New NCAA academic eligibility requirements

[CP87]

Somehow I have not heard about this until today. This coming year's high school freshmen will have to meet different requirements to compete in college athletics than those that came before them (summarized here and in this podcast). Below is a highlight of the changes:

In order to be eligible for a scholarship and compete at a Division I institution a high school student must have done the following:
________________________________________________

16: Number of core courses required for NCAA eligibility (same)
10 : Number of core courses that must be completed by the beginning of a high school athlete's senior year (big change; no more Michael Oher sneaking in all of the core courses online during the summer after senior year)
7 : Number of 10 initial core courses that must be in English, math or science
2.3: Minimum GPA in those 16 core courses ( up from 2.0)
2.5 : Minimum GPA for junior college transfer

According to NCAA statistics:
15.3: Percentage of student-athletes who enrolled in 2009-10 but would not meet the 2016 academic standards
35.2: Percentage of football players who enrolled in 2009-10 but would not meet the 2016 academic standards
43.1 : Percentage of men's basketball players who enrolled in 2009-10 but would not meet the 2016 academic standards.

In terms of national competitiveness, this is probably good for the Big Ten (strong academic institutions), but could create some problems for certain programs across the country.

It could really hurt some kids who lack the proper guidance to get their proverbial **** together early in their high school careers. If you work with athletes with college aspirations, get on them about this.

[herkyattack]

The SEC is ****ed

[latrans]

The SEC is ****ed

Took the words right out of my mouth.

[CP87]

The SEC is ****ed

In the podcast linked in the original post, Ivan Maisel recalled talking to Saban and Muschamp at SEC media day. He said both men reviewed how well their current rosters would have done meeting the new standards. To paraphrase, both coaches said the results were very ugly.

I can see why the NCAA is doing this, but I can also see the legitimate arguments about how it could hurt some kids.

[kmurp]

The SEC is ****ed

I would like to see evidence that Iowa etc would have fared better under these new rules than the average SEC school.
I thi k you are probable correct but... I'm not certain

[hawkdrummer1]

Here comes Jesse or Al screaming racism in 3.... 2.... 1....

[CAARHawk]

I would like to see evidence that Iowa etc would have fared better under these new rules than the average SEC school.
I thi k you are probable correct but... I'm not certain

I have first hand knowledge of the academic difference between B1G and southern schools. Believe me, Iowa would fare much, much better.

[eyekwah]

I have first hand knowledge of the academic difference between B1G and southern schools. Believe me, Iowa would fare much, much better.

Carr, is it true that the Big Ten has higher admission standards than the NCAA and each Big Ten University can require higher admission standards than the Conference minimum?

I know it was true, but these new NCAA standards are still below the standards for admission for all student at Iowa public universities.

[MoseSchrute]

In the podcast linked in the original post, Ivan Maisel recalled talking to Saban and Muschamp at SEC media day. He said both men reviewed how well their current rosters would have done meeting the new standards. To paraphrase, both coaches said the results were very ugly.

LOL, good to hear. This should help the B10, overall.

[CP87]

Carr, is it true that the Big Ten has higher admission standards than the NCAA and each Big Ten University can require higher admission standards than the Conference minimum?

I know it was true, but these new NCAA standards are still below the standards for admission for all student at Iowa public universities.

Here are the current standards for Regents University automatic admission (from the U of Iowa Registrar)...

Decisions on admission to a regent university are based on the following four factors:

• performance on standardized tests (SAT Reasoning Test or ACT)
• high school grade point average (GPA)
• high school percentile rank in class
• number of high school courses completed in the core subject areas

These factors are used in the following equation to calculate a regent admission index (RAI): RAI = (2 x ACT composite score) + (1 x high school rank expressed as a percentile) + (20 x high school grade point average) + (5 x number of high school courses completed in the core subject areas)


Graduates of approved Iowa high schools who have the subject matter background required by each university and who meet the regent admission index of 245 required for automatic admission will be admitted to any regent university. Applicants who do not meet the regent admission index...at the discretion of the admissions officers may:

1. Be admitted unconditionally
2. Be admitted conditionally
3. Be required to enroll for a tryout period during a preceding summer session
4. Be denied admission

If you met the minimum NCAA requirements of 10 core courses and 2.3 GPA, finished around the 50th percentile of your class, and scored 20 on the ACT (around 50th percentile), that would give you an RAI of 186, well below the standard for automatic admission (245). A typical student would probably be screwed in this situation, but an athlete would probably benefit from the "discretion of the admissions officers."

I couldn't find anything about minimum admissions requirements, either for the conference or for Iowa.