Lee loses two more players

[Parrott]

APR is not affected if said student-athlete is not on scholarship.

igeaux.mobi

[headragincajun]

_ APR is not affected if said student-athlete is not on scholarship.

igeaux.mobi _

Josh, was the athlete on scholarship ? If he was taken off, wouldn't that affect the APR ? I was thinking that the only reason it wasn't was because he stayed in school. Otherwise, aren't you getting rid of a scholarship player ?
I understand he underperformed in the class room. I'm just trying to get a handle on the APR (just in case I coach again). Could you double check it and let us know ? A lot of fans on this board are really confused about the APR deal. I would like to know too. Thanks Man.

Headragincajun

[headragincajun]

_ APR is not affected if said student-athlete is not on scholarship.

igeaux.mobi _

Josh,
Maybe we were talking about 2 different things too. If so, that was my fault. I was saying that the APR was not affected in Oct, because the student athlete was elgibile, and returned to school even after his scholarship was pulled. What is called a 2 for 2.

Maybe you were saying that he didn't count on next Oct 2010 because he wasn't on scholarship this year and was a walkon. I think that was were Jay might have been coming from too.

If you find out different let me know. Thanks man. I know it is confusing. Just trying to help some folks out. I'm getting a ton of APR Questions.

Headragincajun

[Parrott]

For those unaware, coaches have the choice of whether to renew a scholarship year to year. The APR is only affected when a student-athlete is on scholarship. It's one of the reasons Roberson is not on scholarship and has had to pay his own way here.

In McCoy's case, he was eligible and remained in school last spring, so he earned both APR points for the semester (one for being eligible, one for retention.)


igeaux.mobi

[RaginDave]

_ Josh, was the athlete on scholarship ? If he was taken off, wouldn't that affect the APR ? I was thinking that the only reason it wasn't was because he stayed in school. Otherwise, aren't you getting rid of a scholarship player ?
I understand he underperformed in the class room. I'm just trying to get a handle on the APR (just in case I coach again). Could you double check it and let us know ? A lot of fans on this board are really confused about the APR deal. I would like to know too. Thanks Man.

Headragincajun _

"JUST IN CASE" come on coach, don't be so pessimistic....don't you mean "WHEN YOU COACH, THE CAJUNS, AGAIN"

LOL

[MetryCajun]

_ Lee may not have the wins we'd like, but moves like this show that he isn't as stupid as some think he is. He had the foresight to remove a kid from scholarship so it wouldn't hurt APR down the road. At some point the losses will bite him, but he corrected all the crap we _____ed about with Jessie.

GEAUX UL! _

The only credit Lee should get is cleaning up the APR mess he created. Other than his first year, he has been a complete and total failure.

[Turbine]

If I were a reporter I would have questions. I'm not and I still have questions.

This is all rather weird considering McCoy's struggles in the classroom happened last spring yet he stayed eligible. Good for him, a lot of incentive to keep up and improve the effort.

At struggle time David Walker decided to keep Robert Lee because he was best suited to keep players eligible. I didn't buy it then or now, that does not make Robert a bad guy.

Do all struggling kids get scholarships yanked? I mean since when do coaches have higher standards than the University? HE PASSED.

Chicken-Egg did Robert have a crystal ball or was the scholarship yanking a morale killer?
igeaux.mobi

[Cajunsmike]

_ Josh, was the athlete on scholarship ? If he was taken off, wouldn't that affect the APR ? I was thinking that the only reason it wasn't was because he stayed in school. Otherwise, aren't you getting rid of a scholarship player ?
I understand he underperformed in the class room. I'm just trying to get a handle on the APR (just in case I coach again). Could you double check it and let us know ? A lot of fans on this board are really confused about the APR deal. I would like to know too. Thanks Man.

Headragincajun _

Athlete was eligible when the semester began due to his work in the previous semester. Therefore there was no negative APR impact. He was removed from scholarship as he barely made it in the previous semester and the administration saw there was a risk this would occur. You guys may recall that when Raymone Andrews was signed, Travis Bureau supposedly gave up his scholarship for that to occur. I believe Travis got the scholarship back when McCoy struggled. As he is not on scholarship this semester, the APR impact from his struggles is ZERO. This explanation comes from someone in athletic administration whom I trust 100%. One more good semester academically and we will be out of the ARP rolling averge concern.

[Rebel02]

Wait, I thought Lee was going to be different from Jesse in that Lee's players would succeed in the classroom? Bring Evans back!

[Turbine]

Athlete was eligible when the semester began due to his work in the previous semester. Therefore there was no negative APR impact. He was removed from scholarship as he barely made it in the previous semester and the administration saw there was a risk this would occur. You guys may recall that when Raymone Andrews was signed, Travis Bureau supposedly gave up his scholarship for that to occur. I believe Travis got the scholarship back when McCoy struggled. As he is not on scholarship this semester, the APR impact from his struggles is ZERO. This explanation comes from someone in athletic administration whom I trust 100%. One more good semester academically and we will be out of the ARP rolling averge concern.

The window for yanking and granting scholarships is rather small.

I do recall the word going into this season was... what a team player Travis was for giving up his scholarship -for the team- to make room. Evidently that was old (and wrong) news.

[Parrott]

No problem. McCoy should not count because he was not on scholarship this season. Walk-ons don't affect APR unless coaches decide to include them.

Josh,
Maybe we were talking about 2 different things too. If so, that was my fault. I was saying that the APR was not affected in Oct, because the student athlete was elgibile, and returned to school even after his scholarship was pulled. What is called a 2 for 2.

Maybe you were saying that he didn't count on next Oct 2010 because he wasn't on scholarship this year and was a walkon. I think that was were Jay might have been coming from too.

If you find out different let me know. Thanks man. I know it is confusing. Just trying to help some folks out. I'm getting a ton of APR Questions.

Headragincajun

igeaux.mobi

[Cajunsmike]

_ If I were a reporter I would have questions. I'm not and I still have questions.

This is all rather weird considering McCoy's struggles in the classroom happened last spring yet he stayed eligible. Good for him, a lot of incentive to keep up and improve the effort.

At struggle time David Walker decided to keep Robert Lee because he was best suited to keep players eligible. I didn't buy it then or now, that does not make Robert a bad guy.

Do all struggling kids get scholarships yanked? I mean since when do coaches have higher standards than the University? HE PASSED.

Chicken-Egg did Robert have a crystal ball or was the scholarship yanking a morale killer?
igeaux.mobi _

Not all student-athletes who barely retain eligibility lose their scholarship. I believe it may become a more common occurrence in the future however as APR is a relatively new issue schools are dealing with. Also, not every school who has an athlete in this situation is trying to get out of a rolling average impact threat. Finally, if it were an athlete who performed at an all conference level, perhaps the risk would have been taken.