(06-29-2014 09:27 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(06-29-2014 05:12 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  If by mass amounts you mean 5-6 a year then ok. The continuous whining and crying from ECU fans on this issue is exhausting.

So 25%+ of each class! yikes.

Every last student athlete that signed a LOI to play at Marshall in last years class that came in as NQer had a 3.5 or better when grades were posted a few weeks ago. There was 1 that had a 4.0 and 3 others 3.85 or higher.

As Ive said before most kids who become NQers usually fall into 1 of 2 categories:

1) Kids that were one of the stars of the school and the school would rather just pass the kid though and not help him.
2) Kids with a true learning disabilities that wasn't spotted in 13 years of school.

Since Doc has been at Marshall, we have had 2 recruits recruited as NQer not make it to the field and neither made it to campus at all.

The premise of this article is a little odd.
It's like they're saying that C-USA will be tougher than the Belt at least partially because some teams take non qualifiers.
Hardly unique to C-USA, especially coming from the Belt.

Is there a difference between a non-qualifier and a partial qualifier?

(06-29-2014 10:29 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  Is there a difference between a non-qualifier and a partial qualifier?

Since 2005, in NCAA Division I, you are either a qualifier or a non-qualifier. From 1986-2005, there was a partial qualifier status (also known as Prop 48s) that allowed the athlete to receive athletic financial aid and practice with the team, but not be athletically eligible the first year while they gained eligibility. Partial qualifiers were able to gain a fourth year of athletic eligibility if they were on pace to graduate. Partial qualifiers still exist in NCAA Division II.

Non-qualifiers may not receive athletic scholarship aid, may not practice with the team, and may not receive any assistance not otherwise available to the general student population.

(06-29-2014 10:15 PM)EdisonDoyle Wrote:  The premise of this article is a little odd.
It's like they're saying that C-USA will be tougher than the Belt at least partially because some teams take non qualifiers.
Hardly unique to C-USA, especially coming from the Belt.

Good observation.

(06-29-2014 10:53 PM)CoachMaclid Wrote:  Non-qualifiers may not receive athletic scholarship aid, may not practice with the team, and may not receive any assistance not otherwise available to the general student population.

NQers can't have access to the coaches, SC coach or team facilities. This includes the weight room. NQers either go to the Rec Center or have a gym membership.

(06-29-2014 09:41 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(06-29-2014 09:27 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  

(06-29-2014 09:10 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  

(06-29-2014 08:51 PM)Thegoldstandard Wrote:  

(06-29-2014 08:45 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  Here are the NCAA standards for anybody that is curious: http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/eligibility_cent..._Sheet.pdf

In there somewhere is something that penalized smart kids. Many kids now who show advancement in math are put in algebra 1 in the 8th grade. Credits earned before the 9th grade year do not count toward the 16.

Where does it say anything about credits in 8th grade not counting toward the 16? I've looked but can't find anything. I wouldn't understand why 8th graders can get HS credit for taking Algebra I in 8th, and then not have that same HS credit count towards college. HS credit is HS credit, no?

Probably unbeknownst to many, and speaking for Texas, there are more students than many realize who actually take Algebra I in 7th grade, Geometry in 8th, and enter HS having already taken two HS credit math classes. They subsequently take Algebra II in their freshman year. It wouldn't make any sense to penalize kids for being intelligent and ambitious enough to take a course earlier than most others do.

If you're one of the people who is taking Algebra II freshmen year of high school (And I'm speaking from my own experience as well as my peers' from that class), you are likely self-motivated enough to be taking four years of math anyways. I guess it COULD be an issue, but it is not something I see becoming a major problem.

I agree they'll likely take 4 years of math regardless. I also agree that it wouldn't be a major problem. In fact, it wouldn't be any sort of a problem at all because those students likely have very high GPAs and fall well within the NCAA guidelines for eligibility. I'm still curious though as to whether those HS credits taken in middle school truly don't count towards the 16. Just seeking clarification because whether it makes a difference or not, it doesn't seem fair for those courses to not count just because they were taken earlier.

I couldn't find anything on this link either...
http://2point3.ncaa.org/#courses

I will look and ask a friend whos a counselor at the local hs. If its changed its been in the last 2 years. But it specifically said credits earned before the 9th did not count.

