I was simply using UCLA as a comparison to show that all schools give kids a chance for an education that they would not normally get if they were not an athlete, and most end up graduating. Why question SC for giving Van Blarcom a chance with a scholarship just because he was a minimum qualifier. Most athletes at most schools are below the regular standards, so why should it matter how far below if they meet the ncaa minimum. As long as they pass their courses and earn a degree then its a win win for everyone. I'm sure there are athletes who were not minimum qualifiers that ended up being ineligible. Some who should make it dont and some who shouldn't make it do. Van Blarcom didn't make it, other minimum qualifiers will.