used a poor choice of words and expounded a bit on it - especially good stuff when he mentioned that sports are an entertainment business).

I get the feeling that even when Geno and JC's relationship was frosty, they were both still supportive of each other professionally (Geno more so than JC), and I think the strong relationship that Geno and KO have is a testament to great coaches who don't feel threatened by the others' successes, and who actually like one another...

My take is the same as yours, pretty much. I believe that Geno believes that the NCAA did not treat the university fairly regarding the men's sanctions. Now I'm sure he isn't thrilled with them about Mo'ne Davis but I do think his distaste for Emmert stems from the sanction against the men's program.

Regarding the Men's BBall board, as with any of the BY boards, you will find some who are fans of a specific team, and some who are fans of the university as a whole. I think there is a lot of support, and pride, for the WBB team. For that matter I've seen supportive posts there for the Field Hockey team and woman's soccer. What is almost certainly going to generate a negative response there is any assertion that UCWBB team "could beat the men" which, as Geno has noted, is silly even during a down year for the men.

Regarding the whole Jim vs. Geno thing, it's been talked about a lot over the years. Personally having seen both Jim and Geno talk about it recently, I think it is bugs Geno and Jim doesn't see it as an issue but that could well be that Jim has a retirement prospective. They are both big personality guys and neither are willing give an inch when pressed. I think on this board there may a slight bias to credit Jim more with the fall out such as it was. I'd offer Geno vs. Jim, Geno vs. Pat, Geno vs. Muffet as a counter-argument. Now a rebuttal to that might be that KO and Geno get along well together. But then again KO and Calhoun do as well. I think you have to take the fact that KO is a very humble guy. I suspect that he's an easy guy to like and tough guy to have a running feud with.

In any event, I like where we are now with two very successful program and two very good coaches (understatement as to Geno, but you get the point.) As fans we should follow the Geno/KO model of focusing on the school's successes as a whole rather that relative merits of the various programs. JMHO.