The CardBoard
Well, 71Bear called THAT one - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Well, 71Bear called THAT one (/thread-5259.html)

Pages: 1 2

Re: Well, 71Bear called THAT one - terry - 06-12-2013

The NCAA has not made it easy to figure out how the APR is calculated. I spent a while poking around today and came up empty. Finally, I found something tonight, a lengthy document that seems to explain it.

Jacketree, you're right, there would seem to be an inherent advantage for quarter-system schools. The NCAA figured that out at some point. So they developed an adjustment to convert quarter-system results into something comparable to semester-system results. They compute an APR based on the average of fall and spring quarters, and another APR based on the average of winter and spring quarters, then average those two calculations, then divide by two. Or something like that. It's late and this is making my head hurt, so I'm not going to take the time to figure it out tonight. Here's the document -- http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/ksu/genrel/auto_pdf/2011-12/misc_non_event/APPCollectionGuide.pdf (see page 28 and following).

I haven't had a chance to read this document. There are probably some other counter-intuitive nuggets in there.

The APR rewards schools that are good at processing players through the system and keeping them eligible. Graduation is not a significant aspect of the APR. For the most part, the major football factories have figured out how to keep players eligible. They've had players majoring in eligibility for years. So the football factories do OK under the APR system (which, of course, is why it was designed the way it is). Most of the penalties are imposed on the have-nots, who aren't as good at gaming the system. I don't really put much stock in the APRs.

Re: Well, 71Bear called THAT one - 82 Card - 06-13-2013

Some observations from the document terry posted:

1. The eligibility point for a term is determined at the end of the term. A freshman in a fall sport can play all season without getting an eligibility point.

2. The retension point is  based on whether the player is still registered 5 weeks into the following term unless they graduate, in which case it is automatic.

3.  A player who flames out in first term earns no points but doesn't count in following term.  If a student is getting into academic trouble, the school can protect APR by finding reason to boot them rather than give them time to catch up. By booting a  player in academic trouble, the team loses one retention point for the previous term but avoids 2 points they might not pick up the following term. Doing this with a couple players can cause instant rebound of two-year APR.

4.  A student who transfers to Columbia loses their former school 1 retention point (unless there is some "legislated exemption" I missed).

5.  A student who finishes early but delays getting the diploma because they want to wacky walk with their classmates or who doesn't enroll full time the last term because they only need one more class costs the team 1 retention point (unless there is a "legislated exemption" I missed).

6.  After playing with a bunch of samples, it seems like a 930 APR corresponds to about a 45% graduation rate.  But this assumes ontinuous even attrition, which is almost certainly not the case. Some eligibility tests are only run at the end of the year.

Re: Well, 71Bear called THAT one - Bruce Wang - 06-13-2013

All this convoluted math makes me think this is a bunch of hand waving to conceal abysmal graduation rates.

Re: Well, 71Bear called THAT one - Kathy - 06-13-2013

(06-13-2013, 01:19 AM)82 Card link Wrote:4.  A student who transfers to Columbia loses their former school 1 retention point (unless there is some "legislated exemption" I missed).

I thought one of the big selling points of APR was that it alleviated the problems schools encountered with the Graduation Success Rate in that schools are not penalized for transfers and early exits to go pro. (GSR simply measures the percentage of entering freshmen who graduate within six years.)


Re: Well, 71Bear called THAT one - 82 Card - 06-13-2013

(06-13-2013, 06:31 AM)Kathy link Wrote:[I thought one of the big selling points of APR was that it alleviated the problems schools encountered with the Graduation Success Rate in that schools are not penalized for transfers and early exits to go pro. (GSR simply measures the percentage of entering freshmen who graduate within six years.)

That may be. I didn't see that in the publication. But the legislated exemption proviso opens the possibility that there is a provision somewhere outside the definition of retention or outside of the document entirely that makes transferring to another school a legislated exemption which then would give the school the point. Even if this isn't the case, transferring or dropping out has a fairly small impact on the score. The team loses one point for one term out of ten or 15 in a full career.

The whole thing is on the same level as some of the more obtuse work of congress. By making the rules difficult to understand and using really high numbers, NCAA leaves most people thinking the standards must be really tough. Most people miss the fact that 930 is supposed to mean a 50% failure rate. 

Re: Well, 71Bear called THAT one - 82 Card - 06-13-2013

Thoughts while walking to the train station:

1.  The problem with part time or none enrollment in the term before graduation is easily solved. The athletic department enrolls the player in basket weaving and frisbee class. The player doesn't have to go. The get dropped from the classes in week 6. The team gets two retention points (one for the previous term because they were enrolled full time in the last term and another for the last term because they graduate) and an eligibility point (because they graduate).

2.  I'm guessing that any time there is some rule that allows a player to play right away after transferring, that would be a legislated exemption, which would allow the former school to get a retention point. I haven't seen this anywhere. Just guessing.

3.  Wonder how many weird rules are hidden away that allow high revenue schools to boost APR.

Re: Well, 71Bear called THAT one - terry - 06-13-2013

(06-13-2013, 06:20 AM)Publius link Wrote:All this convoluted math makes me think this is a bunch of hand waving to conceal abysmal graduation rates.

Bingo.

Re: Well, 71Bear called THAT one - yvonne - 06-13-2013

I'm not sure what you're saying is meant to conceal abysmal graduation rates. The math? the APR system itself?