MadtownGopher
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,738
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 36
Yeah because everyone outside of Minnesota is really aware of the Rakeem Buckles situation.
Rakeem Buckles Update 9/3: NCAA Denies Appeal, Buckles Headed Back to FIU
- Thread starter GopherHole Staff
- Start date
Yeah because everyone outside of Minnesota is really aware of the Rakeem Buckles situation.
die hard gopher
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 20, 2013
- Messages
- 9,273
- Reaction score
- 818
- Points
- 113
"and one source said the team feels good about that appeal's chances." better be
Bad news on the buckles front.
So I decided to come up with my own unsubstantiated unincorporated theory.
So this is what happened. Appeal sent to NCAA via US Mail. Appeal arrives in mail room on first floor of Ncaa Hdqtrs. Mail room delivers appeal letter to 2nd floor where new employee x or y looks at appeal and sees that Buckles has already transferred once before thus prompting the automatic rubber stamp denial decision. It is way above employee x or y's pay grade to make a decision allowing for a 2nd transfer.
The U appeals that decision based on mitigating factors to the 3rd floor of the NCAA HQ. Voila! Ncaa grants appeal based on FIU NCAA post season ban - athlete injury status - and graduation status.
Theory 1A not as desirable but maybe acceptable.
Buckles (theory Now) is one class from graduation. NCAA says that if and when he graduates he can submit another appeal. Buckles takes the required class - graduates - appeals - and is ruled eligible for 2nd semester.
So I decided to come up with my own unsubstantiated unincorporated theory.
So this is what happened. Appeal sent to NCAA via US Mail. Appeal arrives in mail room on first floor of Ncaa Hdqtrs. Mail room delivers appeal letter to 2nd floor where new employee x or y looks at appeal and sees that Buckles has already transferred once before thus prompting the automatic rubber stamp denial decision. It is way above employee x or y's pay grade to make a decision allowing for a 2nd transfer.
The U appeals that decision based on mitigating factors to the 3rd floor of the NCAA HQ. Voila! Ncaa grants appeal based on FIU NCAA post season ban - athlete injury status - and graduation status.
Theory 1A not as desirable but maybe acceptable.
Buckles (theory Now) is one class from graduation. NCAA says that if and when he graduates he can submit another appeal. Buckles takes the required class - graduates - appeals - and is ruled eligible for 2nd semester.
die hard gopher
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 20, 2013
- Messages
- 9,273
- Reaction score
- 818
- Points
- 113
This is what Eamonn Brennan had to say about it
http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation
Transfers seem straightforward. A player leaves one school and attends another, and has to sit out one year before he can play for his new team. Simple, right? Wrong: Even that seemingly structured rule is beset by a score of academic timeline requirements and bureaucratic processes.
A player must receive a written permission-to-contact letter from his current coach. He must have spent a full year in "academic residence" -- i.e., attending classes as a full-time, 12-credit-hours-or-insert-your-school's-equivalency student -- before he is eligible to get back on the court at his new school. There are "4-4" transfers and "2-4" transfers and different rules therein; there are issues involving full, partial, or non-qualifying academic status; and there are waivers and appeals you can make based on specific circumstances that can change the preexisting requirements, just like that.
How dizzying is this stuff? Here's the NCAA's brochure [PDF] for student-athletes interested in learning more about the transfer process. Ostensibly, this document was created to make the rules easy to understand and apply. It is filled with handy little case studies; it even has a glossary of important terms. And if you can read past the third page without help from prescription ADHD medication, well, I'd love to shake your hand. This stuff is brutal.
Which brings us to today's latest transfer news, reported by ESPN.com's Jeff Goodman:
Former Louisville forward Rakeem Buckles, who sat out last season at Florida International, will not be allowed to follow Richard Pitino to Minnesota, multiple sources told ESPN.
Buckles spent three seasons at Louisville and suffered two major knee injuries. He left the Cardinals and sat out last season at FIU, but decided to transfer to Minnesota and apply for a waiver to play immediately because Florida International was hit with a postseason ban by the NCAA for academic issues dating to the Isiah Thomas regime.
As Jeff writes, the surprise here stems from the fact that a player wouldn't be allowed to transfer away from a school that is currently not barred from the NCAA tournament for Academic Progress Rate violations. We've seen a handful of recent players in similar situations move to new schools and be eligible right away (see: Huskies, UConn). One of them is already working out in Minneapolis: Current Gophers guard Malik Smith, also formerly of FIU, transferred to Minnesota and was granted a waiver by the NCAA this summer. He'll play this season, but Buckles won't. Huh?
