This is some BS: NCAA approves ULM waiver, grants postseason eligibility

[UCDaveD]

http://content.usatoday.com/communi...-grants-postseason-eligibility/1#.T0k-UHlRauk

 

[mets1090]

Makes sense

 

[jrazz12]

Honestly, if there's not a civil suit being filed the minute we're officially screwed by the NCAA and ruled ineligible I'll be shocked. I would gladly take this one pro bono

 

[champs99and04]

It would make me too angry to read the article, so can somebody please summarize the NCAA's reasoning behind this one?

 

[arnie3]

Hopefully this creates a firestorm. If this doesn't show bias by the NCAA for one school and bias against another, then I don't know what will. There is absolutely no reason to grant this exception while denying another of a similar nature. I don't understand the justification for this. It really isn't spelled out in the article, but it sure looks like an organization favoring one institution over another where both seem to have a very similar situation. Am I missing something here?
This is BS!

 

[Rico444]

I guess they were ruled ineligible for the tournament for two years: this year, and next. This year, they will not participate. They were granted a waiver for next year.

 

[UCDaveD]

In its approval, the NCAA specifically cited ULM's recently revised academic improvement plan and successful implementation of the plan. ULM's waiver to the NCAA includes limited practice and competition periods and academic support initiatives to offset the lessened time on the court.

Makes me want to punch a wall.

 

[champs99and04]

In its approval, the NCAA specifically cited ULM's recently revised academic improvement plan and successful implementation of the plan. ULM's waiver to the NCAA includes limited practice and competition periods and academic support initiatives to offset the lessened time on the court.

Makes me want to punch a wall.

What the *k? If this is the NCAA's reasoning behind granting them a waiver, but they don't grant UConn one when they have had excellent scores over the last two years, then that would be a crime.

 

[dogpause]

It would make me too angry to read the article, so can somebody please summarize the NCAA's reasoning behind this one?

Any prcedent for filing one on behalf of fans?

 

[HooperScooper]

I guess they were ruled ineligible for the tournament for two years: this year, and next. This year, they will not participate. They were granted a waiver for next year.

Except they gave up something they never would have had. They are 2-26 this season.

I gave up having sex with super models for the next 2 years. I hope my wife appreciates that.

 

[upstater]

Except they gave up something they never would have had. They are 2-26 this season.

I gave up having sex with super models for the next 2 years. I hope my wife appreciates that.

The real question is: will your wife give you a waiver if you ever have the opportunity?

 

[FfldCntyFan]

The biggest issue with the NCAA is their selectivity in handing out penalties. A year ago when it was announced that we would lose scholarships over our APR, two schools weer in worse shape than us (Arkansas and some smaller school, possibly ULM) but were not penalized because the NCAA felt their improvement warranted leniency (although we had shown similar improvement).

As long as enforcement of rules is discretionary, the governing body will be little more than a joke.