USC admission standards have Spurrier fuming

I am very aware of how much preferential treatment student athletes get in the admissions process already. It’s obvious. We all know how it works.

Just because “it is how it is” doesn’t make it right. Just because something unfair exists and that it’s the sad truth does not mean I should not say anything about it. On the contrary, I think I have an obiligation to speak out about things that are not just, and would be expected to do so in a public forum such as this message board where things like this are expected to be spoken about and debated.

I tell you what… You keep on “getting over it” if you don’t like something in life or see something as unfair, and I’ll keep on speaking out about it. You follow your philosophy, and I’ll follow mine. Deal?

Look, I feel bad for the kids, too. It’s obviously not their fault. They were promised something by a coach, it was taken away from them (well, actually never had it… just under the impression they did), and they were left in a TERRIBLE situation. Not their fault, and I would be VERY upset if I were them. But, my point is this: Wouldn’t it be Spurrier’s fault? Spurrier is an employee of that institution and is a representative of that institution. Shouldn’t he be very certain and shouldn’t he know the policies, timing, and process of the institution for which he is recruiting? I would think that would be something important to know.

[QUOTE=NinerATL2CHA;252800]I am very aware of how much preferential treatment student athletes get in the admissions process already. It’s obvious. We all know how it works.

Just because “it is how it is” doesn’t make it right. Just because something unfair exists and that it’s the sad truth does not mean I should not say anything about it. On the contrary, I think I have an obiligation to speak out about things that are not just, and would be expected to do so in a public forum such as this message board where things like this are expected to be spoken about and debated.

I tell you what… You keep on “getting over it” if you don’t like something in life or see something as unfair, and I’ll keep on speaking out about it. You follow your philosophy, and I’ll follow mine. Deal?

Look, I feel bad for the kids, too. It’s obviously not their fault. They were promised something by a coach, it was taken away from them (well, actually never had it… just under the impression they did), and they were left in a TERRIBLE situation. Not their fault, and I would be VERY upset if I were them. But, my point is this: Wouldn’t it be Spurrier’s fault? Spurrier is an employee of that institution and is a representative of that institution. Shouldn’t he be very certain and shouldn’t he know the policies, timing, and process of the institution for which he is recruiting? I would think that would be something important to know.[/QUOTE]

Keep fighting the good fight. Your perfect world would make for terrible NCAA sports. I have no issue with these kids getting the perks, they make good $$ for the schools.

For arguments sake. Should Marcus Bennett have been upset with Bobby for his troubles? Apparently since Bobby was the coach he should have been able to foresee any potential pitfall. According to you he should.

[QUOTE=s9er;252757]I’m fully aware of that, They had met NCAA standards, that should have sped up the admissions process. That is my only point, and Spurriers point as well.

Somwhere the issue was blurred to indicate that a request was made to lower standards, it never was. The request was for a more efficient admissions process.

I’m not sure what your point is about the rankings of HS’s is?[/QUOTE]
The NCAA requirements are minimal for college admission.

[QUOTE]For the class of 2008: Division I – 16 core courses
If you plan to enter college in 2008 or after, you will need to present 16 core courses in the following breakdown:
[LIST][]4 years of English
[
]3 years of mathematics (Algebra I or higher)
[]2 years of natural/physical science (one must be a lab science)
[
]1 year of additional English, math or science
[]2 years of social studies
[
]4 years of additional core courses (from any area listed above, or from foreign language, nondoctrinal religion or philosophy)[/LIST][/QUOTE]
Some of these kids may not be “stupid” but were given bad advice on classes to take by their coaches/guidance counselors.

The last SAT numbers I could fine, 2004, South Carolina ranked 50th. If the high schools are not preparing kids for the future, we are all doomed.

FYI, Benny made the comment Monday that the incoming SAT scores for UNCW freshmen are higher than Chapel Hill’s. Their Chancellor is concerned that since UNCW is considered a regional institution, they are getting away from serving the folks of eastern NC/SC because they are not well educated and are not getting the education needed to enter UNCW.

Keep fighting the good fight. Your perfect world would make for terrible NCAA sports. I have no issue with these kids getting the perks, they make good $$ for the schools.