That's hardly the only confusing recent transfer news. Last week, Kerwin Okoro, a player transferring from Iowa State to Rutgers, was denied a hardship waiver by the NCAA. Okoro appealed to play immediately, as many players in recent seasons have, under the medical or family hardship "legislative relief" exemption (see what I mean?) after losing his New York City-based father and brother in the matter of two months last winter. But Okoro's appeal was denied, which raised red flags out in Rutgers, where the Star-Ledger has tried to divine why so many former Scarlet Knights were granted post-Mike Rice appeals this spring while Okoro, who is entering the program recovering from family tragedy, was not. The key quote from an NCAA spokesman:
"It’s not a formula. It’s not a math problem," NCAA spokesman Christopher Radford said. "The guidelines evolve and we see different circumstances and scenarios, and the guidelines evolve with that to make the process better and more efficient."
This comes amid the Star-Ledger's attempt to explain the transfer hardship/relief/whatever appeals process, and the various NCAA subcommittees each case passes through on each various appeal attempt. It all ends at the desk of the Legislative Council Subcommittee, which "may not even be burdened by the guidelines it has set for the NCAA staff."
"The subcommittee essentially can make whatever decision they think is the appropriate decision as a representative of the membership," Brooks said.
It would seem that Okoro is a textbook case, a player who left New York to play at Iowa but felt compelled to return when his family suffered not one but two deaths in a brutally short period of time. We've seen plenty of relief appeals granted for far less in recent seasons, and while that may still happen in Okoro's case, it begs the question: What is the difference here? Where are the guidelines? How big is the box? Is it even a box in the first place?
The same goes for Buckles. This is not his first transfer, which changes things, because the NCAA has been concern-trolling about the purportedly destructive nature of player nomadism for years now. By attempting to transfer a second time after just one year at his previous school, Buckles faces a higher burden of academic proof. But even so, the circumstances of the case seem like a no-brainer: A player is leaving a school that is banned from the NCAA tournament and that now no longer even has a scholarship available for him to return to play one last year for his former coach at that coach's new school. And not only was his hope to play right away at Minnesota dashed, he was told he couldn't transfer at all. Maybe that aligns with the NCAA's rules on academic status for transfers. It's hard to know, because the player's privacy is worth protecting. But even if we're talking rules and not "guidelines" … why? Because that would be bad for Buckles? Even though he clearly disagrees? I know, I know, the NCAA is our last societal bastion of early-20th century class patriarchy. But really?
Simplify the transfer rules. Simplify the appeals guidelines. Simplify the rules. This was among NCAA president Mark Emmert's primary goals when he took on the job of representing the NCAA membership, and he has managed to streamline other areas of the rulebook. There are now more straightforward (and strict) punishments for violations, less confusion about texting recruits, no penalties for eating cream cheese, etc. etc. But the transfer rules remain.
There is some movement on this front: Last November, the Division I Legislative Council’s Subcommittee for Legislative Relief (no joke, that's what it's actually called)* changed the guidelines for hardship waiver requests in an effort to make application thereof more consistent. CLearly, that hasn't worked out too well, but it's something -- and indicative of a larger effort to make transfers less of a thorny mess.
In a perfect world, players would have as much personal agency as the men paid handsomely for marshaling their talents. In a perfect world, the NCAA wouldn't need to create 20-page pamphlets to educate students on transfer rules, because those rules would be so simple as to be intuitive. In a perfect world, the NCAA wouldn't feel the need to tell 22-year-old men and women it knows what's better for their academic futures than they do.
We do not live in a perfect world, unfortunately, and some of the above will never happen, at least not as long as the NCAA is still kicking. But the current system is at best poorly misunderstood and at worst irreconcilably broken. Either way, it's time to start over.
*Oh, and while we're at it, can you guys stop naming things the Division I Legislative Council’s Subcommittee for Legislative Relief? Call it the Appeals Group. Rebrand. Football Group. Basketball Group. Rules Group. Investigations Group. Enforcement Group. Whatever.
