OT: Ole Miss Gets Additional One-Year Bowl Ban, Other Sanctions
Here it is (from an Ole Miss source, not officially from NCAA yet). One additional year for Ole Miss, meaning Shea Patterson and Greg Little, and all other Ole Miss rising juniors, will not be immediately eligible via transfer. Patterson wasn't coming anyways, but all that were still holding out hopes can officially put those to rest.
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2017/12/1/16512428/ole-miss-n…
December 1st, 2017 at 10:10 AM ^
Other sources are saying it's a two yera bowl ban meaning players are eligible. One of the tweets is by an author of your article:
December 1st, 2017 at 10:17 AM ^
The two years includes 2017, the year they already imposed on themselves. Meaning it does not span the remainder of Patterson and Little's eligibility, so they cannot transfer freely.
December 1st, 2017 at 10:19 AM ^
December 1st, 2017 at 10:22 AM ^
The ban is for the 2017 and 2018 postseasons. That's it.
December 1st, 2017 at 10:27 AM ^
December 1st, 2017 at 10:32 AM ^
Oh yeah I see that, I think the article just failed to specify properly. Some Ole Miss players are free to transfer without penalty, but not all - only those entering their final year of eligibility. That's the accurate description of the consequences of this ruling.
December 1st, 2017 at 10:45 AM ^
Others are reporting it differently as of 5 minutes ago so we'll see.
December 1st, 2017 at 11:56 AM ^
December 1st, 2017 at 1:24 PM ^
Per NCAA Bylaw 14.7.2 paragraph (c):
"On the recommendation of the Committee on Infractions, for a student-athlete who transfers to a member institution to continue the student-athlete’s opportunity for full participation in a sport because the student athlete’s original institution was placed on probation by the NCAA with sanctions that would preclude the institution’s team in that sport from participating in postseason competition during all of the remaining seasons of the student-athlete’s eligibility (see also Bylaw 13.1.1.3.4)."
As a result, only the juniors will be eligible to transfer.
December 1st, 2017 at 11:31 AM ^
there would be no math.
December 1st, 2017 at 12:19 PM ^
This is a UM board, we can handle math as long as no trains are involved.
/that last part was for me.
December 2nd, 2017 at 2:42 AM ^
December 1st, 2017 at 11:59 AM ^
December 1st, 2017 at 12:04 PM ^
No, they can't. Source: The literal NCAA guidelines, and also an NCAA spokeswoman herself.
December 1st, 2017 at 11:34 AM ^
Brett McMurphy is reporting that players ARE ELIGIBLE to transfer
SHEA PATTERSON COME ON DOWN!?!??!!?
December 1st, 2017 at 11:52 AM ^
He's wrong
December 1st, 2017 at 1:10 PM ^
If he simply said "players are eligible to transfer," he isn't wrong because he failed to include the qualification that the players have to be in their last year of eligibility.
December 1st, 2017 at 1:15 PM ^
December 1st, 2017 at 10:11 AM ^
December 1st, 2017 at 10:18 AM ^
So, since the NCAA just added 1, does that officially count as a 2 year or 1 year? Can they transfer or not? Anyone? Bueller?
December 1st, 2017 at 10:20 AM ^
my understanding is no. the players needed to be uneligble for a bowl game for the rest of their eligibility. since they only added another year, greg little and shea patterson would be eligible to play in a bowl game the year after next
December 1st, 2017 at 10:23 AM ^
That makes sense.
December 1st, 2017 at 10:21 AM ^
The ability to transfer isn't based on a set, arbitrary number - you can't just transfer if it's a 2 year ban no matter what year you are in. The ban has to span the remainder of your eligibility to be able to transfer without sitting out. That means that kids in their final year of eligibility next year can transfer freely. Others cannot.
December 1st, 2017 at 10:23 AM ^
Got ya! That makes more sense.
December 1st, 2017 at 8:24 PM ^
I mean, did you even read the post, or just decided to throw out these BS posts for points?
December 1st, 2017 at 10:34 AM ^
And most players are usually able to grad transfer for their last year of eligibility anyways, whether it be because they redshirted a year, or graduated in 3 years (maybe not common at Ole Miss). So it will likely have no effect on who can transfer since this year is already over.
December 1st, 2017 at 1:19 PM ^
Do you have actual numbers about the percentage of players who are eligible for a grad transfer for their last year of eligibility?
It would be interesting to see how many starters fit in that category. There are a lot of players on most teams who have no realistic expectation of playing in the NFL so they are probably fairly diligent about academic progression, but those aren't the players Michigan looks to for a grad transfer.
December 2nd, 2017 at 2:46 AM ^
December 1st, 2017 at 10:14 AM ^
The NCAA is a joke. Yawn. Nothing to see here...what time does cocktail hour start?
December 1st, 2017 at 10:24 AM ^
It's all a matter of perspective.
December 1st, 2017 at 10:17 AM ^
"hey wrist..... SLAP !!!!"
December 1st, 2017 at 10:20 AM ^
December 1st, 2017 at 10:18 AM ^
December 1st, 2017 at 10:21 AM ^
See here an article that apparently current Miss St linebacker Leo Lewis took $10,000 each from both Ole Miss AND Miss State. Of course, the NCAA won't do crap, remain hypocritical, and let the SEC skate by with its bagmen.
December 1st, 2017 at 10:38 AM ^
Hate the NCAA all you want, but they didn't ignore it. They learned about the MSSt payment long after their Ole Miss case had started. I don't expect them to ignore it, but they don't work that fast.
December 1st, 2017 at 11:25 AM ^
This scandal should have far-reaching implications for other SEC programs. The fact that Mississippi State was also involved is intriguing. They should be in serious trouble too. The tentacles of this scandal could be long and slimy.
Considering these players were top recruits and were being pursued by a bunch of other teams, I imagine lots of other stories will come out. While this was a mostly internal scandal (Nutt vs Freeze) I wonder if Ole Miss is ticked off at Miss St and other conference foes and if they'll rat them all out. If you're going down for some shit that everyone else is doing, might as well take 'em all down with ya. I imagine many other players were paid much more than the $10,000 that Lewis received. I bet LSU, Alabama, Auburn and Florida aren't squeaky clean and are sweating bullets right now.
All of this, of course, if the NCAA feels like doing anything about it. There are likely other dominoes ready to fall - the NCAA just has to push one.
December 1st, 2017 at 12:34 PM ^
This story is over. You're right in that it could lead to a bunch of shit going down, but this is the NCAA. Nothing more will come from this.
This NCAA is a hollow joke of nothing.
December 1st, 2017 at 10:39 AM ^
fails to do anything meaninful at all. What a joke. Cheating pays again.
December 1st, 2017 at 11:38 AM ^
They fired their coach (who has a show-cause now), got banned from the postseason for two years and lost scholarships. What more were you expecting?
December 1st, 2017 at 10:40 AM ^
24 total scholarships (between sanctions and self-imposed) over probably 4 years will also help to cripple the team.
They were 6-6 this year, scholarship limits and the view of the program's effect on recruiting will likely drop them down to a 4-8 or 3-9 team for the next few years which will be hard to come back from.
December 1st, 2017 at 10:49 AM ^
December 1st, 2017 at 11:12 AM ^
You have late transfers and other attrition. Signing day decisions that go the other way. Non-qualifiers are always going to be an issue at Ole Miss, probably more so than at most Power 5 schools. They were willing to take those risks in trying to keep up with more attractive SEC programs. Now that paying recruits is off the table for a few years, they'll do more of it.
Starting with 6 fewer spots to fill will hurt Ole Miss. It certainly gives less margin for error in recruiting and the factors above will still apply.
RR's 1st season saw a ton of attrition. I don't think it was much of an an issue the next two seasons, but it contributed to the unbalanced recruiting classes that we still see.
December 1st, 2017 at 11:16 AM ^
December 1st, 2017 at 11:20 AM ^
It can be done.
December 1st, 2017 at 11:37 AM ^
December 1st, 2017 at 11:35 AM ^
I think we were under 85 but it wasn't that low - in the 75-80 range IIRC.
December 1st, 2017 at 10:50 AM ^