TxSU President to Lead NCAA Advisory Board on Limited Resource Institutions


Status
Not open for further replies.
jag4life said:
The NCAA banned us from the postseason. The SWAC just defined the SCG as their version of a postseason game and made it a rule that no one under NCAA ban can play in the SCG. Regardless, JSU wouldn'thave made the SC that year anyway.

It is not hypocracy when your school was about to be under the same type of ban and you knew it.
Click to expand...

So why now bring the attention to the same thing you voted in favor of in 2011?! Especially when it was pointed out in 2011?
 
Fiyah said:
A certain school just think it was a issue with them and them only. They still bringing this crap up.....

They just reaffirmed the issue and showed that the SCG is a game played in the post season.

Get over it......
Click to expand...

:lol: The same "crap" Dr. Meyers brought up in 2011. Oh my bad...I guess the other SWAC President finally caught their slow asses up. :tup:
 



FAMU CLIFF said:
My issue would be the possible confusion with the more recent TSU athletic issues being cited as caused by limited resources, with the implication we all have similar integrity issues.

Potentially right message, potentially wrong messenger.
Click to expand...

While I can see your concern, I don't think that will be an issue. Our President and AD's responses to our recent sanctions did not include anything even remotely to stating limited resources or APR caused this. They accepted our faults in the situation, as well as how we were already addressing the inadequacies. ex. A number of the compliance officers at TSU came from the NCAA.
 
Last edited:
southsuburbs said:
So why now bring the attention to the same thing you voted in favor of in 2011?! Especially when it was pointed out in 2011?
Click to expand...

Errr uhhh... SU was banned back then and I supported the ban. Our president actually voted with JSU's president on the matter.
 
FAMU CLIFF said:
My issue would be the possible confusion with the more recent TSU athletic issues being cited as caused by limited resources, with the implication we all have similar integrity issues.

Potentially right message, potentially wrong messenger.
Click to expand...

In short, I agree.
 
Blankman2k5 said:
Wasn't that the year We were in a tie with JSU and ASU for 1st in the east? I am pretty sure it was because after we lost to JSU the crowd was dejected... 10 minutes later we were celebrating because ASU lost (I believe it was to SU) so we were going to the SCG. Had the ban not been in effect, JSU would have gone 9-2 (if memory serves), won the tie breaker and gone on to the SCG. So in my opinion they have a 2nd reason to be pissed off...
Click to expand...

Nah Bama A&M would have had the tiebreaker in a 3-way tie regardless because the tiebreaker depended on certain teams winning and that scenario didn't happen.
 
southsuburbs said:
I think if the SWAC Presidents would have voted to allow JSU and SU to participate in the SWAC Championship that year it would have said the same thing Dr. Meyers said then and Dr. Rudley is saying now...about "...the disparity in funding between HBCU's and major conferences and how that funding indirectly/directly affected one's APR status."

Why vote for something if you don't agree with it!? They knew it was wrong...why continue to follow something that doesn't make sense?
Click to expand...

Because he agreed with being held accountable to the NCAA rules that governed us at that time. We took our ban this year just like JSU and SU did (which again he knew was coming when the vote was taken in 2011). The NCAA had already banned JSU and SU from post season play. The COP were voting on whether the game was actually a post season event. The SWAC Championship game was/is post season play whether it was written that way in the SWAC rulebook or not and all of us on this board know that. In essence, this issue really is the SWAC's office fault for not updating their rules to note the SWAC Championship as a post-season event.

He did not agree with the fact that the NCAA did not recognize (at the time) that many HBCUs were in a different situation financially which impacted our APR. Hence why he had been tracking our institutional data on the matter since his arrival to prove it. Now he is trying to work to change that on the behalf of ALL LRIs. His vote was about policy and accountability, not about whether he believed HBCUs were being shafted to limited resources. He already knew that, but at the time those are two separate matters.
 
jag4life said:
The NCAA banned us from the postseason. The SWAC just defined the SCG as their version of a postseason game and made it a rule that no one under NCAA ban can play in the SCG. Regardless, JSU wouldn'thave made the SC that year anyway.

