STrib: Gophers to seek waiver for Pittsburgh transfer Marcus Carr to play in '18-19

Donate To GopherHole
DeathClutch said:
This is a very weird decision by the NCAA. Blake Harris played for Missouri, for the first semester last season, then transferred to NC State. Instead of having to sit out a full year and resume playing in the second semester for NCSU, he is eligible to play right away. WTF? Using this precedent Carr should, at the minimum, be able to play the second half of the season for the Gophers.

https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/nc-state/article217096765.html
Click to expand...

Shaqfu14 said:
Hurricanes transfer Anthony Mack allowed to compete this season
By Rob DausterAug 22, 2018, 9:31 AM EDT

CORAL GABLES, Fla. — Miami Hurricanes transfer Anthony Mack has been granted a waiver by the NCAA and will be eligible to compete during the 2018-19 season.

A 6-foot-6 shooting guard, Mack was a freshman at Wyoming last season and didn’t play in any official games because of an injury. He will have four years of eligibility left.

Mack will help replace guards Lonnie Walker IV and Bruce Brown Jr., both underclassmen who turned pro after last season.

Hopefully this is a good sign for Carr.
Click to expand...

jovs said:
I think the NCAA is in the process of evaluating and possibly changing the rule when coaching changes happen and as such are looking at each case in the interim. I hope the waiver is accepted, the age where D1 athletes pick a school for academic reasons is long gone and it is stupid to pretend that is the case.
Click to expand...

Of course Pitino is not going to get his hopes up, but there has been precedence in B.B. and FB where they have let players transfer without having to sit a year.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

...... and to re-quote that same excellent post from bizzle22 again ...

bizzle22 said:
In other cases where immediate eligibility was granted the player either never played a game/played very few games at their former school, transferred mid-season, moved closer to home, or have some extenuating circumstances beyond something as simple as a coach being fired. None of those apply to Carr, and there are no other extenuating circumstances that I am aware of in his case.
Click to expand...


As far as jovs' post: sure, that could be true. I don't think it works like that. I don't think the NCAA would start an academic year (2018-19) without a rule change in place, and then allow it to happen anyway without the rule change being voted on. But I'm not going to say it's impossible. If there was a link supporting it, then that would be that.
 
Last edited:


HOOP DREAMS said:
Probably don't want to, but absolutely should IMO.
Click to expand...

If you're just saying that because it would help the Gophs this year ... keep in mind that all of our opponents could just as easily benefit the same way, in the future.

I'm 100% for athlete rights, and all that. But it's just something to consider ...
 

HOOP DREAMS said:
Probably don't want to, but absolutely should IMO.
Click to expand...

IMO if you do that then just open them up altogether. I don't think it's fair to the program that all their players become free agents if a coach resigns, is fired, or takes another job. That could blow up an entire program. I can think of a ton of scenarios where that could get really murky. And I don't think the NCAA has the manpower, or wants to get in the middle of, deciphering all of that. And the NCAA shouldn't. It's a really slippery slope.
 


The longer it takes to get a decision in this the less optimistic I am.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

bizzle22 said:
IMO if you do that then just open them up altogether. I don't think it's fair to the program that all their players become free agents if a coach resigns, is fired, or takes another job. That could blow up an entire program. I can think of a ton of scenarios where that could get really murky. And I don't think the NCAA has the manpower, or wants to get in the middle of, deciphering all of that. And the NCAA shouldn't. It's a really slippery slope.
Click to expand...

Agreed. In the NFL or NBA, if a coach gets fired, there isn't a provision in the players' contracts saying they can automatically become free agents if they signed under that coach.

People always argue that players in pros can get traded and play even that same year, let alone right away the next season. But to me a player requested transfer is more like a player asking to be traded or released. The front office doesn't have to honor that request, the player is bound by the contract. So I don't agree it's a good analogy for college transfers.

There are legit reasons for allowing transfers without a sit-out year. And I like the idea of rewarding graduation from college with a bachelor's, by letting them go somewhere else and play right away. ***these are my opinions!
 

