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

Donate To GopherHole
Some guy said:
I don’t think he should play. I agree with NCAAs rule.

If you could get a waiver simply for the coach leaving, that is a giant can of worms.
If I wanted free agency I would watch the nba
Click to expand...

I’m in the same boat as you on this one. I think if he were from the area the odds would have been better. It always seemed like a long shot and the fact the program wasn’t publicly seeking a waiver until the Fall I think speaks to how long of a shot it was. Bummed out for Marcus but I think it will work out for the best in the long run. Carr, Oturu, Gabe and Jarvis are the future of the program and I look forward to watching them grow together in the same class. This also gives Isaiah a chance to get a good amount of minutes and develop before him and Carr battle it out next year for the starting job.
 

GopherNuts said:
I’m in the same boat as you on this one. I think if he were from the area the odds would have been better. It always seemed like a long shot and the fact the program wasn’t publicly seeking a waiver until the Fall I think speaks to how long of a shot it was. Bummed out for Marcus but I think it will work out for the best in the long run. Carr, Oturu, Gabe and Jarvis are the future of the program and I look forward to watching them grow together in the same class. This also gives Isaiah a chance to get a good amount of minutes and develop before him and Carr battle it out next year for the starting job.
Click to expand...

For what it’s worth, I’m pretty sure they applied for the waiver shortly after Carr signed on to play here back in May. It just wasn’t talked about here much for some reason until a few months later. There’s a post from the Marcus Carr commit thread mentioning it.

WriterGoph said:
It's extremely odd to me that with all the concerns about Pitino taking two sit-out transfers this spring, that nobody has mentioned this part of Marcus' article:

Carr, who has three years of eligibility left, is hoping to be allowed to play next season at Minnesota since Pitt coach Kevin Stallings was fired in April, according to his mentor and Northern Kings AAU coach Vidal Massiah.

"Given the current state of college basketball, I know they're looking at that rule where if your coach is fired you would be eligible to transfer and play immediately," Massiah said. "I think either way, it's a case worth fighting for. Here's a coach who had been recruiting him for years and the coach gets fired. Then you tell a kid he can't make a lateral move and secure his future? That's kind of the elephant in the room right now."

It's unclear whether Carr will get his waiver granted by the NCAA before next season, but the Gophers have a spot for him either way.
Click to expand...
 

Some guy said:
I don’t think he should play. I agree with NCAAs rule.

If you could get a waiver simply for the coach leaving, that is a giant can of worms.
If I wanted free agency I would watch the nba
Click to expand...

Totally disagree. If they made coaches have to sit out a year before they changed jobs it might seem more fair. However, the moralistic "the athlete commits to the school, not the coach" is total BS. How many kids would have gone to Memphis if Cal wasn't head coach. Who the hell would want to spend 4 years is Lansing if Izzo wasn't coach. Kids commit and go to colleges based on the coaches and that relationship. You can get a great education almost anywhere.

I agree with Bilas on this even though we disagree on other issues.
 

NCAA looking like the Kangaroo court that it is. If only the Gophers wore baby blue...
 

TNGophfan said:
Totally disagree. If they made coaches have to sit out a year before they changed jobs it might seem more fair. However, the moralistic "the athlete commits to the school, not the coach" is total BS. How many kids would have gone to Memphis if Cal wasn't head coach. Who the hell would want to spend 4 years is Lansing if Izzo wasn't coach. Kids commit and go to colleges based on the coaches and that relationship. You can get a great education almost anywhere.

I agree with Bilas on this even though we disagree on other issues.
Click to expand...

Nothing forces the kids to play for the ncaa. They signed up to play by those rules.
 


Some guy said:
Nothing forces the kids to play for the ncaa. They signed up to play by those rules.
Click to expand...

Jesus, shut up. The whole point is the NCAA's ruling have been inconsistent. There is no rhyme or reason. It's not like Carr was the only guy looking for a waiver due to a coaching change. He is just one of the very few to get denied
 

Some guy said:
I don’t think he should play. I agree with NCAAs rule.

If you could get a waiver simply for the coach leaving, that is a giant can of worms.
If I wanted free agency I would watch the nba
Click to expand...

The issue is consistency. Other players with similar situations were given the waiver. This is just another example of the NCAA not being an even playing field.
 


TNGophfan said:
Totally disagree. If they made coaches have to sit out a year before they changed jobs it might seem more fair. However, the moralistic "the athlete commits to the school, not the coach" is total BS. How many kids would have gone to Memphis if Cal wasn't head coach. Who the hell would want to spend 4 years is Lansing if Izzo wasn't coach. Kids commit and go to colleges based on the coaches and that relationship. You can get a great education almost anywhere.

I agree with Bilas on this even though we disagree on other issues.
Click to expand...

This. The coach makes a HUGE difference to a kids decision. For some, it is almost the ONLY decision. The NCAA rule is wrong and should be changed. Tough crap for the school that fires its coach and loses players to transfer. If the coaches players are so good, then why fire the coach? Kids should have more freedom. Will it create more havoc? Yes. Might it bite the Gophers at some point? Yes, but it’s the right thing to do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 



TNGophfan said:
Totally disagree. If they made coaches have to sit out a year before they changed jobs it might seem more fair. However, the moralistic "the athlete commits to the school, not the coach" is total BS. How many kids would have gone to Memphis if Cal wasn't head coach. Who the hell would want to spend 4 years is Lansing if Izzo wasn't coach. Kids commit and go to colleges based on the coaches and that relationship. You can get a great education almost anywhere.

I agree with Bilas on this even though we disagree on other issues.[/

Agree 100%. People pick the school because they feel comfortable with their new coach and new "family." In Carr's case the leader of his family was leaving and after the news of the coach being fired, alot of the players also left. He felt the situation was toxic. If we should think that he cant play this year because those are the rules, then why is everyone else allowed to play? Like Dick Vitale was saying, people are just coming up with anything and it's working. My grandma is in hospital and I want to be closer to her. If were following the rules then the NCAA should say sorry about your grandma, but hopefully she can watch you next year after you sit out a year. Alot of people have been saying that every situation is different. I agree, but what's a better reason than carr's? I agree with the sit out rule so if you transfer you should sit out, but if everyone is getting a waiver to play then Carr should play. This will all be good in the end for our class next year, but Carr got screwed.
Click to expand...
 

I agree with the ncaa ruling per their rules.

I disagree with their rules.

I think the NCAA is corrupt.

I don’t think this situation is a good example of the NCAA being corrupt.

I think the NCAA had overstayed it’s welcome.

I don’t want the NCAA to go away because I like college affiliated basketball.

I think college affiliated basketball with amateur players is silly.

I think paid players ruins college basketball.
 

MennoSota said:
NCAA looking like the Kangaroo court that it is. If only the Gophers wore baby blue...
Click to expand...

#Levelplayingfield

#Excusesareforlosers

Carr would have greatly improved this years team.

NCAA picking winners and losers. Again.
 

BarnBurner said:
#Levelplayingfield

#Excusesareforlosers

Carr would have greatly improved this years team.

NCAA picking winners and losers. Again.
Click to expand...
I think it hurt us that Richard's last name is Pitino. D@mn, the NCAA holds grudges in ways that make you shake your head while kissing the @$$es of others that really make you shake your head.
I have come to despise the NCAA as a neutral governing body. It's like watching the US Gymnastics program in all its dysfunction.
 




MennoSota said:
I think it hurt us that Richard's last name is Pitino. D@mn, the NCAA holds grudges in ways that make you shake your head while kissing the @$$es of others that really make you shake your head.
I have come to despise the NCAA as a neutral governing body. It's like watching the US Gymnastics program in all its dysfunction.
Click to expand...

MennoSota -- definitely the biggest conspiracy theorist on this site.

In reality, changing coaches doesn't make players eligible to transfer and play immediately. We can argue whether or not that should be the case. I'm not for waivers in general, but with coaching changes I believe the NCAA should allow players to transfer and play immediately. However, as the rules are set up now, the burden lies on the player/team to "waive" the transfer year. This isn't some grand conspiracy against teams in Minnesota or head coaches with a last name Pitino. That's ridiculous.
 

golfing18now said:
MennoSota -- definitely the biggest conspiracy theorist on this site.

In reality, changing coaches doesn't make players eligible to transfer and play immediately. We can argue whether or not that should be the case. I'm not for waivers in general, but with coaching changes I believe the NCAA should allow players to transfer and play immediately. However, as the rules are set up now, the burden lies on the player/team to "waive" the transfer year. This isn't some grand conspiracy against teams in Minnesota or head coaches with a last name Pitino. That's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I dont think there's a conspiracy against Minnesota or Pitino, but again, everyone is saying he didnt get the waiver because that's the rule. Why everyone else then and not Carr? Someone please explain that to me!
 

TNGophfan said:
Totally disagree. If they made coaches have to sit out a year before they changed jobs it might seem more fair. However, the moralistic "the athlete commits to the school, not the coach" is total BS. How many kids would have gone to Memphis if Cal wasn't head coach. Who the hell would want to spend 4 years is Lansing if Izzo wasn't coach. Kids commit and go to colleges based on the coaches and that relationship. You can get a great education almost anywhere.

I agree with Bilas on this even though we disagree on other issues.
Click to expand...

I get what you're trying to say, however around 14-15k students go to Memphis because of the school and around 35k go to MSU and not the various coach. (in sports its different I get that as you go for the coach)
 

gophereric30 said:
I dont think there's a conspiracy against Minnesota or Pitino, but again, everyone is saying he didnt get the waiver because that's the rule. Why everyone else then and not Carr? Someone please explain that to me!
Click to expand...

In the NCAA’s defense, I think a lot of the waivers that were granted involved guys who were going closer to home, which Carr is not doing. But there was still the Mark Smith case, where he was not going closer to home and there was no coaching change, but he’s immediately eligible anyway.
 

Cayman said:
In the NCAA’s defense, I think a lot of the waivers that were granted involved guys who were going closer to home, which Carr is not doing. But there was still the Mark Smith case, where he was not going closer to home and there was no coaching change, but he’s immediately eligible anyway.
Click to expand...

Thats because Brand Underwood was allegedly ok with him being immediately eligible whereas most coaches typically wouldn't be, at least thats what has been said on here.
 

Mark Smith likely got put at the top of the list because he left Illinois early. Also at Mizzou Dru Smith hasn't received a waiver and his situation looks more like Carr's
 

gophereric30 said:
I dont think there's a conspiracy against Minnesota or Pitino, but again, everyone is saying he didnt get the waiver because that's the rule. Why everyone else then and not Carr? Someone please explain that to me!
Click to expand...

I don't have the answer but do we also have examples of kids that transferred due to a coaching change but then didn't even bother to file a waiver given the current policy?

I suspect some of these other approvals may have had extenuating circumstances that we aren't aware of. Maybe not.....
 

Pittsburgh pretty much was against granting the waiver and that did not help
 

die hard gopher said:
Thats because Brand Underwood was allegedly ok with him being immediately eligible whereas most coaches typically wouldn't be, at least thats what has been said on here.
Click to expand...

theczar said:
Pittsburgh pretty much was against granting the waiver and that did not help
Click to expand...

Thought I saw a Marcus Fuller tweet stating that Pitt was not obstructing the waiver from going through.
 

gophereric30 said:
I dont think there's a conspiracy against Minnesota or Pitino, but again, everyone is saying he didnt get the waiver because that's the rule. Why everyone else then and not Carr? Someone please explain that to me!
Click to expand...
The name "Pitino" and a grudge by the committee. [emoji41]
 

Cayman said:
In the NCAA’s defense, I think a lot of the waivers that were granted involved guys who were going closer to home, which Carr is not doing. But there was still the Mark Smith case, where he was not going closer to home and there was no coaching change, but he’s immediately eligible anyway.
Click to expand...

That should not be a reason to grant someone a waiver.
 

He wasn't granted the waiver because he didn't have a good reason to get it. It's that simple. Pitino said that was their argument for getting him a waiver was because there was a coaching change. That's not a good enough reason. There is only one other player who has received a waiver due to a coaching change, and in that situation it was a football player and the coach who got fired was his dad. Little different.

Stop being a bunch of whiners. Nobody got screwed. There is no conspiracy. We'll be fine.
 

bizzle22 said:
He wasn't granted the waiver because he didn't have a good reason to get it. It's that simple. Pitino said that was their argument for getting him a waiver was because there was a coaching change. That's not a good enough reason. There is only one other player who has received a waiver due to a coaching change, and in that situation it was a football player and the coach who got fired was his dad. Little different.

Stop being a bunch of whiners. Nobody got screwed. There is no conspiracy. We'll be fine.
Click to expand...

I was saying if were going with the transfer rules then transferring closer to home is a weak reason to give a waiver too.
 

gophereric30 said:
I was saying if were going with the transfer rules then transferring closer to home is a weak reason to give a waiver too.
Click to expand...

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
 

bizzle22 said:
He wasn't granted the waiver because he didn't have a good reason to get it. It's that simple. Pitino said that was their argument for getting him a waiver was because there was a coaching change. That's not a good enough reason. There is only one other player who has received a waiver due to a coaching change, and in that situation it was a football player and the coach who got fired was his dad. Little different.

Stop being a bunch of whiners. Nobody got screwed. There is no conspiracy. We'll be fine.
Click to expand...

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.
 

Where does inconsistency end and corruption begin? Especially in light of the UNC situation, it's clear what side of that line the NCAA is on.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom