Jump to content

follow the link


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

>mckinney would probably have to redshirt so we wouldnt gain

>a thing over the worst case thought of waiting a year for

>tommie to qualify. i say if my choice is a transferring

>mckinney or a year wait for liddell, i wait for liddell.

I was under the impression that if the NCAA sanctions rose to the level of prohibiting post season play that players then could freely transfer and not sit out (ala John Lucas going from Baylor to OK State). As Tommie stands a fair chance of going to JUCO (based on the rumors), I don't think JMac and Tommie would overlap at SLU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

internet rumors are one thing. paid staff reporters making bold statements like this without basis (i dont blame them for not sharing sources) is something totally different.

my point is, that if this is totally false, then the reporter that put it out needs to find another profession and probably will be asked to do just that. because you can bet that missouri will go after him and fox full speed if he made it up or quoted some unknown guy in a bar or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont remember players in the past being able to freely transfer as the baylor thing played out last year. i believe that was a special circumstance based on the whole sickening way the baylor thing played out. murders, drugs, etc. they had to let the kids leave without penalty imo. i dont think that necessarily makes that transfer situation the norm hereforward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

see josh fisher. meaning the ncaa frowns heavily on players following their coach. had romar not left saint louis university, josh fisher would never have gotten that year back he had to sit out when he followed lorenzo from pepperdine to saint louis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this board is getting carried away that this story is gospel. While it wouldn't surprise me if that is what Missouri gets, it also wouldn't surprise me if they got something less severe. How is this rumor any different than the coaching change rumors that get published and never happen. I believe that if the NCAA had finished their report they would be currently notifying Missouri of their findings not waiting for May. I'll use that expression that I hate ,I'm from the show me state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, it's up to the individual conferences to decide rules regarding intra-conference transfers, not the NCAA. For example, in the Big Ten you either have to sit 2 years or not get a scholarship and sit 1.

Also, the Baylor situation was a special one due to the trauma surrounding the program. A teammate was murdered by another teammate, the coach was caught on tape trying to get other coaches and players to frame the murdered teammate, it was a situation the NCAA had never dealt with, let alone imagined. Because of the severity of the situation all players were allowed to transfer without sitting out. 2 transferred to other Big 12 schools (Lucas and another kid, Taylor, to Texas) and Lawrence Roberts to Miss. State.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a school is penalized by suspension of postseason play then a player has carte blanche to transfer wherever he wants to without sitting out. Conley or anyone else for that matter could end up playing on a big 12 team next season. Mizzou cannot hold their players back or not grant their release if they do recieve a postseason ban.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>see josh fisher. meaning the ncaa frowns heavily on players

>following their coach. had romar not left saint louis

>university, josh fisher would never have gotten that year

>back he had to sit out when he followed lorenzo from

>pepperdine to saint louis.

Not true, Roy. It wasn't the NCAA it was Pepperdine who wouldn't fully let him out of his LOI. Before a kid enrolls he is bound to his LOI, but if he breaks it before enrollment the school can release him, meaning he doesn't lose any eligibility, or the school can not release him, meaning he loses a year of eligibility. Some schools won't release a player who follows a coach because they are concerned about tampering - thus the reason Pepperdine didn't release Fish until Romar left. A player must get a release from the school he has signed with for each school he is interested in transferring to, not just a blanket release. If Painter does go to Purdue and Shaw wants to leave it is up to SIU, not the NCAA, to decide whether or not they would release Shaw to Purdue or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kalen is a different player with the Eagles than with HC.

Posters have said that we need a more mobile PF and Grimes does not fit in with that. He is a post up guy and will not be handling the ball anywhere beyond 15 feet from the basket.

I would take Kalen in a heartbeat over 99% of JUCOs. At worst I think he projects to be a Justin Tatum type player. At best he is an undersized bull of a center in the mold of tractor Traylor or Corliss Williamson. UB can get anybody to play, he has done it with JJ, Izik and Reggie. I don't worry about kalen's effort, if he doesn't show it he stays on the pine.

Still McKinney would be the more likely option in coming to SLU at least in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the length of the post-season ban dictate which players on the penalized team can transfer and play immediately?

For example, if Team AAAA gets a one year post-season ban can only the juniors (seniors to be) on that team be allowed to transfer without sitting out a year? Or can current year freshmen and sophmores be eligible to transfer and play immediately as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think tatum is the better comparison. his lack of consistency all throughout his high school career makes me doubt he will ever be a big time pf. i hope for kalen's benefit i am wrong and someone or someplace will be able to "flip the switch".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the tiger board has a string going now (i am sure it will be deleted soon as most of them are these days) that alludes that this whole story about mi$$ouri probation is a result of a rumor that roy williams is starting to try to convince tyler hansborough to come to north carolina instead of missouri. regardless of whether this stuff is true or not, it makes for fantastic entertainment.

now if that is true, and the tigers dont go on probation, roy williams needs to be dealt with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh i dont know. how much smoke was around all that luke axtell b.s.? and the guy that transferred to kansas from lsu, lester earl i believe was his name, was pure slime. i dont hold roy williams on any pedestal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ticks me off. I can't believe one can't engage in reasonable critiques of coaches or players without getting a suspension. Why one can't articulate reasons for ousting Quin is ridiculous to me. Thankfully, Steve's policy is different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow, those tiger guy$ have some clout! got fox to take down the story.

to summarize, there was a story aj that was on fox's site that had a bunch of random bits. kind of like bernie's bits column on saturdays. just a sentence or two hitting stuff happening or people being seen around the final four. one of the paragraphs was a shot at missouri. basically said the word around san antonio is that the tigers will receive a two year probation and one year post season ban.

kfns had both writers on the byline on their show today. neither would give out sources only said that they were hearing that throughout the tourney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys on 1380 said they spoke with Veltrop and DeCoursey (sportingnews college hoops writers) this afternoon and learned that the story would be pulled from the website. Apparantly as the writers dug around deeper, their sources started to get contridicted and the initial revelation that Mizzou would get 2 years probation and a one year post season ban, was less certain.

The prediction may happen, but the writers felt it was prudent to remove the story early.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roy ... I think you are right Baylor was a special case and was given special consideration from the NCAA ... He would have to sit a year. I would rather pass on him ... but on the flip side ... it could put us in very good favor with Floyd ... bailing his guy out of a bad situation and a decent player to boot ... then again ... what if he couldn't start ...

Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

or it could have been poor journalism. I didn't hear KFNS, but the Tigerboard threads talk about how both DeCourcey and another reporter, who were responsible for the story, seemed to back off on their scoop. Did anyone else hear KFNS?

Anyway, they're saying that DeCourcey said he didn't report the story, so they got the other co-reporter on the air. It seems that he wouldn't commit to saying whether his source was a Mizzou official or NCAA official. Thus, one can say he was only reporting a rumor from an outsider not directly involved in the investigation. If this is the case, it's unfortunate that Fox Sports didn't report this as a rumor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...