Robert Lee APR since 2004-05

[ShowDog]

_ If this school could find an A.D. with half a brain, we could be so much more than I think even fans realize. Jim Weaver at Va Tech has laid out the blue print for a school like us. A town, school, population, enrollment, and fanbase of comparable proportions; and they burst onto the national scene 15 years ago. Goes to show what leadership can do for ya. _

Or what the LACK of leadership will do for you!

[scotto_25]

_ So what does this mean? _

It means:

That the Cajuns and Coach Lee are;

A-against
P-players
R-returning

Because we suck!!!

[Turbine]

When it comes to good timing for hiring a new men’s basketball coach now is the time. There might come a time just as good as now, but none better.

According to David Walker the last 2 periods compiled for men’s basketball had a 1000 or 100% APR rating. As heavy as David Walker's APR praises were for Robert Lee, one can only assume he expects a 1000 or 100% APR for this school year as well. Meaning UL will soon have 3000 points on the books

The historical APR only looks at 4 year increments! Namely the last 4 years.

The scary part of this whole equation is that after this 2008-09 season is compiled, it will be the very last time the egregious 2005-2006 will ever be looked at.

Meaning #1: If a new coach were hired now, the 2005-06 season (the ONLY culprit currently on the books) would be off the table when his first year is added up.

Meaning #2: If not now, there will NEVER be a good APR time to hire a new coach. If you are going to make a change you must do it when the new coach will be backed up by 3 1000 point seasons. He could score as low as 700 and stil meet the NCAA threshold.

No coach can score that bad with this many seniors coming back.

[CajunZ1]

_Meaning #2: If not now, there will NEVER be a good APR time to hire a new coach. If you are going to make a change you must do it when the new coach will be backed up by 3 1000 point seasons. He could score as low as 700 and stil meet the NCAA threshold. _

The more I think about it (and read people's comments) the more I believe we don't know the whole story with how the APR thing actually works.

It's not as simple as DW's press release makes it out to be.

[KACajun]

_ The more I think about it (and read people's comments) the more I believe we don't know the whole story with how the APR thing actually works.

It's not as simple as DW's press release makes it out to be. _

I agree...

[scotto_25]

So if Lee left we could possibly lose players and that would hurt the "APR"

What about Lee staying and some players leaving the team or flunking out....same affect different situation.

It's hard to understand! It just seems like poor little UL is the only one that has to worry about this. People get hired, fired, and players transfer all the time.......mind boggeling!

[Turbine]

A friend sent me this helpful information.

  Here's a little info on the APR question you posted. It deals with what the NCAA calls with an "Improvement Plus" review. I think posting a pair of 1000's after a 683 would merit significant improvement in the NCAA's eyes. But, this is just my guess based on what I could decipher off the NCAA website.

---

A team with an APR below 925 (four year rolling average) will be subject to a penalty of up to 10 percent of the maximum number of scholarships they can award. Additional penalties can include a reduction of total official visits hosted by the institution and a reduction of practice time by two hours per week throughout the playing season.

Teams scoring below 900 (four year rolling average) are subject to further examination to determine if historical penalties (having all sport programs banned from post-season competition, loss of D-I membership, etc.) are warranted. Specifically, teams are compared against the bottom 10 percent within their sport, general student body academic performance, and performance expectation given the resources of the institution.

Teams scoring below 900 (four year rolling average) but meeting their "Improvement Plus review will not receive any historical penalties. This will apply only to teams that demonstrate significant improvement, as evidenced by a favorable review of the "improvement" factors previously approved by both the NCAA Division I Committee on Academic Performance.

[rhineaux]

_ A friend sent me this helpful information. _

I would hope that Parrott is able to bring this up. I'm curious if DW even knew about this, and if so, if the NCAA has ever defined "Improvement Plus", or if they asked the NCAA to define it.


Another thing I'd like to know is when the 08/09 APR is calculated. Is it calculated at the end of the SP 09 semester? If so, if a player leaves after that, is the 08/09 APR adjusted? One would think that if the players all had their grades in order, and the players that would transfer, transferred after this semester (i.e. after grades were finalized), then the APR for the 08/09 would already be set, and anything that happened afterwards would be outside of the 4 year segment that is in question. So, if a few players did leave, they wouldn't be thrown in with the 05/06 exodus, thus clearing us.

Also, I don't see where a player could leave before the semester is over anyway. If they did, then they would kill their grades, which would prevent them from gaining access to other schools.

If the 08/09 APR isn't calculated until the following fall semester, or when practice resumes, then I guess it's a moot point. But as I understand it, you get one point for player retention, and we retained almost all of our players from 07/08 to 08/09, and another point for everyone having their grades, and I'm assuming that we have that.

I tried to find some of these answers on NCAA.org, but there wasn't much there.

[ZuluCajun]

Well, I've had time to sit back and digest the Basketball decision. At first, I was disappointed that our Officials decided to retain Lee. I still feel like Universities have to be prepared for situations such as this, and put aside enough CASH to expect Buyouts , which are a common occurance, especially around here. BUT, after considering their point of View, and the possibility of a BIG APR Hit, I am forced to agree with their decision.

Now, that does NOT mean i agree with this un-democratic process that the Almighty NCAA has decided to bestow on Universities. Just another example of trying to over-manage an individual and public institutions. Why on earth, does the NCAA feel like they MUST force an individual to remain in school, or remain at a particular school ? Last time i checked, this was a Free country, with Rights bestowed upon us by our forefathers.

If an athlete decides to move on, by all means , Let them go. Why does the NCAA feel the need to force anybody to do anything when it comes to a personal decision ? I do understand some of the implications when it comes to scholarships, so i would agree that the athlete should suffer some consequence for notliving up to their agreement,but, the institution should not be penalized into forcing an Individual to do anything beyond their will.

There has to be other alternatives to discourage transfers, many of which i can think of, but my main point is the NCAA has taken this APR thing way too far. Who inthe He--, do they think they are ?

I think it's time for another sactioning body to try to compete with the NCAA, and offer Conferences the right to choose among them. This is the only way that we can retain some voice , or choice. Because of the current Iron Grip that the Almighty NCAA has on UL and all Universities, I have to agree with the decision by our Athletic Dept. But, it is a SAD day for College Athletics.

[Turbine]

Because Lee was not the exception, coaches not unlike Lee would court-n-kick.

This APR was designed to make coaches treat their players like more than rag dolls.


igeaux.mobi

[LsuULfan]

_ Because Lee was not the exception, coaches not unlike Lee would court-n-kick.

This APR was designed to make coaches treat their players like more than rag dolls.


igeaux.mobi _

I thought the APR was designed to keep programs from running off a bunch of players as some coaches werre prone to do. Here it is somewhat like the tail wagging the dog-the players wd be leaving even though the university wd be trying to retain them.

[Turbine]

_ I thought the APR was designed to keep programs from running off a bunch of players as some coaches werre prone to do.

You are correct and is what I meant by court-n-kick