Westbrook waiver denied | Page 7 | The Boneyard

Westbrook waiver denied

Status
Not open for further replies.
BobbyJ said:
I don't believe I mentioned anything about starting fives. I don't worry about starters, I care who's on the floor in the 4th quarter of a close game. My point was that if Fudd wants to go to UConn, she won't be deterred by the presence of Westbrook or anybody else.
Expand ...

That is the kind of positivity I want to hear to calm me down. :)
 
Plebe said:
Source on the denial of original waiver request?
Expand ...

I don't think that there has been any news regarding Prince's request. At least that's my understanding of what Graves said in an interview last week.
 
I certainly hope that Evina gets fair treatment eventually.

I also think that the UConn v. Tennessee series renewal will be limited to 2 games. Geno didn't particularly want to renew. He certainly won't cut Tennessee any favors now.
 
It seems like the NCAA is slowly painting itself into a corner where it will become irrelevant and schools will do what they want to do. Apparently, the NCAA sees itself as a strong central power, but the leagues have a mind of their own. Eventually each league will decide its own rules and if they want a player to play that transfers, it will be done. Central control will be diminished because their decisions are not for the student and individual freedom of action. It is only a matter of time.
 
Sluconn Husky said:
Shepard's tweet was in response to the first and wouldn't post separately. I just thought it's interesting that she's opining on the situation. And it wasn't her only one on the topic.
Expand ...
My impression of Shepard just took a huge hit. She sounds like an NCAA spokesperson. How can she know with certainty that the school has nothing to do with the decision? Just because you benefited from a process doesn't mean it has integrity.
 
jonson said:
I don't think that there has been any news regarding Prince's request. At least that's my understanding of what Graves said in an interview last week.
Expand ...
Yes, I was hoping @willtalk would either acknowledge the error or provide the source that apparently no one else has seen
 
.-.
The waiver situation with Evina boils down to simple contract law.Rather than appealing the NCAA decision, I would go to the courts seeking a reversal based on violation of contract. It is established knowledge that players pick schools based on a coach’s recruiting. When the coach involved in that recruiting is fired, it relieves the player from said contract, even if such is not stated in scholarship offer. A legal ruling to that effect would immediately simplify the waiver process.
 
I think it's safe to say that this decision by the NCAA has opened up some old wounds among both fan bases. For better or for worse it certainly adds a lot more spice for the upcoming match up. That my friends I like very much.
 
Dokey said:
The waiver situation with Evina boils down to simple contract law.Rather than appealing the NCAA decision, I would go to the courts seeking a reversal based on violation of contract. It is established knowledge that players pick schools based on a coach’s recruiting. When the coach involved in that recruiting is fired, it relieves the player from said contract, even if such is not stated in scholarship offer. A legal ruling to that effect would immediately simplify the waiver process.
Expand ...
Did you really think about this?
A contract between who?
Which court(s) are you proposing Evina walks into. She's from Oregon, played at TN, and is now attending UCONN & NCAA HQ is in Indiana?
If TN violated this "alleged" contract why would that allow her to play at UCONN immediately?
FYI a scholarship agreement is between the player and the University without regard for the coach.
By signing a scholarship agreement a player voluntarily agreed to abide by NCAA rules there is not a court in America that is able to grant her relief from the NCAA rules.
 

Attachments

  • 1572712627851.png
    1572712627851.png
    451.2 KB · Views: 3
Last edited:
Dokey said:
The waiver situation with Evina boils down to simple contract law.Rather than appealing the NCAA decision, I would go to the courts seeking a reversal based on violation of contract. It is established knowledge that players pick schools based on a coach’s recruiting. When the coach involved in that recruiting is fired, it relieves the player from said contract, even if such is not stated in scholarship offer. A legal ruling to that effect would immediately simplify the waiver process.
Expand ...
Good luck. I hope you're not a lawyer.
 
It is established knowledge that players pick schools based on a coach’s recruiting.

That doesn't mean a damn thing in a contract. It may be "established knowledge" that people consider the neighborhood before buying a house, but if you sign the purchase contract on a home today and discover a crack house next door tomorrow, you are still stuck buying the house. The only "established knowledge" that matters is what is established in the contract, period.

If you want to play for a specific coach, it's simple. Don't sign a LOI. Don't accept a scholarship. Just walk on. If the coach leaves at the end of the season, walk on to wherever he's going.
 
.-.
eebmg said:
As much as I feel bad about Evina personally, I also think this greatly complicates our recruitment.

By pushing her back to 2021, 2022 I worry that this will make it harder to recruit Azzi since a three guard rotation of CW (Sr) , Paige (Sophmore) and Evina(Sr) would be pretty firmly established and Azzi would most likely be coming off the bench her freshman year. For those who say Evina would have left for the WNBA, she needs 2 years to establish herself at a level where she can go pro imho.

And from Evina's point of view, I doubt she would beat out Paige coming in at the same time so Evina would probably be the third guard

If she had 2020 to establish herself in the system and excel, I think in 2021, she would have been the 2nd guard with Paige coming in off the bench (significant minutes of course) which I think Paige would have no issue with psychologically and Evina would have the experience to make a push for top status and strong potential for the WNBA

I would love some one to tell me I am dead wrong.
Expand ...
Uh, dead wrong by your own criteria. 1) you doubt Evina will beat out Paige, 2) Azzi is better than Paige, 3) Azzi beats out Evina. Don't you just love it!
 
hoopsfan22 said:
To be fair, UConn only submitted the waiver request in early October. Maybe someone needs to ask Geno why they waited several months. I bash the NCAA on the reg, but making a decision on a waiver request in 3-4 weeks is pretty good and above and beyond my expectations even if I dislike the outcome.
Expand ...
Probably to see if she was healing correctly from her surgery. There is no sense wasting time on a player who is medically unable to play.
 
