Ole Miss formally opposes Shea's transfer:
April 10th, 2018 at 12:51 AM ^
Oh, I know that. I'm shitting on Ole Miss because this is still about Laquon Treadwell for me. That and a sort of generalized dislike of the school for its past and lingering embrace of the Confederacy. And Hugh Freeze's hypocrisy in conducting hooker road tours while thumping on his bible and trumpeting his moral rectitude. Fuck Ole Piss.
The NCAA is already thinking about changing this rule so anyone is immediately eligble to transfer if the team broke NCAA rules and gets a post season ban. Seems like they have to let Shea play.
Just the two of us spit-balling, er... speculating, but I think the NCAA is being super careful with this case because they DON'T want to establish the precedent that everyone is immediately eligible on transfer.
Consider all the indicators. The evidence that the Ole Miss players were mislead is strong, and they have sympathetic circumstances. For one, they already sat out one post-season ban in their last year at Ole Miss. However, there are six of them all at once, and whatever happens with them will have significant precedential value. This case feels like it is taking an awfully long time to decide on facts that look pretty clear cut (usually a bad sign). However, the hearing officer is making every effort to let Ole' Miss have its say (an ambiguous sign), while at the same time showing interest in the precise issues Shea's attorney would like them to examine closely (a very good sign).
I'm thinking the NCAA knows it has to let all 6 players play this season, and no horsing around. However, it's worried about turning every investigation into a free for all to recruit players at the program under investigation. Therefore, it is being careful to thoroughly document this case so that in the future it can point to all the things that make this an exceptional situation, and not be bound to let everyone else play immediately.
That's my optimistic take. I could be wrong, and frequently am; just ask my wife.
+1. Great take.
This is just what I was thinking below (missed your post). I don't think there is any chance these players don't play next year. This is a big organization trying desperately to not look like idiots before they give permission.
Rob
So this is finally starting to get some national play. I sometimes listen to some sports radio on Sirius in the morning and afternoon on my commute. This morning, Greg McElroy (who is fairly pro-Harbaugh and a good listen) brought up Ole Miss' objection. I didn't get to hear the in-depth discussion (was to start after I was in the office), but neither he nor his sidekick (Brad Hopkins) are in OM's corner on this one. I'll have to listen to Mark Packer's take on my way home this afternoon. Packer claims to love Harbaugh as a coach, but he ALWAYS rails against everything Harbuagh does. He clearly doesn't like Harbaugh (or Michigan football), so it'll be interesting to hear that. I don't call in, I'll leave that to the troglodytes in Columbus, SEC, and ACC territory. But my question would be why is nobody railing on OM when Harbaugh would be burned alive if he denied some kid a transfer?
And make no mistake, Harbaugh would be nationally eviserated for denying a transfer.
Ole Miss isn't objecting to the transfer, they are objecting to immediate eligibility.
Harbaugh's crew would have a good case to object to immediate eligibility (in the absence of Freeze type of he done it violations) if someone left, say, to go to Oklahoma or Georgia (even someone we might not play next year), not as a graduate transfer, and who wanted to play immediately. They want to transfer and sit out a year? We wish them the best in all they do.
Take a breath.
As far as I can tell, this is a no-op. All that's going on here is Ole Miss is not going to agree in writing, or do anything that can be interpreted as agreeing in writing with Patterson (or the other players) version of events. I don't believe anyone ever thought they would. Their agreement is not an important part of this from what virtually anybody is saying.
My prediction: We will hear that Patterson is eligible by the end of April at the latest. I actually think more like end of next week.
Rob
April 10th, 2018 at 10:09 AM ^
It can't be entirely true that Ole Miss said they did nothing wrong. They did self impose last years bowl ban didn't they?\
Anyway they are getting beat up on local radio here in Alabama. Then again even if they didn't do anything wrong that would be the case.
April 10th, 2018 at 10:11 AM ^
It can't be entirely true that Ole Miss said they did nothing wrong. They did self impose last years bowl ban didn't they? Most of their objections are about procedural things really to lesson the blow it seems to me. Doing what lawyers are paid to do for the most part.
Anyway they are getting beat up on local radio here in Alabama. Then again even if they didn't do anything wrong that would be the case.
April 10th, 2018 at 10:51 AM ^
wondering a long time ago what side the NCAA stands on when it comes to the right of student ahletes in relation to their member institutions whose interests they guard because the schools pay the way for everyone.
The NCAA always sides on the right of those who pay the bill. This has historically been the case and no choice, school suspension or student-athlete right has stood any test to longstanding commitment to any internal ruling or challenge that doesn't benefit the membership longterm, because the NCAA doesn't exist otherwise.
It only polices institutional members because they won't and can't do it themselves. It only protects the interests of student-athletes because they are part of the mission of the membership, not because of any greater oversight authority. View the NCAA role on that level, and you never misunderstand what it does or how it proceeds and then changes when the political winds die down.
April 10th, 2018 at 11:13 AM ^
but a grunt?
BTW FUCK THE SEC.
At any rate, I'm cringing in anticipation of an NCAA screw job that may or may not happen.
I refuse to get too high or too low about Patterson's eligibility this year until it's decided.