The House of Blue

Just curious, but why is that?

It's also unfair to hold athletes to a lower standard than their peers, which is currently the case at many institutions.

That isn't true....99% of all BCS conference players in FB and BB would not be able to qualify moving forward if so.

There might be something like if they have a GPA that is crazy low they need that high of a test score, but it won't be all athletes just need a 25 as a minimum score.

They also have a TON more work than regular students, when you factor in practice, position meetings, team meetings, film study, workouts, etc, ESPECIALLY as freshmen (when most "regular" students don't work). I worked with the football team in college, and while they have "advantages" certainly, its not like its a cakewalk. Remember, in football, where the student-athlete has to stay eligible for 3-4 years minimum, its not just about getting in.

Also, not all professors are overly flexible, and the AD/coach don't always have much sway or influence with them. I saw multiple students get hosed, frankly, BECAUSE they were athletes and the prof had an agenda of sorts -- let us not forget that article from the UK faculty member a year or two ago.

Bottom line -- those advantages are to mitigate the added rigor and demands of playing a varsity college sport. Holding the students to a higher standard is not only ridiculous, its unfair. Those who work close to programs and have that insight will resoundingly tell you that it is the exception, rather than the norm, for an athlete to have it easy in college. For every Percy Harvin story, there are 100 guys grinding it out and writing papers at 4am after film study until 12 with morning workouts at 6am.....

The ACT is a college ENTRANCE exam to get INTO college....if they don't get the 25 they need, then around the clock tutoring would be non-existent. (b/c they didn't get in to the school in the first place).

The reason they offer that around the clock tutoring is b/c they actually have a busier schedule than "regular students".....that in fact takes them away from studying on a normal schedule like a normal student.

I dabbled in DIII bball - DIII.....and it was ridiculous the amount of time required for a small DIII program. I can only imagine its 5 times as worse for a program like UK, UNC, IU, Duke, etc.....

As someone who was involved in athletics at UK, the time investment is more than a fulltime job. Practice and games don't touch the tip of the iceberg as far as time goes.

But we aren't talking about college athletes getting paid over and above their free tuition....we're discussing the tweet by Penders that said the scores will need to be 25 or above by 2013-14. Those are two different issues.

Further, I would disagree with your final statement "nobody is forcing them to do it". The system dictates players like say, John Wall, to come to college for a year then they can go to the NBA....so in effect, they are being forced to go to college for at least one year....

Sure, Wall could have A) not played basketball for a year (that was basically NOT an option), or B) he could have gone to Europe or somewhere overseas to play for 1 year.....neither are very good options.

So yeah - literally "nobody is forcing them to it"....but if you were a John Wall, Anthony Davis, etc., in today's system, I'm pretty sure you would go to college for 1 year.

You sound like a disgruntled, scorned non-athlete. As far as athletes getting preferential treatment...well, you're on a UK athletics message board. The guys in FB and BB earn more than their fair share for those extra benefits.

The rule is an NCAA rule...so it would also apply to DII and DIII. Further DIII doesn't give athletic scholarships - some kids don't come from wealthy backgrounds to cover tuition at a DIII school (usually smaller, private institutions that are very costly to attend).

Finally, it's simply not reality to expect these kids not to play DI......I mean, if you were John Wall with an NBA future coming out of high school - are you telling me you would prefer to go to Thomas More (DIII)? Carson-Newman (DII) just outside of Knoxville. Please......And as mentioned the rule will likely also apply to DII or DIII....so then it's on to NAIA.... Gtown, KY v. UK? Really?? You'd pick Gtown? I suppose if it's their only alternative - then I guess that's what they'll have to do....but I'm guessing the rule will hurt NCAA basketball as I'd imagine there are many guys out there who struggle to get eligible (sometimes also not for lack of effort in the classroom).

It's not about the scouts missing on these guys....it's about being in the spotlight - and no kid who has been treated like a king for 2-4 years of HS BBall is not all of a sudden going to pick a smaller school to take a break from the limelight. These guys are athletes. They are cocky. They want to be in the limelight, they want a "free ride" (wouldn't you if you had all that talent???). They want to play for a program that is on TV, a program good that will push them to improve their game....to prepare them for the rigors of the NBA. That's reality. Not saying it's right. It's just reality.

You think John Wall would have improved in 1 year playing at an NAIA school, as opposed to playing at UK against the best competition in the nation, not to mention Eric Bledsoe everyday in practice?.

Further, I know of no AAU league that exists beyond High School. When was the last time you saw a guy from "AAU" get drafted into the NBA (after the one-and-done rule)? That's rhetorical.....

There aren't many coaches that could score a 25 on the ACT...

From JD's post above, it seems there is a sliding scale of sorts. I think that would mean having a higher GPA would necessitate a lower minimum ACT but I could be wrong. IOW, if 25 is the right number it would probably be for those with the lowest GPA that would allow eligibility...I think.