(06-29-2014 10:12 PM)HerdZoned Wrote:  

(06-29-2014 09:27 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(06-29-2014 05:12 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  If by mass amounts you mean 5-6 a year then ok. The continuous whining and crying from ECU fans on this issue is exhausting.

So 25%+ of each class! yikes.

Every last student athlete that signed a LOI to play at Marshall in last years class that came in as NQer had a 3.5 or better when grades were posted a few weeks ago. There was 1 that had a 4.0 and 3 others 3.85 or higher.

As Ive said before most kids who become NQers usually fall into 1 of 2 categories:

1) Kids that were one of the stars of the school and the school would rather just pass the kid though and not help him.
2) Kids with a true learning disabilities that wasn't spotted in 13 years of school.

Since Doc has been at Marshall, we have had 2 recruits recruited as NQer not make it to the field and neither made it to campus at all.

I'm not sure that's the kind of the thing you want to promote. Basically, without saying it you're saying your school is a diploma mill. LOL. End joke.

Seriously though I know what you're really trying to say though I don't believe there are just two categories. There's a third. A lot of these kids like this have gone through a school system that doesn't teach them. It's not that a learning disability wasn't caught it's that they weren't taught a damn thing in 13 years because of bad school systems in low income areas. It's just a sad reality. Remember those articles that have come out about all these kids that have graduated from schools like UNC and didn't know how to read?

I'm not speaking to the situation at Marshall. I have no idea how you guys do or do not handle it. And I really don't have a problem with signing a NQ on a case-by-case basis.

The problem for us is that McCollum was trying to sign all these four star kids who couldn't even get into some jucos. I can't tell you how many kids he signed that never set foot on campus. It was awful what he was doing. He nearly ruined us, and that was before the APR was put in place. When APR was approved I thought we were done. But all that is a far cry from what's happening at Marshall or anywhere else. No one could do that now with the APR, so I'm not being critical of Doc. Like I said I don't really know how you guys handle it, so I can't comment on it.

(06-29-2014 10:04 PM)banker Wrote:  I hope nobody but Marshall takes them. I'll take all the Vinny Currys, Kevin Grooms, DJ Hunters, Deontay McManus, etc. we can get. Leave 'em all for us.

Here's the thing, it's not against the rules. Is it fair that Marshall is in a state that produces, on average, 3 division 1 football players a year? Is it fair that Marshall has about $10 million a year to spend on football while wvu has about $60 million? If there is an advantage that a G5 school can exploit, they ought to exploit it. People can cry the academic angle, but if you feel 5-6 kids a year out of your freshman class define your school, I don't know what to tell you.

I can understand a school like Rice turning their nose up at the practice, but the rest of the schools in the conference are, for the most part, second tier, public universities intended to educate the masses. Taking a few NQs every year isn't going to soil your reputation.

Just a note: Tony Petersen said he was amazed at all the HS talent around Louisiana. He has said more than once how nice it is to be able to drive around to recruit instead of having to fly.

Whats the difference in taking a NQ and taking a Juco? Nothing. We all know why kids go Juco, its because they couldn't get into the colleges that were recruiting them. The big schools tell them to go Juco or Prep school, get their grades in order and then we'll re-sign you once you get that done.
To gain a D1 scholarship to any school and be cleared by the NCAA, an athlete must have graduated HS with a 2.5 GPA. At least that was the requirement last time I checked. These kids aren't retarded.

I would rather take an NQ, Let them pay their first year, establish an academic presence, work towards a degree and have them 4 years - as opposed to taking a Juco for two years whose classes at that "institution" may or may not be approved by the NCAA. jmo.

(06-30-2014 09:19 AM)SVHerd Wrote:  establish an academic presence, work towards a degree and have them 4 years

That's the point of signing a JUCO over a NQ. You want them to establish on someone else's dime and time that they are going to commit to do college course work. It's a risk-based decision.

(06-30-2014 09:19 AM)SVHerd Wrote:  Whats the difference in taking a NQ and taking a Juco? Nothing. We all know why kids go Juco, its because they couldn't get into the colleges that were recruiting them. The big schools tell them to go Juco or Prep school, get their grades in order and then we'll re-sign you once you get that done.
To gain a D1 scholarship to any school and be cleared by the NCAA, an athlete must have graduated HS with a 2.5 GPA. At least that was the requirement last time I checked. These kids aren't retarded.

