Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: JR4AU on August 31, 2010, 04:54:02 PM
-
http://blogs.clarionledger.com/um/2010/08/31/masoli-denied-ole-miss-appeals/
« Words from JSU coach Jack Crowe
Masoli denied, Ole Miss appeals
Rod Walker
Posted on August 31, 2010in Uncategorized. View Comments This just in from a statement sent out by Ole Miss athletic department. Will be back with more following 4 p.m. press conference concerning this issue.
OXFORD, Miss. — Ole Miss appealed an NCAA waiver decision Tuesday that would restrict Jeremiah Masoli from playing football for the Rebels until 2011.
The Ole Miss appeal of the NCAA staff’s decision will now be reviewed by an NCAA subcommittee. A response could be expected as early as Friday but no later than one week
Go to twitter.com and follow rwalker1906 for more updates.
-
HAhahahahahahahahahahaahahahah!
:haha:
Fuck Nutt.
-
Now that's gonna' leave a mark. Just going by memory here but wasn't Masoli kicked off the Duck's squad? Was he suspended, kicked out of school or what? I think that regardless, he's supposed to sit for a year. Hell, if Nutt can sign 68 players in one class, certainly he can get an ineligible player to suit up and play QB.
-
Now that's gonna' leave a mark. Just going by memory here but wasn't Masoli kicked off the Duck's squad? Was he suspended, kicked out of school or what? I think that regardless, he's supposed to sit for a year. Hell, if Nutt can sign 68 players in one class, certainly he can get an ineligible player to suit up and play QB.
No, not regardless...but regardless, it appears he's not playing this year.
-
I guess he won't be able to chase that lifeling dream of a forrestry degree
-
So this means that Raymond Cotton will have his time to shin.......wait, nevermind. Who's the QB?
-
I guess he won't be able to chase that lifeling dream of a forrestry degree
He actually has a degree from Oregon. He was to enroll in Parks and Recreation as a grad student at Ole Miss.
-
There going to be super shitty now :haha:
-
There going to be super shitty now :haha:
I'm thinkin' you're dead nuts on.
-
He actually has a degree from Oregon. He was to enroll in Parks and Recreation as a grad student at Ole Miss.
Oh my bad, I knew he was in the masters program but I thought it was forrestry. The only reason he chose parks and rec is because by NCAA rule he had to find a Masters degree program that is not offered at Oregon in order to transfer without having to sit out.
-
The NCAA says that this was an attempt to circumnavigate the spirit in which the rule was created. I wouldn't be expecting Masoli on the sideline anytime soon.
:bar:
-
The NCAA says that this was an attempt to circumnavigate the spirit in which the rule was created. I wouldn't be expecting Masoli on the sideline anytime soon.
:bar:
Well then, what is the spirit in which the rule was created? I'm guessing for like redshirt juniors or seniors who have already graduated, get a new coach who installs a system that eliminates their position? Colin Peek even had to sit out a year at Alabama when the TE position was eliminated from Georgia Tech's offense.
I will try to find the exact rule in play here. I mean, unless it flat out in black and white says one way or another, fuck all this "spirit of the rule" shit, until they change the rule officially. I'm guessing that it's not spelled out in black in white. I mean, Nutt is crazy as a shithouse rat sure, but I don't think he's stupid. I just don't think he would have put all his eggs in one basket on this kid if it was clear it would never get by the NCAA.
-
Well then, what is the spirit in which the rule was created? I'm guessing for like redshirt juniors or seniors who have already graduated, get a new coach who installs a system that eliminates their position? Colin Peek even had to sit out a year at Alabama when the TE position was eliminated from Georgia Tech's offense.
I will try to find the exact rule in play here. I mean, unless it flat out in black and white says one way or another, fuck all this "spirit of the rule" shit, until they change the rule officially. I'm guessing that it's not spelled out in black in white. I mean, Nutt is crazy as a shithouse rat sure, but I don't think he's stupid. I just don't think he would have put all his eggs in one basket on this kid if it was clear it would never get by the NCAA.
This could be NCAA payback for Nutt constantly flaunting the rules and allowing his brother on the sidelines and/or in the booth despite having his hand slapped about it.
-
This could be NCAA payback for Nutt constantly flaunting the rules and allowing his brother on the sidelines and/or in the booth despite having his hand slapped about it.
I personally think this does have something to do with it. Add to that, you know they don't like the kid either so the NCAA had the opp to take out two birds and they did.
-
Well then, what is the spirit in which the rule was created? I'm guessing for like redshirt juniors or seniors who have already graduated, get a new coach who installs a system that eliminates their position? Colin Peek even had to sit out a year at Alabama when the TE position was eliminated from Georgia Tech's offense.
I will try to find the exact rule in play here. I mean, unless it flat out in black and white says one way or another, fuck all this "spirit of the rule" shit, until they change the rule officially. I'm guessing that it's not spelled out in black in white. I mean, Nutt is crazy as a shithouse rat sure, but I don't think he's stupid. I just don't think he would have put all his eggs in one basket on this kid if it was clear it would never get by the NCAA.
No worries here guys. RWS has to spout this bullshit so when Saban finds a loophole in some kind of new recruiting tactic, he can call him a fucking genius. He really doesn't believe this bullshit.
-
The NCAA created this rule as a benefit for those players who graduate early and want to pursue a masters degree elsewhere. The kid graduated form something in Oregon. He decided to transfer to Old Mrs. Under the current rule, he did nothing wrong. I don;t like the kid or Nutt, but the NCAA cannot be such pompous assholes that they just change the rule as they see fit at any time. The kid was not thrown out of school and followed the rules, no matter what the intent. He should be eligible. I am totally sick of the NCAA and wish the SEC would align itself with a few more conferences and tell the NCAA to suck it.
-
The NCAA created this rule as a benefit for those players who graduate early and want to pursue a masters degree elsewhere. The kid graduated form something in Oregon. He decided to transfer to Old Mrs. Under the current rule, he did nothing wrong. I don;t like the kid or Nutt, but the NCAA cannot be such pompous assholes that they just change the rule as they see fit at any time. The kid was not thrown out of school and followed the rules, no matter what the intent. He should be eligible. I am totally sick of the NCAA and wish the SEC would align itself with a few more conferences and tell the NCAA to suck it.
Had he not been kicked off the oregon team he would not have transferred to Ole Miss. Pretty sure the NCAA di not mean to givea kid a chance cicumvent a suspension.
-
No worries here guys. RWS has to spout this bullshit so when Saban finds a loophole in some kind of new recruiting tactic, he can call him a fucking genius. He really doesn't believe this bullshit.
I know you're referring to the video conferencing. It says in black and white in the recruiting rule book that video conferencing is considered a phone call. It wasn't a loophole. It wasn't an act of genius. It was a matter of simply reading the rules. Very simple. For that matter, I wasn't one of the ones touting Saban as a genius for it. But I don't buy this whole "spirit of the rule" bullshit. Either it is, or it isn't.
-
Had he not been kicked off the oregon team he would not have transferred to Ole Miss. Pretty sure the NCAA di not mean to givea kid a chance cicumvent a suspension.
Unless it was an NCAA mandated suspension, it's none of their fucking business.
-
But I don't buy this whole "spirit of the rule" bullshit. Either it is, or it isn't.
This
Unless it was an NCAA mandated suspension, it's none of their fucking business.
and this.
The NCAA has about as much business trying to mandate all this shit as Tiger Woods has keeping an eye on your woman for you.
-
I think the ruling is dead on, I just think it is kinda shitty they waited til Aug 31 to tell the kid...something they could've done july 1st or so!
-
But I don't buy this whole "spirit of the rule" bullshit. Either it is, or it isn't.
I'm with you here.
Not a huge fan of Masoli or Nutt but there is nothing wrong here to cause the NCAA to not grant this kid the 2010 season.
-
I think the ruling is dead on, I just think it is kinda shitty they waited til Aug 31 to tell the kid...something they could've done july 1st or so!
I am sure they were gauging public opinion to see which way they would look better.
-
I think the ruling is dead on, I just think it is kinda shitty they waited til Aug 31 to tell the kid...something they could've done july 1st or so!
Unless that rule says straight up this or that, and I don't think it does, the NCAA looks to be in the wrong here.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5516909
He pleaded guilty in a January theft at a fraternity house and was suspended for the entire 2010 season by Oregon coach Chip Kelly. Then in June, he was cited for misdemeanor marijuana possession and dismissed from the squad.
The senior has already completed his undergraduate degree and enrolled in Mississippi's Parks and Recreation graduate program. The NCAA will sometimes waive a one-year residency requirement for athletes who are transferring but enrolling in a graduate program not offered at the previous school.
In a press release, the NCAA said Masoli's request violated the intent of the waiver: "The waiver exists to provide relief to student-athletes who transfer for academic reasons to pursue graduate studies, not to avoid disciplinary measures at the previous university."
Nutt said the NCAA should take into account that Masoli was kicked off only the football team, not the university.
"He was not dismissed from the university," Nutt said. "He was dismissed from the team. I've had players that I dismissed. I want them to go play for somebody else. I want them to learn from their mistakes."
I mean, if they're going to make this kid sit, then they need to rethink how kids that play for a D1 team and get kicked off of a team for whatever reason can go play for UNA, Jacksonville St, etc, and not have to sit out. I know it's a lower level of competition and all, but they're doing it for the same reason Masoli is, so why do they catch a break just because of a lower level of competition?
Again, this whole "intent of the waiver" issue is bullshit. It's none of the NCAA's business who a team suspends or dismisses, unless it's NCAA mandated. It doesn't matter what the NCAA's intentions were when they made the rule. All that matters is what is written in the book. If they don't like it, then they need to change it for next year.
-
Nutt said the NCAA should take into account that Masoli was kicked off only the football team, not the university.
"He was not dismissed from the university," Nutt said. "He was dismissed from the team."
Someone on woopig made a great point about this fallacious argument (which the OM fans have adopted). The distinction between "institution" and "athletic program" (the rule refers consistently to dismissal from the "insitution"). When the NCAA drops the hammer for "lack of institutional control", they are referring to the athletic program.
-
The NCAA says that this was an attempt to circumnavigate the spirit in which the rule was created. I wouldn't be expecting Masoli on the sideline anytime soon.