HuskeyinSC said:
Uh, dead wrong by your own criteria. 1) you doubt Evina will beat out Paige, 2) Azzi is better than Paige, 3) Azzi beats out Evina. Don't you just love it!
Expand ...

Well, I said if paige and evina enter as 1st year players in the uconn system, i think paige would win that competition.

When Azzi would come in, Evina would have a year under her belt so edge to Evina

Also, I do not agree that Azzi is better than paige. Pretty equal imho.
 
What percentage of appeals is eventually granted?? Is there a difference in women's versus men's basketball?
 
Last edited:
HuskeyinSC said:
Evina is 6 feet tall, the same height as Maya Moore. You don't think she would start at wing?
Expand ...
No I don't think she would start at the wing over senior Megan Walker nor 6'3" freshman Aaliyah Edwards.
Evina through HS, AAU and at TN was a combo guard. Playing on the wing would required her to switch position and she would have to improve her perimeter defense drastically.
 
.-.
Plebe said:
My impression of Shepard just took a huge hit. She sounds like an NCAA spokesperson. How can she know with certainty that the school has nothing to do with the decision? Just because you benefited from a process doesn't mean it has integrity.
Expand ...
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.
 
TheFarmFan said:
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 does does she know? 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.
Expand ...
The saying "A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing" comes to mind.

So because she, as a sample size of one, has firsthand anecdotal experience, she suddenly is the authority who can make sweeping comments about how the process works for every single athlete.

She can't possibly know for certain, for example, that her request wasn't aided as a result of being a transfer to Notre Dame. She may sincerely believe that it was no factor, but believing and knowing are two different things. (One would think a Notre Dame graduate would've been taught that difference.) Even her own dad said he had no idea why the request was approved.
 
CocoHusky said:
No I don't think she would start at the wing over senior Megan Walker nor 6'3" freshman Aaliyah Edwards.
Evina through HS, AAU and at TN was a combo guard. Playing on the wing would required her to switch position and she would have to improve her perimeter defense drastically.
Expand ...

There is not a big difference between playing the 2 vs the 3, especially in UConn's system.
 
Plebe said:
The saying "A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing" comes to mind.

So because she, as a sample size of one, has firsthand anecdotal experience, she suddenly is the authority who can make sweeping comments about how the process works for every single athlete.

She can't possibly know for certain, for example, that her request wasn't aided as a result of being a transfer to Notre Dame. She may sincerely believe that it was no factor, but believing and knowing are two different things. (One would think a Notre Dame graduate would've been taught that difference.) Even her own dad said he had no idea why the request was approved.
Expand ...
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.
 
marti3td said:
Expand ...

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.
 
.-.
Incidentally, I looked for the transfer waiver form and couldn't find it on a quick google, but I did find the description of the process, and the key question is whether the transfer was necessitated by "documented mitigating circumstances outside the student-athlete's control."

I would not be shocked if in EW's situation, given that she and her family members were dousing kerosine on the fan fire at times, and that EW essentially called for Holly to be fired days before she was, that any argument that she had to transfer because of fan hostility or the coaching change would not be considered "mitigating circumstances outside the student-athlete's control."

Now, whether or not that's a good reason is totally worth questioning. But I based on the brief description of the criteria I don't think EW has an open-and-shut case based on what I have heard about her reasons for transferring.
 
uconnell said:
If anyone doubts that Shepard was denied a waiver then granted one on appeal ! Look up Wikipedia.
Expand ...

Would you be kind enough to provide a link to the wikipedia article please? I could not find it. Thanks
 
Carnac said:
Would you be kind enough to provide a link to the wikipedia article please? I could not find it. Thanks
Expand ...

Don't worry about it. Shepard was not denied by the NCAA.
 
Florida Fan said:
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.
Expand ...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't a coach bolting a university be more relevant than one being fired? Not that EW was happy with the coaching in the first place. I have to think her and UConn's argument went in a direction other than Warlick's dismissal.
 
TheFarmFan said:
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.
Expand ...
I never said her claim was implausible. But if she's making a claim, she bears the burden of proof, not me.

Just because no one formally asked "why Notre Dame" or formally asked for interviews Notre Dame folks doesn't prove anything about whether the destination school was a factor in the process. Unless she can **prove** that the people considering her request were unaware of which school she had transferred to, she hasn't proven anything. Only stated her belief. Her belief may be a plausible one, but it hasn't been proven.
 
Plebe said:
The saying "A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing" comes to mind.

So because she, as a sample size of one, has firsthand anecdotal experience, she suddenly is the authority who can make sweeping comments about how the process works for every single athlete.

She can't possibly know for certain, for example, that her request wasn't aided as a result of being a transfer to Notre Dame. She may sincerely believe that it was no factor, but believing and knowing are two different things. (One would think a Notre Dame graduate would've been taught that difference.) Even her own dad said he had no idea why the request was approved.
Expand ...
Oh come on! An astute poster like yourself would concede that you have no idea if Jessica knows this difference or that there are people who have graduated from your own and all other alma mater that do not know this difference. You are simultaneous lashing out at something Jessica said and ND because of a perceived benefit that the NCAA gave to ND. All of that is misdirected. Your target needs to be the NCAA.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,054
Messages
4,551,254
Members
10,433
Latest member
lkcayoho1


Top Bottom