We haven't been eliminated.
Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread (April 2018)
- Status
We haven't been eliminated.
This was true that it didn't clear for athletic scholarships, because students typically scored higher in their typical or more comfortable environment. Athletes have to go to national to test date to qualify for athletic scholarships.
I know for a fact that was the case about a dozen years ago when I accepted an athletic scholarship to play college football. It was heavily stressed by recruiters, counselors, etc.
From the NCAA:
“Students may take the ACT or the SAT an unlimited number of times prior to full-time collegiate enrollment. All ACT and SAT scores should be reported to the NCAA Eligibility Center. It is best for students to list the NCAA Eligibility Center as a score recipient at the time of exam registration to avoid additional fees. Please note only official test scores sent from the testing agency (ACT/SAT) are acceptable. Test scores on your high school transcript will not be used.”
The rules may have changed or that last line might make a difference. Tests not administered by ACT may not be reported by them. National test dates were Saturday’s and you had to pay, etc. Sounds like Illinois has since moved to SAT? So who knows. Either way, I hope Okoro becomes an Illini.
And don't forget Ninja III: The Domination
Malik Martin
Hopefully taller than BU
That might have been the case years back about it being on a certain test date but it's not now. The part that you quoted though is just about reporting scores, meaning students can't have the scores sent via their high school transcript (likely because it can be easily doctored by the school sending it). They need it directly from the SAT or ACT, which is like an additional $15 if they don't put it as one of the 4 initial locations.
Let me know if you see a recent document that still states that as a requirement though but as far as I can tell the last document that stated anything like that was from a powerpoint in 2008 and I'm not even sure how accurate that was then. That old powerpoint had some loopholes about national test date requirements and I don't think it was actually from the NCAA but was widely circulated anyway.
Last edited:
Deleted member 8632
D
Guest
Glad we got off that roller coaster ride. It would be hilarious(in an anti-Miznoz way) for him to recommit to Louisville.
kcib8130
- Parts Unknown
In 2004 I had to take two ACT's to be a D1 athlete, one administered by the school and the other on the national testing date. Either score could be used by colleges for admission, but the latter was used by the clearinghouse.
For better or worse the game continues to evolve. Even K initially hated one and dones and now he's cornered the market.
https://www.theringer.com/2018/4/9/17213792/trevon-duval-duke-one-and-done
If 800+ players transferred last year you can bet the majority of them were not "Creaned." There's too much at stake for these coaches not plan for it.
Perfectly valid opinion, but as you seem to be aware, that's reality. Players at high majors are basically free agents every year, with the significant inhibitor of sitting a year if they transfer. Lotta money in college bball, so I would argue it's a de facto professional sport.
At least free agency works both ways in some regards. Coaches have leeway, but so do players. I gave up hoping the system would work better, instead of having all these under the table inducements for many of the elite players. YMMV.
"Only ACT or SAT test results achieved under national testing conditions on a national testing date prior to full-time collegiate enrollment are usable for NCAA purposes. ACT state-administered tests may also be used. Students with education-impacting disabilities may use scores achieved during a nonstandard administration of the SAT or ACT. A student who takes the nonstandard test must achieve the minimum required test score; however, the test is not required to be administered on a national testing date."
http://www.ncaa.org/student-athletes/future/eligibility-center/does-ncaa-accept-act-compass-scores
Every SAT or ACT that students register on their own through the College Board or ACT is on a national testing day, and the SAT administered through Illinois falls under the state-administered test. A district can choose to administer the ACT on three 3 different dates, but they're all national test dates too. It's certainly possible that it was different back in 2004, but now every test besides a practice test is reportable to the clearinghouse since they all fall under either one of those categories. I can't think of a scenario where a student would take a non-standard SAT or SAT besides a practice test. That's just not how testing is administered.
Also, while we're here. A student can take the PSAT instead of the SAT/ACT in order to be eligible for taking official visits.
In my defense, this is recruiting related and there's some downtime when it comes to recruiting.
haasi
- New York
Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread
+1.
I wouldn’t agree with straight out revocation of scholarship when a better player is coming in, but an open and free transfer market is in the best interests of the players and the programs, and when honest discussions with coaches lead players to transfer, no problem there. Probably much better than riding pine for years and being dissatisfied with your role in the program when it turns out it’s not a great fit. And if it turns out that program thinks there’s a better player on the horizon and wants to recruit them to fill a spot that you occupy, when you’re unlikely to be a major contributor, transferring is probably in your best interests (but absolutely shouldn’t be compelled).