:bar:
I have to disagree...circumventing the spirit of the rule would be a playear acting as a free agent to t'fer his Sr. year to a better team when he had no reason to leave the team he was on. Masoli was kicked off Oregon. He was trying to find a home within the rules the NCAA laid out.
You folks chortle at Nutt all you want. The NCAA will make this kind of arbitrary 11th hour decision about an Auburn (Ark or bammer player for those fans here) and you'll be screaming bloody murder. The NCAA needs it's hand slapped a shitload more than Nutt.
-
I have to disagree...circumventing the spirit of the rule would be a playear acting as a free agent to t'fer his Sr. year to a better team when he had no reason to leave the team he was on. Masoli was kicked off Oregon. He was trying to find a home within the rules the NCAA laid out.
You folks chortle at Nutt all you want. The NCAA will make this kind of arbitrary 11th hour decision about an Auburn (Ark or bammer player for those fans here) and you'll be screaming bloody murder. The NCAA needs it's hand slapped a shitload more than Nutt.
Taylor, give this man some head.
-
I have to disagree...circumventing the spirit of the rule would be a playear acting as a free agent to t'fer his Sr. year to a better team when he had no reason to leave the team he was on. Masoli was kicked off Oregon. He was trying to find a home within the rules the NCAA laid out.
You folks chortle at Nutt all you want. The NCAA will make this kind of arbitrary 11th hour decision about an Auburn (Ark or bammer player for those fans here) and you'll be screaming bloody murder. The NCAA needs it's hand slapped a shitload more than Nutt.
Bingo. I remember a time or two an AU player being held up in the clearing house and it taking forever for them to get cleared. Or in the case of Deion Belue, where he was 3 days into fall camp and the NCAA decided there was a problem with a course he took, as where they originally cleared him.
Nutt seems to have a fairly strong case. The NCAA can't just come up and say "Well, that's not really how we wanted the rule used, so we're not letting him do it." Can coaches start having referees waive off false start penalties because the OL didn't really mean to move? How about offsides penalties? The NCAA expects schools to follow every letter of the rule book. They should practice what they preach.
-
I have to disagree...circumventing the spirit of the rule would be a playear acting as a free agent to t'fer his Sr. year to a better team when he had no reason to leave the team he was on. Masoli was kicked off Oregon. He was trying to find a home within the rules the NCAA laid out.
Does it make a difference to you that Masoli has not taken a RS year and still has eligibility to spare?
You folks chortle at Nutt all you want. The NCAA will make this kind of arbitrary 11th hour decision about an Auburn (Ark or bammer player for those fans here) and you'll be screaming bloody murder. The NCAA needs it's hand slapped a shitload more than Nutt.
This happens all the time. Attempts to exploit loopholes are made and the NCAA makes what appears to be a decision contrary to the language of the rule only to go back and revise said rule (See: Nutt/oversigning rule; Saban/bump rule)
-
Does it make a difference to you that Masoli has not taken a RS year and still has eligibility to spare?
This happens all the time. Attempts to exploit loopholes are made and the NCAA makes what appears to be a decision contrary to the language of the rule only to go back and revise said rule (See: Nutt/oversigning rule; Saban/bump rule)
Then they should change the rule to spell it out clearly....not retrofit a new interpretation of it to the past.
-
Does it make a difference to you that Masoli has not taken a RS year and still has eligibility to spare?
Well, of course he has eligibility left. If he didn't, then he couldn't play. What does that have to do with anything?
This happens all the time. Attempts to exploit loopholes are made and the NCAA makes what appears to be a decision contrary to the language of the rule only to go back and revise said rule (See: Nutt/oversigning rule; Saban/bump rule)
And what did the NCAA do with those two examples? They identified a weak point in the rule, and they fixed it for the next year. They didn't just make some shit up right then and there and say "Well, we didn't mean for that to happen, so now you're in deep shit." And that's the way this should be handled as well. A weak point has been found in the rule. Fine, lesson learned. Fix it next season.
-
Well, of course he has eligibility left. If he didn't, then he couldn't play. What does that have to do with anything?
And what did the NCAA do with those two examples? They identified a weak point in the rule, and they fixed it for the next year. They didn't just make some shit up right then and there and say "Well, we didn't mean for that to happen, so now you're in deep shit." And that's the way this should be handled as well. A weak point has been found in the rule. Fine, lesson learned. Fix it next season.
I've got to agree with the bammer on this one.
I don't necessarily disagree that Nutt was violating the "spirit of the rule", but as it stands now, it's not against the rule. Make it against the rules if you're not going to clear someone in that situation.
And on top of all of that, to do this two days before College football kicks off? That's a hell of a low blow...
That being said, I will chortle at an SEC West opponent's misfortune with no remorse.
-
Well, of course he has eligibility left. If he didn't, then he couldn't play. What does that have to do with anything?
If his eligibility was running (and it would if he transferred schools and was not allowed to play...or if he stayed at UO and could not play), then he would not be able to play ever again unless he was granted this waiver. With this result, he will still be afforded the opportunity to play.
Masoli was asking for a waiver of the rule. He wanted special dispensation. Without it, and because he has an extra year of eligibility (in contrast to a kid on his last year seeking to transfer), he will be eligible to play next year.
