Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

NCAA sucks..... Some new transfer clarifications that fit just a few limited situations

"Student-athletes in some specific situations can now transfer and compete immediately without a waiver, the Division I Council decided this week. The Council met Thursday and Friday in Indianapolis.

Incoming freshman college athletes who have enrolled in summer school and received athletics financial aid can transfer and play immediately without a waiver if their head coach departs before the first day of classes for the fall term. Additionally, walk-on student-athletes on teams that provide athletics aid and nonrecruited walk-ons can transfer and play immediately without a waiver. Those rules are effective for students who transfer to new schools this fall."

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/di-council-adjusts-transfer-rules

 

Per Football Scoop:  An NCAA spokesperson has clarified that this applies only to incoming athletes who will begin their college enrollment for the summer term — not high schoolers who graduated early and enrolled in January.

Edited by LTtxfan
Posted
4 hours ago, LTtxfan said:

NCAA sucks..... Some new transfer clarifications that fit just a few limited situations

"Student-athletes in some specific situations can now transfer and compete immediately without a waiver, the Division I Council decided this week. The Council met Thursday and Friday in Indianapolis.

Incoming freshman college athletes who have enrolled in summer school and received athletics financial aid can transfer and play immediately without a waiver if their head coach departs before the first day of classes for the fall term. Additionally, walk-on student-athletes on teams that provide athletics aid and nonrecruited walk-ons can transfer and play immediately without a waiver. Those rules are effective for students who transfer to new schools this fall."

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/di-council-adjusts-transfer-rules

 

Per Football Scoop:  An NCAA spokesperson has clarified that this applies only to incoming athletes who will begin their college enrollment for the summer term — not high schoolers who graduated early and enrolled in January.

That just means they don't have to apply for a waiver. Re: the bolded part, it just means those students would still have to apply for a waiver... Which very well may get approved. It doesn't mean that a waiver 100% won't be approved

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, TheBryMan81 said:

That just means they don't have to apply for a waiver. Re: the bolded part, it just means those students would still have to apply for a waiver... Which very well may get approved. It doesn't mean that a waiver 100% won't be approved

Just seems like a limited situation where a Head Coach leaves in the summer.  Guess this should be called the Bob Stoops/Lincoln Riley rule......  Not sure why the freshman early enrollees shouldn't be allowed to leave without a waiver too just like the incoming summer freshman??

I have NO problem with walk-ons transferring and having immediate eligibility without a waiver.

Edited by LTtxfan
Posted
20 hours ago, LTtxfan said:

Just seems like a limited situation where a Head Coach leaves in the summer.  Guess this should be called the Bob Stoops/Lincoln Riley Rule......  Not sure why the freshman early enrollees shouldn't be allowed to leave without a waiver too just like the incoming summer freshman??  I have NO problem with walk-ons transferring and having immediate eligibility without a waiver.

Or call it the Hugh Freeze Escort-Service Rule..... resigned in late July 2017 from Old Miss. This new rule does not apply to the  run-of-the-mill Nov/Dec/Jan firings or departures.

Posted
20 hours ago, LTtxfan said:

Just seems like a limited situation where a Head Coach leaves in the summer.  Guess this should be called the Bob Stoops/Lincoln Riley rule......  Not sure why the freshman early enrollees shouldn't be allowed to leave without a waiver too just like the incoming summer freshman??

I have NO problem with walk-ons transferring and having immediate eligibility without a waiver.

I'd think they'd all be granted as the NCAA is going to have a heck of time in court explaining why group A can and group B can't.  I'm guessing this rule is more a warning to schools if they do a Stoops/Riley all that year's recruits are allowed to change schools. 

Posted
4 hours ago, bEastTexas said:

According to Mike Roach Texas is looking into this grad transfer LB from Florida, still in the vetting process but interest from both sides. 

 

https://247sports.com/Player/Kylan-Johnson-56320/

It can't hurt, but taking a JAG LB over the summer and expecting him to have the talent level and ability to pick up the scheme in time to be helpful for next season seems unlikely. If we experience injuries to the point where we'd need this guy to start, I think I'd rather just go 4 DL and 7 DBs. 

Posted

Certainly not ideal, but it's pretty damn fortunate we have LOS DBs in Foster (proven) and Overshown (unproven) with the lack of LB depth. Foster had a hand-full of really savvy plays against larger linemen last season. 

Posted
31 minutes ago, BigBenBamboozle said:

Certainly not ideal, but it's pretty damn fortunate we have LOS DBs in Foster (proven) and Overshown (unproven) with the lack of LB depth. Foster had a hand-full of really savvy plays against larger linemen last season. 

Yeah, Overshown is a pretty big unknown but his HS film makes me think he'd excel at Rover. In the goal line series during the spring game, Overshown navigated the box extremely well and knifed into the running lane multiple times.  He showed the instincts and natural ability to flow to the play you want to see out of an ILB. 

 I suspect Overshown might be the best LB on our roster currently, and it's a shame he hasn't been training at Rover all spring, whether that's his choice or the staff's.

Posted
3 hours ago, Burt Macklin said:

It can't hurt, but taking a JAG LB over the summer and expecting him to have the talent level and ability to pick up the scheme in time to be helpful for next season seems unlikely. If we experience injuries to the point where we'd need this guy to start, I think I'd rather just go 4 DL and 7 DBs. 

At worst he’s competition. It’s not like we’ve never seen seniors suddenly make a jump in play.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

At worst he’s competition. It’s not like we’ve never seen seniors suddenly make a jump in play.

A returning senior is much different than a grad transfer. It's going to take a ton for him just to learn the system in time, let alone play well. But yeah, there's really no downside to taking him. I'm just saying the odds of him making much of a beneficial contribution are extremely low.

Posted
5 minutes ago, texifornia said:

The NCAA crackdown on the biggest menace in today's recruiting landscape (sick relative transfer waivers), continues:

 

 

4 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

The Tate Martell ruling looks pretty fucked up now in retrospect.

Yeah. How the fuck did hte Martell waiver not open the flood gates? 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

The Tate Martell ruling looks pretty fucked up now in retrospect.

Guess the sick family member request for a waiver is where the tough NCAA draws the line.

giphy.gif

  • Haha 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, texifornia said:

The NCAA crackdown on the biggest menace in today's recruiting landscape (sick relative transfer waivers), continues:

 

I would be more sympathetic to his argument if he was not so full of shit. His number one reason for transferring was playing time. 

Posted
4 hours ago, Burt Macklin said:

 I suspect Overshown might be the best LB on our roster currently, and it's a shame he hasn't been training at Rover all spring, whether that's his choice or the staff's.

We're going to have to run linebacker drills for the safeties just so Overshown can play "safety"

  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Newy25 said:

I would be more sympathetic to his argument if he was not so full of shit. His number one reason for transferring was playing time. 

Which, given Martell's situation, still makes the NCAA hypocritical (easily debunk-able cover story, plus playing time concerns)

Posted

Luke Ford is full of shit, but this is still all absurd. It's similar to how the NCAA decides to punish some schools and not others. 

  • Like 1
Posted
29 minutes ago, Machinator said:

What have we here??

 

does he have any connection at all to austin that would make him want to come here and split time?  tre watson is from california so obviously austin seemed like a good idea to him, plus he played against us twice.  feaster is from spartanburg.

Posted
3 minutes ago, futureman said:

does he have any connection at all to austin that would make him want to come here and split time?  tre watson is from california so obviously austin seemed like a good idea to him, plus he played against us twice.  feaster is from spartanburg.

@closetojumping says we have some kind of in with Feaster.

He must like F250s.

Posted
54 minutes ago, Fud said:

We're going to have to run linebacker drills for the safeties just so Overshown can play "safety"

Yep. I still have a hard time believing Overshown just flat out refuses to play LB. He wasn't a diva while being recruited and he lined up all over for Arp, including playing DL one year, so it doesn't add up to me, but regardless, it doesn't seem like he's been getting any reps at Rover, even though he seems like the best candidate for that spot on the roster. 

Posted
9 minutes ago, texifornia said:

@closetojumping says we have some kind of in with Feaster.

He must like F250s.

 

8 minutes ago, Machinator said:

Bump

It's going to be interesting to see how involved Texas is with him, given how bullish they are on Whittington now. I don't see why they wouldn't pursue him. I'll see if they're still excited about getting him on campus.

Posted
1 minute ago, closetojumping said:

 

It's going to be interesting to see how involved Texas is with him, given how bullish they are on Whittington now. I don't see why they wouldn't pursue him. I'll see if they're still excited about getting him on campus.

so what’s the connection?  why were we a possible “likely destination” several months ago?

Posted
1 hour ago, closetojumping said:

I keep futureman off of ignore pretty much solely for the purpose of having someone set the floor on the boards for me.

I’ve always felt like we made a good team. 

Posted

Feaster makes a ton of sense if he's graduating or gets a waiver. Doesn't make a ton of sense from his end if he isn't. 

While he's really good, I'd get him just to keep him away from OU and A&M

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...