It is not hypocracy when your school was about to be under the same type of ban and you knew it.
Click to expand...

What punishment was Tex. Southern under when JSU was banned? None. You don't get credit for being "about" to be punished.:emlaugh:

Their President is complaining after the fact, not before the fact. If he had brought forth these same complaints BEFORE the ban, then he'd have much more credibilty.
 
Fiyah said:
A certain school just think it was a issue with them and them only. They still bringing this crap up.....



They just reaffirmed the issue and showed that the SCG is a game played in the post season.

Get over it......
Click to expand...

Who said it was just about JSU? In my post, I mentioned SU as well. There goes your theory.

As far as getting over it, that's over and done. As far as hypocristy is concerned, that's in the here and now.
 
TSUGIRL07 said:
Jay Rob fair statement and valid points. As for Rudley’s response to Myers plea and discussing our datasets, I have no idea. Very good question though. Honestly, I would have loved to be in that room to hear the discussion. However, again, trust me when I say that when that vote occurred Rudley and Charles already knew that we were next. Therefore, he knew that we were going to be held accountable to the outcome of the vote as well, and rightfully so. This is key and what I think people are failing to realize here.
Click to expand...

So where were the complaints within our own closed doors before the ban? It's seems to me that Rudley's trying to cry "foul" now that his school is under the gun. Before their punishment, he didn't seem to care at all....at least not publicly via his vote.

I was fairly new to the board when this happened, but here is the question I have always had about the APR “ban voteâ€￾ debate – If the SWAC Presidents would have voted to allow JSU and SU to participate in the SWAC Championship that year, what would that have said to the larger population about our academic priorities? Yes most, if not all, of our APR issues are related to a disparity in resources. Yes I recognize that at the time of the vote TSU’s APR was worse than JSUs. However, since the 2011 vote occurred prior to the LRI discussion actually gained some weight/legitimacy, a vote to allow teams that were “perceivedâ€￾ to be progressing unsatisfactorily participate in conference championships would have been a slap in the face to the NCAA and a number of outside entities would have tried to crucify the SWAC. Do you not agree?
Click to expand...

Or the vote against the ban could've been a loud response to the NCAA about the glaring disparities between the have's and have not's. As far as slapping the NCAA in the face, it wouldn't have been because they never banned us in the first place. They had no "dog" in that hunt.
As far as slapping the NCAA in the face again, we do that every year when we reject the playoffs, so it wouldn't have been the first time.

I am not saying that I agreed with JSU and SU being banned at the time, but in hindsight I think it was actually a strategic move (at least I am hoping our COP were thinking in that manner) Sometimes you have to pick your battles and think long-term, rather than right now. If the SWAC COP would have voted to allow JSU and SU to be eligible in 2011, I seriously doubt the NCAA would have even listened to any LRI claims and waved it off because in their eyes we would have misplaced our priorities and essentially circumvented their rules concerning APR and post-season bans (even though the SWAC Championship game does not fall under their domain). From the supposed leeway that the initial discussions from this committee have produced (additional funding from the NCAA to help with academic resources, different APR scoring rubrics for LRI institutions), I do not think that would have occurred for any of our institutions, if that vote had gone differently.
Click to expand...

So to please the NCAA, we had to sacrifice a few of our own? I believe JSU's President cited several reasons why the ban was unfair. Seems to me that she was courageously ahead of the curve long before others came on board.

Seems to me that the NCAA took note of our plea long before choosing Rudley. JSU and a couple other HBCU's stood in the gap and proposed to the NCAA valid reasons as to why the APR sanctions weren't fair. THAT is what got their attention.
The NCAA looked at the number of HBCU's being affected by APR bans and took a second look at their rulings and decided to come up with this team after being educated by HBCU leaders.
I would loved to have heard Rudley come out publicly years ago than come out now, only after his school has been affected. That alone would've been more than enough for me.
Click to expand...
 
JayRob said:
What punishment was Tex. Southern under when JSU was banned? None. You don't get credit for being "about" to be punished.:emlaugh:

Their President is complaining after the fact, not before the fact. If he had brought forth these same complaints BEFORE the ban, then he'd have much more credibilty.
Click to expand...