For arguments sake. Should Marcus Bennett have been upset with Bobby for his troubles? Apparently since Bobby was the coach he should have been able to foresee any potential pitfall. According to you he should.

The world is [I]not[/I] perfect, and [I]that’s[/I] why I speak out. If student athletes had to wait in line just like everyone else, they would still make just as much $ for the schools. It might be a different type… harder working, better grades, etc. But, trust me, no one will stop watching college football if college athletes are treated equally.

The NCAA is different than college admission. Each has it’s own admission standards. The colleges can and does vary from the NCAA’s policies. That’s a completely different beast/argument. I am talking about a coach being familiar with his own university’s (you know, his employer) admittance policies, procedures, time-line, etc. In the very least, I think a coach should be or if he can’t guarantee something, tell the poor kid, “I can’t honestly say right now…”

I really do not want to get involved in any debate here for obvious reasons … but a little perspective might help.

This whole debate really only exists because of a timeline problem. 5 years ago at my former university of employment I had a conversation with our faculty rep predicting a future lawsuit on this exact issue. It was clear that it was going to start happening more and more because of timing.

As coaches, we are recruiting players that have only one year of high school on their transcript (if that) and no standardized test scores. Now take a scenario of a high school sophomore (or early junior year perhaps) saying she/he is ready to commit to school X and is being offered scholarships elsewhere. Well now this coach MUST offer to have a chance to get this athlete.

So … down the road this athlete takes the standardized tests and meets all NCAA requirements and is then rejected by the university YEARS later than the commitment.

Again, no opinion here on what is right or wrong, just giving you the 1st hand experience on why this whole issue exists.

Add to this that some coaches KNOW that if they offer any scholarship money at all (in football it is obviously a full ride but in some sports this could be literally .01 of the full scholarship) and the athlete qualifies by NCAA standards, than the school AUTOMATICALLY admits that athlete.

Now you are at school Y that does not guarantee such admission and you are competing against school X who does. The athlete chooses you and then gets rejected, when he/she is NCAA eligible and has been offered scholarship dollars, meaning he/she would have been accepted at your rivals with the automatic acceptance. You beat out those rivals for a top recruit, but lose out in the end to those schools in the end. This WILL be used against you in future recruiting battles.

Every school has its own standards and coaches must know these. But the debate rages because of timing. No admissions department can tell you that a freshman or sophomore without standardized tests is admissible, so have fun recruiting in that new world of early commitments.

But, they can tell you … “if the players qualifies by NCAA standards then we will accept him/her”

Now you know Spurriers world. Again I am not giving an opinion in any way … just trying to explain the issue.

Thanks, Coach!

If I am understanding what you said correctly:

Since USC’s standards are [I]not [/I]exactly like those of the NCAA’s and a student can be rejected regardless as to whether or not the student meets NCAA standards, then either Spurrier should tell them this (“Hey, you still need to do well enough to become academically qualified at our school even if the NCAA clears you. And, if you’re borderline, it will take longer.”) and be honest with the prospect, or the school (if it deems it that important) needs to change its requirements to mirror those of the NCAA’s… automatic entry if cleared by NCAA.

Either way, Spurrier, as an employee and representative of the university and the one who does the majority of recruiting for football, should make himself [I]extremely [/I]familiar with his institution’s rules, regs, time lines, etc. with regards to the admissions process (especially when it comes to borderline cases) so that he can operate within them and not be surprised in the end IMO.

I am not saying what he should or should not do … or what the university should or should not do.

What I am saying is that in the world of early commitments if your school does NOT automatically admit those players that are NCAA eligible you better brace yourself if you plan to recruit (borderline admits)against schools that do offer such guarantees.

I will also add, again with no opinion, that admissions standards, timelines, etc often change year to year, which is logical. So if you are recruiting a 2010 grad, for example, and get a commitment in 2007 for this player, by the time he/she goes through the admissions process it is probably different then when the recruit committed.

Hence why a coach would ask for a guarentee that his/her rivals may offer … if you are NCAA admissible you WILL get accepted. Spurrier is asking for a level playing (recruiting) field. We all know this does not exist at all schools as schools all have different admissions standards (see Ivies, etc). He is asking for something that some of his rivals certainly have (but not all). That now is up to the school to decide if he will get this guarantee. Then it is up to him to live with this decision or not.