September 28, 2006
NCAA announces graduation rates - Texas #216
There were a few surprises in the NCAA's report of student-athlete graduation rates for DIA and DIAA schools. Overall, graduation at D-IA schools is up to 77% nationwide. The statistics are based on the incoming classes of 1996-97 through 1999-2000. The percentages reflect graduation rates in all sports over a four-year period, with athletes given six years to graduate.
#1 Navy 98%
#2 Boston College 96%
#3 Notre Dame #95%
#4 Stanford 94%
#5 Wake Forest 93%
#5 Duke 93%
#5 Air Force 93%
Big time programs at the bottom:
#204 Alabama 44%
#204 Minnesota 44%
#204 Cal 44%
#214 Georgia 41%
#216 Texas 40%
#217 Arizona 39%
And, just because I know you want to know:
#229 Florida A&M
Comments:
OU Fan said:
posted on September 28, 2006 1:38 PM — 69.29.102.143 — link — abuse?
Looks like us dumb Okies, hillbillies, inbreds, rednecks, whatever Texans call us folks from north of the red river are not as dumb as Texans would like to think. I mean the University of Oklahoma has a better graduation rate of student athletes than the University of Texas. Thats awesome. Go Sooners!
posted on September 28, 2006 3:18 PM — link — abuse?Kevin Donahue said:
#2 - Craig, Tennessee finished at #141 (58% grad rate) as a school. (PDF from IndyStar.com)
G. said:
posted on September 28, 2006 3:42 PM — 128.227.5.178 — link — abuse?
Tommie Trojan..this actually from when ND was mediocre
96-2000...
those would be the Bob Davie years.These rates never tell what's happening right now with college programs.
There's way too much hootin' and hollerin' about these things...
wareagle524 said:
posted on September 28, 2006 3:49 PM — 63.162.187.78 — link — abuse?
The reason the military schools are so high is that if a cadet/midshipmen doesn't graduate the payment in return for their education is something like $150,000.00. You bet your ass they are going to finish, and it is not a "normal" college life. As for joining the military before graduating??? That is impossible, they are 1)already in the military and have taken an oath (just not commissioned) 2)They cannot be commisioned until all class requirements are finished. Their military obligation is first and foremost, however in the past the government has made some exceptions for men to finish what is supposed to be active duty on reserves status by tacking on more years...(IE: David Robinson USNA graduate)
FanoftheGame said:
posted on September 29, 2006 9:18 AM — 12.43.234.14 — link — abuse?
Who cares about 6 to 10 years ago? If this subject is worth talking about, then shouldn't we be discussing the CURRENT graduation rates of these schools rather than ANCIENT history? For Christ sakes, some of the student athletes attending these universities, were in elementary school when the data was taken for this report. We must be hard pressed for good blog material if this is what we're left with.
Lance5218 said:
posted on September 30, 2006 7:43 PM — 24.143.26.104 — link — abuse?
Texas was 216 you say, that's fine, I'm UGA fan myself and I'm sure we're not to high up the chart either, but then I can't remember the last time "Harvard" won a BCS title, so If you've been to college and got what you needed from your school (degree wise), which I have, then what does it really matter what your "Favorite Football" school ranks? Harved and those schools are known for their things, and Texas, UGA, Auburn, Ohio State, are known for their things....FOOTBALL! GO DAWGS
posted on October 1, 2006 8:41 PM — 75.0.113.13 — link — abuse?
Yes, this is when ND was mediocre, but if you go back an look at the numbers, ND has never been far from the top of this list. It has to do with the type of players that a program attracts. When a player commits to a place like Navy, BC, Stanford, Wake or ND they're doing so because they want a top notch education AND a chance to play D-1 ball. Seems like a smart move if you have aspirations beyond football.
Look at Alan Page of ND's 1966 National Championship team. Stud on the field and then became a freakin' federal judge. Not to say this can't happen elsewhere but it helps to go to a top 25 (academics, that is) institution if you have ambitions like that.
On the other hand, you have players that may not have the GPA but have the insane athelticism. I'm not saying that these guys should be looked down upon. Like everyone else in this world they're just using what God gave 'em to make the best life for themselves possible. So, I guess I agree with those that say these rankings get a little overplayed. Although, one could make the argument that universities still have an obligation to educate their athletes and see that they make the best choices possible. I mean, we are still talking about 18-22 year old kids.
JoeMontanalow said:
posted on October 2, 2006 2:58 PM — 12.171.224.124 — link — abuse?
To G.:
The lowest Notre Dame's graduation rate has ever been is 87% since they started keeping records! The year they won the National Title in 1988 it was 100%. They have proven it can be done. Please don't insinuate that once they start winning 10 games consistently a year again that their graduation rate will plummet. It simply will not happen.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on October 4, 2006 8:49 AM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Fans of other conferences have to enjoy that the Pac-10 and SEC have the most teams at the bottom and the least teams at the top of this list. I will say that I was suprised to see that Auburn isn't near the bottom of this list until I remembered they let allow credits for students that don't attend class and let illiterate athletes graduate. So when you factor in that Auburn's graduation standards along with Alabama and Georgia, then the SEC fans should be proud that they have the stupidest athletes in the nation.
