Schools Face Academic Sanctions

Under NCAA's New Reform Guidelines, 99 Will Lose Athletic Scholarships

Ninety-nine Division I college sports programs will lose scholarships for failing to meet new academic standards, but almost all the traditional marquee football and men's basketball programs will avoid sanctions this year.

Yesterday's long-awaited announcement by the NCAA signaled the first wave of penalties in the organization's academic reform package, which NCAA President Myles Brand has called a "sea change" in college athletics. In a response to poor graduation rates, the NCAA has vowed to hold programs accountable for the academic success of their players.

"Our goal is not to sanction schools but to change behavior," Brand said in a teleconference, "and we are seeing some positive results."

In all, less than 2 percent of all Division I programs nationwide will be affected in the first year of penalties for poor Academic Progress Rate (APR) scores, which measure a program's ability to retain eligible athletes semester to semester. Programs with scores below a 925 cutoff, which Brand said equates to a 60 percent graduation rate, were at risk to lose at least one scholarship.

Football had the most teams (43) below the cutoff, with 23 receiving sanctions. Nine women's programs were penalized. The NCAA also highlighted the top performers, including the U.S. military academies and William & Mary.

Last year, when the preliminary data was released but no penalties were enforced, several prominent programs, including the 2004 national champions in football (Southern California) and men's basketball (Connecticut), fell below the 925 cutoff. But this year, of all football and men's basketball teams from power conferences, only one -- DePaul's men's basketball team of the Big East -- will lose a scholarship.

Critics suggest the reform package is the latest example of how the NCAA practices selective enforcement, making examples of less recognizable schools while bigger programs operate without penalty.

"The NCAA has no interest in protecting," the small schools, said Linda Bensel-Meyers, a member of the Drake Group, a watchdog organization of educators and athletic administrators. "They are going to protect those who are high revenue, high visibility programs. And they are going to scapegoat the small programs in order to protect themselves."

Along those lines, concerns were raised over the relatively high number of historically black colleges that received penalties.

"It's an issue," Brand said. "A number of those institutions received [school] mission exemptions, but there are a number of institutions that are still not performing as well for student-athletes as they are for the rest of the student body."

Brand credited schools that made swift improvement after last year's preliminary scores were publicly released. NCAA officials also pointed to adjustments made in the APR formula after concerns were voiced by prominent men's basketball coaches.

Some, such as Syracuse's Jim Boeheim, praised the APR's intent in the summer but said the formula was flawed because it punishes the most talent-laden teams that lose non-seniors to the NBA draft. Adjustments were made so a team's APR score would not be hampered as long as the non-senior was academically eligible when he turned pro.

Other coaches this summer were unconcerned about potential consequences of a poor APR because men's basketball teams can't lose more than two scholarships -- or 10 percent of the total allotment -- and many programs carry fewer than the maximum 13 scholarship players under normal circumstances.

Walter Harrison, the president of the University of Hartford and chairman of the NCAA's Committee on Academic Performance, said the reduction of scholarships is meant to be a "tough warning."

"It's like shock therapy," said Phil Martelli, Saint Joseph's men's basketball coach. "Everyone is like, 'Well, you could lose two scholarships.' To get there, you'd have to be consistently inept at educating the young people that you have. I'm not into the sky is falling. Nothing is being done to hurt people. It's being done to get people's attention."

This year's penalties were based on data from the 2003-04 and 2004-05 years. Chronic underachievers will be at risk for harsher penalties in the future, including recruiting restrictions and even a ban from postseason competition.

Said Harrison: "The messages of academic reform are clear: recruit student-athletes who are capable of doing college-level work; help them meet the standards for progress toward a degree; and keep them enrolled so the opportunity for a quality education becomes a reality."