Marcus Carr Waiver: Appeal Announcement Expected Today (11/14)

agree, but not when coming closer to play in front of a sick relative. The rule will be changed to allow not sitting out if there is a coaching change. That will be in effect next year

Right. I agree. I think were all arguing the same thing. I agree a waiver should be granted for a coaching change or a sick relative, and we all understand the rule, but are we all on a level playing field? I dont think so! Someone remind me how mark smith got a waiver if were going by the strict transfer rules?
 

Any Lawyers amongst us think that the NCAA is opening themselves up to liability given the inconsistencies in their rulings? I think it could be pretty easy to show that younger players mean more to NBA scouts based on drafting data and so taking a year from one player when they don't from another could easily be $$$.
 

Right. I agree. I think were all arguing the same thing. I agree a waiver should be granted for a coaching change or a sick relative, and we all understand the rule, but are we all on a level playing field? I dont think so! Someone remind me how mark smith got a waiver if were going by the strict transfer rules?

We would all need all the facts on each case.
 

We would all need all the facts on each case.

You can get all the facts in the world, but according to the rules I'm sure 95% of these waivers that are being granted 5 years ago would have had no chance. All of a sudden this off season, the ncaa was giving out waivers like candy on Halloween. If there were 15(just throwing this number out there) waivers that have been granted so far, how many of them with the facts, do you think would have been granted 5 years ago? How many of those 15 do you think have a better case than Carr? Either way my guess would be not many of the 15 would be granted and I would imagine let's just say Carr might be in the middle where some have better cases and some dont. Like we've been saying it's the inconsistency that were upset with. Carr was on the wrong end of something that everyone is confused about. The national media cant believe it!
 

If the papers we submitted were similar to Pitino’s public statements, then our people did a sh&tty job of advocacy and other schools doing a better job may be why their players got waivers. We should have been focused on mental health and effects resulting from the environment at Pitt, not the coaching change itself. The former is a specific reason for a waiver under ncaa rules (“transfer necessary for the health and well being of the student athlete”). The latter is not.

Pitt’s lukewarm support or lack of support may have been a factor. We probably will never know the full story on what they said.

I also do believe the Pitino name does not help the cause. Contrast this to Tubby (well regarded in ncaa, former coaches association president, etc) getting a waiver for Mbakwe that was by no means assured.

Finally, there might be different individuals within the ncaa assigned to different cases, which could somewhat explain some variance despite an organizational goal of (purported) consistency.
 


If the papers we submitted were similar to Pitino’s public statements, then our people did a sh&tty job of advocacy and other schools doing a better job may be why their players got waivers. We should have been focused on mental health and effects resulting from the environment at Pitt, not the coaching change itself. The former is a specific reason for a waiver under ncaa rules (“transfer necessary for the health and well being of the student athlete”). The latter is not.

Pitt’s lukewarm support or lack of support may have been a factor. We probably will never know the full story on what they said.

I also do believe the Pitino name does not help the cause. Contrast this to Tubby (well regarded in ncaa, former coaches association president, etc) getting a waiver for Mbakwe that was by no means assured.

Finally, there might be different individuals within the ncaa assigned to different cases, which could somewhat explain some variance despite an organizational goal of (purported) consistency.

You may be right. Im pretty sure 'toxic" was the word brought up about environment after the coaching change. I would bet that the University of Minnesota did everything right on their behalf. Not sure about Pittsburgh, but im pretty sure it all came down to the Ncaa just being D'BAGS!
 

Then what is a good enough reason? Mark Smith seemed to have even less reason to have his waiver granted than Carr did.

Just today Matthew Moyer was granted immediate eligibility at Vanderbilt. He transferred from Syracuse. He is from Columbus, Ohio. He transferred from a school that is 7 hours from home to a school that is 6 hours from home. There was no coaching change involved. What was his good reason for getting immediate eligibility?

I agree that the team should still be pretty good this year without him, and that suggesting that the NCAA is conspiring against Minnesota is a little ridiculous, but let's also not act like they're strictly adhering to a clear set of rules and being consistent with their rulings. Guys who seemingly have no more valid justification for immediate eligibility than Marcus Carr has are still getting waivers.

It just seems ridiculous to me that people are ripping it with pretty limited information.

I'd compare it to college admissions.

Kid A got a 28 on his ACT and had a 3.6 GPA in HS.
Kid B got a 27 on his ACT and had a 3.4 GPA in HS.