I would rather take an NQ, Let them pay their first year, establish an academic presence, work towards a degree and have them 4 years - as opposed to taking a Juco for two years whose classes at that "institution" may or may not be approved by the NCAA. jmo.

Interesting... that's probably right. I would prefer that route also. However, we signed a kid this year who didn't make his grades and is now going to a JC. It would be nice to have the option of keeping them at the school for 4 years. He may end up signing with another team out of JC now.

(06-30-2014 09:26 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(06-30-2014 09:19 AM)SVHerd Wrote:  establish an academic presence, work towards a degree and have them 4 years

That's the point of signing a JUCO over a NQ. You want them to establish on someone else's dime and time that they are going to commit to do college course work. It's a risk-based decision.

Seeing how NQs are non-scholarship, they're establishing their academic presence on their own dime. Its actually a fairly low risk practice. They either qualify and join the team, or they don't qualify and either transfer or flunk out.

(06-30-2014 09:19 AM)SVHerd Wrote:  Whats the difference in taking a NQ and taking a Juco? Nothing.

Good point (re the nonqualifiers who go JUCO, which is almost all of them except on the west coast).

(06-30-2014 08:56 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(06-29-2014 10:12 PM)HerdZoned Wrote:  

(06-29-2014 09:27 PM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(06-29-2014 05:12 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  If by mass amounts you mean 5-6 a year then ok. The continuous whining and crying from ECU fans on this issue is exhausting.

So 25%+ of each class! yikes.

Every last student athlete that signed a LOI to play at Marshall in last years class that came in as NQer had a 3.5 or better when grades were posted a few weeks ago. There was 1 that had a 4.0 and 3 others 3.85 or higher.

As Ive said before most kids who become NQers usually fall into 1 of 2 categories:

1) Kids that were one of the stars of the school and the school would rather just pass the kid though and not help him.
2) Kids with a true learning disabilities that wasn't spotted in 13 years of school.

Since Doc has been at Marshall, we have had 2 recruits recruited as NQer not make it to the field and neither made it to campus at all.

I'm not sure that's the kind of the thing you want to promote. Basically, without saying it you're saying your school is a diploma mill. LOL. End joke.

Seriously though I know what you're really trying to say though I don't believe there are just two categories. There's a third. A lot of these kids like this have gone through a school system that doesn't teach them. It's not that a learning disability wasn't caught it's that they weren't taught a damn thing in 13 years because of bad school systems in low income areas. It's just a sad reality. Remember those articles that have come out about all these kids that have graduated from schools like UNC and didn't know how to read?

I'm not speaking to the situation at Marshall. I have no idea how you guys do or do not handle it. And I really don't have a problem with signing a NQ on a case-by-case basis.

The problem for us is that McCollum was trying to sign all these four star kids who couldn't even get into some jucos. I can't tell you how many kids he signed that never set foot on campus. It was awful what he was doing. He nearly ruined us, and that was before the APR was put in place. When APR was approved I thought we were done. But all that is a far cry from what's happening at Marshall or anywhere else. No one could do that now with the APR, so I'm not being critical of Doc. Like I said I don't really know how you guys handle it, so I can't comment on it.

I actually think you could look at both Marshall's football and basketball program to see how and how not to recruit non-qualifiers. Doc brings in athletes that either had a solid GPA or a good test score but did not have both. For the most part these guys have made the grades and been solid citizens at Marshall.

Herrion brought in props based on their athleticism to which some never made it to the court, some were discipline problems, and some used us and moved on.

The end result Marshall football is soaring and basketball is a dumpster fire.

IMO, the NCAA standards are a total joke. I believe that they should raise the test scores necessary to qualify, and do away with the GPA requirement. If you are able to get your high school diploma, then you should be able to play at the next level. I think they should raise the SAT requirement to ~1060 and the ACT requirement to 18 or 19 composite.

(06-30-2014 09:56 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  IMO, the NCAA standards are a total joke. I believe that they should raise the test scores necessary to qualify, and do away with the GPA requirement. If you are able to get your high school diploma, then you should be able to play at the next level. I think they should raise the SAT requirement to ~1060 and the ACT requirement to 18 or 19 composite.

Agree. I was looking at the school-by-school breakdown where it said Rice doesn't take NQ, because the schools requirements are higher than the NCAA's. But is there a Division I school out there that has lower requirements than the NCAA's? I can't imagine there is.

(06-30-2014 10:35 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(06-30-2014 09:56 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  IMO, the NCAA standards are a total joke. I believe that they should raise the test scores necessary to qualify, and do away with the GPA requirement. If you are able to get your high school diploma, then you should be able to play at the next level. I think they should raise the SAT requirement to ~1060 and the ACT requirement to 18 or 19 composite.

Agree. I was looking at the school-by-school breakdown where it said Rice doesn't take NQ, because the schools requirements are higher than the NCAA's. But is there a Division I school out there that has lower requirements than the NCAA's? I can't imagine there is.

Yeah, not any I could think of off the top of my head. Some schools (including some very selective ones) are test-optional but I'd assume that athletes still have to take either the ACT or SAT to be admitted given the NCAA requirements. I know at Rice, Vandy, and BC (and others, those are just the ones I have personal experience with), that students have to either submit the ACT or the SAT.... BUT, if they take the SAT, they also have to submit two SAT subject tests. I don't know if they waive this requirement for athletes.

(06-30-2014 09:56 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  IMO, the NCAA standards are a total joke. I believe that they should raise the test scores necessary to qualify, and do away with the GPA requirement. If you are able to get your high school diploma, then you should be able to play at the next level. I think they should raise the SAT requirement to ~1060 and the ACT requirement to 18 or 19 composite.

For Marshall ACT 18 is required for the general student. For an athlete an ACT of 21 is required. Marshall does have an open admission policy for WV students as does every public school in WV. They still have to have test scores but can't be denied admissions for any reason.

(06-30-2014 08:56 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  I'm not sure that's the kind of the thing you want to promote. Basically, without saying it you're saying your school is a diploma mill. LOL. End joke.

You've been reading to many fiction books.

Quote:Seriously though I know what you're really trying to say though I don't believe there are just two categories. There's a third. A lot of these kids like this have gone through a school system that doesn't teach them. It's not that a learning disability wasn't caught it's that they weren't taught a damn thing in 13 years because of bad school systems in low income areas. It's just a sad reality. Remember those articles that have come out about all these kids that have graduated from schools like UNC and didn't know how to read?

That would still fall under #1. The thing is Doc recruits mostly South Florida and most of their schools are recommended and have good academics.

Quote:I'm not speaking to the situation at Marshall. I have no idea how you guys do or do not handle it. And I really don't have a problem with signing a NQ on a case-by-case basis.

The NQers that Doc and the staff have been recruiting have been low risk, high reward kids. Just take Rodney Allen from last years class. The kid transfers schools and at the end of the year the clearinghouse rules him ineligible because they say his math 11 and math 12 are to similar and say he is a credit short. Allen had a 3.7 GPA in HS and at the end of his 1st semester had a 4.0 at Marshall.

Quote:The problem for us is that McCollum was trying to sign all these four star kids who couldn't even get into some jucos. I can't tell you how many kids he signed that never set foot on campus. It was awful what he was doing. He nearly ruined us, and that was before the APR was put in place. When APR was approved I thought we were done. But all that is a far cry from what's happening at Marshall or anywhere else. No one could do that now with the APR, so I'm not being critical of Doc. Like I said I don't really know how you guys handle it, so I can't comment on it.

I understand lazy recruiting. At the end of Bob Pruett's tenure at Marshall he was doing that. In Pruetts last 3 recruiting classes we had 31 kids recruited that never made it to campus and 8 others that never made the field after coming to campus and 2 that were dismissed before classes even started. We had only 29 of 70 (loss of 5 scholarships in 2004) make it on the field.

(06-29-2014 05:58 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(06-29-2014 05:12 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  If by mass amounts you mean 5-6 a year then ok. The continuous whining and crying from ECU fans on this issue is exhausting.

6 a year over 4 years....24 non qualifiers on an 87 max team?

They arnt on the team if they are non qualifiers. Only those with grades and test scores are.