|
I couldn't agree with you more. While I understand the idea behind the APR, there are also good ideas and bad ideas--and this is a bad one only because it makes no sense in the real world.
The schools and sports programs have absolutely no control, or even influence, over whether an athlete (note that I purposefully didn't say "student-athlete") and his/her family think that it's better to transfer to another school (if they're not good enough to get much playing time--i.e., Wright and Stanback) or go pro (if they're good enough to do so--i.e., Love and Westbrook). Even though they meet the required academic standards, these athletes can't be forced to stay with one school for the full four years.
For the APR system to work effectively, the schools would have to focus on recruiting solely mediocre athletes who fill very specific roles on ever-changing, injury-possible teams. An impossible task.
The Hansbroughs and Collisons of the world are the exceptions, not the rule. And, again, you can argue that they're completing their four year educations only for personal reasons and not because of anything that the school or basketball programs were able to influence them to do. So the schools shouldn't be rewarded for the personal decisions made by their athletes and they shouldn't be punished for those personal decisions either.
Even changing the basketball requirement to two years won't fix this system.
|