Gophers_4life said:
Agreed. In the NFL or NBA, if a coach gets fired, there isn't a provision in the players' contracts saying they can automatically become free agents if they signed under that coach.

People always argue that players in pros can get traded and play even that same year, let alone right away the next season. But to me a player requested transfer is more like a player asking to be traded or released. The front office doesn't have to honor that request, the player is bound by the contract. So I don't agree it's a good analogy for college transfers.

There are legit reasons for allowing transfers without a sit-out year. And I like the idea of rewarding graduation from college with a bachelor's, by letting them go somewhere else and play right away. ***these are my opinions!
Click to expand...

The NFL and NBA has contracts and are employees of an organization. Now if you want to argue that the players are under contract, which I've heard before, get ready for a different argument regarding employment status.

The idea of limiting someones ability to play a sport that they aren't being compensated for in a guaranteed status is goofy to me. Non competes in the real world are being contested in a court of law, why do they have power here?
 

Winasota Gopher said:
The NFL and NBA has contracts and are employees of an organization. Now if you want to argue that the players are under contract, which I've heard before, get ready for a different argument regarding employment status.

The idea of limiting someones ability to play a sport that they aren't being compensated for in a guaranteed status is goofy to me. Non competes in the real world are being contested in a court of law, why do they have power here?
Click to expand...

You're not wrong in the slightest.

If you're going down that road, then just blow the whole thing up -- "amateurism" I mean. Players sign contracts with school for $X over Y length of time, can be traded and released, and don't even need to enroll at the school, they're just employees of the school (like a janitor, admin assistant, etc.)
 



Winasota Gopher said:
The NFL and NBA has contracts and are employees of an organization. Now if you want to argue that the players are under contract, which I've heard before, get ready for a different argument regarding employment status.

The idea of limiting someones ability to play a sport that they aren't being compensated for in a guaranteed status is goofy to me. Non competes in the real world are being contested in a court of law, why do they have power here?
Click to expand...

I'll disagree with the part that I have bolded. They are compensated with free school, meals, a place to live, stipend, etc. And, at least in most major conferences including the B1G, that compensation is guaranteed for four years. Now, obviously we could go down a different rabbit hole as to whether or not they are fairly compensated.

But I agree with your sentiment. Which is why I say that if you are going to give free transfers if there is a coaching change then why not just open it up altogether? If the NCAA wants to maintain any level of authority on transfers they have to require that a player provide some other reason than "my coach got fired."
 

If Carr is cleared to play this year, my excitement will from about 7 out of 10 to an 11.
 

Gophers_4life said:
Apparently you haven't! Try starting here: http://www.forums.gopherhole.com/bo...s-Carr-to-play-in-18-19&p=1584824#post1584824
Click to expand...
Apparently you haven't. Did you read the Blake Harris article? He was a fresman last year who played in 14 games (he started in 9) and averaged 14 min/game. His waiver was approved to play this year. If you read the article, you would have seen this paragraph:

"Under NCAA transfer rules, the former top-100 recruit from Chapel Hill was supposed to sit out the first semester of the upcoming season. Instead, he received a waiver from the NCAA, which has recently loosened its transfer policies."

A quick Google search produces these recent articles about the loosening of transfer rules. It is apparent the NCAA is taking a new approach to transfers.

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/698386002

https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...with-legislation-up-for-review-this-week/amp/
 

Harris was already explained. You didnt read the posts.

The two links you cite are for exactly the same new rule, which has nothing to do with getting a waiver from having to sit out.
 



Gophers_4life said:
Harris was already explained. You didnt read the posts.
Click to expand...

I just re-read the posts and I guess there is something that I don't understand. Can you explain why Harris' waived was approved?
 

With these transfers getting granted it would make no sense if Carr too isn’t granted but knowing NCAA they’re corrupt and odd they will probs make him sit out. If this is the case I’ll be mad
 

bizzle22 said:
IMO if you do that then just open them up altogether. I don't think it's fair to the program that all their players become free agents if a coach resigns, is fired, or takes another job. That could blow up an entire program. I can think of a ton of scenarios where that could get really murky. And I don't think the NCAA has the manpower, or wants to get in the middle of, deciphering all of that. And the NCAA shouldn't. It's a really slippery slope.
Click to expand...

