Academic stuff from football team

[ReVOLver]

Word is coming out that the team as a whole had a pretty bad fall semester in the classroom and there is much work to be done for some players to be eligible. Hubbs reported it this morning. He isn't giving numbers, but there are some players who did not pass 9 hours in the fall. Players who didn't pass 9 hours in the fall are subject to a 4 game suspension to start the year, unless they pass a total of 27 between last fall, this semester, and the summer... in which case they are then subject to a 2 game suspension. The way Hubbs makes it sound the suspensions aren't hard rules.

Of course there are rumors that this affects a very large number of players including some very big names but I have no idea what's true so it's best to just go with what Hubbs is saying. I'm guessing more will come out as people pull the threads.

My question is, when we get beat by NCSU because we have a bunch of players suspended or gone because of academics, will people use that as yet another excuse for Dooley or will they begin to believe that he is in over his head and can't manage a whole program? 

[Volznut]

Someone in compliance dropped the ball. I understand a lot of it is due to players not attending class (that's a good way to get lower grades).

[ReVOLver]

Someone in compliance dropped the ball. I understand a lot of it is due to players not attending class (that's a good way to get lower grades).

Rubio is going to be the fall guy for it but it's just another representation of a season of dysfunction. That kind of dysfunction was exposed by (not caused by) the injuries and the resulting losing and culminated into the stinking mess that happened at Kentucky.

I give Dooley credit for shaking up the staff but this type of stuff is just more fuel to the fire for people like me who say he's got one year to get the thing pointed in the right direction or GTFO. Nobody can blame lack of class attendance by players and a resulting bad semester on lack of depth on the roster or injuries. I thought that was part of the legendary VFL program.

[BanditVol]

Someone in compliance dropped the ball. I understand a lot of it is due to players not attending class (that's a good way to get lower grades).

At one point, Dooley was said to be really good at monitoring players attendence.  So if this is true, then it speaks volumes, unfortunately.

Of course, at this point it's only a rumor, and one we should all hope is untrue or exagerated.   If it turns out to be a serious problem, then the heat goes up another notch.

[Volznut]

Rubio is going to be the fall guy for it but it's just another representation of a season of dysfunction. That kind of dysfunction was exposed by (not caused by) the injuries and the resulting losing and culminated into the stinking mess that happened at Kentucky.

I give Dooley credit for shaking up the staff but this type of stuff is just more fuel to the fire for people like me who say he's got one year to get the thing pointed in the right direction or GTFO. Nobody can blame lack of class attendance by players and a resulting bad semester on lack of depth on the roster or injuries. I thought that was part of the legendary VFL program.

Rubio isn't going to be. He didn't have anything to do with compliance, from what I can tell.

Looks like these are all first timers, so whoever they are will have a chance to not miss any games if they can pass the 27.

Oh and we won't be the only ones affected by this. We need to keep in mind the new rules (link)

http://www.umesls.com/post/8384296182/tougher-rule-for-academic-eligibility-in-football

[VinnieVOL]

If true, its more evidence to me DD is in over his head.

[ReVOLver]

At one point, Dooley was said to be really good at monitoring players attendence.  So if this is true, then it speaks volumes, unfortunately.

Of course, at this point it's only a rumor, and one we should all hope is untrue or exagerated.   If it turns out to be a serious problem, then the heat goes up another notch.

Only the wild exaggerations (for example 20 players including all of our offensive stars) are rumors. The premise of my post is not a rumor.

[ReVOLver]

Rubio isn't going to be. He didn't have anything to do with compliance, from what I can tell.

Looks like these are all first timers, so whoever they are will have a chance to not miss any games if they can pass the 27.

Oh and we won't be the only ones affected by this. We need to keep in mind the new rules (link)

http://www.umesls.com/post/8384296182/tougher-rule-for-academic-eligibility-in-football

The fact that it's a new rule changes nothing for me if we have multiple suspensions and I bet none of the big programs will be really affected by it. Everybody knew it was a rule. I hope that it ends up being nothing at all and that Dooley gets everybody on the right path.

What is confusing me is the part that Brent threw in about the 2 game suspensions... the rest of what he said makes it sound like it's 4 or nothing.

[BanditVol]

Only the wild exaggerations (for example 20 players including all of our offensive stars) are rumors. The premise of my post is not a rumor.

That was what I meant.  I would be surprised if we DIDN'T have a few players in academic trouble, but my hope is that it's not as widespread and particularly that there was not widespread blowing off of classes.  Class attendence was cited as a strength of Dooley in year 1, so if that regressed, it speaks volumes.

[ReVOLver]

That was what I meant.  I would be surprised if we DIDN'T have a few players in academic trouble, but my hope is that it's not as widespread and particularly that there was not widespread blowing off of classes.  Class attendence was cited as a strength of Dooley in year 1, so if that regressed, it speaks volumes.

Yeah, I don't think the wild rumors are true, but the feeling I get is that there are some real possibilities that some very good players are under the academic gun.

[Volznut]

The fact that it's a new rule changes nothing for me if we have multiple suspensions and I bet none of the big programs will be really affected by it. Everybody knew it was a rule. I hope that it ends up being nothing at all and that Dooley gets everybody on the right path.

What is confusing me is the part that Brent threw in about the 2 game suspensions... the rest of what he said makes it sound like it's 4 or nothing.

No suspensions for first timers if they pass the 27 is what I get from reading it

[Volznut]

Yeah, I don't think the wild rumors are true, but the feeling I get is that there are some real possibilities that some very good players are under the academic gun.

There is no doubt about that.

[ReVOLver]

No suspensions for first timers if they pass the 27 is what I get from reading it

That's the overall picture he paints but this sentence doesn't reconcile with that.

Further, that one-time suspension is supposed to only reduce the suspension from four games down to two and not completely wipe it out.

I believe the first "suspension" in Brent's sentence was meant "exemption" based on the context.

[Volznut]

That's the overall picture he paints but this sentence doesn't reconcile with that.

Further, that one-time suspension is supposed to only reduce the suspension from four games down to two and not completely wipe it out.

I believe the first "suspension" in Brent's sentence was meant "exemption" based on the context.

I am reading this from the link on the rules "One time during a student-athlete’s career, he may earn back all four games".

[ReVOLver]

I am reading this from the link on the rules "One time during a student-athlete’s career, he may earn back all four games".

Got it... thanks for clarifying. Not sure why Brent muddied it up.

[Volznut]

Got it... thanks for clarifying. Not sure why Brent muddied it up.

He will sometimes do that