What are the chances Bradley get his waiver granted this week??

[brianstl]

3 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

I don't think so either as it will be more lawsuits. Also the rule is applied unevenly as we've already pointed out. In Football a player can make 4 appearances without losing a year of eligibility why can't you appear in any basketball games?

The uneven application of rules and the US rule of law to protect the individual will win out. 

If Ez wants to play, then play.

As for our international players. It's a little trickier but we could see a future lawsuit. Persons admitted legally to the US are in almost all cases treated by law as a US Person. However, I'm not completely sure what type of visa foreign student athletes get and the wording of the visa. Also they are not able to earn money. However, if the condition of their scholarship is based on playing a sport and the NCAA is hindering them playing that sport they may have a case. Therefore, the NCAA stalling granting eligibility to a student athlete, when a school has already deemed they meet the entry requirements is an undue penalty.

The application of the rule is applied even more unevenly when you add the fact that it isn’t applied to the vast majority of sports the NCAA governs.  It is hard to justify that a year in residency is needed for the benefit of students athletes or competitive reasons when you only apply it to student athletes in 5 sports.

[3star_recruit]

We already know what the possible downside is if a player plays the next two games.  What's the upside?  I think the most likely outcome is a 1-1 record whether Ezewiro plays or not.  

[JMM28]

7 minutes ago, HoosierPal said:

What's kind of ironic here is that in January, D1 conferences wanted the rules to be tightened.  They were tightened, and now some of the same schools are upset.

On January 11, the Division I Council—which includes a voting representative from each Division I conference—voted unanimously to significantly tighten the criteria for undergraduate students who transfer for a second time to be granted a waiver to play immediately.

I think they’re upset about the waiver system. If the NCAA stuck to what they said “absolutely no waivers” this wouldn’t be an issue. 

[TheA_Bomb]

4 minutes ago, JMM28 said:

I think they’re upset about the waiver system. If the NCAA stuck to what they said “absolutely no waivers” this wouldn’t be an issue. 

I think they were short sighted. They didn't want their players to transfer out but wanted all transfers in to be eligible. Also, you need to go with reality. At the time this wasn't a court ruling now it is so there's no point in fighting it, ya gotta go with it.

[Compton]

29 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

We already know what the possible downside is if a player plays the next two games.  What's the upside? 

Our likelihood of winning goes up. More depth, more size, more experience, etc...

[AnkielBreakers]

If I was Travis Ford, I would be talking Ezewiro into playing and not even asking for approval. He needs to go for broke.

[Pistol]

18 minutes ago, AnkielBreakers said:

If I was Travis Ford, I would be talking Ezewiro into playing and not even asking for approval. He needs to go for broke.

What if you were Brad?

[NextYearBill]

if i was Power 5, I'd play - they will have your back if stuff hits the fan

If i was at SLU - im sitting 

[billikenfan05]

If I were Travis Ford, I would have renegotiated my contract down to 1.5 mil and told the booster that signs the check on that extra mil to donate it to the BVF. 

[thunderdan]

1 hour ago, The Wiz said:

From a risk prospective, Ezewiro has already taken the big risk. He did so months ago when he became a 2 time transfer.   Turns out  that was a 10 % chance of winning.   The next gamble is... should he play the next 2 weeks. That success probability  starts out at about 70%.  Is that a hypothetical guess?  No...The judge doesn't grant a TRO unless there is a high probability the players will win the case.   That plus the fact that he will probably grant another order for the same reason in a couple of weeks...ie to continue to prevent harm  to the players. The judge has implied  you have a good chance of winning...the next order or legal proceeding will probably last at least 3 months and therefore will make the whole issue of burning a year of eligibility a  moot point as the season will be over by then.  

The judge's stance is he wants to protect the players...Now that the NCAA has spit in the face of the judge by trying to nullify and over  turn his ruling and cause further harm to the players by making it more difficult to play (threatening players with a 1 year  burn)  the probability of player having a successful out come probably increases to 80%.

The players and the schools took a a  10% chance of successful outcome at the start of the season. Why not take the 80% chance of success now.  Some may argue ...yeah but at least  you don't burn a year of eligibility...True ...instead you burn a year of your life...a strange trade off.

To the NCAA....by trying to save themselves they are hastening their death.  LET THE KIDS PLAY.

 

 

[Dr Bird]

The NCAA had a chance to look benevolent during the 2-week period but fumbled yet again.

I had a glimmer of hope yesterday but now my guess is no Brad until a final resolution.

[wgstl]

24 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said:

If I were Travis Ford, I would have renegotiated my contract down to 1.5 mil and told the booster that signs the check on that extra mil to donate it to the BVF. 

You don’t even need to go down that much. 2m would do wonders. 

[slufan13]

I have a feeling SLU wouldn't have played Brad anyway until something more permanent happened but now it seems really unlikely he'll play. Hope they prove me wrong but seems like more players are sitting than playing after the first day or two of this and I don't typically see SLU in the aggressive/risky category

[HoosierPal]

There are only two votes here that count, one for the Basketball Team and one for Brad Ezewiro.  If both vote the same way, situation resolved whatever the vote is. 

If SLU says no you aren't playing, and Brad says yes I want to play, then likely he sits.  Ford doesn't have to play him under that decision. 

But if SLU says yes you are playing, and Brad says no I don't want to play, that would be interesting.

[gobillsgo]

13 minutes ago, HoosierPal said:

There are only two votes here that count, one for the Basketball Team and one for Brad Ezewiro.  If both vote the same way, situation resolved whatever the vote is. 

If SLU says no you aren't playing, and Brad says yes I want to play, then likely he sits.  Ford doesn't have to play him under that decision. 

But if SLU says yes you are playing, and Brad says no I don't want to play, that would be interesting.

I don’t think even Ford would stoop so low as to force a player to risk a year of eligibility if the player didn’t want to take that chance. 
 

then again, desperate times…

[billikenfan05]

1 minute ago, gobillsgo said:

I don’t think even Ford would stoop so low as to force a player to risk a year of eligibility if the player didn’t want to take that chance. 
 

then again, desperate times…

I go back and forth on how much Travis actually thinks his job is on the line 

[HoosierPal]

25 minutes ago, gobillsgo said:

I don’t think even Ford would stoop so low as to force a player to risk a year of eligibility if the player didn’t want to take that chance. 
 

then again, desperate times…

Good point, but if your 'employer' says do X Y and Z, and you don't, that's not a good situation.  Brad is getting a full ride.

But I'm with you, I wouldn't play him, specifically for the next two games, if he says no.  It's only two games.

Brad is one of a few transfers with two years eligibility.  Most have only one.  Those players have a much larger decision.  Do you risk the rest of your college basketball career on this two week TRO?

[johnbj14]

17 minutes ago, billikenfan05 said:

I go back and forth on how much Travis actually thinks his job is on the line 

I didn’t think he felt any pressure. Then the postgame comments against Hofstra made me reconsider. That’s not exactly a quote a guy who feels secure will throw out. 

[cgeldmacher]

3 hours ago, billikenfan05 said:

If I were Travis Ford, I would have renegotiated my contract down to 1.5 mil and told the booster that signs the check on that extra mil to donate it to the BVF. 

Imagine a business with a $2.5 million contract with another business to supply a certain product.  That contract is renewed annually.  That business finds out that the customer is now unhappy with the product it is being sold and is likely to cancel the contract.  There is a way to salvage the deal.  The customer can, after receiving the product, spend $1 million enhancing the product, thus bringing it up to the level of quality it expects.  What does the business do?  Should they lose the business of this customer altogether?  Or should they agree to renegotiate the deal so that the customer gets the product it wants and the supplying business gets to continue making money off of the deal?

[billikenfan05]

10 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said:

Imagine a business with a $2.5 million contract with another business to supply a certain product.  That contract is renewed annually.  That business finds out that the customer is now unhappy with the product it is being sold and is likely to cancel the contract.  There is a way to salvage the deal.  The customer can, after receiving the product, spend $1 million enhancing the product, thus bringing it up to the level of quality it expects.  What does the business do?  Should they lose the business of this customer altogether?  Or should they agree to renegotiate the deal so that the customer gets the product it wants and the supplying business gets to continue making money off of the deal?

I think this is like comparing Honeycrisp to Red Delicious. I think it’s same but really different. Let’s use @wgstlsuggestion for instance. My hypothetical is not that it’s a negotiation initiated by SLU but a voluntary move by Travis. Travis reducing his salary by 500k or 1m is not so much a sign of good faith after a tough season but an acknowledgment of a changing landscape in college basketball. It ensures that he is able to continue to recruit at a certain level and keep pace with the other schools. Now he has an NIL bag, one of the biggest in the conference. Think about the difference in team we have right now, it’s an insurance policy on his career. 

[Speyburn]

NEWS: Based upon communication received Friday night from the NCAA, SLU junior forward Bradley Ezewiro will be in uniform Saturday against Louisiana Tech and is eligible to compete for the Billikens for the remainder of the season. 

[Billikenswin]

3 minutes ago, Speyburn said:

NEWS: Based upon communication received Friday night from the NCAA, SLU junior forward Bradley Ezewiro will be in uniform Saturday against Louisiana Tech and is eligible to compete for the Billikens for the remainder of the season. 

Deal was made to extend TRO into next spring. No retaliation against school or player allowed when double transfers start playing now. Great news for Brad and the Bills.

[slufan13]

Next 5 or so games will be very interesting to see how good we are with him

[The Wiz]

40 minutes ago, Billikenswin said:

Deal was made to extend TRO into next spring. No retaliation against school or player allowed when double transfers start playing now. Great news for Brad and the Bills.

I guess the NCAA read my post above ....I think the key line that got them was about how  "they spit in the face of the judge"  The whole point of the TRO was to do no harm to the players and in 24 hours the NCAA did harm.  After wiping themselves out legally they have decided to do the right thing.... Who is in charge at the NCAA....Goofy or Pluto?

[HoosierPal]

The full communication.