Westbrook waiver denied

[CL82]

I feel like you're reading more into her tweet than she said. She didn't say the process has integrity, nor that the situation at the transfer-out school has nothing to do with it. She simply said that the transfer-in school is irrelevant and that the application is about the player's situation.

As for how she knows? Because she went through it, then appealed after she was denied the first time. She's presumably intimately familiar with what the process asks of the player. Unless someone on this board has more experience than that, with all due respect, I'd defer to her over any of you.

I sort of agree with your closing sentence, but the notion that the Applicant has detailed knowledge of the workings of the panel reviewing the application is likely wrong.

 

[CL82]

So If Shep knows that they don't ask questions about "Why Notre Dame," they don't ask for contacts at Notre Dame to interview about her situation, and in her appeal she did not need to provide new information justifying her choice of Notre Dame specifically, then I think she can speak with more authority than any of us can about why the transfer-in school is not relevant to the process. Unless and until you have evidence to the contrary, fact-free assertions don't make her claim implausible.

Are you seriously asserting that the NCAA did not know the school Shepard had transferred to? You realize the school submits the application for waiver right?

 

[oldude]

Guys, I feel like you aren't reading my post and just responding to your feelings.

I said:




So yes, it is about money - preventing high-$$$$ sports from creating pernicious incentives for coaches, athletes, and boosters. But I already said that.

I also feel like people are making claims they can't actually substantiate.

How do we know this? The "documented mitigating circumstances outside the student-athlete’s control" are generally not made public, so in most circumstances, precisely what's in the waiver application isn't publicly known. So how do we know whether or not that's the case? Can anyone honestly say they know what was in Westbrook's application vs. Shepard's? No, you can't. You could call for more transparency, but because of student privacy concerns, they're never going to make this process as transparent as, say, criminal sentencing hearings, where judges treat defendants sentenced for the same crime of conviction differently all the time, but because they have to give public reasons, there's a public process to verify good versus bad reasons for the differential treatment.

Ultimately, the problem here is that there's no transparency, but because this concerns the private information of students, there can't be. The NCAA could certainly provide more details about the process, factors weighed, etc. But ultimately, this has to be done behind closed doors.

And honestly, UConn of all places should like the NCAA process. Get rid of it, and private schools and state schools with richer budgets than UConn can just start buying off your players. That may not succeed during the Geno era, but Geno won't be coaching forever, and someday you may find yourself on the other side of some of these transfer decisions.

Early in the morning and I hadn’t had a cup of coffee yet, so I missed your comment about “revenue sports.”

So in the words of Rosanne Rosanna Danna, “Never mind....”.

 

[TheFarmFan]

Are you seriously asserting catch that the NCAA did not know the school Shepard had transferred to? You realize the school submits the application for waiver right?

I do. I've read the document outlining the process quite closely, and linked to it repeatedly. Here it is, again.

My point is: the application isn't about the transfer-in school. And if anything, it would cut against a program like Notre Dame, because one factor they consider is "Whether there is a competitive or recruiting advantage gained through the waiver process." The whole point of this process is to guard against schools opportunistically recruiting away top athletes at other schools.

 

[oldude]

The whole point of this process is to guard against schools opportunistically recruiting away top athletes at other schools.

It’s a nice thought, but in practice it’s not working, whether or not players have to sit out a year once they transfer. Each of the last 3 national championship teams likely would not have won the championship without the critical contributions of one or more top transfers.

 

[Shmermerer]

Except that it only applies to revenue sports like football and basketball. If an AA swimmer wants to leave Stanford for the warmer climate of UCLA, they might be out of their mind for doing so, but neither Stanford nor the NCAA could require them to sit out a season before competing at their new school.

There in lies the hypocrisy of the NCAA’s transfer rules. It has nothing to do with what is best for the student-athlete. It is entirely about $$$$.

Actually the AD of the school you are transferring from has to sign off on it otherwise you DO have to sit out a year. I was able to transfer and not sit out a year, but the AD had to sign off on it and she threatened to not sign it until the very last minute.

 

[UConnCat]

It’s seems that in some cases it’s about the transfer-out school and whether that school supports or merely has no objection to the waiver. That is unfair to the student athlete.

The entire process is absurd. All should be allowed to play immediately.

 

[CL82]

I do. I've read the document outlining the process quite closely, and linked to it repeatedly. Here it is, again.

My point is: the application isn't about the transfer-in school. And if anything, it would cut against a program like Notre Dame, because one factor they consider is "Whether there is a competitive or recruiting advantage gained through the waiver process." The whole point of this process is to guard against schools opportunistically recruiting away top athletes at other schools.

I’m quite sure you’re right and that is a stated purpose, however it is undeniable that the application of the transfer waiver rule is notoriously arbitrary. That typically is a good indication of a lack of concrete rules. One of the hallmarks of a “fair“ process is that similarly situated people are treated similarly. That clearly isn’t that the case in the application of NCAA transfer waivers. That is the point that people are making which you appear to be missing, perhaps willfully.

 

[Bama fan]

Early in the morning and I hadn’t had a cup of coffee yet, so I missed your comment about “revenue sports.”

So in the words of Rosanne Rosanna Danna, “Never mind....”.

those words actually stem from Emily Litella . She of the "What's all this fuss about endangered feces?" fame. Both characters were wonderful!

 

[TheFarmFan]

It’s a nice thought, but in practice it’s not working, whether or not players have to sit out a year once they transfer. Each of the last 3 national championship teams likely would not have won the championship without the critical contributions of one or more top transfers.

Ok, but of the four players you're talking about, only one got a waiver.

Chloe Jackson graduated from A&M and so as a grad transfer, these rules wouldn't apply to her. Same with Minyon Moore, who graduated from USC in three years while playing top bball!

For Alisha Gray and Kaela Davis, both of them transferred from institutions (UNC and Georgia Tech) that would shortly after part ways with their coaches for reasons that probably should have made them eligible for waivers. I have no doubt the coaching issues were part of what motivated their transfers. But both had to sit out a season before playing for the Gamecocks, so the system didn't unfairly benefit either of them, and both probably had stronger arguments than Westbrook does.

So the only one left is Shepard, whom we've discussed at length previously.

So I am failing to see how any of those four cases show the system didn't work. I welcome some facts to the contrary.

 

[oldude]

those words actually stem from Emily Litella . She of the "What's all this fuss about endangered feces?" fame. Both characters were wonderful!

So I was wrong twice in less than an hour. That has to be some kind of record....

 

[Bama fan]

So I was wrong twice in less than an hour. That has to be some kind of record....

I , for one, am terribly proud of you, my friend. However, since I met my darling bride over 30 years ago, I have routinely surpassed that standard.

 

[oldude]

Ok, but of the four players you're talking about, only one got a waiver.

Chloe Jackson graduated from A&M and so as a grad transfer, these rules wouldn't apply to her. Same with Minyon Moore, who graduated from USC in three years while playing top bball!

For Alisha Gray and Kaela Davis, both of them transferred from institutions (UNC and Georgia Tech) that would shortly after part ways with their coaches for reasons that probably should have made them eligible for waivers. I have no doubt the coaching issues were part of what motivated their transfers. But both had to sit out a season before playing for the Gamecocks, so the system didn't unfairly benefit either of them, and both probably had stronger arguments than Westbrook does.

So the only one left is Shepard.

So I am failing to see how any of those four cases show the system didn't work. I welcome some facts to the contrary.

Part of your argument was based on preventing top schools from, “opportunistically recruiting away top athletes.” Whether it’s grad or undergraduate transfers there is now clearly a second recruiting season immediately following the end of the regular season where top programs scour the transfer portal to immediately descend on top players that can bolster their team.

After winning the national semifinal vs OR in part because of an outstanding effort by Chloe Jackson, Kim Mulkey candidly admitted that, “Unfortunately we’re in the transfer business.” Top teams like SC, MS St, Baylor, MD, ND, Lou and yes, even UConn fill holes in their roster with transfers. The one exception to this, all too common practice, is a certain team in Palo Alto that has the unique ability to recruit top HS players and keep them for 4 years.

So the cat is already out of the bag. The question is, do you eliminate the hypocritical and arbitrary process that currently exists and implement a hard and fast process that everyone understands?

 

[sivad40]

Ok, but of the four players you're talking about, only one got a waiver.

Chloe Jackson graduated from A&M and so as a grad transfer, these rules wouldn't apply to her. Same with Minyon Moore, who graduated from USC in three years while playing top bball!

For Alisha Gray and Kaela Davis, both of them transferred from institutions (UNC and Georgia Tech) that would shortly after part ways with their coaches for reasons that probably should have made them eligible for waivers. I have no doubt the coaching issues were part of what motivated their transfers. But both had to sit out a season before playing for the Gamecocks, so the system didn't unfairly benefit either of them, and both probably had stronger arguments than Westbrook does.

So the only one left is Shepard, whom we've discussed at length previously.

So I am failing to see how any of those four cases show the system didn't work. I welcome some facts to the contrary.

At that time, they were no allegations of abuse by both Georgia Tech and UNC coaches that lead both of those players to transfer. Alisha Gray transferred from UNC because she thought that they were going to be put on probation at some point if she remained there due to the Notice Of Allegations that came against UNC the summer of her rising junior year. Kaela Davis left in her own words because wanted to compete for a national championship.

Tech star Kaela Davis leaving by mutual decision

The Georgia Tech women’s basketball team has lost one of the best players in team history as guard Kaela Davis will transfer.

www.ajc.com

Is transferring to a team for the opportunity to play for a national championship enough to get qualify for a waiver?

I agree with you about the differences between grad transfers and undergrad transfers.

 

[TheFarmFan]

Kaela Davis left in her own words because wanted to compete for a national championship.

Tech star Kaela Davis leaving by mutual decision

The Georgia Tech women’s basketball team has lost one of the best players in team history as guard Kaela Davis will transfer.

www.ajc.com

Is transferring to a team for the opportunity to play for a national championship enough to get qualify for a waiver?

I agree with you about the differences between grad transfers and undergrad transfers.

Davis had to sit out a season - she didn't seek or get a waiver. And since you agree with me about grad transfers, we're still back to where I started - none of these examples but Shepard is one where a student athlete got a waiver, transfered and played immediately, and helped win a championship.

 

[CL82]

none of these examples but Shepard is one where a student athlete got a waiver, transfered and played immediately, and helped win a championship.

Mmm, not sure the helped win a championship is all that relevant to the discussion. If you tack on that verbiage to any statement you will automatically limit the possible example to one team a year, right?

 

[HuskylnSC]

Notre Dame's Shepherd is the biggest example of NCAA compliance variance, but Tennesee's coaching change should be enough. If the parents have more waiver evidence we should push to the limits of the appeal process.

While she can't claim she transferred because of a coaching change, the coaching change initiated by the AD gives credence to the claim she was in a dysfunctional environment. Add to that noxious posts about her from some Lady Vol fans and the interaction with her mother all point that she would be better to leave that environment.

If what I described is true (and all I have is an observers info), I would remove my daughter from such a situation with all deliberate haste.

 

[HuskylnSC]

as a tennessee fan myself, i hope fulmer does the right thing and supports evinas appeal process. she had to endure that whole mess with holly and just doesnt seem fair to me that she has to lose a whole year bc of it.

Evina's statement was a shot right at Fulmer. In essence, she called him out for not doing his job and letting the program fall into such a state. I would not be surprised if UT's neutral stance doesn't change.

 

[Alydar]

That might cause complete chaos.

And maybe coaches will start being more honest to recruits as to playing time, etc.

 

[Alydar]

evina was in the transfer portal before holly was fired, so that is a moot point

there are several very compelling reasons why evinas waiver should have been granted. for one, she was in a toxic environment for which she had no control over. during her two years at tennessee, two players were kicked off the team for disciplinary reasons. holly had lost control of the team and either refused to do anything about it or couldnt do anything about it. not only that but diamond deshields had enough and didnt return her senior year and alexa middleton transferred out. im sure evina didnt expect all this mess when she committed to tennessee nor should she have had to put up with it. also, there were fans who just constantly harrassed her and her mother on facebook. its a shame the ncaa didnt grant her waiver. hopefully she can get this appeal to go thru

I agree with you and wonder if the denial was in any small part influenced by the NCAA not wanting to label the LV program as a toxic environment. Image is everything to the NCAA. (That and $$$)

 

[Alydar]

Plebe, normally a fan of your hot takes, but this one is pretty cold. I'll speak from a relevant experience. When one completes the Standard Form 86 to seek a security clearance, one must furnish quite a lot of information, and provide a number of corroborating third-parties who can confirm certain key facts about your background. The applicant and all of those individuals are interviewed, and in some circumstances re-interviewed. Sure, I'm an N of 1. But I can tell you with great certainty that every address I've lived at post-college was a required part of that form, but which classes I took in college, and what grades I got on them, wasn't.

So If Shep knows that they don't ask questions about "Why Notre Dame," they don't ask for contacts at Notre Dame to interview about her situation, and in her appeal she did not need to provide new information justifying her choice of Notre Dame specifically, then I think she can speak with more authority than any of us can about why the transfer-in school is not relevant to the process. Unless and until you have evidence to the contrary, fact-free assertions don't make her claim implausible.

Just because something isn't on an application or mentioned in the regulations doesn't mean it isn't considered "sub rosa". These decisions are not black and white and in that gray area all sorts of things not in the rules can influence decisions. They just aren't mentioned because a lot of them are petty and personal and the rest are political.

 

[Justavisitor]

avis, both of them transfer

I agree with you and wonder if the denial was in any small part influenced by the NCAA not wanting to label the LV program as a toxic environment. Image is everything to the NCAA. (That and $$$)

You can trust that the $$ in Women's basketball is not enough to worry about a label. Also, how can you label any program as any thing when the entire staff has been replaced and in year 1?

However, what I have been seeing is that the NCAA must be in some type of mood as the waiver denials have been in abundance and many more than just Evina have been denied.

Perhaps, the NCAA doesn't like the new trend and they are trying to stymie that trend by making players aware that they may transfer, but the likelihood of a waiver is never in the bag.

 

[UConnCat]

You can trust that the $$ in Women's basketball is not enough to worry about a label. Also, how can you label any program as any thing when the entire staff has been replaced and in year 1?

However, what I have been seeing is that the NCAA must be in some type of mood as the waiver denials have been in abundance and many more than just Evina have been denied.

Perhaps, the NCAA doesn't like the new trend and they are trying to stymie that trend by making players aware that they may transfer, but the likelihood of a waiver is never in the bag.

Not true on the men’s side. 85% of waivers approved as of last week, probably down a little now.

 

[Alydar]

So yes, it is about money - preventing high-$$$$ sports from creating pernicious incentives for coaches, athletes, and boosters. But I already said that.

And honestly, UConn of all places should like the NCAA process. Get rid of it, and private schools and state schools with richer budgets than UConn can just start buying off your players. That may not succeed during the Geno era, but Geno won't be coaching forever, and someday you may find yourself on the other side of some of these transfer decisions.

I agree with your comments about privacy but disagree about the above. Are you suggesting that the student-athlete must be denied in order to keep schools honest? Are wealthy schools like Stanford ready to hand athletes piles of cash as soon as the transfer rules are relaxed? That's a rather cynical POV. And I wouldn't dismiss public universities so quickly. Do you think that all those Alabama football players wouldn't find packages from Tide boosters? Those bribes are not in budgets nor would they come from the taxpayers.

I liked professional sports better before free agency but last time I looked they were thriving without making the players indentured servants.

 

[Alydar]

You can trust that the $$ in Women's basketball is not enough to worry about a label. Also, how can you label any program as any thing when the entire staff has been replaced and in year 1?

The $$$ is on the mens side and the transfer rules apply equally. And the Vol staff may have been replaced but we are talking about the Summitt legacy. No one at the NCAA wants the final chapter to read "after she resigned her hand-picked successor's program was found to be "toxic". And Westbrook's transfer came under the former staff.