That is the basis for the debate about whether "college" football programs really consist of "students". They are mostly football factories, but all of them pride themselves on a graduation rate. If they are not actual students, then what's the point?

i wonder what these graduation rates are compared to non-scholarship or non-athletes who attend college and then stop for one reason or another? 2/3s or higher sounds respectable for a program, that is likely close to non-athletes. less than that, you have some work to do

those are for football only. 2000-2003. the numbers are slightly different when you take all sports into consideration...

2/3 does sound good for football programs. I'm sure the rest of the student body isn't much better. I'm surprised and impressed by some of the numbers. Who would be willing to bet that Miami's graduation rates haven't always been that good?

I am especially suprised they were that high at that time. That was the end of the thug era in Miami. Of note Notre Dame graduates a full 99% of their athletes.

Well, football is essentially their major (I'm talking about the major schools). Even if you don't make the pros, being able to say you played for THE Ohio State probably catches more eyes on a resume in Columbus than anything else. But to be honest, I couldn't care less if the athletes are dumb as a rock and getting millions under the table. I just want a feeder system for the pros and somethign to watch on Saturday. I value my own personal entertainment more than the future success of a few dozen kids I'll never meet.

the Neilsen Rating love you baby!!!

The Aggies beat Oklahoma and Nebraska, and all we get is the Cotton Bowl....now that is a travesty!!!

I reckon your Aggies should have beaten the razorbacks or cowboys or tigers, huh? Don't complain, old man.

there was a change in offense and defense between the groups that can account for the early losses.....

so, it is possible A&M goes up against your homeboys, TN...do you remember what happened the last time these two teams met in the Cotton Bowl..... it was a nightmare!!!!

<---- still waiting patiently for Rich Rod to get fired...

*sigh*

I remember.

I don't expect wins yet, but I'm happy with our 6-6 record. I was anticipating 4-8. Had the Vols not won their last 4 games in a row, this season would have been a lot rougher for us. We started out 2-6.




Poor Agg. (Love the name change!)

If Auburn were 5-7 right now, would the NCAA have ruled the same way on the Cam Newton issue?

better yet, would anyone have cared?

Probably not, which is my point.

Kind of to Happy's point, I don't think the NCAA would have decided in the same timeframe otherwise. There would have been no rush.

I don't necessarily disagree, but i think that's a cop out on their part. Either you have enough information to make a decision or you don't and either having a parent trying to sell your services is a violation or it isn't......how successful the team in question is at the time SHOULD be a moot point.

I agree as well (with what you said, not me ). I think the NCAA was pressured into doing something right now, and it may come back to bite them. Or, perhaps several months down the line they can get away with "additional investigation has revealed..."

What stinks is that they're having to rule on this situation on this caliber of player at this point in time. Really, I feel like an example needs to be made. If parents see that they can get away with it, this may happen more often. Wonder which schools (and/or alumni with deep pockets) will say no.

I think Cam's dad sucks. First, good message to your congregation, Pastor. (Oh, and you're the kind of pastor who made me decide to stop going to church). And second, if Cam doesn't know it about it, way to exploit your son.

JMO, feel free to disagree.

And by the way, if both Auburn & Oregon win this weekend, and then something comes out in the future that requires Auburn to give up wins, TCU folks will have every right to complain. If that happens, I'll be PO'ed with them.

Agree, but how ironic would that be if Auburn was the one that caused it given what happened in 2004?

I felt for Auburn in 2004, but it's not the first time it's happened. Anytime you have 3 or more teams go undefeated, guess what? One of them is gonna go away feeling they got hosed. In fact, it doesn't even matter if it's being undefeated or not.....if 3 or more teams have the same number of losses, somebody feels screwed. Wasn't 2004 the year OU and USC played for it all? Either of those would have felt hosed if they hadn't got to play for the title too. It's just the way it will always be until/unless we have a playoff.

What really sucks to me is i would bet you that the NCAA comes out with "clarifying" remarks making what happened in Cam Newton's case grounds for ineligibility.....in all cases except Cam Newton's of course.

well, Auburn declared him ineligible and the NCAA immediately reinstated him. Even though their guidelines clearly state "if any family member"...father admitted to the NCAA he tried but said no money ever changed hands.

Guess without the money they have less of a case?

I think there is some ambiguity in the language which is why i think they "clarify". I do feel bad for the kid if he truly knew nothing of it.