Rebrand, guys. Communicate simply, clearly, declaratively. It really doesn't have to be this hard.
http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation
Transfers seem straightforward. A player leaves one school and attends another, and has to sit out one year before he can play for his new team. Simple, right? Wrong: Even that seemingly structured rule is beset by a score of academic timeline requirements and bureaucratic processes.
A player must receive a written permission-to-contact letter from his current coach. He must have spent a full year in "academic residence" -- i.e., attending classes as a full-time, 12-credit-hours-or-insert-your-school's-equivalency student -- before he is eligible to get back on the court at his new school. There are "4-4" transfers and "2-4" transfers and different rules therein; there are issues involving full, partial, or non-qualifying academic status; and there are waivers and appeals you can make based on specific circumstances that can change the preexisting requirements, just like that.
How dizzying is this stuff? Here's the NCAA's brochure [PDF] for student-athletes interested in learning more about the transfer process. Ostensibly, this document was created to make the rules easy to understand and apply. It is filled with handy little case studies; it even has a glossary of important terms. And if you can read past the third page without help from prescription ADHD medication, well, I'd love to shake your hand. This stuff is brutal.
Which brings us to today's latest transfer news, reported by ESPN.com's Jeff Goodman:
Former Louisville forward Rakeem Buckles, who sat out last season at Florida International, will not be allowed to follow Richard Pitino to Minnesota, multiple sources told ESPN.
Buckles spent three seasons at Louisville and suffered two major knee injuries. He left the Cardinals and sat out last season at FIU, but decided to transfer to Minnesota and apply for a waiver to play immediately because Florida International was hit with a postseason ban by the NCAA for academic issues dating to the Isiah Thomas regime.
As Jeff writes, the surprise here stems from the fact that a player wouldn't be allowed to transfer away from a school that is currently not barred from the NCAA tournament for Academic Progress Rate violations. We've seen a handful of recent players in similar situations move to new schools and be eligible right away (see: Huskies, UConn). One of them is already working out in Minneapolis: Current Gophers guard Malik Smith, also formerly of FIU, transferred to Minnesota and was granted a waiver by the NCAA this summer. He'll play this season, but Buckles won't. Huh?
That's hardly the only confusing recent transfer news. Last week, Kerwin Okoro, a player transferring from Iowa State to Rutgers, was denied a hardship waiver by the NCAA. Okoro appealed to play immediately, as many players in recent seasons have, under the medical or family hardship "legislative relief" exemption (see what I mean?) after losing his New York City-based father and brother in the matter of two months last winter. But Okoro's appeal was denied, which raised red flags out in Rutgers, where the Star-Ledger has tried to divine why so many former Scarlet Knights were granted post-Mike Rice appeals this spring while Okoro, who is entering the program recovering from family tragedy, was not. The key quote from an NCAA spokesman:
"It’s not a formula. It’s not a math problem," NCAA spokesman Christopher Radford said. "The guidelines evolve and we see different circumstances and scenarios, and the guidelines evolve with that to make the process better and more efficient."
This comes amid the Star-Ledger's attempt to explain the transfer hardship/relief/whatever appeals process, and the various NCAA subcommittees each case passes through on each various appeal attempt. It all ends at the desk of the Legislative Council Subcommittee, which "may not even be burdened by the guidelines it has set for the NCAA staff."
"The subcommittee essentially can make whatever decision they think is the appropriate decision as a representative of the membership," Brooks said.
It would seem that Okoro is a textbook case, a player who left New York to play at Iowa but felt compelled to return when his family suffered not one but two deaths in a brutally short period of time. We've seen plenty of relief appeals granted for far less in recent seasons, and while that may still happen in Okoro's case, it begs the question: What is the difference here? Where are the guidelines? How big is the box? Is it even a box in the first place?
The same goes for Buckles. This is not his first transfer, which changes things, because the NCAA has been concern-trolling about the purportedly destructive nature of player nomadism for years now. By attempting to transfer a second time after just one year at his previous school, Buckles faces a higher burden of academic proof. But even so, the circumstances of the case seem like a no-brainer: A player is leaving a school that is banned from the NCAA tournament and that now no longer even has a scholarship available for him to return to play one last year for his former coach at that coach's new school. And not only was his hope to play right away at Minnesota dashed, he was told he couldn't transfer at all. Maybe that aligns with the NCAA's rules on academic status for transfers. It's hard to know, because the player's privacy is worth protecting. But even if we're talking rules and not "guidelines" … why? Because that would be bad for Buckles? Even though he clearly disagrees? I know, I know, the NCAA is our last societal bastion of early-20th century class patriarchy. But really?
Simplify the transfer rules. Simplify the appeals guidelines. Simplify the rules. This was among NCAA president Mark Emmert's primary goals when he took on the job of representing the NCAA membership, and he has managed to streamline other areas of the rulebook. There are now more straightforward (and strict) punishments for violations, less confusion about texting recruits, no penalties for eating cream cheese, etc. etc. But the transfer rules remain.
There is some movement on this front: Last November, the Division I Legislative Council’s Subcommittee for Legislative Relief (no joke, that's what it's actually called)* changed the guidelines for hardship waiver requests in an effort to make application thereof more consistent. CLearly, that hasn't worked out too well, but it's something -- and indicative of a larger effort to make transfers less of a thorny mess.
In a perfect world, players would have as much personal agency as the men paid handsomely for marshaling their talents. In a perfect world, the NCAA wouldn't need to create 20-page pamphlets to educate students on transfer rules, because those rules would be so simple as to be intuitive. In a perfect world, the NCAA wouldn't feel the need to tell 22-year-old men and women it knows what's better for their academic futures than they do.
We do not live in a perfect world, unfortunately, and some of the above will never happen, at least not as long as the NCAA is still kicking. But the current system is at best poorly misunderstood and at worst irreconcilably broken. Either way, it's time to start over.
*Oh, and while we're at it, can you guys stop naming things the Division I Legislative Council’s Subcommittee for Legislative Relief? Call it the Appeals Group. Rebrand. Football Group. Basketball Group. Rules Group. Investigations Group. Enforcement Group. Whatever.
Rebrand, guys. Communicate simply, clearly, declaratively. It really doesn't have to be this hard.
Unreal, so it's subjective and not objective and reason based, you cannot run any organization that way whether it be the neighborhood sewing club or something more important, and to make things worse they are screwing with people's lives.
Trolling and purportedly destructive nature of player nomadism? Buckles is tethered to Pitino, the NCAA should appreciate his loyalty. Isn't that good for the game? If the NCAA is worried about trolling and nomadism, perhaps the NCAA should limit a coach's ability to move from university to university.
I don't understand the denial at all. Unless there is something I'm not aware of, this seems to be a classic example of an arbitrary and capricious decision, the benchmark of a reversible administrative action.
Gopher Warrior
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 3,915
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 36
There could be a number of things going on behind the scenes... some possibilities of issues causing the denial include academics, multiple 4-4 transfers, FIU's history, etc..
Father Pitino speaks up:
"I'm just blown away by it. It makes no sense. It's amazing the NCAA can do this," Pitino told ESPN.com. "He's a model student-athlete who had a 3.2 GPA when he left Louisville. He just wants a chance to play in another NCAA tournament."
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas...-baffled-ncaa-denying-rakeem-buckles-transfer
"I'm just blown away by it. It makes no sense. It's amazing the NCAA can do this," Pitino told ESPN.com. "He's a model student-athlete who had a 3.2 GPA when he left Louisville. He just wants a chance to play in another NCAA tournament."
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas...-baffled-ncaa-denying-rakeem-buckles-transfer
Jason Groth
Member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2009
- Messages
- 39
- Reaction score
- 6
- Points
- 8
Hopefully the negative national press this is getting will at least help expedite the appeal process (if not influence the decision).
Nice.
Bad Gopher
A Loner, A Rebel
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,510
- Reaction score
- 11,033
- Points
- 113
This story has made a bit of a splash in the national media because it's such a bewildering and seemingly unjust ruling. I agree - all the attention can't hurt the chances of the appeal. The timing couldn't be worse for the NCAA, on the heels of their strange penalty in the Manziel matter (A half-game suspension? Really?).
Winasota Gopher
Deep Insider
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2012
- Messages
- 6,668
- Reaction score
- 77
- Points
- 48
The NCAA is an acronym for
Not
A
Fuck!ng
Clue
They just put the wrong letters on the name.
BBQ Platypus
Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2010
- Messages
- 464
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
Needlessly Complicated and Arbitrarily Applied.
Bad Gopher
A Loner, A Rebel
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,510
- Reaction score
- 11,033
- Points
- 113
No
Clue
About
Anything
Clue
About
Anything
howieramone
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2011
- Messages
- 2,451
- Reaction score
- 14
- Points
- 38
WanderingGopher
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2009
- Messages
- 2,634
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 36
Interesting thoughts, but still, what you seem to be suggesting (and what may be true) is that a few NCAA staffers charged with this task will read the papers submitted, consider the facts and then ... decide "what is best for the student-athlete and member institutions." Which is an incredibly paternalistic, unpredictable and ridiculously unfair approach to things. Especially given the money at stake in big time college basketball, as well as a major part of the student's life (and possibly livelihood).
WanderingGopher
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2009
- Messages
- 2,634
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 36
It's also possible that the NCAA staff tends to take a "burden is on student athlete" approach to these waiver requests and will tend to deny them if they're unsure, it's complicated, or it's a close call, knowing that the athlete then will get a second bite at the appeal, via appeal, to provide a more detailed explanation, more supporting facts, etc.
And it's possible in this case the reviewing staffers didn't fully appreciate that an appeal here may not practically be possible due to the timing issues.
And it's possible in this case the reviewing staffers didn't fully appreciate that an appeal here may not practically be possible due to the timing issues.
BleedGopher
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2008
- Messages
- 62,316
- Reaction score
- 19,009
- Points
- 113
Yahoo weighs in: Denial of Rakeem Buckles’ request for a waiver highlights NCAA’s inconsistency
It's difficult to ascertain why Smith would receive a waiver and Buckles wouldn't, but the NCAA clearly saw differences in the two cases. The primary difference is this is Buckles' second transfer since he began his career at Louisville under Rick Pitino and left to play for the elder Pitino's son Richard at FIU when injuries and an influx of talent at his position diminished his chances of playing heavy minutes.
It would help Minnesota considerably if Buckles were to win his waiver because the Gophers need a forward who can defend, rebound and protect the rim. Minnesota is thin in the frontcourt next season as a result of the graduation of Trevor Mbakwe and Rodney Williams.
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaab...ghts-ncaa-inconsistency-154408433--ncaab.html
Go Gophers!!
It's difficult to ascertain why Smith would receive a waiver and Buckles wouldn't, but the NCAA clearly saw differences in the two cases. The primary difference is this is Buckles' second transfer since he began his career at Louisville under Rick Pitino and left to play for the elder Pitino's son Richard at FIU when injuries and an influx of talent at his position diminished his chances of playing heavy minutes.
It would help Minnesota considerably if Buckles were to win his waiver because the Gophers need a forward who can defend, rebound and protect the rim. Minnesota is thin in the frontcourt next season as a result of the graduation of Trevor Mbakwe and Rodney Williams.
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaab...ghts-ncaa-inconsistency-154408433--ncaab.html
Go Gophers!!
Gopher Warrior
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 3,915
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 36
Serious question: how would you do things differently? Here we have a school who wants to be granted an exception to the rules. They are able to make their case (and appeal their case if their request is initially denied) by providing whatever information they believe is relevant. Then, a decision is made based on the available information. What are the alternatives that are less "paternalistic, unpredictable and ridiculously unfair"?
One thing that most people miss in their rants about the NCAA... I'll try to keep this short. You'll hear, "Emmert (NCAA President) is terrible, burn him at the stake, etc".. but what people miss is that the NCAA is essentially THE MEMBER SCHOOLS!
"The NCAA sucks!" say some schools.. OK, then change it. It's effectively your organization.
An example here is the Committee on Academic Performance (who makes recommendations as to waivers when there is a postseason ban)... I think this is a 15-person committee. There are always at least 2 heads of schools (i.e. president or equivalent)... all 15 are on staff at a MEMBER SCHOOL or conference! 4 year terms. They are policy setters and report directly to the Board of Director.
In other words, it's not as if there is some evil group of "NCAA staffers" that is mindlessly screwing schools and players. You've got your peers making decisions. Groups of people from other schools.
The setup is nice in that regard... their perspective is (or should be) "the student comes first"...
Anyway, my point is "the evil NCAA" isn't Emmert and a bunch of crazies with no clue flipping coins... it's representatives of the schools it serves.
From the Barn
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2008
- Messages
- 4,255
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 36
I'd hate to hear what you think about jury trials.
WanderingGopher
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2009
- Messages
- 2,634
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 36
I'm not sure the people initially evaluating waiver requests like the Buckles one are member school reps. I think they are NCAA staffers. Whether the appeals reviewers are different, I don't know but I think so.
I think the NCAA's long term role (at least in the big time sports) is in some question ... everyone can see where things seem to be going in football.
Hopefully the NCAA can address the appeal quickly as they have in some other cases, like that ex-marine wanting to play football (admittedly different facts, but similar in timing was an issue).
I think the NCAA's long term role (at least in the big time sports) is in some question ... everyone can see where things seem to be going in football.
Hopefully the NCAA can address the appeal quickly as they have in some other cases, like that ex-marine wanting to play football (admittedly different facts, but similar in timing was an issue).
short ornery norwegian
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2011
- Messages
- 21,873
- Reaction score
- 15,868
- Points
- 113
In the case of the ex-marine, the NCAA basically folded after getting roasted in the media, which suggests that their decisions are not cast in stone, and can be arbitrary depending on who is making the decision.
bemidjigopher
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2011
- Messages
- 7,148
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 38
I think Buckles will win his appeal, while not at the same level, the elder Pitino and a couple writers at espn have been roasting the NCAA for this one.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Going to zzz land not forgetting the UNFAIR DEAL MARK EMMERT'S NCAA staff have given to innocent athletes OKORO-HILL-BUCKLES-<a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23MARKGETITRIGHT&src=hash">#MARKGETITRIGHT</a></p>— Dick Vitale (@DickieV) <a href="https://twitter.com/DickieV/statuses/374747423983140864">September 3, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
DeathClutch
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2010
- Messages
- 2,453
- Reaction score
- 379
- Points
- 83
Raymond Taylor, who transfered to FIU and sat out last year, tweeted this 4 days ago.
PSA!!!! ... My Brother Rakeem Buckles is officially Golden Panther !! FIUOE WeReady
I'm not entirely sure of the validity of this, but it would really suck if true.
PSA!!!! ... My Brother Rakeem Buckles is officially Golden Panther !! FIUOE WeReady
I'm not entirely sure of the validity of this, but it would really suck if true.
WanderingGopher
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2009
- Messages
- 2,634
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 36
I believe FIU may be helping to f* up this situation. I've been suspicious of that ever since reading this quote in Fuller's blog on Aug. 20 (which, while technically true at the time, seemed a bit odd of a statement for someone whom everyone thought was about to transfer, esp given reports that FIU had filled all its scholarships for fall):
"Despite speculation Tuesday that forward Rakeem Buckles would be transferring to the Gophers soon, FIU spokesperson Paul Dodson said Buckles is still "a scholarship athlete at FIU." Buckles, a former Louisville transfer, needs a waiver from the NCAA to play this season for Pitino, who coached the Panthers in 2012-13."
If FIU somehow finds a scholarship for Buckles now, it 1) basically forces his hand to stay, and 2) to some extent undermines our appeal (I know the lack of scholarships at FIU isn't supposed to be an on-the-record factor, but you can bet it'd be considered especially given the public pressure/perception).
Even though FIU has known all along Buckles wants to transfer and planned to transfer, I wonder how much they have been cooperating in this process.
"Despite speculation Tuesday that forward Rakeem Buckles would be transferring to the Gophers soon, FIU spokesperson Paul Dodson said Buckles is still "a scholarship athlete at FIU." Buckles, a former Louisville transfer, needs a waiver from the NCAA to play this season for Pitino, who coached the Panthers in 2012-13."
If FIU somehow finds a scholarship for Buckles now, it 1) basically forces his hand to stay, and 2) to some extent undermines our appeal (I know the lack of scholarships at FIU isn't supposed to be an on-the-record factor, but you can bet it'd be considered especially given the public pressure/perception).
Even though FIU has known all along Buckles wants to transfer and planned to transfer, I wonder how much they have been cooperating in this process.
WanderingGopher
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2009
- Messages
- 2,634
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 36
Another blog reaction, with a few interesting comments about Buckles' potential (apparently a Louisville fan).
Bad Gopher
A Loner, A Rebel
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,510
- Reaction score
- 11,033
- Points
- 113
Yes, the plot seems to thicken. I remembered that quote from FIU, too, and wondered what was going on. I can understand why Florida International would be trying to salvage some of their roster by trying to keep Buckles, but it makes Rakeem into somewhat of a pawn in all of this, especially considering the post season ban and his only one year of eligibility. I feel worse for the guy than I do about our own needs here.