And on top of all of that, to do this two days before College football kicks off? That's a hell of a low blow...
They have always dragged their feet (as previously pointed out by said bammer). Why the wailing and gnashing of teeth over this?
-
Does it make a difference to you that Masoli has not taken a RS year and still has eligibility to spare?
Not unless the rule says something about that. Otherwise, Masoli, or players on teams such as USC are the exact reason the rule was created.
This happens all the time. Attempts to exploit loopholes are made and the NCAA makes what appears to be a decision contrary to the language of the rule only to go back and revise said rule (See: Nutt/oversigning rule; Saban/bump rule)
The Masoli deal isn't nearly as blatantly taking advantage of a rule as the two you mention.
-
The Masoli deal isn't nearly as blatantly taking advantage of a rule as the two you mention.
You don't think so?
Nutt is on record stating that Masoli was simply casting about for ANY grad program that UO didn't offer so that he could play football this year instead of sitting out like every other (non-waived) transfer.
-
You don't think so?
Nutt is on record stating that Masoli was simply casting about for ANY grad program that UO didn't offer so that he could play football this year instead of sitting out like every other (non-waived) transfer.
As I stated, he was a player looking for a home when he was without one. Under your logic, players stuck on teams like USC would be "casting about" looking for any program not on probation. Which, by the way, the NCAA allows. Masoli wasn't looking for special dispensation. As I understand it the "waiver" is stated in the rule for the purpose of making sure that the chosen curriculum isn't offered at the school the player is leaving. The NCAA has made an arbitrary decision despite the rule, and you're letting your hate for Nutt color your argument.
-
As I stated, he was a player looking for a home when he was without one. Under your logic, players stuck on teams like USC would be "casting about" looking for any program not on probation. Which, by the way, the NCAA allows.
Whooooooooooaaaa. Apples and fucking rutabagas. The program is on probation, punishing kids who did not participate in the wrongdoing leading to the punishment, and they are allowed to leave. That is entirely different than letting a kid whose own actions led to his dismissal from the team simply transfer schools and play immediately. The punishment (losing a year of playing time) is unfairly avoided in the Masoli scenario.
Masoli wasn't looking for special dispensation. As I understand it the "waiver" is stated in the rule for the purpose of making sure that the chosen curriculum isn't offered at the school the player is leaving. The NCAA has made an arbitrary decision despite the rule, and you're letting your hate for Nutt color your argument.
I love a technical argument as much as the next guy, I hate the NCAA and Nutt, and we are still going to disagree here.
-
Whooooooooooaaaa. Apples and fucking rutabagas. The program is on probation, punishing kids who did not participate in the wrongdoing leading to the punishment, and they are allowed to leave. That is entirely different than letting a kid whose own actions led to his dismissal from the team simply transfer schools and play immediately. The punishment (losing a year of playing time) is unfairly avoided in the Masoli scenario.
I love a technical argument as much as the next guy, I hate the NCAA and Nutt, and we are still going to disagree here.
Apples and oranges my friend. Masoli's "punishment" was an Oregon issue, not an NCAA issue. Had Oregon chosen to, they could have let Masoli stay and play, and the NCAA has no rule against it. He's eligible under this rule to play this year (under it's current letter AND spirit) or it would have never come up. The NCAA isn't, and never has been involved in player off the field conduct outside of that affecting eligibility such as agent contact or special benefits. This is no circumventing of any rule in that respect.
I'll be that if Neil Caudle decided to transfer under this rule this year, he'd be allowed to without any arbitrary negative treatment.
-
I hate rutabagas. Not fond of artichokes either; however, artichoke and spinach dip is pretty tasty.
Heard our local sports talk guy reading some quotes this morning on this. Not sure where from but the jist of what was said was that the NCAA based their decision strictly on their determination that the move was made for football reasons only and had zero to do with akeydemiks. I know, that's what's being argued here but ulitimately, the NCAA knew about this transfer long before it happened. Hell, the possibility of it was being discussed on national talk shows a week before he made the move. Why would the NCAA not look at the situation and give a thumbs up or down before the guy moved his shiot across the country, enrolled in school and participated in practice. That could be determined in one phone call. But then, we are talking about the NCAA.
-
Apples and oranges my friend. Masoli's "punishment" was an Oregon issue, not an NCAA issue. Had Oregon chosen to, they could have let Masoli stay and play, and the NCAA has no rule against it. He's eligible under this rule to play this year (under it's current letter AND spirit) or it would have never come up. The NCAA isn't, and never has been involved in player off the field conduct outside of that affecting eligibility such as agent contact or special benefits. This is no circumventing of any rule in that respect.
As long as you recognize that the two scenarios are completely incomparable. [edit: just saw the bold portion of your post was the apples/orange comment. I'll let my dumas stand]
Let's further muddy the waters with another NCAA by-law:
14.5.1.3 Disciplinary Suspension. A student who transfers to any NCAA institution from a collegiate institution
while the student is disqualified or suspended from the previous institution for disciplinary reasons (as
opposed to academic reasons) must complete one calendar year of residence at the certifying institution.
Does this play into Masoli's situation?
I'll be that if Neil Caudle decided to transfer under this rule this year, he'd be allowed to without any arbitrary negative treatment.
Perhaps. But, then, Neil doesn't come with the baggage that Masoli does. Call it arbitrary or call it taking into account all the factors in the equation.
-
As long as you recognize that the two scenarios are completely incomparable.
Let's further muddy the waters with another NCAA by-law:
14.5.1.3 Disciplinary Suspension. A student who transfers to any NCAA institution from a collegiate institution
while the student is disqualified or suspended from the previous institution for disciplinary reasons (as
opposed to academic reasons) must complete one calendar year of residence at the certifying institution.
Does this play into Masoli's situation?
Perhaps. But, then, Neil doesn't come with the baggage that Masoli does. Call it arbitrary or call it taking into account all the factors in the equation.
As I've read the rule, and comment on the rule, really both our arguments are off. The NCAA has written in it's own "arbitrary decision clause" in to the waiver rule...where they say the transfer must be "academically motivated"...so they basically get to decide whether a kid simply wants to play sports, or play sports while getting a graduate degree he couldn't get at the other institution.
-
The waiver is a waiver of the one year "sit out" rule...
This is a comment about the Bball player kid that t'fered from Duke to Syracuse to play football.
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/media+and+events/press+room/news+release+archive/2009/official+statements/20090416_gradtransferrules_rls.html
-
As long as you recognize that the two scenarios are completely incomparable. [edit: just saw the bold portion of your post was the apples/orange comment. I'll let my dumas stand]
Let's further muddy the waters with another NCAA by-law:
14.5.1.3 Disciplinary Suspension. A student who transfers to any NCAA institution from a collegiate institution
while the student is disqualified or suspended from the previous institution for disciplinary reasons (as
opposed to academic reasons) must complete one calendar year of residence at the certifying institution.
Does this play into Masoli's situation?
Perhaps. But, then, Neil doesn't come with the baggage that Masoli does. Call it arbitrary or call it taking into account all the factors in the equation.
The rule specifically refers to suspension from the institution, which Masoli was not.
-
The rule was put in to place to allow an athlete the ability to transfer if a school did not offer the masters program that the athlete wanted to pursue. One of the problems here is that Masoli was already enrolled in the Masters program of his choice at Oregon. He left that program and found one that was not offered at Oregon and now has to claim his transfer is strictly due to the fact that Oregon does not offer a Parks and Rec masters program so he must transfer to Ole Miss to have access to said curriculum.
Well I'm calling bullshit and say the NCAA made the right decision here
-
The rule specifically refers to suspension from the institution, which Masoli was not.
Yep! Anyway, it matters not...
-
If his eligibility was running (and it would if he transferred schools and was not allowed to play...or if he stayed at UO and could not play), then he would not be able to play ever again unless he was granted this waiver. With this result, he will still be afforded the opportunity to play.
Masoli was asking for a waiver of the rule. He wanted special dispensation. Without it, and because he has an extra year of eligibility (in contrast to a kid on his last year seeking to transfer), he will be eligible to play next year.
They have always dragged their feet (as previously pointed out by said bammer). Why the wailing and gnashing of teeth over this?
The fact that he still has another year of eligibility means dick. It's not like a free ticket for the NCAA to be able to say "Screw it, the kid has another year anyway." I would be pissed if it happened to Alabama. You would be pissed if it happened to AU. Nobody really cares for Nutt or Ole Miss, it's just the fact that the NCAA is being so flagrant about it. You can't change the rule written in the book in the middle of the game. You can't on the fly subject it to "Well, that's not what we really meant."
My point is, apparently it's just a matter of time until the NCAA decides to snatch the rug out from under Alabama or Auburn on something like this on a whim. I'm not OK with them just changing the rules right then and there because they feel like it.
-
The rule was put in to place to allow an athlete the ability to transfer if a school did not offer the masters program that the athlete wanted to pursue. One of the problems here is that Masoli was already enrolled in the Masters program of his choice at Oregon. He left that program and found one that was not offered at Oregon and now has to claim his transfer is strictly due to the fact that Oregon does not offer a Parks and Rec masters program so he must transfer to Ole Miss to have access to said curriculum.
Well I'm calling bullshit and say the NCAA made the right decision here
Actually, I'd have to agree now that I've more closely looked at the rule, AND the comments.
-
I actually think the NCAA did in fact make the right decision based on the rule. My beef is strictly with the timing and how they could have stopped this entire situation with a couple of phone calls. I'm like Chad said earlier...have no problem pointing and laughing at the misfortunes of an SEC West rival. I just hate the NCAA with a passion.
-
I actually think the NCAA did in fact make the right decision based on the rule. My beef is strictly with the timing and how they could have stopped this entire situation with a couple of phone calls. I'm like Chad said earlier...have no problem pointing and laughing at the misfortunes of an SEC West rival. I just hate the NCAA with a passion.
The problem I have is that if he were looking around because Oregon had been put on probation, the whole "academically motivated" deal wouldn't even be considered. Under this criteria, few would actually be eligible for the waiver.
-
The problem I have is that if he were looking around because Oregon had been put on probation, the whole "academically motivated" deal wouldn't even be considered. Under this criteria, few would actually be eligible for the waiver.
That is correct, only a few would be eligible for the waiver. The rule was never meant to be used by a large amount of players. It was intended for a very few who truly are in a position that they must transfer to further their education.
Here is a good example of how the rule is supposed to work:
Let's say an AU player graduated in criminal justice, wants to go to law school, and still has a year of eligibility left. Because AU does not have a law school, this player would be allowed to go to the law school of his choice and play out his 1 year of eligibility.
It was never written for a player to be able to shop around for a school with an obscure masters program that is not offered at his current school in order to play so that he does not have to live out a suspension on his current team. This situation is simply ludicrous.
-
That is correct, only a few would be eligible for the waiver. The rule was never meant to be used by a large amount of players. It was intended for a very few who truly are in a position that they must transfer to further their education.
Here is a good example of how the rule is supposed to work:
Let's say an AU player graduated in criminal justice, wants to go to law school, and still has a year of eligibility left. Because AU does not have a law school, this player would be allowed to go to the law school of his choice and play out his 1 year of eligibility.
It was never written for a player to be able to shop around for a school with an obscure masters program that is not offered at his current school in order to play so that he does not have to live out a suspension on his current team. This situation is simply ludicrous.
According to the way I read what they consider when granting or denying the waiver, the fact that your current team is on probation, or just changed coaches isn't even part of the deal...yet, that's the reasons or two of the major reasons most folks assumed the rule was put in place.
-
It was never written for a player to be able to shop around for a school with an obscure masters program that is not offered at his current school in order to play so that he does not have to live out a suspension on his current team. This situation is simply ludicrous.
But, unless the rule specifically states you cannot do it for that reason, isn't that the NCAA's fault for not being specific? I understand what you're saying here, but what I'm saying is if the NCAA didn't specify and made an ambiguous rule, why should they be allowed to change that rule on the fly just because they didn't mean for it to encompass a situation like this?
-
But, unless the rule specifically states you cannot do it for that reason, isn't that the NCAA's fault for not being specific? I understand what you're saying here, but what I'm saying is if the NCAA didn't specify and made an ambiguous rule, why should they be allowed to change that rule on the fly just because they didn't mean for it to encompass a situation like this?
Because if you don't make common sense judgements on a situation like this, you open up the possibility of "recruiting" graduated players. I'm sure there are many NCAA rules that are up for interpretation and to expect them to write specific language for every unforseen circumstance is simply not possible. As much as we may or may not like it, these kids are supposed to be student athletes. Student first, athlete second. This ruling does nothing to stop Masoli from pursuing his education, does nothing to take away hos last year of eligibility, it simply says: Hey Jeremiah, you have to sit out a year and you can play at Ole Miss next year.
-
But, unless the rule specifically states you cannot do it for that reason, isn't that the NCAA's fault for not being specific? I understand what you're saying here, but what I'm saying is if the NCAA didn't specify and made an ambiguous rule, why should they be allowed to change that rule on the fly just because they didn't mean for it to encompass a situation like this?
It's not really a "rule" in and of itself but a rule that says you can seek a waiver of the existing rule about sitting out a year.
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/media+and+events/press+room/news+release+archive/2009/official+statements/20090416_gradtransferrules_rls.html
NCAA issues waiver decision for Ole Miss student-athlete
The NCAA staff has granted a graduate student transfer waiver for University of Mississippi football student-athlete Jeremiah Masoli, but he must wait until the 2011-12 academic year to compete. Mr. Masoli can continue to pursue his academic career, is eligible to receive athletics aid, and may practice with the team.
In its decision, the staff noted the student-athlete was unable to participate at the University of Oregon based on his dismissal from the team, which is contrary to the intent of the waiver. The waiver exists to provide relief to student-athletes who transfer for academic reasons to pursue graduate studies, not to avoid disciplinary measures at the previous university.
According to NCAA rules, created by member schools, football graduate student-athletes must receive a waiver in order to compete if they enroll in a university other than where they received their undergraduate degree.
After receiving information from both universities and the student-athlete, the NCAA staff obtained the final piece of information yesterday evening from the University of Mississippi and issued its decision today. The university may appeal this staff decision to the Subcommittee for Legislative Relief, an independent group comprised of representatives from NCAA member colleges, universities and athletic conferences.
-
Good fucking grief guys, give this shit a rest. I could care less if the Hawaiian duck plays or not. The only thing I was looking forward to seeing is the Pac-10 quack sucker come to the SEC and get hit so hard snot bubbles come from his nose.
-
It's not like the guy just got pissed and up and transferred. HE GOT HIS DEGREE. He has proven that he can handle the academic side well. And the NCAA is always spouting off out the blowhole about academics. Here you have a player who has gotten his degree while still having eligibility left. So what if he changed masters. Does not a fair percentage of grad change their masters? So now the NCAA can look into young men's minds an KNOW what they are thinking?
And will this not help the future of one of their young men and maybe help the future of one of their institutions as well?
The bottom line is that the NCAA did not foresee something like this happening and now they are changing the rules mid-game. It has been their way for a while now. They have unlimited power and DO NOT care for the individuals that they so adamantly claim to be there for. If they are going to allow just one grad to transfer and use their remaining eligibility at other institutions, then this should be allowed also. Until they actually ARE GOD and can know without a doubt what someone is thinking, then this rule is flawed.
Do I care if he plays? No. But I hate the way the NCAA loves to make everyone BEG to them.
Like I said earlier, I wish the SEC and a few more conferences would get together and create their own governing body and kick the NCAA to the curb.
-
You guys can continue to quote scripture if you want, but it comes down to the rule being prescriptive, or open to interpretation. It can be used to determine a proper course based on the specifics involved. In this case, the decision to suspend Masoli was NOT an NCAA punishment, but one given by Oregon itself. True. However, the punishment was rendered to satisfy the NCAA, and thus the NCAA didn't pursue it further.
My statement in which the NCAA feels that Masoli was transferring and utilizing this rule against the spirit in which it was intended, meant that the NCAA felt that Masoli was skirting his punishment at Oregon and simply said that he's not going to receive the special permission necessary to play this year at Ole Miss. They did not, as many did not believe that this was purely an academic move.
With all that said, I agree with Chizad, that this matter certainly could have been handled cleaner and quicker, but it is what it is.
Fuck Ole Miss.
-
You guys can continue to quote scripture if you want, but it comes down to the rule being prescriptive, or open to interpretation. It can be used to determine a proper course based on the specifics involved. In this case, the decision to suspend Masoli was NOT an NCAA punishment, but one given by Oregon itself. True. However, the punishment was rendered to satisfy the NCAA, and thus the NCAA didn't pursue it further.
My statement in which the NCAA feels that Masoli was transferring and utilizing this rule against the spirit in which it was intended, meant that the NCAA felt that Masoli was skirting his punishment at Oregon and simply said that he's not going to receive the special permission necessary to play this year at Ole Miss. They did not, as many did not believe that this was purely an academic rule.
With all that said, I agree with Chizad, that this matter certainly could have been handled cleaner and quicker, but it is what it is.
Fuck Ole Miss.
I agree with all but one point. The NCAA had nothing to do with Masoli being suspended at Oregon. The NCAA doesn't involve itself in player's off field behavior. A school can play convicted felon parolee if he has eligibility and meets academic guidelines.
-
I actually think the NCAA did in fact make the right decision based on the rule. My beef is strictly with the timing and how they could have stopped this entire situation with a couple of phone calls. I'm like Chad said earlier...have no problem pointing and laughing at the misfortunes of an SEC West rival. I just hate the NCAA with a passion.
what he said ^
-
One thing I will add, is that everyone comes down on the NCAA, and I don't particularly care for them either.
However, we live in a society where a lot of superstar athletes believe they can get away with anything, and time has proven that some of them have. We tend to forget that this kid is not Mr. Innocent, we all know why he was transferring and we all know what Nutt was trying to do. From the arguments it doesn't seem if this "rule" is clear cut, therefore the NCAA has the ability to make determinations based on circumstance. In this case, I think they got it right.
Like Wes said, it is not like he doesn't get to play, he just has to sit out like everyone elsewho transfers. Awww pour kid, he will still probably end up making millions.
-
One thing I will add, is that everyone comes down on the NCAA, and I don't particularly care for them either.
However, we live in a society where a lot of superstar athletes believe they can get away with anything, and time has proven that some of them have. We tend to forget that this kid is not Mr. Innocent, we all know why he was transferring and we all know what Nutt was trying to do. From the arguments it doesn't seem if this "rule" is clear cut, therefore the NCAA has the ability to make determinations based on circumstance. In this case, I think they got it right.
Like Wes said, it is not like he doesn't get to play, he just has to sit out like everyone elsewho transfers. Awww pour kid, he will still probably end up making millions.
They did get it right as I read their reasoning...I just want to see the same reasoning applied the next time some kid(s) wants to t'fer out because his team was put on probation.
-
The rule specifically refers to suspension from the institution, which Masoli was not.
Define "institution" for me in the context of NCAA regs. Is is the university at large, the athletic program specifically, or some combination thereof?
Including a discussion on the phrase (bammers know this one by heart) "lack of institutional control" earns you extra credit.
-
Define "institution" for me in the context of NCAA regs. Is is the university at large, the athletic program specifically, or some combination thereof?
Including a discussion on the phrase (bammers know this one by heart) "lack of institutional control" earns you extra credit.
"Ins" meaning those going in the school...there are in doors...ins...and there are out doors...outs. Or the variety of belly buttons of its students.
"Tit" well..tit is self explanatory.
"U" as in University
"tion"..is a derivative of shun. To shun away. To reject Masoli's waiver and transfer..
-
"Ins" meaning those going in the school...there are in doors...ins...and there are out doors...outs. Or the variety of belly buttons of its students.
"Tit" well..tit is self explanatory.
"U" as in University
"tion"..is a derivative of shun. To shun away. To reject Masoli's waiver and transfer..
Gooooooood answer. I like the way you think. I'm gonna be watching you.
-
Gooooooood answer. I like the way you think. I'm gonna be watching you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1N6rzfoWHzg
-
Gooooooood answer. I like the way you think. I'm gonna be watching you.