I think if players transferring out of a program with a fired coach are allowed to play immediately, then players transferring into that program must be allowed to play immediately. Otherwise, there would be too much disincentive to firing a coach.
 

cjbfbp said:
I think if players transferring out of a program with a fired coach are allowed to play immediately, then players transferring into that program must be allowed to play immediately. Otherwise, there would be too much disincentive to firing a coach.
Click to expand...

In this day and age of instant gratification, we are too quick crush coaches who are building their program. If an NCAA policy shift were to provide an incentive to allow a program to develop rather than drop a bomb at the first sign of adversity, it might be an additional reason to favor the change.
 

matt said:
I just re-read the posts and I guess there is something that I don't understand. Can you explain why Harris' waived was approved?
Click to expand...

Post #62

EDIT: guessing that won't satisfy you. Harris moved back home. He's from the Triangle region. Carr on the other hand, did anything but move back closer to home. He's from Toronto, finished high school in Florida, went to Pittsburgh to play, then his coach got fired, and he transferred to Minnesota. There's just no circumstance there to warrant an exemption to a rule that's designed to discourage players from moving around to find better schools/teams every year.
 
Last edited:

cjbfbp said:
I think if players transferring out of a program with a fired coach are allowed to play immediately, then players transferring into that program must be allowed to play immediately. Otherwise, there would be too much disincentive to firing a coach.
Click to expand...
I think this would create an incentive to let coaches develop their program, especially in scenarios where it's a young team. Imagine if we had fired Pitino three years ago, lost our 16 recruits and Murphy, Mason and McBreyer transferred. We'd be in year two of a new coach but probably looking at a year like Rutgers or Illinois is going to have, maybe worse

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 

Every time I see a new comment I am hoping for actual news. All I get is someone's thoughts on how the world should work
 



Carr would mean more to this team than Mason did last year.
 

go_gophers said:
In this day and age of instant gratification, we are too quick crush coaches who are building their program. If an NCAA policy shift were to provide an incentive to allow a program to develop rather than drop a bomb at the first sign of adversity, it might be an additional reason to favor the change.
Click to expand...

I don't feel sorry for coaches who are fired (perhaps with the exception of Claeys). Most coaches get fired sooner or later. Many of them land another good position. While they are coaches they make good-to-terrific compensation. When they get fired they get the kinds of buyouts that only CEO's get (again, Claeys was an exception). Schools have a right to make a change if they aren't satisfied. Sometimes they improve themselves, sometimes they don't. Transfer rules shouldn't have an effect on coaching change decisions.
 


cjbfbp said:
I don't feel sorry for coaches who are fired (perhaps with the exception of Claeys). Most coaches get fired sooner or later. Many of them land another good position. While they are coaches they make good-to-terrific compensation. When they get fired they get the kinds of buyouts that only CEO's get (again, Claeys was an exception). Schools have a right to make a change if they aren't satisfied. Sometimes they improve themselves, sometimes they don't. Transfer rules shouldn't have an effect on coaching change decisions.
Click to expand...

I’m not saying I feel sorry for the coach. I’m saying it takes time to build a true program. There are many ways to be a successful. Different philosophies will work for different coaches. Firing the coach and starting over at square one every few years practically guarantees a program will be mired in mediocrity, if not worse. I’d like for our teams to have some stability at the top.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


Any word on the appeal, doesn't school start today, this is slow even for the NCAA.
 

jovs said:
Any word on the appeal, doesn't school start today, this is slow even for the NCAA.
Click to expand...

My guess is no news is no, just like most of us expected. Unless there is a major backstory that no one knows, there is no compelling reason for him to be exempted from the transfer rule.
 

Holy Man said:
My guess is no news is no, just like most of us expected. Unless there is a major backstory that no one knows, there is no compelling reason for him to be exempted from the transfer rule.
Click to expand...

Correct. And in my worthless opinion, just moving closer to home, if there isn't a serious family circumstance that happened, isn't even a compelling reason. But Carr has moved farther from home (Toronto), going from Pittsburgh to Mpls.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom