FSU's Chatrice White granted immediate eligibility waiver

[southie]

Hmmmmnnnn . . .

NCAA Waiver Granted for Chatrice White

 

[triaddukefan]

I guess any transfer who doesnt want to sit out a year should transfer to FSU

 

[JordyG]

Somewhere Nicole Kornet just threw up in her mouth a little bit.

 

[CocoHusky]

Does't anyone know what the basis of this was?

 

[HuskyFan1125]

This is big for FSU. She really replaces Adut Bulgak in the post for them. And FSU recruited some pretty good guards too. I like Semaru so good for them.

 

[BroadwayVa]

Does't anyone know what the basis of this was?

\
Call me naive ---Until the season starts ---it is only punitive to a kid to not allow a fully open waiver. Kids make mistakes and the good one know it early. The only damage to the coach is the lost opportunity to get another player --to fill that slot. Why be vengeful ??
Bad karma comes back to get ya.

 

[CocoHusky]

\
Call me naive ---Until the season starts ---it is only punitive to a kid to not allow a fully open waiver. Kids make mistakes and the good one know it early. The only damage to the coach is the lost opportunity to get another player --to fill that slot. Why be vengeful ??
Bad karma comes back to get ya.

I'm nas aot sure I'm following you. Chatrice transferred from Illinois to FSU. Usually the NCAA requires you to sit a year after transferring. The NCAA has ruled that Chatrice doesn't have to sit for a year. Good for her IMO. But it begs this question why was she made eligible immediately vs. say Azura Stevens. The coach at Illinois was investigated and vindicated as was the coach at Duke. Even Leticia Romero who transferred from KSU to FSU was not alowed to play immediately.
Think about it this way if Azura is ruled eligible to play immediately Vegas, the BY and the rest of WCBB is going to have to adjust the odds of UCONN winning 5 or 6 in a row.

 

[CajunHusky]

I'm nas aot sure I'm following you. Chatrice transferred from Illinois to FSU. Usually the NCAA requires you to sit a year after transferring. The NCAA has ruled that Chatrice doesn't have to sit for a year. Good for her IMO. But it begs this question why was she made eligible immediately vs. say Azura Stevens. The coach at Illinois was investigated and vindicated as was the coach at Duke. Even Leticia Romero who transferred from KSU to FSU was not alowed to play immediately.
Think about it this way if Azura is ruled eligible to play immediately Vegas, the BY and the rest of WCBB is going to have to adjust the odds of UCONN winning 5 or 6 in a row.

The Chatrice White and Leticia Romero cases are both complicated and good portions are private.

Chatrice's father was vocally involved with support of the embattled Illinois coach. I'm sure that might have made the environment there uneasy for Chatrice. The players who left Illinois petitioned to have the "sit out" year waived ... don't know how that went. I suspect FSU's success with Romero encouraged them to request a waiver for White.

The Leticia Romero case involved a young lady with limited English skills who connected with a head coach who was abruptly fired. Leticia finished her year and requested a release to transfer. The school refused to release her thereby killing any chance for a scholarship and forcing her to return to Spain. Eventually under pressure Kansas relented and released her. FSU took her in and sucessfully petitioned for a waiver. Romero only missed 13 games.

So as you say ... good for them both!

 

[BroadwayVa]

I'm nas aot sure I'm following you. Chatrice transferred from Illinois to FSU. Usually the NCAA requires you to sit a year after transferring. The NCAA has ruled that Chatrice doesn't have to sit for a year. Good for her IMO. But it begs this question why was she made eligible immediately vs. say Azura Stevens. The coach at Illinois was investigated and vindicated as was the coach at Duke. Even Leticia Romero who transferred from KSU to FSU was not alowed to play immediately.
Think about it this way if Azura is ruled eligible to play immediately Vegas, the BY and the rest of WCBB is going to have to adjust the odds of UCONN winning 5 or 6 in a row.

I can see why JPM would not want to support Azura,(punitive) it has been her mode of operation for some time. But the NCAA should have allowed both to play immediately prior to the season beginning. The losing team or Conf should have not any say in the ability to play immediately or not--it should be an OPEN rule. Possibly Azura didn't request immediate eligibility

I can see why I confused you. Also by the end of Dec mid Jan Vegas and the Boneyard shall know if we have to adjust to less than 5 in a row.. I suspect getting the 5th is significantly more difficult than it would have been to get 6 or even 7 possibly 8

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

I get the arguments for and against the whole sitting out a year thing. Never-the-less, looking at it as a rule that exists, I do think the NCAA is (sometimes) reasonable in granting waivers. I think they weigh player's issues and best interest with the impact of granting the waiver as to precedent and mixing in a healthy dose of whatever the powers that be in the NCAA hierarchy is in the "best interests of the game (or, more accurately, the NCAA). Since some of those criteria are probably not none to outsiders, and not quantifiable, it becomes hard to predict or understand the reasoning for waivers.

 

[JordyG]

Yes I agree good for Ms. White. Clearly we don't know all that went into this, just as we don't know all that went on at Illinois, or all that went into that decision. Nevertheless, as you've said, the optics on this just smells (to mix metaphors). It seems to me as we enter these interesting times of mass transfers and "oops, it wasn't my fault" thinking we are going to see more and more of these decisions that seem questionable. As these increase it seems again inevitable that the inner workings of these committee decisions will become public as the demand for transparency increases. For good or ill, welcome to the 21 st century.