+1 for using the right quote
+15 to Snaggle for actually using a movie quote....it being funny.....and a classic.
-
Fair or not. Legal or not. Right or not.
If it fucks with Nutt, I am all for it.
-
"Ins" meaning those going in the school...there are in doors...ins...and there are out doors...outs. Or the variety of belly buttons of its students.
"Tit" well..tit is self explanatory.
"U" as in University
"tion"..is a derivative of shun. To shun away. To reject Masoli's waiver and transfer..
I'm an idea man Chuck, I get ideas, sometimes I get so many ideas that I can't even fight them off! What if you mix the mayonnaise in the can, WITH the tunafish? Or... hold it! Chuck! I got it! Take LIVE tuna fish, and FEED 'em mayonnaise! Oh this is great. Call Starkist.
-
I'm an idea man Chuck, I get ideas, sometimes I get so many ideas that I can't even fight them off! What if you mix the mayonnaise in the can, WITH the tunafish? Or... hold it! Chuck! I got it! Take LIVE tuna fish, and FEED 'em mayonnaise! Oh this is great. Call Starkist.
Hey kid, you like music?
Sure
Great...Jumpin Jack Flash...
-
Some of Keaton's best work IMO. Right there with "Mr Mom" & "Gung Ho"
-
Hey kid, you like music?
Sure
Great...Jumpin Jack Flash...
As we sit here and idly chat, there are woman, female human beings, rolling around in strange beds with strange men, and we are making money from that.
-
I'm an idea man Chuck, I get ideas, sometimes I get so many ideas that I can't even fight them off! What if you mix the mayonnaise in the can, WITH the tunafish? Or... hold it! Chuck! I got it! Take LIVE tuna fish, and FEED 'em mayonnaise! Oh this is great. Call Starkist.
Hey someone once laughed at me when I said "why not put the peanut butter and the jelly in the same jar."
-
Some of Keaton's best work IMO. Right there with "Mr Mom" & "Gung Ho"
I'm just crazy for your country. I mean, I love it. You know, my Dad was over here with the Army in about, uh,
-
Some of Keaton's best work IMO. Right there with "Mr Mom" & "Gung Ho"
No question about it.
-
I'm just crazy for your country. I mean, I love it. You know, my Dad was over here with the Army in about, uh,
Is it just me or do you hate the way your shorts feel when they're wet?
-
(http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d58/saniflush/HoustonGump_3copy.jpg)
-
Hey someone once laughed at me when I said "why not put the peanut butter and the jelly in the same jar."
Just let them go tailgate...let em go. Once they get going, there is no stopping them...
And just chalk it up to another fucked up thread...
-
Y'all fuck up every thread
-
On the topic of the NCAA dragging its feet...
Questions also were raised about the timing of the decision. The decision was communicated to the school within the generally stated three-week time frame for this type of waiver. The NCAA staff received the waiver request from Ole Miss on Aug. 13 and received the final piece of information from the school in the evening of Aug. 30. After considering that final piece of information, the NCAA staff communicated the decision to the school in the morning of Aug. 31
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/resources/latest+news/2010+news+stories/september+latest+news/jeremiah+masoli+case+brings+attention+to+the+ncaa+waiver+process+for+graduate+students (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/resources/latest+news/2010+news+stories/september+latest+news/jeremiah+masoli+case+brings+attention+to+the+ncaa+waiver+process+for+graduate+students)
-
On the topic of the NCAA dragging its feet...
Questions also were raised about the timing of the decision. The decision was communicated to the school within the generally stated three-week time frame for this type of waiver. The NCAA staff received the waiver request from Ole Miss on Aug. 13 and received the final piece of information from the school in the evening of Aug. 30. After considering that final piece of information, the NCAA staff communicated the decision to the school in the morning of Aug. 31
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/resources/latest+news/2010+news+stories/september+latest+news/jeremiah+masoli+case+brings+attention+to+the+ncaa+waiver+process+for+graduate+students (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/resources/latest+news/2010+news+stories/september+latest+news/jeremiah+masoli+case+brings+attention+to+the+ncaa+waiver+process+for+graduate+students)
Oh sure, go ahead and use your Googles to shoot down our feet dragging theory. Don't think I won't Youtube your Google in response.
-
On the topic of the NCAA dragging its feet...
Questions also were raised about the timing of the decision. The decision was communicated to the school within the generally stated three-week time frame for this type of waiver. The NCAA staff received the waiver request from Ole Miss on Aug. 13 and received the final piece of information from the school in the evening of Aug. 30. After considering that final piece of information, the NCAA staff communicated the decision to the school in the morning of Aug. 31
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/resources/latest+news/2010+news+stories/september+latest+news/jeremiah+masoli+case+brings+attention+to+the+ncaa+waiver+process+for+graduate+students (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/resources/latest+news/2010+news+stories/september+latest+news/jeremiah+masoli+case+brings+attention+to+the+ncaa+waiver+process+for+graduate+students)
While you're at it, just go blow the NCAA staff, and don't spill a drop!
-
While you're at it, just go blow the NCAA staff, and don't spill a drop!
No love for the NCAA, just don't want some excuse for Nutt's predictably craptacular behavior to be incorrectly propagated.