I-AAs Among Nation's Worst Student-Ath Grad Rates

[TexasTerror]

Quite a few I-AAs there at the very bottom. Of course, take these with a grain of salt to some extent. This is from 1995-1998 classes, guys that are long gone and of course, it's tough to understand the "formula" to how they make this thing up. Seems there are exceptions to this, not exceptions to that. I don't quite get it!

Of course, this is overall and not football. You'll have to search the individual school. Football numbers can be higher or lower than those institutions' final total student-athlete success rate.
--------
"Savannah State had the lowest, at 22 percent, followed by Florida A&M at 35 percent, TSU, New Orleans at 38 percent and Norfolk State and Charleston Southern at 40 percent.

A majority of the 13 schools that fell below the 50 percent mark were historically black colleges in the South or Southwest."

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/3599774.html

To look up your school, click over to:

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/!ut/p/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKLN4j3CQXJgFiGph76kR CGN0zM2BQihFDlCBfw9cjPTdX31g_QL8gNDY0od1QEAJgymTc!/delta/base64xml/L3dJdyEvUUd3QndNQSEvNElVRS82XzBfTFU!?CONTENT_URL=h ttp://www.ncaa.org/grad_rates/2005/d1_school_data.html


I-AA Sampling
Sam Houston State 60
Stephen F. Austin 61
Georgetown 97
Georgia Southern 72
Appy State 73
Jackson St 46
Northern Arizona 63
Hofstra 76
Missouri St 63
Nicholls St 47
Grambling 53
Drake 83
Montana 68

[bodoyle]

If I read this right, CCU is 92%?? :hurray: :hurray: :hurray:

[Baldy]

Shame...Savannah State the worst in the NCAA at 22%. :nonono2:

On the other hand, GSU #1 in the state of GA @ 72%. :nod:

[Coastal89]

If I read this right, CCU is 92%?? :hurray: :hurray: :hurray:
:beerchug: :beerchug: :hyped: :hyped: :hyped:

[blukeys]

University of Delaware 89% :) :) :)

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Booya... Lehigh at 97%!

This should shut up the Bucknell jerks on the voy forums that are complaining about academics, with Bucknell at 94%. :cool:

[th0m]

JMU - 84%

[MarkCCU]

If I read this right, CCU is 92%?? :hurray: :hurray: :hurray:

that's QUACKtastic news!

[3rd Coast Tiger]

Thanks for posting what I was about to post ShellShock.

In addition to Myles Brand's comments:


"Clearly you're going to have to look at socio-economic backgrounds and particularly the quality of the high school they attended," Brand said of the black-white difference. "There may well be other factors, but we don't have the research to support that right now.

Texas Southern has open admissions policy that accepts students who have been at a huge disadvantage throughout their entire primary school education. Therefore, we will always have somewhat low numbers in comparison to those schools that have a stricter admissions policy.

Once some of these disadvantaged students (including athletes) matriculate through Texas Southern, they are evaluated and put into remedial courses to get them caught up with the rest of their peers. Once a semester or year or so of remedial classes are taken THEN they are allowed to take standard freshman courses so they are already a year behind.

I could further elaborate quite a bit more but I would hope one would get the jest of my comments.

Texas Southern has a multitude of success stories from students just like the one I just gave a scenario on. Case and point. Our 2004-2005 Student Government Association President graduated from high school with a deplorable GPA (.19 on a 4.0 grading scale). He came from a large California metropolitan school system that never took the time to look into his personal family issues. Once he arrived at Texas Southern a professor took the time to listen to him and got through his deep family wounds; got him into the right counseling and he excelled! Excelled to the point of graduating with a 3.95 GPA and the President of the entire student body. He is in graduate school now and has entertained over 12 offers from major global companies for positions when he is ready. He also opened a bookstore across the street from our campus to compete with our on campus bookstore.

[bodoyle]

.....and the rest of the story
Let's compare to the SoCon schools since we seem to have interested parties in that area:

Coastal 92%
Wofford 92%
ASU 73%
Elon - no data
WCU 78%
GSU 72%
UTC 53%
CofC 76%
Citadel 95%
Davidson 97%
Furman 93%
UNCG 83%

Less then half the teams have an equal or better rate then Coastal, so the academic debate is shot to hell. Next....

