Report: Jeremy Clark denied 6th year, has hired agent
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:27 AM ^
I really wish the NCAA would at least try to look even-handed.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:50 AM ^
the NCAA.
That is all.
January 23rd, 2017 at 11:01 AM ^
strong to qualify for the help needed by MSU but not strong enough to get the protection of OSU and Alabama.
January 23rd, 2017 at 11:32 AM ^
The NCAA can suck my umbig11" dick.
January 23rd, 2017 at 12:38 PM ^
People are upvoting this garbage. Unreal idiocy here. My God, what is the logic in this statement?
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:28 AM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:28 AM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:35 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 23rd, 2017 at 12:40 PM ^
Ed Davis getting a sixth year at another school made you get into a huge argument with a family member.
Fucking YIKES. Brian sure winds his lemmings up into coniption fits over nonsense, doesn't he?
January 23rd, 2017 at 1:31 PM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:28 AM ^
This really is bullshit.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:39 AM ^
Nah, it's normal. To get a sixth year, the NCAA requires you to have been scout team player of the week at least once while you are injured.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:29 AM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:30 AM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:37 AM ^
Ed Davis won practice awards and got a 6th year for "injuries" during that season.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:39 AM ^
Sure. But note you're saying that he wasn't injured. The issue for Clark wasn't whether he was injured, it was when. Completely different question.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:41 AM ^
didn't play a game in his 5th year. Winning practice awards tell me nothing because he could've been coaching from the sideline, helping out his teammates on how to run the scout team. Why do we assume that he actually wore pads and played football in practice?
January 23rd, 2017 at 11:51 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 23rd, 2017 at 2:35 PM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:57 AM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 11:48 AM ^
I believe Michigan currently recognizes scout team players of the week. I feel like I see it on instagram, maybe from Aaron Bills? It seems like a good way to motivate your 3rd & 4th string guys
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:37 AM ^
No it didn't. The issue is whether his original redshirt was injury related or not.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:44 AM ^
Even if that is true, it's still a different inquiry from the Davis case, isn't it? I think people are confused about Clark because of Davis, when the two aren't the same.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:51 AM ^
How so? They both took a regular redshirt and then lost a season to injury. Whether Clark got to play a bit before he got hurt is irrelevant as the rule very clearly makes an allowance for being injured early in the season within the first 4 games.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:54 AM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 12:09 PM ^
Right, which works out to 4 games. Clark got hurt in the 4th game of the season last year.
January 23rd, 2017 at 12:12 PM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 12:43 PM ^
Shhhh. Let's see how many of the imbeciles here can figure that out for themselves.
January 23rd, 2017 at 12:59 PM ^
4th game wasn't completed.
January 23rd, 2017 at 2:45 PM ^
EDIT: As noted above, it's 4 games because they due to math by saying "what is 30% of the season" and then round, so .3 x 12 = 3.6, or .3 x 13* = 3.9, both round to 4, and you need to have "more than" so 4th game injury would be fine
(*it appears they count the conference championship game, regardless of whether you play in it, but the math doesn't impact it).
The rule is just that you participated in it, not that the player "completed" the game himself:
In team sports, the injury or illness occurs when the student-athlete has not participated in more than three contests or dates of competition (whichever is applicable to that sport) or 30 percent (whichever number is greater) of the institution's scheduled or completed contests or dates of competition in his or her sport.
(12.8.4(c)) The reference to a "completed contest" is that the contest itself was completed, not that the player himself completed the contest. It comes from a change to the rule to deal with cancelled games to due natural disaster, weather, etc.
If you dig through the history you can see that Proposal 2000-76 (Link) makes the chance from "completed" to "scheduled" with this rationale:
The current hardship-waiver legislation, which measures the first half of the playing season by the number of completed contests or dates of competition rather than scheduled contests or dates of competition, leaves injured student-athletes uncertain as to whether they will be granted a medical-hardship waiver until the end of the playing season. The proposed change would provide injured student-athletes with more certainty as to the outcome of a medical-hardship waiver. Additionally, measuring the first half of the playing season by the number of scheduled contests (as set prior to the first scheduled contest or date of competition) will eliminate inequitable results that occur when games are cancelled due to inclement weather, power outages and other forces of nature. Measuring the first half of the playing season in this manner also will eliminate the need for hastily arranged make-up games.
It's then added back in by Proposal 2005-23 (Link) to read "scheduled or completed" echoing that rationale:
Rationale: Currently, there is an inconsistency between hardship waivers and season of competition waivers. Hardship waivers are calculated based on scheduled dates of competition, while season of competition waivers are based on completed dates of competition. The hardship waiver was amended a few years ago from completed to scheduled contests with the purpose of bringing clarity to injured student-athletes uncertain as to whether they will be granted a medical-hardship waiver until the end of the playing season. Additionally, measuring the first half of the playing season by the number of scheduled contests (as set prior to the first scheduled contest or date of competition) will eliminate inequitable results that occur when games are cancelled due to inclement weather, power outages and other forces of nature. Some instances, however, have arisen where the use of completed contests would prove more beneficial to the student-athlete. This proposal will permit student-athletes applying for either waiver to use the calculation method most beneficial to their situation. [....]
Basically, the rule is based on the game itself, not the player's participating in it, as far as I understand it.
January 23rd, 2017 at 1:32 PM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:30 AM ^
could be better spent improving our NCAA lobbying efforts.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:30 AM ^
Has he tried applying under the name "Ed Davis"?
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:36 AM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 2:43 PM ^
This issue was always going to be a problem for Clark, given the 3 game/30 precent rule of the hardship waiver, but it should not have impacted Davis, given the nature of his availability on the Scout team. EDIT: Now that I look at it again, 30% of 12 games = 3.6, and the NCAA rounds up (Rule 12.8.4.3.6), which would be 4 games, so that would not have knocked him out.
Davis was listed as a Scout team participant on MSU's page for him in the 2011 season (Link):
2011 SEASON: Redshirted . . . named Scout Team Defensive Player of the Week vs. Minnesota . . . selected Scout Team Special Teams Player of the Week vs. Central Michigan.
The Central Michigan game was their fourth game of the year (sept 24), the Minnesota game was their ninth game of the year (Nov 5, 10th week of the season if you count their bye week).
You're asking to extend the Five year clock (NCAA Bylaw 12.8.1.5), so it needs to be "circumstances beyond your control" (Link to NCAA Bylaws on this):
This waiver may be granted, based upon objective evidence, for reasons that are beyond the control of the student-athlete or the institution, which deprive the student-athlete of the opportunity to participate for more than one season in his or her sport within the five-year period.
(12.8.1.5.1.) What qualifies as "circumstances beyond control" is defined in 12.8.1.5.1.1 and includes: injury that prevented competition, immediate family member injury, erroneous academic advice, natrual disasters, or extreme financial difficulties. it's worth nothing that this section talks about inability to "participate in intercollegiate athletics", except for injury which prevented an individual's ability to "participate in intercollegiate competition" - thus even if he had a family member injury, financial issue, etc. the fact that he was practicing during the 2011 season would negate a hardhsip waiver.
It also specifically does not include redshirts, and this is noted in 12.8.1.5.1.2:
12.8.1.5.1.2 Circumstances Within Control. Circumstances that are considered to be within the control of the student-athlete or the institution and cause a participation opportunity to be used include, but are not limited to, the following: (Adopted: 8/10/94, Revised: 10/12/95, 10/9/96, 7/30/10, 7/31/14)
[...]
(d) Redshirt year;
Also, 12.8.3.1.3 specifically exempts "preseason exhibitons" and "preseason practice scrimmages" during the initial year. Thus, any other type of practice is implied to count.
I still don't understand the Ed Davis decision, but without seeing everything that was submitted it simply doesn't make sense. I have yet to see anything that would suggest he should have been given another year.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:31 AM ^
Can we do another negbang?
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:32 AM ^
Here comes the youth movement!
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:33 AM ^
Can anyone explain why Ed Davis was granted a 6th year and Jeremy was not? Other than 'lol NCAA'
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:35 AM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:46 AM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 11:04 AM ^
NCAA didn't want to take a look at his case until he got his bachelor degree. Is that part of the requirement on applying for the 6th year waiver? If so, that explains the timing.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:36 AM ^
Unfortunately your response is far more sophisticated than anything the NCAA could respond with.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:33 AM ^
I'm not really sure why so many people expected the 6th year to work out for him. I had always just assumed he wouldn't be on the team next year.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:39 AM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:41 AM ^
January 23rd, 2017 at 12:46 PM ^
Because he was on 27 Tickets! Alongside other wildly optimistic inclusions such as Isaiah Wilson and Grant Newsome. It's a sugarplum-and-ferry world until Brian hears it isn't.
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:34 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:34 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:50 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad