Basketball team officially avoids APR punishment

Though the Indiana men’s basketball teams’ four year rolling-average of 899 puts it well within the range of established punishment boundaries set out by the Academic Progress Rate, the Hoosiers avoided the wrath this year.

The NCAA released its data for the 2006-07 academic year today. On the three page document that logs all of Indiana’s teams, a footnote explains that the basketball team was spared punishment because of the “team’s demonstrated academic improvement and favorable comparison based on other academic or institutional factors.”

Only one school, Purdue, had a lower APR for men’s basketball in the Big Ten. The Boilermakers are also the only conference school to suffer any penalty in basketball. They’ll suffer an “immediate punishment,” possibly the loss of a scholarship

UPDATE: According to the Indy Star, Purdue already implemented its one-scholarship penalty last year.

15 comments

  1. Great that we avoid a penalty. We can’t afford to lose any more scholarships…

    It’s crazy that even though there was all this speculation about players failing off and bad grades, our score of 899 is higher than alot of other schools!! Why is there no huge media outcry about these other institutions????!?!!?!?

  2. As I read the report summary, it covers what appears to be four academic years ending with the 2006-2007 academic year. The recent transfers/departures and any academic fallouts for this semester were therefore not covered by this APR, but rather would be addressed in next year’s APR (and as it appears to be a rolling average, some years to follow).

  3. Dodging the bullet because of “academic improvement and favorable comparison based on other academic or institutional factors.” What in the world does that mean? How bad were the academics before this year if 899, a number that can get you a penalty, is an improvement?
    So…the 2 worst APR scores for men’s basketball in the Big Ten were IU & PU? Proud day for Indiana!

  4. “favorable comparison based on other academic or institutional factors”
    equals:
    “You fired the guy who was responsible for this, who Swampy now thinks may have suffered some sort of stroke or closed head trauma, because how in god’s name does someone pull the crap that he pulled and not think he’s going to get destroyed by the university.”

  5. Yes, the APR is a rolling average. This is the fourth year of the program, so it’s really the first time the NCAA has put a lot of weight into the average number because the data sample is now large enough (the rolling average is based on four years.)

    Indiana’s average over those years is 899. Since its average after three years was 890, Indiana’s APR for just the 2006-07 school year was probably around 930. The improvement is what allowed Indiana to avoid punishment.

    Skip is also correct in that the recent departures are not reflected in this report. That won’t happen until next year, I think.

  6. Whoops! Crean this up Coach Clean. Ankle bracelets for all of them. Keep them in class.

  7. Did anyone else notice UAB was hit with penalties? It looks like Sampson probably wasn’t the only one letting the kids slack.

  8. ww………whats the deal message board troll? You comment on every persons post now? Get a life and go support your team. You know when we are rolling like a freight train in 3-4 years that you wont have much to say then, so by all means, make yourself feel better now.

    Good news for the Hoosiers with the grades. I was surprised to see PU on there. I guess they already implemented the scholy loss, so it wasnt too much of a detriment other than their 08 class is a terrible follow up to their 07 class. Funny how Painter went from being a great recruiter to a guy who is “just trying to get guys that fit his system.” According to PU fans.

  9. Well this is way better news than I had expected. I hope that with the recent addition it appears to be of students ( VJ III for example) who want to be in school will help out the program. In the mean time, revel in the fact that Purdue and its genius up there are even dumber!

  10. one thing that i think most people are missing is that 06-07 was what brought us up. that was sampsons first year. the problem was what happened under davis, and the players that have since left. the issues that came after sampson was here have yet to be felt. so you can’t look at this and blame sampson – in fact you have to realize he might be one of the reasons we don’t have a scholarship loss. say what you want about sampson, but he did bring some discipline here. at least more than what was present with davis. now obviously, with the grade troubles and the transfers since his departure, he wasn’t so hot either. i think he was definitely an improvement over davis though.

  11. Caleb……check my previous posts for my feelings and support. I would guess that I have supported the team(s) (and university) for more years than you have existed.

    Thanks for understanding that one does not always have extra time to post extensive comments. Sorry to annoy you and thanks (again) for being the official “Blog Monitor”.

Comments are closed.