:bang: :bang: :bang:

[SoCon48]

.....and the rest of the story
Let's compare to the SoCon schools since we seem to have interested parties in that area:

Coastal 92%
Wofford 92%
ASU 73%
Elon - no data
WCU 78%
GSU 72%
UTC 53%
CofC 76%
Citadel 95%
Davidson 97%
Furman 93%
UNCG 83%

Less then half the teams have an equal or better rate then Coastal, so the academic debate is shot to hell. Next....

:bang: :bang: :bang:

Depends on how easy it is to graduate from a particular school. Especially an athlete.
Putting CERTAIN schools in the same academic standing as Davidson, Wofford, Furman based on graduation rates is hillarious.
Also, football vs non-football, women sports, etc are apples-oranges.

[soweagle]

Wouldn't Coastal's football numbers be flawed or rather incomplete at this time b/c of not having football for only a few years? Not smack just asking.

[The Gadfly]

Depends on how easy it is to graduate from a particular school. Especially an athlete.

So Savannah State has the best academics since it's so hard to get out of?


Putting CERTAIN schools in the same academic standing as Davidson, Wofford, Furman based on graduation rates is hillarious.
Also, football vs non-football, women sports, etc are apples-oranges.

I don't get it... where should ASU be placed with their rating: with UTC and Savannah States or the Furmans and Woffords? The NCAA has made it quite clear where Coastal belongs when it comes to graduating its athletes on time. xazzx
I know many of our athletes and I have to say that most of them are some of the brightest students on campus. Just look at Pat Hall who was chosen to be apart of the Wall School of Business' elites by becoming a Wall Fellow. These guys compete with the Ivies for top jobs and win them. Josh Hoke is an Academic All-American. Brett Porterfield is apart of the History Honor Society. These are just some on the football team that I know off hand. I'm sure there are plenty more in other sports. So please don't assume that Coastal Carolina University is a cakewalk because it's not.

PS: I love you I-AA 2005 :o .

[ButlerGSU]

Exactly, Coastal did not play football during this studies time frame.

[The Gadfly]

Wouldn't Coastal's football numbers be flawed or rather incomplete at this time b/c of not having football for only a few years? Not smack just asking.


No smack taken b/c it's a reasonable question. Our true seniors graduate this year: 2005-2006.

[Panther88]

Thanks for posting what I was about to post ShellShock.

In addition to Myles Brand's comments:



Texas Southern has open admissions policy that accepts students who have been at a huge disadvantage throughout their entire primary school education. Therefore, we will always have somewhat low numbers in comparison to those schools that have a stricter admissions policy.

Once some of these disadvantaged students (including athletes) matriculate through Texas Southern, they are evaluated and put into remedial courses to get them caught up with the rest of their peers. Once a semester or year or so of remedial classes are taken THEN they are allowed to take standard freshman courses so they are already a year behind.

I could further elaborate quite a bit more but I would hope one would get the jest of my comments.

Texas Southern has a multitude of success stories from students just like the one I just gave a scenario on. Case and point. Our 2004-2005 Student Government Association President graduated from high school with a deplorable GPA (.19 on a 4.0 grading scale). He came from a large California metropolitan school system that never took the time to look into his personal family issues. Once he arrived at Texas Southern a professor took the time to listen to him and got through his deep family wounds; got him into the right counseling and he excelled! Excelled to the point of graduating with a 3.95 GPA and the President of the entire student body. He is in graduate school now and has entertained over 12 offers from major global companies for positions when he is ready. He also opened a bookstore across the street from our campus to compete with our on campus bookstore.

That's excellent 3rdCoastTiger. Kudos.

I think college is supposed to help, enhance, augment, et al. Not hinder. Good job TxSU! :hurray:

[SoCon48]

If I read this right, CCU is 92%?? :hurray: :hurray: :hurray:
You read it right if you noticed that it is based on the 1998-99 Freshman cohort. Before CCU started football, I believe.

[SoCon48]

So Savannah State has the best academics since it's so hard to get out of?



