Tourney - wise, what's is reasonable to expect?

[WAITE HOYT 2]

Originally Posted by Jive

What are you basing this statement on? This has been discussed on other sites. Our graduation rates are not good. The last 8 years have been 50%, 36, 43, 58, 56, 56, 53, 53. You can look this up on the NCAA official site if you don't believe.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/...n-success-rate

Our graduation rates are some of the lowest each year of all teams in the NCAA Tournament.

Because Mick has 4 year players not one and doners. The calculation of such results are very much in question.

[Jive]

Originally Posted by WAITE HOYT 2

Because Mick has 4 year players not one and doners. The calculation of such results are very much in question.

It's been years since I've heard any complaints about how the NCAA does their calculations. Those calculations were once very much in question. It basically gives you credit if your athletes are graduating, or are on schedule to graduate (if they are leaving or transferring). It doesn't matter if you have 4 year players or not. If you're only graduating 50%, or only 50% are on course to graduate, there's a problem,

I looked at Xavier and they are anywhere between about 90 to 100%. They have always advertised that they graduate 100%, but that was obviously a lie.

[cincyguy13]

Originally Posted by WAITE HOYT 2

Because Mick has 4 year players not one and doners. The calculation of such results are very much in question.

Most one and done players go to the same couple schools. I think I heard there isn't 1 "1 and done" player in the final 4.

[Binturong]

Originally Posted by Jive

It's been years since I've heard any complaints about how the NCAA does their calculations. Those calculations were once very much in question. It basically gives you credit if your athletes are graduating, or are on schedule to graduate (if they are leaving or transferring). It doesn't matter if you have 4 year players or not. If you're only graduating 50%, or only 50% are on course to graduate, there's a problem,

I looked at Xavier and they are anywhere between about 90 to 100%. They have always advertised that they graduate 100%, but that was obviously a lie.

From looking at the NCAA website (i could be pulling the numbers incorrectly, it looks like those numbers you are quoting are way out of date. They look like they are from the mid 2000's.

For instance when I pull up 15/16 it gives me their cohort year of 2009, is there an explanation on that?

[ZCat]

Originally Posted by Binturong

From looking at the NCAA website (i could be pulling the numbers incorrectly, it looks like those numbers you are quoting are way out of date. They look like they are from the mid 2000's.


For instance when I pull up 15/16 it gives me their cohort year of 2009, is there an explanation on that?

Is it bc they give you 6 years to graduate? At least I think that's what it once was.

How does UK do it? Players leaving early don't count?

And I thought our grad rate was good. The bad rates reported above may not be accurate.

[Btown Bearcat]

well first of all this idea that getting the tournament being automatic is ridiculous to begin with were lucky to go every year let alone most years. its also all good good to expect whatever but its madness for a reason im not saying be happy just because we get there but at the same time i am.

its all fine to have crazy high expectations but at the end of the day i think people are overlooking so many things. ncaa is all about matchups ya it sucks we didnt even make the sweet 16 but it is what it is