Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Basketball
GT under Pastner vs GT under Gregory?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RonJohn" data-source="post: 298866" data-attributes="member: 2426"><p>The APR is not a four year average. They use the four year average to determine post season penalties. The APR is calculated EACH YEAR. The following is copied from the NCAA website explaining APR:</p><p></p><p>"The APR is calculated as follows:</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Each student-athlete receiving athletically related financial aid earns one point for staying in school and one point for being academically eligible.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A team’s total points are divided by points possible and then multiplied by 1,000 to equal the team’s Academic Progress Rate.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">In addition to a team’s current-year APR, its rolling four-year APR is also used to determine accountability."</li> </ul><p></p><p>During CBG's first year, the "current-year" APR increased dramatically from 935 to 972. The four year average could not have increased from 935 to 972. If the team made a 1000 the year before CBG to bring it up from 915 to 935, a 1000 in CBG's first year would have only been able to reach a maximum four year average of 968. It is mathematically impossible to make that four year average increase in one year. </p><p></p><p>However, I was wrong about the post-season penalties. A few years ago the post-season ban number was raised from 900 to 930. The teams were eligible the whole time, but had they continued at CPW's rate, they would not have been after the increase.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RonJohn, post: 298866, member: 2426"] The APR is not a four year average. They use the four year average to determine post season penalties. The APR is calculated EACH YEAR. The following is copied from the NCAA website explaining APR: "The APR is calculated as follows: [LIST] [*]Each student-athlete receiving athletically related financial aid earns one point for staying in school and one point for being academically eligible. [*]A team’s total points are divided by points possible and then multiplied by 1,000 to equal the team’s Academic Progress Rate. [*]In addition to a team’s current-year APR, its rolling four-year APR is also used to determine accountability." [/LIST] During CBG's first year, the "current-year" APR increased dramatically from 935 to 972. The four year average could not have increased from 935 to 972. If the team made a 1000 the year before CBG to bring it up from 915 to 935, a 1000 in CBG's first year would have only been able to reach a maximum four year average of 968. It is mathematically impossible to make that four year average increase in one year. However, I was wrong about the post-season penalties. A few years ago the post-season ban number was raised from 900 to 930. The teams were eligible the whole time, but had they continued at CPW's rate, they would not have been after the increase. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who was Georgia Tech's starting QB in 2023?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Basketball
GT under Pastner vs GT under Gregory?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top