Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the effectiveness of the APR in its current and proposed state to determine if the corresponding sanctions are serving to increase scores and if these standards are impacting teams financially or athletically. We focus our analysis on the Football Bowl Subdivision, differentiating between BCS and non-BCS schools. We use descriptive statistics from the following sources to conduct the tests: school revenue data from the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act, Sagarin on-field performance ratings, and APR violations through the NCAA database. The results of our study show that the APR has proven effective at improving academic eligibility and retention among student athletes. Additionally, evidence indicates that APR violations are more frequent in non-BCS conferences and that the proposed higher APR threshold will have a stronger effect on revenue than on scholarship reductions, but that scholarship reductions on their own do not affect revenue or on-field performance. Implications for this study address the pressure placed on winning that has overshadowed the student-athlete and what sanctions will have an impact on change. Understanding what causes incentive or disincentive to proposed academic reform will assist leaders in intercollegiate athletics to increase student-athlete academic success measures.