Is it passing 24 or 18 credits in the Fall & Spring Semester? Or does the 24 credits only apply to Frosh?
Passing 24 credits in two semesters is a low standard. Passing 18 credits in two semesters is an extremely low standard. The standard of 'must pass six credits in the Fall' is a laughably low standard. That means that you can fail half of your classes, possibly more than half, and still be eligible in the Spring.
I'll say it again. If a full time student is unable to pass at least 12 credits in a semester, they should not be in college. Apparently, after your first year, you only have to pass 9 credits per semester to remain eligible with the NCAA.
And yes, I know that some majors and some schools have higher standards. I also know that many athletes are doing well as students. However, these NCAA minimum standards are pathetic.
Yes 24 credits only applies to freshman. No just passing 9 credits a term won't keep you eligible forever
You also keep picking one individual requirement, extrapolate it out in total disregard to the other standards that are in place, and make some bold grandiose statement like "if a full time student is unable to pass at least 12 credits in a semester, they should not be in college".
For example, you state "apparently, you only have to pass 9 credits per semester to remain eligible with the NCAA". That ignores the progress toward a degree requirement. Only pass 9 credits a semester and you will very rapidly fail to meet the academic progress requirement.
And your "don't belong in college statement"? I know plenty of very successful people, who for one reason or another happened to hit a bad patch and struggled for a semester. Evidently, you'd have kicked all of them out of school for that one bump in the road.
Those NCAA rules are there for two reasons. One, to provide minimum standards that athletes at all schools must meet (the academic progress requirements). Two, to plug loopholes that might be exploited if the NCAA simply allowed each individual school to set its own standards (the six credits a semester, 18 credits per year requirements).
What would happen if that six credit criteria that you abhor so much wasn't in place? You'd have to fall back to each school's individual eligibility requirement. Let's take Penn State's, for example. What would happen at PSU if a normal student failed to get a satisfactory grade in six credits? Any student who has an individual semester GPA of under 2.0 gets an Academic Watch notice. To Penn State's credit, they don't kick the kid out of school which apparently you think is the correct mode of action. Basically Academic Watch requires them to have a sit down session with their adviser during which they are told that if their overall GPA falls below 2.0 for the following semester, they are in danger of being suspended from the university. They are allowed to stay in school.
So if the NCAA six credit criteria wasn't in place, you could have basketball players simply stop going to class, pull a 0.0 for the fall semester, continue to remain in school and continue to play ball (and, in all likelihood, continue to not go to class). At the end of the year, they could leave school to pursue other avenues (turn pro for example). That's one reason the six credit criteria is there. It makes kids be at least somewhat accountable every semester.
Same story with the 18 credit criteria, just on a larger scale. It ensures that you can't just take an entire year off and still maintain your eligibility. Joe College, can do that if he's built up a high enough overall GPA. Joe Athlete can't.
