Sid Wilson has no shot at a waiver | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Sid Wilson has no shot at a waiver

Sid, Polley, Emmitt, Isaiah, Diarra....were gonna be loaded with 6'8 positionless talent next year, looking forward to it.
 
Balker said:
the entire point of the waiver system is to provide common sense exceptions to the black and white rules... obviously it's clear that the rule exists and applies to these cases.
Expand ...

Exactly. I hate saying Parrish is right, but he nailed it in saying this was the best case for a waiver you could have.

-Beverly enrolled in one class, in May.
-The kid would not have enrolled in that class but for the express representation by the AD that the coach would be retained.
-The coach was fired two weeks after the kid enrolled.

This is a unique set of circumstances, distinguishable even from Sid's situation.

Why bother having a formal waiver system if you're never going to grant one?

Shouldn't the NCAA be encouraging students to enroll in school as early as possible to get a head start on their education? This punishes Beverly for doing just that.

The NCAA sickens me. Nobody questions the rule. We are questioning the NCAA's hypocritical and cruel discretionary enforcement of its rules.
 
businesslawyer said:
So what (other than we like him) would Wilson's common sense exception be? That he made a bad decision and would like to change it? Wouldn't that apply in the case of every transfer, at least in the player's mind?
Expand ...
In my mind, it's common sense that there should be no mandatory waiting periods that extend outside the semester in question. The entire rule is a bogus sham that contributes to my view of the NCAA as profiteering slave drivers who are shouting about "amateurism" and suppressing revenue potential of kids who grow up on the poverty line, while selling tickets to watch them play when they say they can depending on an set of outdated rules that are very one sided... So that's a tough question for me. But for the sake of argument, I'd say if the kid is enrolled during a particular semester, and elects to transfer to another university before the end of that semester, that should not result in a ban from playing sports the following semester at another university if there are circumstances outside those expected by the student at the time of their enrollment, either personal circumstances or ones created by the university.

That said, I wasn't even talking about Wilson. There was no circumstance that was caused by St. John's that resulted in him asking for his release. So personally I'd view that as a situation that would be pretty iffy for a waiver. If I was deciding, based on the current rules, it would depend on what the student presented as his or her reason for needing to change schools. Obviously they are likely using past precedent like case law when considering waivers, but based on what I said previously, you can tell that I would be the guy that just threw that out the window and said it's time to start over and start acting sane. In this case, I was talking about Braxton Beverly's waiver denial. He committed to play for a head coach that was fired abruptly, two months before the start of the season. His denial seems wholly unreasonable by any metric. This decision essentially costs him one year of his income potential for his basketball career, whatever that might be, which could be quite a lot. Given the NCAA's shaky record in recent lawsuits brought by former players, could you really rule out him eventually getting a judgement in his favor for damages?
 
Damages?

No chance.

He committed to Ohio State, signed a letter of intent and attended class there.

I’ve seen the rule described as ‘byzantine’ as it pertains to this case - it’s not. It’s the simplest, most straightforward rule there is.

He transferred. He has to sit out a year while his education, room, board and stipend are paid for. This is not some form of cruelty.

This rule is only fair if it is appplied the same way in all cases.

This kid is no different than Sid Wilson. He changed his mind. Does Matta’s firing make him more worthy than a kid who lost his mom and made a bad decision as a result?

Nope.
 
Fishy said:
Damages?

No chance.

He committed to Ohio State, signed a letter of intent and attended class there.

I’ve seen the rule described as ‘byzantine’ as it pertains to this case - it’s not. It’s the simplest, most straightforward rule there is.

He transferred. He has to sit out a year while his education, room, board and stipend are paid for. This is not some form of cruelty.

This rule is only fair if it is appplied the same way in all cases.

This kid is no different than Sid Wilson. He changed his mind. Does Matta’s firing make him more worthy than a kid who lost his mom and made a bad decision as a result?

Nope.
Expand ...
If the head coach, who you had the strongest connection to gets fired in a somewhat surprising fashion it seems logical that the kid can reconsider his options without penalty, at least in a perfect world. Obviously we know that's not the case, but it should be in my opinion.
 
CardiacAndre7 said:
If the head coach, who you had the strongest connection to gets fired in a somewhat surprising fashion it seems logical that the kid can reconsider his options without penalty, at least in a perfect world. Obviously we know that's not the case, but it should be in my opinion.
Expand ...

These days, you can basically change your mind right up until the moment you land on campus.

But when you enroll, you can’t unring the bell.

That’s fair. You can still transfer and you can still get your education paid for and practice with your new team...you just can’t play.

Once you crack the rule for an exception, the rule is meaningless - it’s no longer fair for anyone. Is Thad Matta getting fired a better reason than Sid Wilson dealing with his mother’s loss? I don’t think so. And then if you grant those two exceptions, you’ll have a third and a fourth and a fifth....

The NCAA used to have a hardship waiver and then grandmothers around the basketball world suddenly fell deathly ill until the rule had to be amended to save their lives.

This would be the same deal.
 
.-.
Jessica Shepard was committed to the Nebraska women’s basketball team for her entire high school career. But she’ll transfer from NU having played just two seasons — and no NCAA tournament games. In a joint statement, Shepard and Husker coach Amy Williams announced Monday that Shepard had decided to play elsewhere.

“Jessica thinks it is in her best interest to leave our program and seek a fresh start at this time,” Williams said. “We wish her the best and will try to help her through the process, if she needs it.”

She transferred to Notre Dame and will be playing this year.

Apparently some bells can be unrung.

NCAA Approves Shepard’s Waiver
 
Fishy said:
These days, you can basically change your mind right up until the moment you land on campus.

But when you enroll, you can’t unring the bell.

That’s fair. You can still transfer and you can still get your education paid for and practice with your new team...you just can’t play.

Once you crack the rule for an exception, the rule is meaningless - it’s no longer fair for anyone. Is Thad Matta getting fired a better reason than Sid Wilson dealing with his mother’s loss? I don’t think so. And then if you grant those two exceptions, you’ll have a third and a fourth and a fifth....

The NCAA used to have a hardship waiver and then grandmothers around the basketball world suddenly fell deathly ill until the rule had to be amended to save their lives.

This would be the same deal.
Expand ...

Please read the articles regarding the Shepard girl xfer from Nebraska to ND
No hardship, no immediate coaching change, no family issues - just a personal decision on her part
She played both freshman and sophomore seasons and made all league teams
Now she can decide she wants to bail out and go to ND and petitions to play immediately
Why does this fly and 2 kids who decided after a short period of time, without even suiting up, have to sit out a year
I agree - there are rules and once they are broken - the floodgates open
This Shepard case has me wondering if there are different sets of rules just for the chosen few and and blows up your "But when you enroll, you can’t unring the bell."
Why is this case an exception?
 
gtcam said:
Please read the articles regarding the Shepard girl xfer from Nebraska to ND
No hardship, no immediate coaching change, no family issues - just a personal decision on her part
She played both freshman and sophomore seasons and made all league teams
Now she can decide she wants to bail out and go to ND and petitions to play immediately
Why does this fly and 2 kids who decided after a short period of time, without even suiting up, have to sit out a year
I agree - there are rules and once they are broken - the floodgates open
This Shepard case has me wondering if there are different sets of rules just for the chosen few and and blows up your "But when you enroll, you can’t unring the bell."
Why is this case an exception?
Expand ...

Because women are considered “ sport” in name only.

The NCAA treats it like intramural activities
 
CL82 said:
Jessica Shepard was committed to the Nebraska women’s basketball team for her entire high school career. But she’ll transfer from NU having played just two seasons — and no NCAA tournament games. In a joint statement, Shepard and Husker coach Amy Williams announced Monday that Shepard had decided to play elsewhere.

“Jessica thinks it is in her best interest to leave our program and seek a fresh start at this time,” Williams said. “We wish her the best and will try to help her through the process, if she needs it.”

She transferred to Notre Dame and will be playing this year.

Apparently some bells can be unrung.

NCAA Approves Shepard’s Waiver
Expand ...

This one is a headscratcher. There's no reason given anywhere that I can find for it, she's quoted as enjoying the last school, and the official reason is "personal reasons". Either there are different strictness of rules for men's and women's basketball, or there's some personal/legal reason she needed to leave Nebraska that won't become public but was serious.
 
.-.
August_West said:
Because women are considered “ sport” in name only.

The NCAA treats it like intramural activities
Expand ...

Can't figure if you are being serious or not on this one AW!!
If the NCAA does consider it intramural activities I cannot believe there hasn't been a huge backlash
Also, we could get in a lot of trouble considering women "sport" in some circles!!!!!
 
gtcam said:
Can't figure if you are being serious or not on this one AW!!
If the NCAA does consider it intramural activities I cannot believe there hasn't been a huge backlash
Also, we could get in a lot of trouble considering women "sport" in some circles!!!!!
Expand ...

I didnt say *I* felt this way. Its obvious the NCAA does with the different application of standards.
 
Fishy said:
Damages?

No chance.

He committed to Ohio State, signed a letter of intent and attended class there.

I’ve seen the rule described as ‘byzantine’ as it pertains to this case - it’s not. It’s the simplest, most straightforward rule there is.

He transferred. He has to sit out a year while his education, room, board and stipend are paid for. This is not some form of cruelty.

This rule is only fair if it is appplied the same way in all cases.

This kid is no different than Sid Wilson. He changed his mind. Does Matta’s firing make him more worthy than a kid who lost his mom and made a bad decision as a result?

Nope.
Expand ...


He was told by the AD the coach would not be fired. So he enrolled in a class, only to have the coach fired. Not crying for him, but if this isn't worthy of waiver when even OSU says they are cool with it, why have a waiver? Just say it is never allowed and move on.
 
auror said:
This one is a headscratcher. There's no reason given anywhere that I can find for it, she's quoted as enjoying the last school, and the official reason is "personal reasons". Either there are different strictness of rules for men's and women's basketball, or there's some personal/legal reason she needed to leave Nebraska that won't become public but was serious.
Expand ...

They are considered different sports, but this is where the NCAA trips on itself.

There’s no announced reason why the waiver is granted and if we assume that it’s something pretty substantial, why did it take until November 1st to approve it?

The NCAA is the Cleveland Browns.

MilliniumPrince said:
He was told by the AD the coach would not be fired. So he enrolled in a class, only to have the coach fired. Not crying for him, but if this isn't worthy of waiver when even OSU says they are cool with it, why have a waiver? Just say it is never allowed and move on.
Expand ...

That is exactly what they should do - state that there is no waiver. Instant fairness across the board.
 
Fishy said:
They are considered different sports, but this is where the NCAA trips on itself.
Expand ...
I don't think that there is a different transfer rule for WBB.
 
.-.
In her case the personal reasons could’ve been very severe and extremely personal or embarrassing, so they decided to let it go since it’s not like anyone cares about fairness in women’s basketball in the first place.
 
The NCAA is the fat guy at the hot dog eating contest looking for mustard.
 
mauconnfan said:
Kid (NC State) should be playing this year for sure, this unfortunately has Emmert's fingerprints all over it. This guy and his team make up rules as they go along, needs to be stopped.
Expand ...
And they did the opposite for a Notre Dame wbb player. Just going to let her play, because she wrote a personal letter. Just mind-boggling hypocrisy.
 
No one here knows the circumstances of the ND player, so it makes no sense to judge it.
 
Fishy said:
They are considered different sports, but this is where the NCAA trips on itself.

There’s no announced reason why the waiver is granted and if we assume that it’s something pretty substantial, why did it take until November 1st to approve it?

The NCAA is the Cleveland Browns.



That is exactly what they should do - state that there is no waiver. Instant fairness across the board.
Expand ...

More like consistent unfairness. But at least more consistent.
 
Am I the only one who is not outraged by this? This isn't a new rule, this is how it has always been, and it's a rule to protect the hard work and resources a staff puts in to win a player's trust and commitment.

Like it or not, we seem to forget college athletes are real people many times, and real people often face unfair consequences for decisions they make. College students, even non athletes, can't just drop out of a program and enroll in another school overnight in August after courses have started with a team of highly paid specialists taking care of all the details for them, so why should that same student who happens to play a sport be given that privilege? Yea, Sid made a poor decision on schools the first time around, and he will learn from that mistake, but there is no "grossly unfair NCAA" finger pointing here. He made a hasty decision like we all have, and he will pay the mild inconvenience of a fee for said mistake like almost all the players who transferred before him.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,304
Messages
4,562,261
Members
10,454
Latest member
caw2


Top Bottom