Zac said:
posted on October 4, 2006 1:26 PM — 209.36.193.14 — link — abuse?
I consider graduation rate more important than national championships. In fact, it speaks well for the schools of those teams with high graduation rates. No matter how well a team does on the field, it still consists of "STUDENT" athletes. They work just as hard in practice and on the field as any of the athletes on teams in the top 25. In my opinion, there are many levels of success. Maintaining good grades and making a team is one level. Maintaining good grades and starting for and contributing to a team is another. Whether that team is top 25 or not, to graduate with solid grades while having played your best is something no one can take from you. Besides, not everyone drafted in the 1st three rounds makes it in the NFL. Those ellipsoid, threaded & laced pig-skins don’t go much farther than the field of play. From a distance, you can’t tell one from another. It's that pig-skin you frame and hang on your wall that will help to take you places.
By the way, Sam - post #13. I seem to remember an article a while back. I think it said something to the effect; since Rodriguez took over as coach, the team's graduation rate has increased to approximately 91%. Not bad.
Tampa Hurricane said:
posted on October 5, 2006 12:13 PM — 24.96.199.254 — link — abuse?
Georgia should be proud of the #214 and 41% for football, when compared to their 9% graduation rate for basketball. Does anyone at the SEC realize that these are supposed to be student athletes (the key word that most SEC people miss is the student). The NCAA needs to set tougher graduation standards for their student athletes and ban programs like Georgia from post-season games until they realize that their players are supposed to be students first!
Denny K. said:
posted on October 9, 2006 11:56 AM — 74.228.246.193 — link — abuse?
How many points do the refs give you for straight A's? I must have missed all those ACT's and study groups on national T.V every Saturday. Maybe the'll show it just for you. More important than national championships. I wish more coaches thought like you. Yeah, coaches of our opponents. Roll Tide!
Jeff said:
posted on October 15, 2006 9:19 PM — 24.5.197.189 — link — abuse?
Im guessing that the reason a program like Stanford is at the top and a program like Cal is at the bottom is because of grading policies. Stanford has massive grade inflation and a "nurturing" atmosphere. They make sure no one with an important Daddy fails. A school like Cal is one of the toughest academically in the nation. At Cal you are a number and it is survival of the fittest. Everyone is competing with each other. This seems to be the trend with good public schools. I don't know enough about schools across the country to determine if there is a strong correlation with this list but it's something to think about.
Also, if u compare grad rates of a school with a "party atmosphere" like ASU or Wisconsin and non-party schools like (I'm guessing) Navy and Air Force you might also find a correlation.Fort Tigers said:
posted on October 24, 2006 12:13 PM — 72.242.207.210 — link — abuse?
#6 Clemson. and average graduation time is 4.5 years...not this measley six mentioned in the study.
Glad to have an honest program with real STUDENT-athletes, and NONE of the off-the-field problems that every other school in the top 10 has
christopher mcannally said:
posted on October 24, 2006 5:21 PM — 68.220.255.107 — link — abuse?
To all the people who say they dont care about grades and % of there schools. thats the same thing your coaches tell those five star thuggs who can't even spell notre dame. mmmm thats why u see alot of thuggs at one school u know mybe like miami. grades are very important im just as proud of notredame 11 NT as i am our 95% grad. and for all u that go for teams and not schools yall can keep geting thugs and notre dame will keep wining with smart students with a real futre not a shot at the nfl and god hope they dont come up short and become the the people that clean up for the next group of thuggs to come threw your school. we will pruduce more 4 time super bowl winners o and the jernalist that report on him.(ps) only 6% of college football players become a nfl pro. o a that does not count the ones who get cut of the practice team
Defensive Minded Nebraskan said:
posted on November 5, 2006 10:15 PM — 75.117.103.152 — link — abuse?
I like the fact that no other school can say this: #1 in academic all americans (that means the stats werent padded by the third and forth string players) in football, as well as all sports as a whole. Find something to bash this with, i know you people will. After your done bashing it however... notice the sour taste in your mouth. Seems i was wrong about the BCS prediction this year, damn injuries! but at least i had the balls to predict something so "crazy" (anyone know if there is a recorded stat for scoring % per possesion (not just in the red zone) and if so what is said % of the huskers, it seems we score everytime someone doesn't fumble) i feel a perticular amount of pride that no team has held texas (yes that includes the vaunted ohio st. D) to so few points this year, and disappointment that the very next week we collapsed to okla. st. damn Cos and his inability to scheme running QB's
Tommie Trojan said:
posted on September 28, 2006 11:50 AM — 206.135.38.217 — link — abuse?I am totally amazed that Cal would rank this low. Looks like the Pac-10 and SEC place two teams each at the bottom with only Stanford finishing near the top. Shows the excellence of Notre Dame to have that high of a graduation rate along with a pretty good product on the field. But, Cal that low! Shocking! Good going Tedford!
Tommie T