If you just go by the basics you'd have to take Kid A over Kid B, right? Pretty easy.

Now add the following information:
Kid A didn't really participate in any extracurriculars except for swimming, was suspended from school for vandalism their junior year, and took all the basic classes.
Kid B was president of the student council, played two varsity sports, was the lead in the school play, volunteered in the elementary school mentoring program all four years, and took only advanced classes.

Now that you know all the info, which one are you going with?

It's dumb to get all worked up about something where the information available to us is so limited. We don't know anything close to the whole story. Maybe it was really unfair, but maybe not. Either way, there are only a handful of people who really know and no one on here is in that group.
 

It just seems ridiculous to me that people are ripping it with pretty limited information.

I'd compare it to college admissions.

Kid A got a 28 on his ACT and had a 3.6 GPA in HS.
Kid B got a 27 on his ACT and had a 3.4 GPA in HS.

If you just go by the basics you'd have to take Kid A over Kid B, right? Pretty easy.

Now add the following information:
Kid A didn't really participate in any extracurriculars except for swimming, was suspended from school for vandalism their junior year, and took all the basic classes.
Kid B was president of the student council, played two varsity sports, was the lead in the school play, volunteered in the elementary school mentoring program all four years, and took only advanced classes.

Now that you know all the info, which one are you going with?

It's dumb to get all worked up about something where the information available to us is so limited. We don't know anything close to the whole story. Maybe it was really unfair, but maybe not. Either way, there are only a handful of people who really know and no one on here is in that group.

You're probably right, but with what we do know about the situation, it sure feels good to vent a little. I think these boards can serve that purpose for many of us.
 

It just seems ridiculous to me that people are ripping it with pretty limited information.

I'd compare it to college admissions.

Kid A got a 28 on his ACT and had a 3.6 GPA in HS.
Kid B got a 27 on his ACT and had a 3.4 GPA in HS.

If you just go by the basics you'd have to take Kid A over Kid B, right? Pretty easy.

Now add the following information:
Kid A didn't really participate in any extracurriculars except for swimming, was suspended from school for vandalism their junior year, and took all the basic classes.
Kid B was president of the student council, played two varsity sports, was the lead in the school play, volunteered in the elementary school mentoring program all four years, and took only advanced classes.

Now that you know all the info, which one are you going with?

It's dumb to get all worked up about something where the information available to us is so limited. We don't know anything close to the whole story. Maybe it was really unfair, but maybe not. Either way, there are only a handful of people who really know and no one on here is in that group.

Limited information, yes. No information, no. As one of the posts above stated accurately, there were boatloads of waivers granted this year that would have had no chance in the recent past. Carr's request would have been deep sixed quickly just a few years ago. The apparent inconsistency is the burr in my butt. Hard to tell, but I would be curious how many waivers/appeals were applied for and how many granted. That would give us a decent starting point on determining how bad a deal Carr got. It seemed like many were granted but very few denied were talked about publicly. Carr is the only one I know of.

I'm not putting much stock in national media. Most of them think transfer rules are oppressive from the get go so they will be on the side of anyone wanting one. I am not opposed to the sit out transfer rule. I just think it should be applied consistently, and there is a lot of anecdotal evidence it wasn't this time around.
 



Souhan chimes in:

NCAA blows decision on Gophers' Marcus Carr

It can be difficult to remember why the NCAA exists. So I checked. I went to NCAA.org, and the mission statement is right there, in white type on orange background:

“Creating a pathway to lifelong success.’’

What could be better than that, other than a reverse mortgage that gives you whiter teeth in 30 days?

The problem is that the NCAA’s pathway to lifelong success is a lot like highway travel in the era of nonstop construction in the Twin Cities. You may think taking 35W North will get you to your destination, because that’s what it was designed to do. You would be wrong.

After this week, even the world’s most sophisticated GPS would be confused by the NCAA’s pathway.

The NCAA has always been a broken, hypocritical organization. What’s amazing is that it has never reformed itself, never made progress toward getting at least the small, obvious decisions right.

Who benefits from Carr sitting out a season?

No one.

Who is hurt by Carr being forced to sit out a season?

The Minnesota basketball program and Carr.

What did Minnesota do to deserve this?

Nothing.

What did Carr do to deserve this?

Nothing.

What is achieved by forcing Carr to sit out a season?

Nothing.

Making a random example of Carr, who has the same résumé as many athletes who were allowed to compete after transferring, does not set a precedent that will keep athletes from transferring in the future.

Nor should it. Athletes should be able to transfer freely, no matter how you view them.

If they are truly viewed as students first — which has always been the NCAA’s winking stance — they should be able to transfer like any other students.

http://www.startribune.com/ncaa-blows-decision-on-gophers-marcus-carr/500648251/

Go Gophers!!
 

You're probably right, but with what we do know about the situation, it sure feels good to vent a little. I think these boards can serve that purpose for many of us.

I get it. For some clarity on why there are more waivers granted now then 5 years ago, the answer lies within coaches no longer being able to block or deny a kid from leaving. That rule changed last year and it was the coaches who voted for it as they continue to try and do more for the student-athlete. The next change is a athlete being able to play right away if he coach leaves or is fired. That will be in play next year. They are not going to go with a no sit out rule across the board as that would only create chaos and serve the best programs as they could simply poach your best players and never stop recruiting them. The problem with the Carr case is we do not know all the specifics but plenty of waivers have been denied. The ones granted made a case of hardship.
 

So, Matthew Moyer of Syracuse just got approval for transfer waiver to Vanderbilt, for unspecified reasons...and no one is saying why. Vanderbilt called it a surprise that he was approved....WTF....he already used a redshirt year at Syracuse too. Good job NCAA.
 

You're probably right, but with what we do know about the situation, it sure feels good to vent a little. I think these boards can serve that purpose for many of us.

Well said! Ive vented and had my say and i promise im done. Time to go beat Texas A&M! Gonna be great to have Marcus on board next year as a Sophomore.
 



So, Matthew Moyer of Syracuse just got approval for transfer waiver to Vanderbilt, for unspecified reasons...and no one is saying why. Vanderbilt called it a surprise that he was approved....WTF....he already used a redshirt year at Syracuse too. Good job NCAA.

So you believe that the Moyer and Carr transfers are the same ? We know nothing about either one. Their not a conspiracy against the U. If the U thinks so they could file a law suit but i am sure that was looked into. There is a reason it was denied and we do not know what it was. We also do not know if there were any similarities between those approved and those not approved. I do know several that were approved on the basis of hardship and location. Sure there is a website that shows which transfers got approved and those that did not. All we get from that is how many besides Carr got denied. Some are acting as though he is the only one.
 

So you believe that the Moyer and Carr transfers are the same ? We know nothing about either one. Their not a conspiracy against the U. If the U thinks so they could file a law suit but i am sure that was looked into. There is a reason it was denied and we do not know what it was. We also do not know if there were any similarities between those approved and those not approved. I do know several that were approved on the basis of hardship and location. Sure there is a website that shows which transfers got approved and those that did not. All we get from that is how many besides Carr got denied. Some are acting as though he is the only one.

OK, then transparency is required so these questions don't arise, doesn't have to be details but generic reason's need to be released otherwise who can take the NCAA at face value, without transparency it is time to disband the NCAA and is something the Big Ten should realistically start to look at with other big 5 conferences.
 

Let kids play immediately if there's a coaching change. Limit teams to 1 such player per season.
 

Souhan chimes in:

NCAA blows decision on Gophers' Marcus Carr

It can be difficult to remember why the NCAA exists. So I checked. I went to NCAA.org, and the mission statement is right there, in white type on orange background:

“Creating a pathway to lifelong success.’’

What could be better than that, other than a reverse mortgage that gives you whiter teeth in 30 days?

The problem is that the NCAA’s pathway to lifelong success is a lot like highway travel in the era of nonstop construction in the Twin Cities. You may think taking 35W North will get you to your destination, because that’s what it was designed to do. You would be wrong.

After this week, even the world’s most sophisticated GPS would be confused by the NCAA’s pathway.

The NCAA has always been a broken, hypocritical organization. What’s amazing is that it has never reformed itself, never made progress toward getting at least the small, obvious decisions right.

Who benefits from Carr sitting out a season?

No one.

Who is hurt by Carr being forced to sit out a season?

The Minnesota basketball program and Carr.

What did Minnesota do to deserve this?

Nothing.

What did Carr do to deserve this?

Nothing.

What is achieved by forcing Carr to sit out a season?

Nothing.

Making a random example of Carr, who has the same résumé as many athletes who were allowed to compete after transferring, does not set a precedent that will keep athletes from transferring in the future.

Nor should it. Athletes should be able to transfer freely, no matter how you view them.

If they are truly viewed as students first — which has always been the NCAA’s winking stance — they should be able to transfer like any other students.

http://www.startribune.com/ncaa-blows-decision-on-gophers-marcus-carr/500648251/

Go Gophers!!

Why so many words in the headline? Could've just used the first two!
 

Thought the Carr decision was unfair, but was not going to dwell on it. Now the Gopher's best softball player announces she is leaving and is eligible to play immediately according to the rules governing softball even without indicating where she is going. Why does the NCAA treat two sports so differently?
 

Thought the Carr decision was unfair, but was not going to dwell on it. Now the Gopher's best softball player announces she is leaving and is eligible to play immediately according to the rules governing softball even without indicating where she is going. Why does the NCAA treat two sports so differently?

Easy Because one sport's tournament pulled in $761 million in 2017 and the other sport's tournament lost money. Not going to let the student athletes mess around with the golden goose.
 



Thought the Carr decision was unfair, but was not going to dwell on it. Now the Gopher's best softball player announces she is leaving and is eligible to play immediately according to the rules governing softball even without indicating where she is going. Why does the NCAA treat two sports so differently?

There is a "one-time exemption" allowed if it's not basketball (M or W), baseball, men's ice hockey, or football. Although apparently the NCAA does still allow conference to squash this rule if it's a transfer within the conference. However, interestingly enough, the one-time exemption is only granted if the previous institution does not object to the transfer and grants the athlete a release.

Now that wasn't the process here, because the rule doesn't apply for basketball .... but it does go back to the idea that Pitt fouled up the waiver, and that's why it didn't go through.


I get the feeling that, one way or another, we're on a pretty clear path to allowing something much closer to free agency for undergrad transfers, regardless of sport. Like you ask, how do justify in court the allowance in some situations but not others? Why for a coach, but not a player? Etc.
 
Last edited:


AP Article on Waivers

This is the part that hurts:

— 55 men's basketball players requested waivers and 33 were approved (60 percent).
You look at the way the Gophers get hosed by the refs on a nightly basis and how they got hosed on the Marcus Carr decision and it makes you see conspiracy theory around every bend. [emoji44][emoji33][emoji34][emoji2959]
 

Unfortunately Carr never had a legitimate chance. The Pitt AD is on the board that reviews these waivers. They were going to do whatever they could to screw him, especially when he expressed how toxic the culture was there before the coach was fired.
 

You look at the way the Gophers get hosed by the refs on a nightly basis and how they got hosed on the Marcus Carr decision and it makes you see conspiracy theory around every bend. [emoji44][emoji33][emoji34][emoji2959]

There is not a conspiracy. Every fan base complains about the officiating. especially when they lose, then it is 100 times worse. Never hear the winner complain. As for Carr, i just wish we knew what the criteria is for approval and being denied. Then we would know if we had a legitimate reason to complain or celebrate. We simply have no idea why some have been approved and others not. The PITT AD is suppose to recuse himself from the case of any Pitt transfer in or out.
 

There is not a conspiracy. Every fan base complains about the officiating. especially when they lose, then it is 100 times worse. Never hear the winner complain. As for Carr, i just wish we knew what the criteria is for approval and being denied. Then we would know if we had a legitimate reason to complain or celebrate. We simply have no idea why some have been approved and others not. The PITT AD is suppose to recuse himself from the case of any Pitt transfer in or out.
The criteria was... don't have the last name...Pitino.
 

The Pitt AD would have to recuse from Carr's petition. However, I could imagine the presence of the Pitt AD on the committee could have an effect.
 

The Pitt AD would have to recuse from Carr's petition. However, I could imagine the presence of the Pitt AD on the committee could have an effect.

That is my point, we are just guessing. Conspiracy theories though are nonsense.
 

NCAA is corrupt and needs to go away for the P5, just like Mark Emmert and his giant glued on toupee both need to away.

The NCAA has been as corrupt as an organization as you could script, relative to the pure PR image presented. The money generators get a pass, the patsies get crushed.

Oklahoma Football, Texas Football, UCLA Basketball, SEC football players driving BMWs, USC, Reggie Bush, Kentucky Basketball., North Carolina BB- fake classes, nothing, ., envelopes of cash documented, Cam Newton, ..... who pays the price- Cleveland State, SMU, Tark-UNLV, Minnesota, Basketball Bill M 1977,
 
Last edited:




Top Bottom