Texas Southern knew they would not meet the APR benchmark. All schools know at least a year before the public knows. JSU knew they wouldn't meet it for 2 years, which is why they applied for and received a waiver for the 2nd year.

I said nothing about "credit".
 
TSUGIRL07 said:
Because he agreed with being held accountable to the NCAA rules that governed us at that time. We took our ban this year just like JSU and SU did (which again he knew was coming when the vote was taken in 2011). The NCAA had already banned JSU and SU from post season play. The COP were voting on whether the game was actually a post season event. The SWAC Championship game was/is post season play whether it was written that way in the SWAC rulebook or not and all of us on this board know that. In essence, this issue really is the SWAC's office fault for not updating their rules to note the SWAC Championship as a post-season event.

He did not agree with the fact that the NCAA did not recognize (at the time) that many HBCUs were in a different situation financially which impacted our APR. Hence why he had been tracking our institutional data on the matter since his arrival to prove it. Now he is trying to work to change that on the behalf of ALL LRIs. His vote was about policy and accountability, not about whether he believed HBCUs were being shafted to limited resources. He already knew that, but at the time those are two separate matters.
Click to expand...

To be frank, Tex. Southern not only had APR issues to deal with, they had full-scale cheating and other NCAA discrepancies, so Rudley had no choice but to accept the NCAA sanctions.
In fact, Texas Southern is fortunate not to have gotten the death penalty for it's football program. You TSU folks know what I'm talking about.
So it was to Rudley's advantage to do whatever he could to avoid more serious penalties from the NCAA.
 
jag4life said:
Texas Southern knew they would not meet the APR benchmark. All schools know at least a year before the public knows. JSU knew they wouldn't meet it for 2 years, which is why they applied for and received a waiver for the 2nd year.

I said nothing about "credit".
Click to expand...

The question is, did he feel the same way back then about the APR as he does now. THAT'S the glaring question. If he did, then he betrayed his own principles and conscience for something he never believed in, in the first place.
What does that say about his character? Just asking.
There was always the default position to at least "abstain" like the Alcorn President did.
 
JayRob said:
The question is, did he feel the same way back then about the APR as he does now. THAT'S the glaring question. If he did, then he betrayed his own principles and conscience for something he never believed in, in the first place.
What does that say about his character? Just asking.
Click to expand...

This commet makes no sense. The ban was for all schools banned by the NCAA for any reason including APR. This limited resource issue is to help smaller schools get more time to adhere to the APR rules. The program was not in place or even in consideration when the ban vote happened. This program came about after the NCAA decided to RAISE the standards even more.
 



jag4life said:
Nah Bama A&M would have had the tiebreaker in a 3-way tie regardless because the tiebreaker depended on certain teams winning and that scenario didn't happen.
Click to expand...

We beat ASU, ASU beat JSU, JSU beat us... JSU had a better overall record... they would have been #1 in the Eat
 
Why didn't Meyers and the SU president make this claim to the NCAA for ALL themselves? As many have stated, we knew what we were in for. A lot of folk were jumping up and down like they had breaking news about sTu's APR issues. The reason most of us were silent is because we already knew. Our AD informed us of the situation when he got a grasp of the severity of the situation. He told us up front what was going to happen and how severe the consequences would be....so, if your claim that sTu's president did something to "harm" JSU and SU when he knew what was coming our way you should re-evaluate your position because it is without merit.

JayRob said:
TSUgirl, I understand and applaud your attempt in trying to speak up for your President. That's very admirable, however I beg to differ with your post.
My question is, where was this concern for JSU and SU when it came time for him to vote? As a I recall, JSU's President Myers stood before ALL of the Presidents to plead her case on why JSU shouldn't be penalized. Quite a bit of that had to do with the disparity in funding between HBCU's and major conferences and how that funding indirectly/directly affected one's APR status.

Where was this concern from TSU's President when Dr. Myers requested leniency from her fellow colleagues? There was none. Not one time did the TSU President mention anything about quantitative and qualitative stats to support President Myers. Instead, he disregarded her plea and voted to penalize JSU inspite of the fact that our APR numbers were almost 100 points higher than Texas Southern's.

Directly, this may have nothing to do with the SWAC vote, but indirectly it has a lot to do with it. The Tex Southern President is trying to plead his school's APR case after he was guilty of penalizing schools for the same APR issues he's now trying to defend them with. Can you spell oxymoron? Did he bother to mention this tidbit of information BEFORE the NCAA chose him to lead this supposed investigation? Did it occur to him that he made a giant error in banning schools for APR issues he's now fighting against? I certainly hope so, and I certainly hope that he's mature enough to admit that he was wrong.
Click to expand...
 
Shaking my head at this thread! :smh:

First, let me say that I was all AGAINST the SWAC presidents voting against JSU and SU to ban them from SCG. However, what's done is done. It is what it is.

However, leave it to SOME of the JSU folks (once again) to play the victim role in a situation that (1.) has nothing to do with the SCG ban that the SWAC handed down to them and (2.) is much bigger than the SCG ban.

From the sounds of it, the NCAA likely asked Rudley to lead this board because of the CURRENT situation TSU is in. He and his school, more than anyone, can probably provide the NCAA details that nobody else can...based on experience.

But this ain't got SHIT to do with SCP voting against you. This situation is bigger than you.

Sheesh...:smh:
 
SAME OLD G said:
However, leave it to SOME of the JSU folks (once again) to play the victim role in a situation that (1.) has nothing to do with the SCG ban that the SWAC handed down to them and (2.) is much bigger than the SCG ban.

From the sounds of it, the NCAA likely asked Rudley to lead this board because of the CURRENT situation TSU is in. He and his school, more than anyone, can probably provide the NCAA details that nobody else can...based on experience.

But this ain't got SHIT to do with SCP voting against you. This situation is bigger than you.

Sheesh...:smh:
Click to expand...

:tup: MUCH BIGGER!
 
Last edited:
JayRob said:
Who said it was just about JSU? In my post, I mentioned SU as well. There goes your theory.

As far as getting over it, that's over and done. As far as hypocristy is concerned, that's in the here and now.
Click to expand...

Look at all of your replys in this thread about it and the number of jsu folks doing the same. It must not be over with and done since ya'll still are getting toasty about it.

SAME OLD G said:
Shaking my head at this thread! :smh:

First, let me say that I was all AGAINST the SWAC presidents voting against JSU and SU to ban them from SCG. However, what's done is done. It is what it is.

However, leave it to SOME of the JSU folks (once again) to play the victim role in a situation that (1.) has nothing to do with the SCG ban that the SWAC handed down to them and (2.) is much bigger than the SCG ban.


Sheesh...:smh:
Click to expand...

Yep, it's crazy on how they want to play victim and blame everyone else for their apr problems and punishment.

GET OVER IT!!!!!!
 
FAMU CLIFF said:
My issue would be the possible confusion with the more recent TSU athletic issues being cited as caused by limited resources, with the implication we all have similar integrity issues.

Potentially right message, potentially wrong messenger.
Click to expand...
I understand your point To a certain degree and I'd think the gangsta pimping ncaa gov body would have enough sense to discern LRI's underfunded attempts to comply w/ the APR vs an institution that owns malfeasance about its athl dept w/ respect to recruitment, elgibility, et al issues.

BTW, I was for the ban upholding any ist, incl PV, if it doesn't meet the standard that's evenly applied to everyone. I'm pro-PV dropping down to d-ii since current leadership doesn't show promise or even plan of promise to be competitive in athls @ the d-i level.
 
Last edited:
Blankman2k5 said:
What were the most recent APR scores for the SWAC schools?
Click to expand...

Never mind...

2010-2011

AAMU 937
AlaSU 883
AlcSU 927
GSU 917
JSU 888
MVSU 905
PVAMU 893
SU 909
TxSU 811
UAPB 928

The teams in bold were below the old threshold of 900, but AAMU is the only school in the conference meeting the new requirement of 930. Does that mean that if the scores remain stagnant, no other school could play in the SCG?

http://web1.ncaa.org/maps/aprRelease.jsp
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top