I don't get it... where should ASU be placed with their rating: with UTC and Savannah States or the Furmans and Woffords? The NCAA has made it quite clear where Coastal belongs when it comes to graduating its athletes on time. xazzx
I know many of our athletes and I have to say that most of them are some of the brightest students on campus. Just look at Pat Hall who was chosen to be apart of the Wall School of Business' elites by becoming a Wall Fellow. These guys compete with the Ivies for top jobs and win them. Josh Hoke is an Academic All-American. Brett Porterfield is apart of the History Honor Society. These are just some on the football team that I know off hand. I'm sure there are plenty more in other sports. So please don't assume that Coastal Carolina University is a cakewalk because it's not.

PS: I love you I-AA 2005 :o .

I just love the way you twist things or else don't understand what you read.
Love you too, Gadfly.

I just think it would be hilarious for ASU to compare itself to Davidson just because we happened to have similar grauation rates, when their students had an average of 200 points higher on the SAT's at entrance.

Didn't say anything about CCU being a cakewalk, but I did say they didn't have a football team when the 98-99 freshman cohort began.
Too,transfers in to CCU don't count in the study either. (neither for the transferring institution nor the one transferrered to).

That just about leaves Coastal football completely out of the study.

[Cap'n Cat]

UNI, 81%


http://www.hawkeyecollege.edu/images/housing-uni.jpg

[SoCon48]

So Savannah State has the best academics since it's so hard to get out of?



I know many of our athletes and I have to say that most of them are some of the brightest students on campus. Just look at Pat Hall who was chosen to be apart of the Wall School of Business' elites by becoming a Wall Fellow. These guys compete with the Ivies for top jobs and win them. Josh Hoke is an Academic All-American. Brett Porterfield is apart of the History Honor Society. These are just some on the football team that I know off hand. I'm sure there are plenty more in other sports.
PS: I love you I-AA 2005 :o .

ASU had 28 athletes to make Academic All-America, including 5 off the football team and yet you see where ASU placed in the findings. Elsner had a 3.99 as an accounting major with ASU's department being the top in the nation on the CPA exams. Transfers out, attrition, etc affect the grad rate tremendously.
Also, you note CCU's graduation included NO football players unless you had a few who were there in 1998 and just happened to decide to play football once CCU had a team.

[SoCon48]

The NCAA has made it quite clear where Coastal belongs when it comes to graduating its athletes on time. xazzx



Too bad your football players don't count in the figures after all the diatribe. xazzx
I just had to throw the shaky butt in since you did, too. :cool:

[jwfgeol]

I-AA Graduation Rates (http://www.ncaa.org/grad_rates/2004/d1/DIAA.html)


I-A Graduation Rates (http://www.ncaa.org/grad_rates/2004/d1/DIA.html)

The most recent data show that I-A has a higher graduation rate by 3 percentage points over I-AA schools for football.


Also found this from US News and World Report. It's from 2002 but it compares graduation rates of all athletes to the overall student body.

Athlete graduation rate (http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/sports/rankings/gradrate.htm)


Posted these in another thread a while back.

[bobcatfan06]

3. Only students who graduate in six years or less count towards graduation rates. Therefore, if you entered school in 2000, but do not graduate until 2007, then your graduation rate does not count.

They should count against you. If it takes you 7 years to finish undergrad, you didn't deserve to be there in the first place. :asswhip:

[GeauxLions94]

What? 35%.:eek: Oh wait, that was my redneck score :D

SLU - 67% (we were still considered I-AAA then)

[GeauxLions94]

They should count against you. If it takes you 7 years to finish undergrad, you didn't deserve to be there in the first place. :asswhip:

Unless you plan on becoming a US Senator and your name is Blutarski :beerchug:

[crunifan]

UNI, 81%


http://www.hawkeyecollege.edu/images/housing-uni.jpg

Strangely enough, that would be the dorm I live in, Bartlett Hall! :nod:

[TexasTerror]

Here's an article on TxSo's plan to bounce back from the low numbers that put them in the very bottom of the listing...

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/3602408.html

[Maverick]

A better way to look at it might be in comparison to the student body grad rate. Those schools who graduate student-athletes close to or ahead of the student body would be getting the job done. This is based on the fact that student-athletes generally have a more demanding situation with practice, lifting, meetings, injuries, travel for games, etc. On the other hand it has been argued that they also get more help in terms of academic guidance from programs that are available to them. Still I am sure that the ones who want to graduate do the things they need to do. Those that only say they want to but don't do what they need don't make it. Those that are there only to play seldom leave with a degree. Still the whole graduation rate thing is really complex. Note that the only people who count in these reports are those who are on athletic aid. Walk-ons who have never been on scholarship in any form are not counted.

[eaglesrthe1]

They should count against you. If it takes you 7 years to finish undergrad, you didn't deserve to be there in the first place. :asswhip:

I say if you finish, then you finish. It's one thing to graduate in 4 yrs when Mom/Dad is putting the roof over your head, wheels under your ass, and food on your table. I have more respect for someone who graduates in seven when they are doing these things for themselves. It's a true test of character to persevere.

Especially if you have others that depend on you to do the providing for them.

[SochorField]

I agree. Well put, eaglesrthe1.

[crunifan]

Gateway Conference Scores:

1- UNI........................81 %
2- SIU........................77%
3- WKU.......................76%
3- Indiana State...........76%
5- Illinois State.............73%
6- Western Illinois.........72%
7- Youngstown State.....70%
8- Missouri State...........63%

[JohnStOnge]

I don't know how people can assume that a high graduation rate doesn't mean the students aren't being sufficiently challenged given their ability level. I'm not saying that's the case in any particular instance. But I think you can see what I'm talking about. If you've got two schools with student populations of approximately equal ability, why would you assume the one with the 90 percent graduation rate is providing a better education than the one with a 60 percent graduation rate? Why wouldn't you suspect that the one with the 90 percent graduation rate is too "easy?"

[ysuindy]

The methodology used to calculate graduation rates by the NCAA is flawed. Here are some of the criteria:

1. If a student transfers from your school, he/she counts against your graduation rate.

2. If a student transfers into your program and graduates, he/she does not count toward your graduation rate or the graduation rate of the school he/she transferred from. In other words, his/her graduation does not count toward any schools graduation rate.

3. Only students who graduate in six years or less count towards graduation rates. Therefore, if you entered school in 2000, but do not graduate until 2007, then your graduation rate does not count.


All three of the above are correct for the Federally reported graduation rates that have been issued for the last several years.

I believe if you read the various articles on the Graduation Success Rate (GSR), you will find 1 and 2 ARE counted as described above. A transfer out who graduates gets you credit. A transfer in who graduates gets you credit. The six year rule still applies in both measures.

And I also believe these numbers are for freshmen entering between 1995 and 1998.

[ysuindy]

Read this article for information on how it is calculated.

http://www2.ncaa.org/portal/media_and_events/association_news/ncaa_news_online/2005/12_19_05/front_page_news/4226n01.html (GSR )

Very much off topic, but amusing none the less, are the scores for Bob Huggins basketball recruits at Cincy. For years we have heard about the transfers in and out who graduate at UC. UC's basketball graduation rate is lower under the GSR than under the old measure.

[HIU 93]

They should count against you. If it takes you 7 years to finish undergrad, you didn't deserve to be there in the first place. :asswhip:

What if you run out of money, and your scholarship wasn't full? That happens to MANY STUDENTS, whether they were athletes or not.

[ChickenMan]

A10...

Richmond 97
W&M 95
Villanova 95
UNH 90
UD 89
N'eastern 88
UMass 84
JMU 84
URI 81
Towson 78
Hofstra 76
Maine 59

[Umass74]

A10...

Richmond 97
W&M 95
Villanova 95
UNH 90
UD 89
N'eastern 88
UMass 84
JMU 84
URI 81
Towson 78
Hofstra 76
Maine 59

Pretty much in line with expectations. The three private schools lead the league as you would expect. UNH, UD, UMass, Northeastern, JMU and URI are all so close that one or two graduations per class would account for the difference.

Towson, Hofstra and Maine are on the low end, but probably exceed the graduation rate of the student body as a whole.

[Cocky]

Are these a bunch of football factories? With 75 -80% or better passing these must be some easy classes.