Now- players having to sit out a year is complete BS, and that needs to be eliminated to make the transfer system fair.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
+1.
I wouldn’t agree with straight out revocation of scholarship when a better player is coming in, but an open and free transfer market is in the best interests of the players and the programs, and when honest discussions with coaches lead players to transfer, no problem there. Probably much better than riding pine for years and being dissatisfied with your role in the program when it turns out it’s not a great fit. And if it turns out that program thinks there’s a better player on the horizon and wants to recruit them to fill a spot that you occupy, when you’re unlikely to be a major contributor, transferring is probably in your best interests (but absolutely shouldn’t be compelled).
Now- players having to sit out a year is complete BS, and that needs to be eliminated to make the transfer system fair.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think this is a valid discussion on recruiting...
I'm glad someone else had the exact same experience as me to corroborate my story because finding information from that time period is proving difficult.
It was always my assumption that the NCAA Clearinghouse believed that the state testing dates were less credible because less students took the test at the same time which could skew results since the test is graded on a curve against all other test takers on the same date.
While I'm never against filling a scholarship for a year, I would think better options exist out there than Malik Martin, though if we are waiting for Okoro and Golden for long, that may change.
He just doesn't have numbers that stand out to me and other than the Antigua connection and size, I see no need for him. That being said, I've never seen him play and obviously at USF he played against top competition. If he is a plus defender and rebounder then im all for him.
He just doesn't have numbers that stand out to me and other than the Antigua connection and size, I see no need for him. That being said, I've never seen him play and obviously at USF he played against top competition. If he is a plus defender and rebounder then im all for him.
haasi
- New York
I don’t think Martin is likely be a good big ten player. But all of our bigs are question marks and we can use some experience and depth, so if it’s Martin for a year or no one, I choose Martin. If there are other better options out there, great - not sure who they are.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In a one year vacuum I agree with you. Would rather fill the scholarship with someone that has experience and can give us solid minutes.
I don't think we're going to be very good this year though and would rather have a young player or two develop for future seasons.
I wouldn't expect much, but sounds like he'd be serviceable for a year.
We are 100% on the same page here. Transfers in general (and specifically in the first 18 months after a coaching change) don't really bother me that much. More often than not if it gets to that point it's most likely in both parties best interest.
Might be an option, hopefully we don't have to make a choice. Okoro test results seems to be the thing he and we, hopefully by end of May, he will be in O+B.
haasi
- New York
Exactly. And the other benefit is practice for our young guys. Having an experienced big guy to go against in practice every day is a good thing for them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Illiniwek06
- N of I-80
+1, very impressive.
BLUE COLLAR SPECIAL
Jaime Jaquez
A four-star prospect and jack-of-all trades wing who loves to play physical and do the dirty work, Jaquez brings a hard hat approach to the basketball court.
He's not concerned with flash, he's concerned with results and he is willing to do whatever his team needs him to do on the offensive or defensive end. He's the type of glue guy that coaches covet and because of his approach, his teammates play harder to match his effort level. But in saying that, he's also a skilled player who brings much more than hustle and toughness.
Last week we got some feedback that we must not like Jaquez to only rank him No. 105 in the entire country during our update to the 2019 Rivals150. Unfortunately, that's a bad read because there is big appreciation for his approach and whether he was ranked No. 23, No. 57, No. 105 or unranked, that wouldn't change. He sports offers from programs like USC, UCLA, Georgetown, Stanford, Illinois, Oregon State and others.
https://basketballrecruiting.rivals.com/news/the-bossi-awards-from-dallas
Jaime Jaquez
A four-star prospect and jack-of-all trades wing who loves to play physical and do the dirty work, Jaquez brings a hard hat approach to the basketball court.
He's not concerned with flash, he's concerned with results and he is willing to do whatever his team needs him to do on the offensive or defensive end. He's the type of glue guy that coaches covet and because of his approach, his teammates play harder to match his effort level. But in saying that, he's also a skilled player who brings much more than hustle and toughness.
Last week we got some feedback that we must not like Jaquez to only rank him No. 105 in the entire country during our update to the 2019 Rivals150. Unfortunately, that's a bad read because there is big appreciation for his approach and whether he was ranked No. 23, No. 57, No. 105 or unranked, that wouldn't change. He sports offers from programs like USC, UCLA, Georgetown, Stanford, Illinois, Oregon State and others.
https://basketballrecruiting.rivals.com/news/the-bossi-awards-from-dallas
- Status