 

[stamfordhusky]

I can see why JPM would not want to support Azura,(punitive) it has been her mode of operation for some time. But the NCAA should have allowed both to play immediately prior to the season beginning. The losing team or Conf should have not any say in the ability to play immediately or not--it should be an OPEN rule. Possibly Azura didn't request immediate eligibility

I can see why I confused you. Also by the end of Dec mid Jan Vegas and the Boneyard shall know if we have to adjust to less than 5 in a row.. I suspect getting the 5th is significantly more difficult than it would have been to get 6 or even 7 possibly 8

Whether Azura, or any other transfer, has to sit out has nothing to do with the support of her prior coach or any sort of waiver. The NCAA can waive the sit-out provision, which they rarely do, if there is some compelling reason - but whether the prior coach supports the player's case is irrelevant.

I doubt Azura or UConn requested a waiver because they knew the chance of succes was virtually zero. That would be true even if JPM begged the NCAA to let her play immediately.

 

[BroadwayVa]

Whether Azura, or any other transfer, has to sit out has nothing to do with the support of her prior coach or any sort of waiver. The NCAA can waive the sit-out provision, which they rarely do, if there is some compelling reason - but whether the prior coach supports the player's case is irrelevant.

I doubt Azura or UConn requested a waiver because they knew the chance of succes was virtually zero. That would be true even if JPM begged the NCAA to let her play immediately.

If you don't request a waiver--your changes of not getting one is ZERO.
If you request a waiver---your chances improve dramatically. NEVER SAY NEVER..

I am not as sure as your are that a statement from the losing coach has no impact on the decisions of the NCAA---even if there were extenuating circumstances that MAY allow the NCAA to allow the waiver. Big organizations like the NCAA --their decisions are not always cut in stone--or they'd all be the same.

 

[UcMiami]

I think the NCAA is probably feeling some pressure in PR terms to be more lenient to athletes on a number of issues and the waiver of the sit-out year is probably one of those areas. So past percentages of waiver decisions are probably not as relevant as they were say five years ago. All the issues surrounding LOI/scholarships are under attack.

The same is true for individual schools and the granting of releases. WCBB which is the only college sport I follow closely enough to have any awareness of transfers is pretty new to that aspect of the scholarship situation, with a recent surge in starters and key players transferring, so again past actions aren't that good an indication of what the current or future holds. The fact that Romero's situation was splashed across the media countrywide is not something that would likely have happened ten years ago regarding a WCBB player.

 

[BroadwayVa]

I think the NCAA is probably feeling some pressure in PR terms to be more lenient to athletes on a number of issues and the waiver of the sit-out year is probably one of those areas. So past percentages of waiver decisions are probably not as relevant as they were say five years ago. All the issues surrounding LOI/scholarships are under attack.

The same is true for individual schools and the granting of releases. WCBB which is the only college sport I follow closely enough to have any awareness of transfers is pretty new to that aspect of the scholarship situation, with a recent surge in starters and key players transferring, so again past actions aren't that good an indication of what the current or future holds. The fact that Romero's situation was splashed across the media countrywide is not something that would likely have happened ten years ago regarding a WCBB player.

]\
As usual you are correct. Organizations that rely on the public's attendance to develop their income--put up a stern front (a times) and feel the pull of the people (fans).
Geno has granted transfers, even at inappropriate times, he even waived the holding of playing for a St John transfer--
In terms of Azura immediate playing waiver--a dozen things came into play for Uconn not think of requesting a waiver--but that's not to say they didn't
The USA world is becoming less rigid --and the NCAA has to go along (sometimes) to get along in the new world--personally I can't see a valid reason for the NCAA to with hold immediate playing time---for coaches not so much.

 

[CocoHusky]

Whether Azura, or any other transfer, has to sit out has nothing to do with the support of her prior coach or any sort of waiver. The NCAA can waive the sit-out provision, which they rarely do, if there is some compelling reason - but whether the prior coach supports the player's case is irrelevant.

I doubt Azura or UConn requested a waiver because they knew the chance of succes was virtually zero. That would be true even if JPM begged the NCAA to let her play immediately.

Illinois had two players transferred Brooke Kissinger to Creighton & Chatrice White to FSU. Per the Creighton web site "Due to NCAA Transfer regulations, Brooke will sit out the 2016-17 season after coming to Creighton from Illinios. "
Per the article above Catrice will not sit out the coming season. While I'm not surprised at the Situational or lack of Ethics of the NCAA I am surprised that they are being this blatant about it. Of all the high profile transfers that have happened in the last 3 years Chatrice White is the only player that will not have to sit out-Why is that?

 

[chuck.r]

Illinois had two players transferred Brooke Kissinger to Creighton & Chatrice White to FSU. Per the Creighton web site "Due to NCAA Transfer regulations, Brooke will sit out the 2016-17 season after coming to Creighton from Illinios. "
Per the article above Catrice will not sit out the coming season. While I'm not surprised at the Situational or lack of Ethics of the NCAA I am surprised that they are being this blatant about it. Of all the high profile transfers that have happened in the last 3 years Chatrice White is the only player that will not have to sit out-Why is that?

According to the following link, there were at least 3 former players involved in the UI lawsuit who were granted by the NCAA exception to play immediately upon transfer:

7 women's basketball players, UI reach settlement

 

[CocoHusky]

According to the following link, there were several former players involved in the UI lawsuit who were granted by the NCAA immediate waivers to play elsewhere upon transfer:

7 women's basketball players, UI reach settlement

I was aware of the settlement and that "Grant, Gleason and Coleman were all granted exceptions by the NCAA to play immediately"."
Brooke Kissinger & Chatrice White were not part of the suit/settlement and stayed on the Illinois team all of 2015-16 season.

 

[chuck.r]

I was aware of the settlement and that "Grant, Gleason and Coleman were all granted exceptions by the NCAA to play immediately"."
Brooke Kissinger & Chatrice White were not part of the suit/settlement and stayed on the Illinois team all of 2015-16 season.

There appears to have been some carryover then. My best guess is the NCAA, having established a precedent for transfers from the Illinois program, felt obliged to offer same to additional requests.