Will Huskies become a house of cards?

Storrs

During the last two home games, the loyalists who have been enjoying nights like this for the last 25 years have never been in fuller throat. If you thought the XL Center was humming last week for the second-half flurry against West Virginia, the roof was up for grabs for various moments Wednesday night at Gampel Pavilion.

Under normal circumstances, you'd say that, well, this is Connecticut, this is what we do. This is how we electrify otherwise lifeless winter nights.

Circumstances, however, suggest that for the first time in decades, the men's basketball program as we know it at UConn might be a house of cards.

And for reasons beyond the 70-67 loss to Cincinnati.

I'm not trying to be fatalistic. Or a Gloomy Gus. But this is reality. If the NCAA's impending decision about UConn's past academic transgressions imperils next season's NCAA tournament - and it's certainly possible - the program could be a shadow if itself by this time next year.

It's possible that Jeremy Lamb and Andre Drummond would leave for the NBA regardless of UConn's situation. But if there's no tournament, would Jim Calhoun retire? It's a legitimate question whether he'd want to stay for a season in which there's no chance to win a championship. It's a question no one wants to answer at the moment. Or can. But doesn't the specter of all this add even more urgency to this season?

Here's the two-minute drill version of why next year could be so different:

UConn might be ineligible for the 2013 tournament because of the NCAA's aim to implement stricter academic standards. It would bar schools from the postseason if their Academic Progress Rate (APR) score is below 900. UConn's APR last spring was 893. Many school officials are certain the score will be significantly improved, but not enough to boost the score to 900 for this year.

The APR is based on one retention point for staying in school and one eligibility point for being academically eligible for each student-athlete. A team's total points are divided by points possible and then multiplied by one thousand to equal the team's Academic Progress Rate score.

The next four-year rolling score will include individual academic year scores from 2007-08 (909), 2008-09 (844), 2009-10 (826) and 2010-11. That means UConn, even if it scores 1,000 (a perfect score), will be unable to boost its rolling score to 900.

Note to those of you who adhere to UConn's persecution complex with the NCAA: It has already banned five other schools from the 2012 postseason for APR issues: Cal-State Northridge, Chicago State, Grambling, Southern University and Louisiana-Monroe. Conversations on Wednesday with various officials at those schools said NCAA representatives weren't much into listening.

UConn officials, who expect to hear something next month, are trying to be optimistic. "Conditional waivers" are granted, according to NCAA bylaws, for "demonstrated academic improvement, active presidential involvement, meeting certain APR benchmarks and implementation of an APR improvement plan."

UConn meets all four at the moment.

But its failure for two of the aforementioned years to reach 900 suggests a pattern of disregard for academics that will be difficult to withstand.

The esoteric nature of the APR invites confusion. But before conventional beliefs fester into fact, understand that if a student-athlete is in good academic standing and leaves school early to pursue a professional career, the team is not penalized and loses no APR points, per NCAA rules. But if a student-athlete leaves early and is in poor academic standing, the team loses two points, making it harder for the team's APR to recover.

UConn, with its 893 score, lost two scholarships because it had two "0-for-2" players (left school with unsatisfactory academic achievement). It has been reported that the players are believed to be Darius Smith and Jonathan Mandeldove.

The APR penalty here would have been a duller ache had Smith and Mandeldove remained in sufficient academic standing. Translation: They didn't do enough schoolwork.

It's possible that the improved APR score and perhaps a plea from new president Susan Herbst might carry some influence. Or not. That's the rub: We just don't know. And it's disturbing. Because no Calhoun and a potentially depleted roster would change the way we've become accustomed to spending winter nights for the last 25 years.

After Wednesday's loss, Calhoun called for his players to become more "invested" in what's happening to the 2011-12 Huskies. Some of them might have no idea how invested they need to be. Because what if this is it?

This is the opinion of Day sports columnist Mike DiMauro.