[blukeys]

Are these a bunch of football factories? With 75 -80% or better passing these must be some easy classes.


It depends on the major. Quite a few, UD football players are engineering majors. There are no easy classes with a major like this. One of the keys is what kind of players you recruit. We have discussed this before. It does a school little good to recruit a player who washes out after a year because he can't handle the academics. :)

[blukeys]

Pretty much in line with expectations. The three private schools lead the league as you would expect.

Technically, W&M is a state assisted school along the lines of JMU and UD.

[WMTribe90]

Technically, W&M is a state assisted school along the lines of JMU and UD.

WM is a state school. In-state tuition is around $9,000 and out of state is around $23,000. WM is one of the best values in the country for in-state students.

The graduation numbers are for scholarship players only. Since scholarship players aren't paying their own way through school and often have academic assistance (tuitors etc) readily available there is no excuse for not graduating within 5 years.

Athletes should graduate at a level equal to or higher than the general student population.

IMO, if a program is graduating at a rate significantly lower than the general student population, that programing is likely recruiting athletes not qualified or prepared for the academic climate of the university and the program is doing a dis-service to the athletes.

[SoCon48]

WM is a state school. In-state tuition is around $9,000 and out of state is around $23,000. WM is one of the best values in the country for in-state students.

The graduation numbers are for scholarship players only. Since scholarship players aren't paying their own way through school and often have academic assistance (tuitors etc) readily available there is no excuse for not graduating within 5 years.

Athletes should graduate at a level equal to or higher than the general student population.

IMO, if a program is graduating at a rate significantly lower than the general student population, that programing is likely recruiting athletes not qualified or prepared for the academic climate of the university and the program is doing a dis-service to the athletes.

9K vs 23K sure sounds like a public to me.

[SoCon48]

I say if you finish, then you finish. It's one thing to graduate in 4 yrs when Mom/Dad is putting the roof over your head, wheels under your ass, and food on your table. I have more respect for someone who graduates in seven when they are doing these things for themselves. It's a true test of character to persevere.

Especially if you have others that depend on you to do the providing for them.

Well said!!!!

[jmuroller]

Athletes should graduate at a level equal to or higher than the general student population.

IMO, if a program is graduating at a rate significantly lower than the general student population, that programing is likely recruiting athletes not qualified or prepared for the academic climate of the university and the program is doing a dis-service to the athletes.


I respectfully disagree.

I don't think athletes need to graduate at the rate of the regular student population. A coach needs to have a balance between winning and having players that are good students. You can't limit yourself when it comes to recruiting High School players. If all you do is recruit players that are above average students, then you simply will not maximize your ability to win games. Don't get me wrong, I am not for a coach that all he signs is trouble makers that barely get into school and make NCAA requirements. But you have to take some chances when it comes players. The running back from innercity Philly that has a 2.0 GPA and an 790 SAT doesn't deserve to shoved to the side because of that.

At JMU I fully expect our % to be slightly lower than the school average. In the past 15 years JMU has become so popular that the average student enrolling every year is more qualified/prepared/smarter than the previous years. I graduated with a 3.4 GPA and 1180 SAT's and I was waitlisted. Now if I was waitlisted, do you think we should recruit and sign only players that are of my quality or better? Classes at JMU are becoming harder and harder every year. Now, as a whole we are not an Ivy, Patriot, or even on the level of a W&M, but we are catching up. It is the responsibility of a coach to do everything in his power to make sure a kid gets his grades and graduates, but the simple truth is that not everyone is meant to graduate college.

Now, some of these rates are ALARMIMG to say the least. No way someone should be below 70%. Something is seriously wrong when your % is say 50%!! But if your student population is for example graduating at 90%, then dropping to the 80%, or even high 70's is good enough. The schools that should be ashamed are the ones that when you see the % your first thoiught is "WTF!"

[SoCon48]

Athletes should graduate at a level equal to or higher than the general student population.

IMO, if a program is graduating at a rate significantly lower than the general student population, that programing is likely recruiting athletes not qualified or prepared for the academic climate of the university and the program is doing a dis-service to the athletes.

I would be very suspicious if student athletes graduated at the same rate and time span as regular students considering the practice time, weight room, travel time, pressures on student athletes compared to reg students.

[WMTribe90]

I would be very suspicious if student athletes graduated at the same rate and time span as regular students considering the practice time, weight room, travel time, pressures on student athletes compared to reg students.

There's no reason a student athlete can't graduate in five years if most "regular" students do it in four years. I graduated from William and Mary in five years. I earned two degrees and never took more than 13 credits in season. I often performed better academically in-season because I knew I didn't have time to slack off and managed my time more efficiently. Lets not make excuses for the current failure of some programs to graduate thier players in five years. These kids are there to get an education first and foremost. To suggest that schools which graduate players at the same rate as the student pop are somehow cutting corners is ridiculous IMO. WM often graduates its athletes at a higher rate than the student pop and I guarantee you no corners were cut or compromises made. We're not the only ones either.

[WMTribe90]

I respectfully disagree.

I don't think athletes need to graduate at the rate of the regular student population. A coach needs to have a balance between winning and having players that are good students. You can't limit yourself when it comes to recruiting High School players. If all you do is recruit players that are above average students, then you simply will not maximize your ability to win games. Don't get me wrong, I am not for a coach that all he signs is trouble makers that barely get into school and make NCAA requirements. But you have to take some chances when it comes players. The running back from innercity Philly that has a 2.0 GPA and an 790 SAT doesn't deserve to shoved to the side because of that.

At JMU I fully expect our % to be slightly lower than the school average. In the past 15 years JMU has become so popular that the average student enrolling every year is more qualified/prepared/smarter than the previous years. I graduated with a 3.4 GPA and 1180 SAT's and I was waitlisted. Now if I was waitlisted, do you think we should recruit and sign only players that are of my quality or better? Classes at JMU are becoming harder and harder every year. Now, as a whole we are not an Ivy, Patriot, or even on the level of a W&M, but we are catching up. It is the responsibility of a coach to do everything in his power to make sure a kid gets his grades and graduates, but the simple truth is that not everyone is meant to graduate college.

Now, some of these rates are ALARMIMG to say the least. No way someone should be below 70%. Something is seriously wrong when your % is say 50%!! But if your student population is for example graduating at 90%, then dropping to the 80%, or even high 70's is good enough. The schools that should be ashamed are the ones that when you see the % your first thoiught is "WTF!"

I'm not saying you must only recruit kids with GPAs and SATs near the school's median scores. I'm all for giving hard-working kids a chance. However, this is COLLEGE football and last time I checked the goal is to graduate with a degree. Not every kid that can play football is meant to go to college and not every kid that plays football should got to a JMU, UD or WM. A school does a dis-service to the athlete if they admit a kid ill-equiped to succeed at that school. The player would be better off getting a degree from a "lesser" school than failing out of JMU after 3 years.

JMU is a competitive school with competitve admissions. Is it fair to turn away qualified students with no athletic ability in favor of a player with little chance of ever graduating? I'm not picking on JMU, just speaking in hypotheticals.

WM wins more than our fair share in the A10. We have the second highest winning percentage behind UD. The average GPA and SAT score for our football palyers are around a 3.5 and 1200. If WM can compete and graduate close to 100% there's no reason any other program in the conference can't do the same.

If all you care about is winning football games then may I suggest the NFL or maybe VT. College football is played by "student athletes" and good money is being paid (tuition) to see them graduate.

[OL FU]

I would be very suspicious if student athletes graduated at the same rate and time span as regular students considering the practice time, weight room, travel time, pressures on student athletes compared to reg students.

One of Furman's difficulties has been redshirting, then they graduate in four years and decide not to play the fifth year of football.

[jmuroller]

The average GPA and SAT score for our football palyers are around a 3.5 and 1200.


You have got to be kidding. If you think that is true then you have no clue. Don't pull numbers out of your ass.

[WMTribe90]

I played at WM and have a pretty good idea what most of my teamates scored. The average for walk-ons and scholarship players at WM is very close to the numbers in my post. I'm not "pulling numbers out my a$$" and suggest you get a clue.

WM won't even look at a kid that scores below 1000. At best WM might get one or two kids in with scores below 1050 a year (if their GPA is high enough to counterbalance the SAT score). For every recruit with a score below 1100 there is on that scored 1200 or better. My roomate freshman year was a walk-on who scored in the low 1400's.

The average SAT for last year's fresheman class was 1342. Our admission office would not allow the average football score to fall much more than 150 points below the class average.

I'm not putting anybody down, just stating the facts. They're is a reason WM, Furman, Lehigh, etc. graduates its players. They don't accept kids that can't handle the academic work load (i.e., kids with scores below 1,000).

[SoCon48]

There's no reason a student athlete can't graduate in five years if most "regular" students do it in four years. I graduated from William and Mary in five years. I earned two degrees and never took more than 13 credits in season. I often performed better academically in-season because I knew I didn't have time to slack off and managed my time more efficiently. Lets not make excuses for the current failure of some programs to graduate thier players in five years. These kids are there to get an education first and foremost. To suggest that schools which graduate players at the same rate as the student pop are somehow cutting corners is ridiculous IMO. WM often graduates its athletes at a higher rate than the student pop and I guarantee you no corners were cut or compromises made. We're not the only ones either.

I wonder. Do reg students still average graduating in 4 years without summer schools??? I was thinking that had changed lately. Like 4.5 or something.

[SoCon48]

I played at WM and have a pretty good idea what most of my teamates scored. The average for walk-ons and scholarship players at WM is very close to the numbers in my post. I'm not "pulling numbers out my a$$" and suggest you get a clue.

WM won't even look at a kid that scores below 1000. At best WM might get one or two kids in with scores below 1050 a year (if their GPA is high enough to counterbalance the SAT score). For every recruit with a score below 1100 there is on that scored 1200 or better. My roomate freshman year was a walk-on who scored in the low 1400's.

The average SAT for last year's fresheman class was 1342. Our admission office would not allow the average football score to fall much more than 150 points below the class average.

I'm not putting anybody down, just stating the facts. They're is a reason WM, Furman, Lehigh, etc. graduates its players. They don't accept kids that can't handle the academic work load (i.e., kids with scores below 1,000).

No reason in hell a school who's average is 1350 should be looking a kids with below 1000.

[SoCon48]

I played at WM and have a pretty good idea what most of my teamates scored. The average for walk-ons and scholarship players at WM is very close to the numbers in my post. I'm not "pulling numbers out my a$$" and suggest you get a clue.


I'm not putting anybody down, just stating the facts. They're is a reason WM, Furman, Lehigh, etc. graduates its players. They don't accept kids that can't handle the academic work load (i.e., kids with scores below 1,000).
Where my gripe comes in is when a school's admission's standards are in the barely 1000 SAT range , etc is compared to one which requires 1350 or so...has the NCAA comparing their 92% graduation rates as equal. That's bull**** any way you look at it.

[SoCon48]

One of Furman's difficulties has been redshirting, then they graduate in four years and decide not to play the fifth year of football.
Graduate school???

[WMTribe90]

Where my gripe comes in is when a school's admission's standards are in the barely 1000 SAT range , etc is compared to one which requires 1350 or so...has the NCAA comparing their 92% graduation rates as equal. That's bull**** any way you look at it.

Why? All the NCAA is saying is that scholarship athletes should graduate at a reasonable level, ballpark 75% at a minimum. Each school should recruit kids capable of handling the workload and requirements for your particular school. Its all about finding good fits. There's no excuse for any school to graduate less than 75% of its players. Its pretty hard to fail out of most schools.


No reason in hell a school who's average is 1350 should be looking a kids with below 1000.

Agreed, which is why WM rarely takes kids in the 1000 to 1050 range (with great GPAs) and never below 1000.

[blukeys]

I say if you finish, then you finish. It's one thing to graduate in 4 yrs when Mom/Dad is putting the roof over your head, wheels under your ass, and food on your table. I have more respect for someone who graduates in seven when they are doing these things for themselves. It's a true test of character to persevere.

Especially if you have others that depend on you to do the providing for them.


I think quite a few people have missed the point. This is a graduation rate that is used to determine how a school is doing and not an indictment of an individual student. If one student takes 8 years to get a diploma it will count against the school but the student should be heralded. But let's not kid ourselves that 50% of a football team that has not graduated within 8 years are near completing their studies. The students who take longer than 6 years and actually finish the school's academic program are rare. By the way any serious look into the problems with graduation rates really should focus on Men's basketball first as statistically basketball programs are the worst at grad rates.

Regarding the 6 year decision, the NCAA has to set some deadline if they ever want to report on any one year. For instance if the NCAA wants to report on the class that entered in Sept of 2000 they have to have a deadline of 6 years to determine a 6 year rate after this June. There is just no other way to make a decision. How will anyone know who will graduate in 10 years just to determine a 6 year rate??? You can't know. To allow a school unlimited time means there is no way to come up for a rate unless you want to wait for eternity.

One interesting example of note. Dallas Green who was a UD student in the late 50's signed a professional contract with the Phildelphia Phillies as a pitcher. He did not graduate in 6 years. He Pitched on the legendary "choke" team of the 1964 Phillies and had a successful baseball career as a scout and manager. This included stints as manager of the Yankees, Cubs and of course he is the only Phil. Phillies Manager to win a World Series in 1980. Green finally earned his final credits to become a UD graduate 30+ years after his class graduated from UD.

To give unlimited time for graduation rates means that the NCAA would have to wait till the 90's to publish the UD Graduation rate of 1962 thanks to Dallas Green. Green's accomplishments are exemplary and speak for themselves but he is the exception. Most Undergrads finish their academic careers in under 30 years and the NCAA cannot wait that time for the one time exception. The rates are fair. Schools that don't make the cut need to help their athletes more or recruit players who can cut it in the classroom.

[SoCon48]

Just not sure it tells how it tells how a school is doing in comparison to other schools. A school with 92% graduation rate with low admission standards compared to a school with 92% graduation rate with Ivy League type standards is apples to oranges. One is a haven for football players and the other is a quality academic school who has a football program.
Really all it does is compare how the athletes do compared to reg students. Nothing else.
If a retard, party animal wants to play football AND still graduate, he can find someone who will take him and still not hurt their %.

[blukeys]

Just not sure it tells how it tells how a school is doing in comparison to other schools. A school with 92% graduation rate with low admission standards compared to a school with 92% graduation rate with Ivy League type standards is apples to oranges. One is a haven for football players and the other is a quality academic school who has a football program.
Really all it does is compare how the athletes do compared to reg students. Nothing else.
If a retard, party animal wants to play football AND still graduate, he can find someone who will take him and still not hurt their %.


It seems to me the schools with the high graduation rates appear to to have the higher admission standards.

Care to show me a Wofford, Colgate, Harvard, or William and Mary with a low graduation rate???

I read the stats as saying the low admission retard Party schools don't graduate their kids at the 50% rate.

UD's admission standards are light years higher than Del State U whose standards are considerably lower. Yet UD's rate is 89% DSU's is 51%.

[jmuroller]

WMTribe,

While I think that W&M definitely has very high GPA's, 3.5 and 1200 is impossible for schloarship players. If you want to add in walkons fine, but it is still below that number. How much I don't know, but not that high.

[WMTribe90]

WMTribe,

While I think that W&M definitely has very high GPA's, 3.5 and 1200 is impossible for schloarship players. If you want to add in walkons fine, but it is still below that number. How much I don't know, but not that high.

For schlorship players only the averages are around 3.3 and 1150.
For scholarship and recruited walkons the average is indeed around 3.5 and 1200. Why wouldn't I count recruited walkons? Several of them end up earning schollies and starting every year under Laycocks system.

The NCAA doesn't publish this info, but I've read the bios for every recruiting class since I graduated and have a pretty good feel what for kind of scores our recruits bring with them. My score was above the 1200 line for what its worth.

If you have some special knowledge on the subject beyond your opinion please present it. Like I said, WM admissions is not run by the football program and they are sticklers. If the average for the freshmen class is 1342, the athlete average is not more than 150 points below the class average.

I'm neither bragging or making excuses, but this is the reality.

[SoCon48]

For schlorship players only the averages are around 3.3 and 1150.
. Why wouldn't I count recruited walkons? Several of them end up earning schollies and starting every year under Laycocks system.



Sure, once they become scholarship players.